Midanao EQ fake news

6.3 magnitude na lindol na tumama sa Tulunan, North Cotabato.

OFFICIALS of Davao and Digos cities are struggling to quell panic over fake news about a tsunami and another powerful
earthquake that have continued to circulate in social media following the magnitude 6.3 tremor that struck parts of Mindanao on
October 16.

In separate posts on social media, officials sought to assuage fears and assured that the reports about a tsunami or a major
earthquake happening at a certain time are not true since these disasters could not be predicted.

In Davao City, authorities apprehended a mother and daughter who allegedly circulated fake news of a tsunami alert on Wednesday
night, October 16, which caused panic among residents.

The two were brought to the barangay hall in Daliao in Toril, Davao City.

The Davao City Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council, in a post on Thursday afternoon, October 17, assured that the
seas were calm.

In Digos City, Davao del Sur, officials reiterated that rumors about a tsunami and a magnitude 8.1 earthquake are false.

There is no need to panic. There is no reason to worry. The report about a tsunami is not true. It's fake news, the City Government
said in a Facebook post.

Digos City Mayor Josef F. Cagas warned that those who spread or share fake news would face legal consequences.

The Davao City Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council cited Section 6(a) of Republic Act 10639, also known as The
Free Mobile Disaster Alerts Act.

It states that "any person who gives false or misleading data or information or willfully or through gross negligence, conceals or
falsifies a material fact, in any investigation, inquiry, study, or other proceeding held pursuant to this Act, shall be punished with
imprisonment of not less than two (2) months but not more than six (6) months, and with a fine of not less than One thousand pesos
(P1,000.00) but not more than Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00): Provided, however, That if the false or misleading data or
information shall have been under oath, the maximum penalty for giving false testimony or perjury shall be imposed."

A bill seeking to penalize creation and spreading of false information is also pending in Congress.

Shortly after the quake struck, the City Governments of Davao and Digos immediately sought to correct reports about a tsunami and
appealed for calm.

A powerful and shallow earthquake, with magnitude of 6.3, struck southeast of Tulunan town in Cotabato at 7:37 p.m. on October
16. It was felt at Intensity VII in Tulunan, M'lang and Kidapawan City.

It was also felt strongly in several other areas in central and southern Mindanao, including Davao and General Santos cities. As of
Thursday, authorities were validating reports that four people have been killed and scores were injured.

The National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council, in a situation report as of 6 a.m. Thursday, confirmed two fatalities
in Magsaysay town in Davao del Sur and 27 injured persons in Davao and Soccsksargen regions.

Video clips of emergency responders retrieving the bodies of a mother and child buried in a landslide caused by the earthquake
have been posted on social media.

The NDRRMC report also noted that 15 structures in Davao and 14 in Soccsksargen sustained damage from the quake. The fire
that hit Gaisano mall in General Santos City was listed as quake-related.

A magnitude 6.3 earthquake hit North Cotabato early Wednesday evening, sending people in coastal communities scampering to
higher grounds, although Chief Philippine government seismologist Renato Solidum said there was no risk of a tsunami because the
earthquake occurred inland.

The earthquake, which was recorded at 7:37 pm., was tectonic in origin and its epicentre was located 23 kilometers southwest of
Makilala town, North Cotabato, or near Tulunan town of the same province. It has a depth of focus of only two kilometers.
The Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (Phivolcs) recorded 33 aftershocks almost three hours later, with one strong
and two mild shakes recorded at magnitude 5.5 (8:09 p.m.), at magnitude 4.3 (9:25 p.m.), and at magnitude 4 (8:34 pm), all
triggered by the tremor at epicentres near Columbio town, Sultan Kudarat.

The quake was felt stronger at intensity 7 in the province’s Kidapawan City, M’lang and Tulunan.

The Davao regional Office of Civil Defense showed pictures of the damage to Cor Jesu College, where Pres. Rodrigo Duterte once
studied and finished high school. The school is located in downtown Digos City, Davao del Sur.

The pictures showed big chunks of cement blocks that fell off several pillars and walls. There was a power blackout in the city after
the earthquake.

Residents near and along the coastline of Davao City also went out of their homes in panic over reports that water along Matina
coastlines had purportedly receded.

Residents of Malita, the capital town of Davao Occidental, told BusinessMirror that they sought higher ground after people said they
saw sea waters receding.

The Davao City Disaster Risk Reduction Management Office appealed to media organizations to help them relay that there was no
tsunami alarm.

