TRIBUNE OPINION: THAT OIL PRICE FREEZE
MANILA, NOVEMBER 4, 2009 (TRIBUNE) by Jonathan De la Cruz - More In case they have not realized it yet, I suggest that the presidentiables, all 11 of them as of this writing, and the lesser lights including those in the private sector, bone up on the twin issues of oil and rice before it is too late. If they don’t have any position on these two basic and highly politicized commodities at this point, they may be prompted to issue out half truths, hare brained or even non-sensical comments which may becloud rather than illuminate and lead the public to paroxysms of “hate and acceptance” that will surely stand in the way of working out proper and responsible measures to resolve matters. These two basic items have been at the center of controversy for years on end it may not be possible to come out with universally acceptable solutions at all. Now or in the future. But at least those aspiring to lead us should not make things any worse by their ignorance and insensitivity. Or worse, evasive and crowd pleasing rather than factual and straightforward positions. We have had enough of those responses and measures for long we cannot afford to have more specially if issued by those who should know better.What’s wrong with EO 839?
Take the case of the recently issued Executive Order (EO) 839 which imposed a freeze on oil prices to the Oct. 15 levels in Luzon until the “state of calamity” imposed on the entire island is lifted. Coming as it did in the wake of the devastation wrought by the typhoons “Ondoy” and “Pepeng” and now “Ramil,” “Santi” and “Tino,” President Arroyo had no choice but to declare such freeze as part of a package of measures meant to ease the pain brought about by these calamities.
It was a necessary response, yet certain sectors wasted no time in attacking the move on the misguided notion that it goes against the essence of a deregulated environment. What? You mean deregulation rendered government inutile to deal with such contingencies? When and where in the world did this happen? Not even America which is supposed to be the bastion of the free market, of unbridled capitalism has imposed or is about to impose such a burden.
At the height of Hurricane “Katrina” then President Bush imposed a similar measure on top of other “anti-free market” initiatives to bring calm and confidence back to the people of New Orleans Certainly, as the truism goes, we cannot be more popish than the Pope. The oil deregulation law was never contemplated to shackle or tie up the chief executive to the point that she cannot do anything in response to an emergency. Responsive and responsible deregulation not shackling or emasculating is what we need in these times. There is no place for an overly doctrinaire approach on matters such as this.
When the public interest so requires, government has to respond sensibly. A timely and appropriate intervention which is time bound and location or sector specific which is what the EO advised will probably suffice.
But it has to be issued properly and in the right manner. Which is why there was no place for the perorations of deputy presidential spokesman Gary Olivar about the oil companies being stubborn and uncooperative or even suggesting that they have not been falsely reporting their standing. That is a comment which can only becloud the issue and unduly stir emotions to the derogation of the EO’s objective to give our people a break from the burdens of coping with the calamities. He should have simply enjoined the critics and the oil companies to be sensitive to the plight of our people. Period. Or, simply shut up. In any event, to avoid any more prolonged discussions when confronted with similar problems in the future we should probably take a second look at the law and smoothen out the rough edges so that we can respond to future occurrences properly and sensibly.
As for rice and other commodity imports the responses government has initiated thus far invite more scrutiny than usual. While rice importation, along with oil and other commodities, is supposed to be deregulated, there are tell tale signs that government is heavily intervening in the market to the point that we seem to have lost any negotiating flexibility. First, we indicated a higher than necessary import level for next year. That started a shadow bidding war as India got into play as well signaling importation of a substantial amount for its own needs. Then, the DA/NFA set additional terms for prospective bidders such as extending longer credit terms and other perks which may or may not apply if done on a government-to-government basis. Finally, there is seeming preference for Vietnam rice over Thai rice for next year’s requirements to the point that we have gone to town openly squabbling with Thailand over rice tariffs — something which we never did with Vietnam. These and a number of other questions not least the real and proper level of importation has bedeviled next year’s importation before anything else has been put in play.
And here we are just talking of the import side which if you ask our farmers should be shrinking rather than increasing every year. So, the ultimate question remains: What steps has government taken to increase our rice production and thus limit our dependence on importation? We have had a number of plans and recommendations for sometime to review things would be superfluous if not ridiculous. In fine, we know what to do. The question is: Do we have the will to do it? Indeed, while rice self-sufficiency may no longer be a doable option we should at least attempt to decrease our dependence on importation on a planned and time bound basis. Not wait for the next calamity to push for even more importation than necessary.
Chief News Editor: Sol Jose Vanzi
© Copyright, 2009
by PHILIPPINE HEADLINE NEWS ONLINE
All rights reserved