‘Secretary for life’

President Bongbong Marcos recently announced that he will be staying on as the incumbent Secretary of Agriculture “until the required structural reforms are instituted to make the sector more efficient and competitive.”

In an article published in The Philippine STAR, the President was quoted as saying: “What I aspire is by the time I leave the DA (Department of Agriculture), we will have systems in place so that we can guarantee the food supply of the Philippines, number one; we can guarantee that the prices are affordable and number three, that our farmers make a good living.”

Based on these preconditions set by PBBM, it is safe to assume that PBBM will remain Secretary of Agriculture “for life” (as a figure of speech) or until his last day in office. It is also interesting to note that in his 3-point agenda, the farmers come in third to food security and prioritizing pricing concerns of consumers. You would think that farmers should be prioritized so that food production would increase and as a result of abundant production, food prices would not only be affordable but cheap.

I have no quarrel with the President regarding his set goals, but his priorities clearly need to be reconsidered and it may help the President if he spoke with other stakeholders and not just his cordon sanitaire or the favored few businessmen pretending to be farmers or pretending to know what’s best for Philippine agriculture.

Farming and agriculture are not some political campaign that you develop for political purposes or propaganda, as DA officials seem to be promoting to pander to PBBM’s links with his father FM and the various programs FM promoted in his time. The desk jockeys and ex-corporates at the DA have to do more than recycle martial law era agricultural campaigns or merely approve importations that stir up controversy and suspicion.

Agriculture is what feeds a nation and ensures its survival and ideally contributes to its progress. It is the rare economic model that rises from the ground up resulting from the hard work, determination and grit of various groups knitted together with their desire to produce food and products from the earth, from water, from plants and animals.

Economists can say and do all they want but if climate change, geo-political disruption and dysfunctional government policies push farmers against the wall, no charts and formulas are going to work, and neither will the farmers.

The “farmer” invests the most with the little he or she has, works the hardest on the land, is the most disadvantaged in the pricing, negotiation and sales and is the most used if not abused when propagandists and storytellers of government come out glorifying themselves. One industry, leader while comparing the Philippines to other nations in the region, labeled the DA and the country as “Anti-Farmer.”

Various agencies of the DA have piles of documentary and scientific and financial requirements for registration, certification and permission in relation to business registration, certification of farms, products or movement. I am certain that if someone at the Anti-Red Tape Authority (ARTA) investigated the processes and requirements of the DA, they would flag so much red tape in its various agencies.

Yes, you can modernize agriculture, you can increase yield, you can integrate and make it more efficient, but only through the people on the ground and of the land. The President’s friends and advisers all talk about “factory farms” and integrating lands that have already been subdivided and distributed in an attempt to make PBBM believe, which he probably already has, that is the answer.

Unless the President has been hiding in a cave, I am certain that he is well aware of the state of agricultural infrastructure in terms of available land for different types of applications, not just rice. He must be aware that irrigation in the country is in such a sorry state that on occasion, the distribution of water ends up being a choice on whether Metro Manila gets potable water or if farmers get water for their rice paddies.

Even with water available, the irrigation and distribution are so fractured that it costs more and wastes more. Time and again it has been suggested that rice production be relocated to regions, provinces or areas where there are rivers and wetlands instead of sustaining them in areas challenged with water supply.

The biggest mistake is we continue to focus all resources of the DA – 60 percent is the often-quoted amount – invested on rice production. Agriculture is not just rice. There is livestock, grains and vegetables along with marine products. Then the DA is like a philanderer whose responsibility is to care for Philippine agriculture but delights in sourcing and supporting the agriculture and products of other countries.

The Philippines needs to create a buffer to transition us towards increased self-sufficiency or local sourcing and ultimately reduce importation of agricultural products simply to cover deficits or as a remedial solution to uncontrollable disruption in the supply chain.

Going full circle, whatever we do to fix Philippine agriculture, it has to start with the farmers. I seriously doubt if there has even been a demographic survey of who and where are the different types of farmers, their products, assets, location and outputs as well as challenges or needs.

PBBM said that Filipinos don’t want dole outs and as far as farmers go, that may be the case. But what they want is a fair and level playing field where their effort and sacrifice are honored by their government through “priority status,” “buy local” policies and to be finally recognized and respected for their contribution to nation building.

DA officials need to be sent to reeducation camps on how to respect their stakeholders, engage and consult. You cannot help farmers if you are not willing to walk their pain and get your feet dirty, mga “bossing.”

*      *      *

E-mail: [email protected]