On late evening, Davao City Mayor Sara Duterte-Carpio announced the suspension of all classes in public and private schools, from
kindergarten to post-graduate studies on Thursday.

With confirmed reports of “structural and electrical damage to buildings and houses”, Duterte instructed all school owners, teachers,
and other school personnel “to subject school structures to a safety inspection with a qualified engineer tomorrow”.

“If they find building defects that are dangerous and need repair, they should immediately condemn the area and not allow students
to use the same,” she said.

Teen-age pregnancy

Causes of Teen-age pregnancy

Adolescent pregnancies are a global problem but occur most often in poorer and marginalised communities. Many girls face
considerable pressure to marry early and become mothers while they are still a child.

Teenage pregnancy increases when girls are denied the right to make decisions about their sexual and reproductive health and
well-being.

Girls must be able to make their own decisions about their bodies and futures and have access to appropriate healthcare services
and education.

WHAT ARE THE CAUSES OF TEENAGE PREGNANCY?

 Lack of information about sexual and reproductive health and rights

 Inadequate access to services tailored to young people

 Family, community and social pressure to marry

 Sexual violence

 Child, early and forced marriage, which can be both a cause and a consequence

 Lack of education or dropping out of school

Approximately 90% of births to girls aged 15-19 in developing countries occur within early marriage where there is often an
imbalance of power, no access to contraception and pressure on girls to prove their fertility
Factors such as parental income and the extent of a girl’s education also contribute. Girls who have received minimal education are
5 times more likely to become a mother than those with higher levels of education. Pregnant girls often drop out of school, limiting
opportunities for future employment and perpetuating the cycle of poverty. In many cases, girls perceive pregnancy to be a better
option than continuing their education.

In addition, the unique risks faced by girls during emergencies increase the chances of them becoming pregnant. Factors include
the desire to compensate for the loss of a child, reduced access to information and contraception and increased sexual violence.

Editorial

Official statistics show a decline, but women’s health advocates say teenage pregnancy incidence remains high. In 2017, the
Population Commission registered 47 live births per 1,000 women aged 15 to 19 – down from 57 in 2013. Most of the pregnancies,
according to PopCom, occurred in rural areas.

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health law five years ago, but
issued a temporary restraining order amid questions on the safety of certain drugs for birth control. President Duterte, who had
included reproductive health in his 10-point socioeconomic development agenda when he assumed office, issued an executive
order to push for his family planning program despite the TRO on the RPRH law, which the SC finally lifted only in late 2017.

The Democratic Socialist Women of the Philippines, a national federation of community-based women’s groups, says that in
absolute numbers, teenage pregnancy incidence remains high. If population growth is factored in, the actual numbers could be even
higher, according to the group, with most of the teenage pregnancies occurring in poor communities.

RH advocates blame the barriers in the implementation of the RPRH law for the continuing high incidence of teenage pregnancies.
Implementation reportedly has been uneven among local government units, with even the education campaigns stymied by
disinformation particularly on contraceptives.

Teenagers tend to be adventurous and rebellious toward parental authority. Those who become sexually active in their teens can
check out birth control options, which are widely available in cyberspace. But not all teenage girls have access to the Internet, or
else they might not know what to look for, or they cannot be sure about the reliability of the information.

In case of unwanted pregnancies, teenage girls can resort to abortion. Studies have shown a significant number of teenagers
accounting for abortions performed in the Philippines. RH advocates have stressed the need for age-appropriate sex education in
schools and access to information on reproductive health to prevent teenage pregnancies. With the Supreme Court TRO lifted for
over a year now, the government must step up the campaign to promote teenagers’ reproductive health.

To give them a chance to complete their studies, learners, who will find themselves pregnant while still in school, should never be
turned away, Education Secretary Leonor Briones urged schools – both public and private.

As a matter of policy, Briones noted that the Department of Education (DepEd) allows pregnant learners – particularly in public
schools – to continue their studies. “We do not encourage schools to expel them,” she said.

However, she also recognized that some private schools have their own policies and regulations.

“There are autonomous private schools so they have their own regulations but in general, we do not encourage expelling these
learners,” she added.

National social emergency

DepEd, along with the Department of Health (DoH), and other related government agencies and private organizations recently a
summit on early pregnancy to help address this “pressing concern.” Dubbed, “Kapit-Kamay: Empowering the Youth to Make
Informed Choices,” the first-of-its-kind summit to discuss and understand the education, health, and development dimensions of
early pregnancy in forging multi-stakeholder consensus on ways forward.

