|
Typhoon
Frank hit the Philippines—to borrow a pugilistic
phrase—in the breadbasket. In the case of the
destructive howler, which the rest of the word called
Fengshen, the blow was literal.
The
typhoon raked through Eastern Visayas, Western Visayas,
Southern Tagalog and Central Luzon. It generated monsoon
rains in Central and Western Mindanao, causing
widespread flooding and landslides. All the regions hit
by the storm contain farms that grow rice, corn,
vegetables and so-called high-value commercial crops (HVCCs),
not to mention fisheries and livestock. It is precisely
in those areas that the bulk of the produce that
Filipinos consume is raised.
Days
after the typhoon barreled its way out of the country,
authorities surveyed the havoc it wrought and placed the
damage at P4.39 billion—mostly in farm-production
losses. However, that is just a preliminary figure.
Agriculture Undersecretary Jesus Emmanuel Paras broke
down the extent of agricultural losses: fisheries, the
hardest-hit, with about P2.2 billion, rice P670 million,
HVCCs P194 million and corn P165 million.
“Until
the waters have receded, we cannot yet determine the
damage to livestock,” Paras added. “But hard hit are the
backyard swine producers.”
Meanwhile, Augusto Santos—sounding more like a spin
doctor than the acting socioeconomic secretary that he
is—said that while the National Economic and Development
Authority is still awaiting final figures, preliminary
data show that Fengshen’s rampage will “not have a big
impact” on economic growth this year.
That may
be so, but Santos failed to consider that Fengshen is
only the sixth weather disturbance so far this year to
cut across the Philippines, which historically is hit by
an average of two dozen typhoons annually. With global
warming expected to generate more numerous, more
frequent and more destructive extreme weather events,
the outlook is not very reassuring, indeed.
Little
can be done, at this point, to temper nature’s fury, but
we have lost neither the capacity nor the resources to
mitigate the impact of storms, especially on our farms.
Question: Do we have the political will to do so?
For one,
officials need to focus further attention than they
already have on not just assuring the supply of rice,
but, more important, supporting the local production of
what is, after all, the national staple.
Senate
Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel Jr. may not be the
sort of politician that, say, Agriculture Secretary
Arthur Yap would be keen to heed. Nonetheless, the
opposition leader has put forward a sensible proposal
that should help the Department of Agriculture guarantee
the availability of rice.
In a
press statement issued Wednesday, Pimentel urged
President Arroyo to grant additional subsidy to the
National Food Authority (NFA) toward boosting rice
production instead of allowing the NFA to incur more
borrowings.
The
additional subsidy, the Mindanao senator said, could
come from the “windfall” collections of the 12-percent
value-added tax (VAT) on oil products—thanks to
skyrocketing fuel prices.
With
debt totaling P35 billion, the NFA still plans to borrow
P8 billion more this year to fund its ballooning deficit
due to its policy of selling imported rice at a loss,
Pimentel said. Last year the NFA posted a P2.6-billion
deficit. In the first quarter this year it already
sustained a P4-billion deficit.
The
government ends up absorbing the NFA’s losses and
borrowings, Pimentel noted, and these are passed on to
the public through higher taxes.
“The
President should help fund NFA operations during these
times of emergency,” Pimentel said. “If she can grant
subsidies by the billions to the small consumers of
power and the transport sector, why can’t she do the
same for the NFA?”
With the
additional subsidy, the NFA should scale down its rice
importations and step up its program to raise rice
production in the country.
Boosting
rice production is one area where taxpayers won’t mind
their hard-earned money to go. |