|
THE
government should reject the latest trade proposals in
the Non-Agriculture Market Access (Nama) negotiations in
the World Trade Organization (WTO) because it would not
only result in lower tariffs, but also cause the
Philippines to lose its policy options to protect the
fisheries sector.
This is
the appeal of the nongovernment fishery organization
Tambuyog Development Center (TDC).
TDC said
that among these trade proposals, which are found in the
July 10 text of the Nama negotiations, is a binding
formula that leads to steep tariff cuts averaging 44
percent of the average tariff commitment of 23.4 percent
for the country’s products—resulting in tariff levels of
only 12 percent to 14 percent after the formula is
applied.
The
tariff level of 23.4 percent is the country’s commitment
in the Uruguay Round of WTO negotiations.
Arsenio
Tanchuling, executive director of Tambuyog, said the
steep tariff cuts are due to very low coefficient
figures ranging from 19 to 26 in the formula for
developing countries.
Tanchuling also noted that binding the country’s
nonagriculture tariffs at such low levels of 12 percent
to 14 percent make the country lose the policy option to
use tariffs as a protective measure.
“Only by
allowing the tariffs to remain unbound can we retain the
flexibility to set tariffs to either high or low levels
depending on domestic needs. Tariffs can even be
increased up to 100 percent, the maximum level allowed
under the Philippine tariff code, if that is needed to
prevent seasonal surges in fisheries imports that could
lead to depressed fish prices that would adversely
affect the income of local fishers. Binding at lower
rates makes us lose this flexibility to use tariffs as a
protective measure,” he said.
Tanchuling argued that the flexibilities proposed in the
July 10 text are now “severely curtailed,” since these
have been linked to the coefficient rates in the binding
formula when they were supposed to be “stand-alone”
provisions under Paragraph 8 of previous Nama texts. He
said that Paragraph 8 has been deleted in the July 10
text.
“The
linking of flexibilities and formula coefficients in the
July 10 text is unacceptable and contrary to the
developmental aims of the Doha round. These include
half-of-formula cuts for only 10 percent to 14 percent
of a total of about 4,700 Philippine tariff lines under
Nama, which is good only if a country chooses the lowest
coefficient of 19 in the formula but forfeited if it
chooses the highest coefficient of 26. As an
alternative, a country has the option to keep only 6
percent to 9 percent of its tariff lines unbound, but
again, only if it chooses the lowest coefficient,” he
said.
Tanchuling urged the Philippine negotiators to reject
the July 10 text and to push for a return to the Nama
text of the 6th Hong Kong Ministerial Conference in
2005.
Until
now, member-countries of the WTO have not yet reached a
consensus on Nama and agriculture to move the Doha Round
of negotiations forward and forge a new global trade
agreement. |