During the summit, Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Ernesto Pernia described teenage pregnancy as a “national social
emergency” because of its implications not just on the economy, but in dimensions of education and health – among others.

“I commit to advocate for the President to issue an executive order acknowledging teen pregnancy as a national social emergency,”
he added.

In the same event, Briones reiterated that President Duterte, himself, was very concerned by implications of early pregnancy.

“The President, during a Cabinet meeting, has instructed us to organize this summit,” she said.

Citing data from the 2017 Annual Poverty Indicator Survey, Briones noted that 57 % of female students were forced to drop out of
school because of “family matters.”
She noted that unlike before – when financial concerns or the cost of education – has been cited as the main reason for leaving
school, “family matters” particularly early marriage and teen pregnancy – is now the leading cause of dropping out.

This, she noted, greatly affects employment because when a child drops out of school, there are lesser career opportunities
available to them.

Meanwhile, Health Secretary Francisco Duque III focused on health dimension of early pregnancy – particularly of maternal
complications and risks that teenage mothers face.

“Greater” risks of maternal complications like preterm deliveries and infant mortality during both pregnancy and childbirth await
those who bear children in their adolescent years.

Briones also underscored the importance of “proper education” to help address teen pregnancy in the country.

“In DepEd, we’re trying to put in what we described as ‘liberating kind of education’ and we’re adjusting our curriculum to the new
generation –the generation Z.”

All the agencies also agreed that aside from education, cooperation of stakeholders and the community is key to address teen
pregnancy.

GMRC bilang opisyal na subj

MANILA, Philippines — Nais ni Sen. Juan Miguel Zubiri na ibalik ang subject na Good Manners and Right Conduct (GMRC) sa lahat
ng levels mula K to 12.

Sinabi ni Zubiri na hindi nakatulong ang pag-downgrade ng nasabing subject tungkol sa kagandahang asal na isinama na lamang
sa iba pang subjects kaya nabawasan ang mga mabubuting mamamayan at namamayagpag ang kriminalidad sa lansangan.

Ipinaliwanag kay Zubiri ni Education Secretary Leonor Briones na mayroon namang subject na Values Education mula Grades K
hanggang Grade 3 pero mula Grade 4 hanggang 12 ay isinama na lamang ito sa iba pang subjects.

Naniniwala si Zubiri na ang subject na GMRC noong hindi pa ito tinatanggal ang dahilan kaya walang masyadong kriminalidad sa
loob at labas ng tahanan.

Dapat aniyang dinidisiplina ang mga mamamayan habang mga bata pa lamang upang hindi lumaki na walang respeto at madaling
maakit ng iligal na droga at mapasama sa mga masasamang grupo.

nihalimbawa ni Zubiri ang Singapore at Japan kung saan ang disiplina at pagrespeto ay itinuturo sa mga eskuwelahan.

oong 2017 ay ipinanukala sa Kamara ang pagmamandato sa mga paaralan na ituro ang subject na good manners and right conduct
(GMRC) sa ilalim ng K to 12 program pero hindi ito naaprubahan.

Ayon kay Atty. Claire Castro, naniniwala siyang dapat itong isabatas pero dapat daw itong ituro bago matutong magbasa ang mga
estudyante.

"Siyempre, kailangan nating turuan ang mga batang magbasa, pero mas titimo sa utak nila kung ano 'yung tamang attitude, tamang
manner," ani Castro sa programang "Usapang de Campanilla" ng DZMM.

Kaakibat nito aniya, dapat turuan ng nasyonalismo ang mga kabataan lalo't hindi na umano niya nakikita ang pagiging makabayan
sa mga kabataan ngayon.

"Yung pagmamahal sa bansa, sa kapwa Pilipino hindi ko na siya nakikita," ani Castro.

Bukod dito, maaari aniyang mas mapasunod ang mga tao kapag mula bata pa lang ay matuturuan na ito ng tamang kaugalian, lalo
na sa paaralan.

"[Kasi] you cannot teach old dog new tricks," paliwanag niya.

Pero ayon kay Castro, maaari namang maglabas ng executive order ang Department of Education para maging mandatory subject
ang GMRC sa mga paaralan.
Bakit ba niwala?

