Another Sugar Act

Before I write any further, let me comment on the serious accusations that Luis “Petloy” Mirasol made during his radio dialog with Vic Mercado last Friday morning.

First, Petloy said that there is corruption in the SRA, referring to sugar importation and that he called SRA to ask whether there is a new Administrator because the incumbent, Regina Martin has become a spokesperson for Coca Cola. He claimed Martin explained the importation that tended to exonerate Coca Cola.

I say these are serious allegations because the two statements are related to each other,  giving the impression that Martin has been corrupted in the importation, the reason she is explaining and appearing  to defend it instead of Coke.

This issue of importation of premix sugar has lingered long enough and if Petloy has evidence that, indeed,  there was corruption, and as Vic Mercado rightly challenged him, Petloy has the duty to file charges against Martin. Then Petloy would be giving a great service to the industry. But he must also prove it otherwise his accusations can be viewed as an irresponsible market vendors talk and undercut his credibility in future commentaries that many respect.

Now let’s go to the topic at hand although I think this case of sugar importation has not rested yet and we await Petloy’s action.

Another bill is to be filed with the House of Representatives but is not yet known when. The draft has already circulated in the sugar industry sector. I thank Enrique Rojas, president of the National Federation of Sugarcane Planters for sharing with me a copy.

This proposed measure is authored by Rep. Pryde Henry Teves of the 3rd District of Oriental Negros, another sugar producing province and therefore as much concerned with us in the Occidental side about the future of the industry that is facing a major challenge due to the impending removal of the import duties on sugar by 2015.

The declining tariff has started this year until it drops to zero by 2015 and with the price of Philippine sugar at a doldrums the industry faces a bleak period that must either be prevented now or alternatives made available to the industry.

The Teves bill is almost entirely different from that of Rep. Albee Benitez, and to say the least,  it is as mild in its approach as the Benitez one is radical. I say the Benitez bill is radical because it is a paradigm shift in the industry as we know today. It is not radical if we think of Philsucom and Nasutra because his bill hews closely to these two government agencies in terms of control of the sugar industry.

The Teves bill is milder in the sense that it retains the present system with alterations here and there to address directly the existing problems in the industry.

The titles tell this difference. That of Teves reads, “An Act Supporting the Development of the Sugarcane Industry of the Country and Promoting Products Derived or Produced from Locally Produced Sugarcane and/or Sugar.” In short it will be known as “Sugar Industry Development Act of 2011.”

Compare this with the title of the Benitez bill, “An Act Providing Protection to the Philippine Sugar Industry by Stabilizing the Prices of Sugar and Regulating Sugar Trading and Appropriating Funds Therefor.  Its short title is “Sugar Price Stabilization Act of 2011.”

The draft of the Benitez bill is dated November 23, 2011 while that of Teves is December 18, 2011.

The Benitez bill intends to regulate the industry through a price and supply control mechanism while that of Teves is for government to extend support for the industry’s development. Which one will the planters and the consumers support?

 We have not yet heard what the plans of the Sugar Regulatory Administration are in terms of specifics but I am certain it has one considering that a committee has already been meeting on this subject.

I was informed that last week the SRA committee was set to meet and perhaps soon it will come out with specific plans to clear the air from a sense of unease among the sugar producers.

The efforts of these three groups are most welcome albeit late in the day, but if the industry leaders unite behind a common plan as I wrote earlier then concrete steps can begin pronto and lift that feeling of deep and serious concern in the industry.

So far the consumers could not care less. There is a strong belief that importation of sugar is beneficial to them as imported sugar, without the tariff sugar would be cheaper. The same sense is felt among small enterprises using sugar, like ordinary market vendors.

Any attempt to make domestic sugar a protected commodity to the disadvantage of consumers can be a cause for some legislators, facing an election year,  to put their foot down on such an attempt.*

back to top