 Good Manners and Right Conduct (GMRC) subject was removed from the K to 12 curriculum

 Edukasyon Party-list Representative Salvador Belaro proposed for the implementation of the subject GMRC in
the K to 12 curriculum but it was not approved

 Castro said that she believed that it should be implemented but it should be taught before teaching the children
how to read

A lot of teachers are having problems with student’s attitude nowadays. Most complain that these children don’t know how to
behave, obey, and even respect their teachers and parents.

This also can be a factor why children find it hard to learn their lessons.

Under the K to 12 curriculum, the subject Good Manners and Right Conduct (GMRC) was removed from the curriculum and it was
integrated to other subjects such as social studies or any related subject in the K to 12 curriculum. In 2007, the Camara had
proposed for the implementation of the subject GMRC in the K to 12 curriculum but it was not approved.

In the program “Usapang de Campanilla” of DZMM, Atty. Claire Castro said that she believed that it should be implemented but it
should be taught before teaching the children how to read.

“Siyempre, kailangan nating turuan ang mga batang magbasa, pero mas titimo sa utak nila kung ano ‘yung tamang attitude, tamang
manners,” she said

She also said that nationalism should be taught in children, for she had observed that most children nowadays don’t know how to
show love for our country.

“Yung pagmamahal sa bansa, sa kapwa Pilipino hindi ko na siya nakikita,” she added

She also explained that maybe these young children, if they will be taught in having a good attitude at an early age, probably they
can easily obey what is told to them.

“You cannot teach old dog new tricks,” she explains

Edukasyon Party-list Representative Salvador Belaro also wanted to push the GMRC subject under the K to 12 curriculum. He also
believes that it is time to teach the students good manners like honesty, to be fair, and have long patience.

GMRC aims to teach students how to gain self-respect, respect for the elderly, patience, perseverance, honesty, and learn how to
socialize with others.

MANILA, Philippines – Several lawmakers are now looking at the positive impact of reviving the Good Manners and Right Conduct
(GMRC) as a separate subject in Basic Education curriculum.

It can be recalled that with the new curriculum of the K to 12 program, GMRC was removed as a regular subject and was integrated
in Social Studies or other related subjects.

House Bill No. 6705 or known as “ An Act to Revive Good Manners and Right Conduct (GMRC) as a Separate Subject in the Basic
Education” was introduced by Representative Salvador B. Belaro. Jr.

Belaro, who is the representative for 1-Ang Edukasyon Party-list, believes that it's timely to remind the youth about proper manners
and core values. According to Belaro, the youth of today has a “surplusage of role models for their behavior owing to the information
explosion in this age of the internet.”

The lawmaker also pointed at modernization as the creator of confusion in the minds of the youth. He also reiterated that pop culture
isn't always “admirable and worthy of emulation.” Belaro added that pop culture even often poses as a threat in the promotion of
good values to the youth.

The party-list representative said that under the act, the Department of Education will be mandated to create a ‘set menu’ of lessons
that will be focused on teaching students good manners and right conduct. They are also tasked to formulate the Implementing
Rules and Regulations of the act.

The lessons will promote basic tenets of respect for oneself, others, and our elders, as well as the teaching of the values of
patience, perseverance, industry, honesty and good faith in dealing with other human beings.

Meanwhile, Senator Joseph Victor G. Ejercito has also submitted the Senate Bill No. 1855 or “An Act to Institutionalize Good
Manners and Right Conduct (GMRC) in the School Curriculum.”

According to Ejercito, the GMRC should be taught in elementary and secondary levels using the “Mother Tongue.”

The senator said, “GMRC is vital to the academic development of a Filipino child as a self-reliant and patriotic citizen. It is also the
policy of the State that good manners and right conduct are indispensable for a member of a nation or society.”

SOGIE BILL

ALL gender. Gender-neutral. Gender-sensitive. LGBTQIA (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual, queer, intersex and asexual).

A public confused over matters concerning gender should go beyond a cognitive understanding of terms, which subtly define and
categorize persons as certain “types” that are perceived as different—equated with “strange” and “abnormal,” thus “threatening”—
from the rest of the world that is predictably and safely male and female.

This may explain why advocates and fellow members of the LGBTQIA community clash with other members of the public in their
sentiments on the Aug. 13 confrontation between transwoman Gretchen Custodio Diez and a female janitor preventing her from
using the female restroom in a Cubao mall.

Following online outrage on Diez’s treatment by the establishment and calls for boycott of the mall to protest its violation of Quezon
City’s “Gender-Fair City” ordinance—passed in 2014 to penalize discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity and
expression (Sogie)—the mall worker apologized and withdrew her complaint against Diez.

Diez dropped her charges against the worker but plans to pursue charges against the mall management for violating the “Gender-
Fair City” ordinance, reported SunStar Philippines on Friday, Aug. 16, 2019.

Diez and the LGBTQIA community’s use of mass and digital media to advocate for and defend LGBTQIA rights is a potent tool for
opening the public to an awareness of the fluidity of genders and respect for and acceptance of a person’s freedom to choose
Sogie.

The Sogie Equality Bill has languished at the Congress of the Philippines. Known also as the Anti-Discrimination Bill, the proposed
legislation penalizes the discrimination of people due to their sexual orientation, gender identity or expression.

This latest incident of harassment has strengthened calls for the immediate passage of the Sogie Equality Bill, which has languished
for three years in the 17th Congress and has been refiled in the 18th Congress. When Diez took a video of the mall toilet employee
resorting to abusive language and behavior to prevent the transwoman from using the women’s toilet, Diez was arrested and
released after the janitress did not press charges.

To promote equality in treatment of customers and clients, Brig. Gen. Dennis Siervo, chief of the Philippine National Police Human
Rights Affairs Office, urged business establishments and government offices to install “gender-sensitive” restrooms for male, female,
and LGBTQIA persons, similar to the facilities in the PNP office in Camp Crame, cited the same SunStar Philippines report.

This “sex coding of toilets” must still be examined and probed for people to realize how preconceptions and biases reflect and
perpetuate the power inequality in society: how power is wielded by certain groups of people who are privileged in society against
those perceived as less privileged.

In a March 27, 2012 Rappler article, Sylvia Claudio debunked the notion that sex-coded toilets “keep people safe” from harassment
committed by the “sexually deviant” and “perverse” members of the LGBTQIA “intruding” in toilets marked solely for men or women.

“As a public health message, I wish to announce that the majority of sexual abusers are heterosexual men,” wrote Claudio.

So it is not the sex coding of toilets but the security measures implemented by an establishment or office that ensure there is no
person of whatever gender that uses force or coercion to harass or initiate and consummate sex in public toilets.

The mentality justifying discrimination also includes acts of tokenism, such as the Quezon City mall’s participation in Gay Pride
festivities to draw market traffic but absence of gender-sensitivity training for mall personnel and failure to implement Quezon City’s
“Gender-Fair City” ordinance in the mall.
IN THE past week, there have been intense discussions on LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, and queer) rights in the
Philippines.

This after Gretchen Diez, a transgender woman, allegedly experienced discrimination at the Farmer’s Plaza Mall in Cubao, Quezon
City on August 13. In a news report by Philippine Star on August 15, 2019, Diez was arrested and then detained at a police station
for 11 hours after she entered the mall’s women’s restroom.

It was reported on SunStar Philippines that on August 16, Diez filed a complaint against Araneta Center Inc., Starline Security
Agency Inc., and the sanitation services agency contracted by the Araneta Center for supposedly violating the Quezon City Gender
Fair Ordinance.

After Diez posted a video of the incident, a discussion was launched over social media with political figures even commenting on the
incident.

Bataan first district Rep. Geraldine Roman and Gabriela party-list Rep. Arlene Brosas have filed a resolution in Congress for the
investigation of the incident. Roman is the first transgender woman to be elected to Congress.

On Monday, President Rodrigo Duterte has met with Diez. Together with her was Roman. However, the Palace has yet to disclose
what was discussed in the meeting.

The discussion of LGBTQ rights in the country is a sensitive matter. We can visibly see how generally “accepting” the country has
been with the LGBTQ community with the presence of known icons. However, the community continues to face discrimination here
and there. For example, transgender women are commonly catcalled or mocked by people when they walk along the streets. Over
social media, it is also common to see slurs thrown at members of the LGBTQ community.

In a bid to stop discrimination towards the LGBTQ community, the Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and Expression Equality
(Sogie) bill, also known as the Anti-Discrimination Act, was proposed in the Congress and the Senate. In the Congress, House Bill
4982 was filed by representatives Emmeline Y. Aglipay-Villar, Kaka J. Bag-ao, and Roman during the 17th Congress. In the Senate,
Senate Bill 1271 was filed by Senator Risa Hontiveros also during the 17th Congress.

The Sogie Bill was approved by the House of Representatives in 2017, but its version in the Senate experienced delays during the
interpellation period. Hontiveros has refiled the bill in the 18th Congress.

According to its Senate Version, the Sogie Bill seeks to “address all forms of discrimination and violence on the basis of sexual
orientation or gender identity and to promote human dignity.”

As it is hotly debated within the halls of Congress and the Senate, the bill is also being hotly debated among Filipinos. Some oppose
the bill fearing that it may step on the different religious beliefs and practices in the country. Supporters of the bill say that there is a
need to pass the bill citing equal rights for the LGBTQ community.

While there are good intentions for the crafting of the bill, in a way that it calls for the protection of the rights of the LGBTQ
community, the proponents must strike a balance between the needs of the LGBTQ community and the sentiments of those who
oppose the bill. Proponents of the bill must also consider and respect the stance of those who oppose the bill as some of their
comments towards the bill also makes sense.

One thing is sure, the Sogie Bill is facing an uphill battle in the halls of Congress just like how the LGBTQ is struggling to fight
discrimination.

Rice Tarrification Law

The whole rationale of Republic Act No. 11203 or the rice tariffication law (RTL) is to provide affordable rice prices for consumers,
coupled with the goal of raising the income of palay/rice farmers. These twin objectives of the law would supposedly ensure food
security for all, and secure the income of producers and the need of consumers. Supply and demand should always remain
balanced. Economists want the public to believe this.
The implementation of RTL in March 2019 has, however, resulted in higher rice prices for consumers but lower palay prices for rice
farmers. This is not the balance that economists envisioned from the law.

The current farm gate price of palay is ridiculously low. It currently sells between P7 and P10 per kilogram (fresh). In Central Luzon,
the country’s rice granary, the average price of fresh palay is P10.60 (low P9, high P14). In Cagayan Valley, it costs P12.31 per kg
(low P11, high P15). If one compares this with the cost to produce a kilogram of palay at about P12.40 per kg, farmers are losing.

Under this current pricing scheme, no farmer will continue planting rice below production cost. The impact on the farmer household
level, such as higher incidence of malnutrition, school dropouts and increased vulnerability to early marriage, are effects that cannot
be ignored.

The National Food Authority (NFA) buffer stocking for 15 days is equivalent to 488,895 metric tons, and the budgetary requirement
for palay procurement is only P15.5 billion. The 30-day stock is equivalent to 977,790 metric tons, requiring a palay procurement
budget of P31.5 billion. But the government can only provide budgetary support of P7 billion. Under the RTL, the NFA is limited only
to maintaining buffer stocks (to be sourced locally) for emergencies and disaster relief. Only one import restriction remains under the
RTL, and this is the Bureau of Plant Industry sanitary permit. This is easy to secure.

The recommendation to engage the services of local government units (LGUs) in the market price mechanism seems interesting but
problematic. Are LGUs willing and capable to take on the task of buying and selling palay, same as the previous role of the NFA?
Do they have the necessary logistics to purchase, store and deliver palay from farm to market places?

A World Trade Organization trade and food security expert has said that the government’s (pre-RTL) tariffication should have looked
first into the effects of tariffs before pursuing a rice deregulation policy. The WTO did not require the Philippine government to
deregulate the rice industry. What the WTO required was simply to replace quantitative restriction (QR) with tariff as the standard
form of global trade policy, and not total rice deregulation measures for the domestic rice industry as now enshrined under the RTL.

This was primarily why the Department of Agriculture (during pre-RTL) had warned of the adverse effects of unilaterally liberalizing
the domestic rice industry. As the only “state-trading enterprise notified by the Philippines in the WTO, the NFA has exclusive or
special rights or privileges, including statutory or constitutional powers, in the exercise of which they influence through purchases or
sales.”

What farmers now recommend to the government and lawmakers is to suspend the RTL implementation during the competitive
measures phase, a period crucial to making Filipino rice farmers viable. Filipino rice farmers are not mere recipients of conditional
cash transfers. They are key staple food producers. Assistance along the lines of the pre-RTL palay price support of P20.70 will go
a long way, especially for cash-starved Filipino rice farmers. Farmers need at least eight cropping seasons (two cropping seasons a
year) to become competitive. The government should continue to regulate rice imports and should provide direct farm and market
support to farmers.

As with any responsible government, it should keep its option for quantitative restrictions in case of disasters, manmade (such as
policy failures) or otherwise.

The National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) is taking the lead in crafting the Implementing Rules and Regulations
(IRR) of the recently signed Rice Tariffication Act or RA 11203, ensuring the country’s smooth and timely transition to a new rice
regime.

“We laud the signing of the historic Rice Tariffication Act. This ushers in a new rice policy that will set in motion big reforms in the
agriculture sector and will ensure the availability of cheaper rice (closer to world prices) in the market,” Socioeconomic Planning
Secretary Ernesto M. Pernia said.

Signed by President Duterte on February 14, 2019, the law amends the two-decade-old Agricultural Tariffication Act of 1996 and
replaces the quantitative restrictions (QR) on rice imports with tariff.

“We, at NEDA, have always been pushing for key reforms that will make the Filipino staple food accessible and affordable for
everyone. We are confident that the full implementation of the law will have the resolute support of everyone,” Pernia said.

In anticipation of the signing of the bill, government agencies started preparing for its implementation as early as January 2019.
Technical working groups were created to discuss key provisions of the bill and provide inputs to the draft IRR.

The IRR Drafting Committee has members from NEDA, Department of Budget and Management, Department of Agriculture, and
other concerned government agencies.

The first draft of the IRR formulated during a two-day workshop last week was presented to the National Food Authority (NFA)
Council on February 18, 2019.
Pernia said the revised draft IRR will be subjected to public consultation in the coming days.

The draft IRR contains provisions on the removal of NFA’s regulatory powers and the streamlining of import requirements. It also
provides details on the necessary institutional arrangements that will enhance competitiveness and institute safety nets to assist
local farmers affected by the removal of the QR on rice imports.

“Anyone, whether a small or a big trader, can now import as long as they have secured a Sanitary Phytosanitary (SPS) clearance
from the Department of Agriculture and paid the corresponding tariff. By removing NFA’s decades-old monopoly on rice importation,
we promote greater participation of the private sector and enhance competition in the market,” Pernia said.

He added that safety nets are included in the new law that address concerns of many farmers.

“The law provides sure and transparent support to farmers through a comprehensive assistance program to the tune of at least P10
billion a year for the next six years,” Pernia said.

In particular, the Rice Competitiveness Enhancement Fund (RCEF) will be used to provide key interventions to support farmers and
enhance their competitiveness and profitability, including farm machinery and equipment to improve farm operations, rice seed
development, propagation, and promotion, expanded rice credit, and extension services.

A portion of the rice tariff revenues in excess of PhP 10 billion will be used to provide direct financial assistance to rice farmers
affected by the removal of the QR and for diversification to high-value crops.

A mandatory review of the RCEF will be conducted by Congress on the sixth year.

Pernia said that the law also grants the President the power to increase, reduce, revise or adjust existing tariff rates to safeguard
Filipino farmers. In case of imminent danger of rice shortage, the bill empowers the President, for a limited period and for a specified
volume, to allow importation at lower tariff rates for the benefit of consumers.

The bill also enables the President to increase the applied tariff to more than 100% (but not to exceed the specified bound rate) if
warranted.

Pernia said that a special safeguard duty on rice will also be imposed to protect the rice industry from sudden or extreme price
fluctuations. A safeguard duty is a temporary increase in import duty of an agricultural product to deal with import surges or price
falls, under the WTO Agreement on Agriculture.

“The new law not only puts in place a new and efficient rice regime but also widens the horizons of productivity and sustainability of
the country’s rice sector. With this law, concerned government agencies, including NEDA, are mandated to craft a Rice Industry
Roadmap. This development plan will detail strategies related to research, production, and governance mechanisms, among
others.”

The law provides a maximum of 180 days from the law’s effectivity date for the formulation and adoption of the Roadmap.

The Philippine rice sector has always been the center of government agricultural policies. The focal points of the policies revolve
around promoting food self-sufficiency, providing high income to rice farmers while making prices affordable to the consuming
public. The accession to WTO provided for the revision of the quantitative restrictions (QRs) and reduce tariff protection. Rice was
exempted from tariffication. The Philippines opened up imports on rice under a minimum access volume (MAV) which is in operation
equivalent to QRs. The QR regime mandated for conversion into tariff protection from 2005- 2012 and a waiver to maintain QR up to
June 30, 2017. The Philippines’ membership to the WTO for 24 years aimed to counter the impact of the expected influx of cheap
rice imports. The Rice Tariffication Law signed into law by President Rodrigo Duterte on February 14, 2019 amends the Agricultural
Tariffication Act of 1996 that imposed tariff to agricultural imports except for rice. The law was prompted because of the surging
inflation of rice price during the last quarter of 2018 after the rice stocks of NFA ran out. As Filipinos continue to struggle with
inflation, the government found ways to temper rising inflation.

Overview of Philippine rice industry

The Philippines became self-sufficient in rice in the 1970s and was a rice exporter to neighboring countries such as Indonesia,
China, and Myanmar. However, with the rapid increase in population and limited land resources to produce the total rice
requirement, the country slowly turned into a net rice importer. The Philippines is the second largest rice importer in the world next
to China (Simeon, 2019). In 2017, the country imports rice mainly from Vietnam (52%) and Thailand (29%) (Santiago, 2019).

Rice is a highly political commodity because it is the country’s main staple. It has always been the center of government agricultural
policies. The focal points of the policies revolve around promoting food self-sufficiency, providing high income to rice farmers while
making prices affordable to the consuming public (Tobias et al., 2011)

The Philippines in the WTO

In 1995, the Philippines acceded to the WTO with the premise of revising QRs and reduce tariff protection. Rice, however, was
exempted from tariffication. The Philippines opened up imports on rice under a minimum access volume (MAV) which is in operation
equivalent to Quantitative Restrictions (QRs). The QR regime of the Philippines was mandated for conversion into tariff protection.
The country obtained a special treatment for rice up to 2005, which was later on extended until 2012. The Philippines has been
applying for extensions of QR on rice since 1995. Eventually, the Philippines acquired a waiver to maintain QR up to June 30, 2017.

The Philippines’ membership to WTO for 24 years aimed to counter the impact of the expected influx of cheap rice imports. The
country apparently has been extending protection primarily to safeguard the local rice farmers from increased competition of
imported rice. Another reason the Philippines had been pushing for a two-year extension of the restriction is to achieve rice self-
sufficiency by 2020. However, given that QR on rice shall be retained, consumers shall continue to bear the burden of overpriced
rice, with the poorest households bearing the burden. Based on the 2012 Family Income and Expenditure Survey, the richest 20%
of households only devote 3% of their spending on rice while poorer income groups tend to allocate greater share for rice (PIDS,
2012).

THE RICE TARIFFICATION LAW

The Rice Tariffication Law titled “An Act liberalizing the importation, exportation, and trading of rice, lifting for the purpose the
quantitative import restriction on rice, and for other purposes” was signed into law by President Rodrigo Roa Duterte on February
14, 2019. This is also known as the Rice Liberalization Act or Republic Act No. 11203, which amends the Agricultural Tariffication
Act of 1996 that imposed tariff to agricultural imports except for rice. Primarily, the law aims to lift the quantitative restriction (QR) on
rice imports and replace it with a general tariff. The Agricultural Tariffication Act of 1996 served as the Philippine government’s
compliance to our obligation to WTO, lifting QRs and imposing tariff to agricultural products. The law aims to protect local farmers
from the entry of more imported rice into the country through the imposition of 35% tariff on rice coming from member-countries of
the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) like Thailand and Vietnam. For non-ASEAN countries, 40% tariff is imposed.
The collected tariffs will be used to fund mass irrigation, warehousing, and rice research.

Objectives of the tariffication law

1. Fulfill our international commitment when we joined the World Trade Organization in 1995. Replace the QR on rice with
another form of protection that is more transparent and generate revenues to support the sector – or a tariff.

2. Ensure the availability of rice in the domestic market for the accessibility of greater majority of the population by allowing
more private traders (big or small) to participate in importing rice.

3. Lower domestic rice prices to levels that would be affordable to greater majority of the population.

4. Make domestic market function effectively and efficiently with much reduced/no government intervention.

5. Provide farmers equivalent protection with the imposition of 35 % or higher tariff rates on rice imports and preferential
assistance to rice farmers, adversely affected by tariffication.

6. Provide opportunity for farmers to earn more in the world market. The law also lifted the restriction on rice exports to
encourage farmers to produce much better quality heirloom/ traditional rice geared to exports.

Key provisions of the rice tariffication act

1. Tariffication. Tariffs are set at 35% tariff rate on all rice imports from ASEAN countries, and a 40% tariff on all imports
from non-ASEAN countries.

2. Lifting of quantitative restriction on imports and exports. Removal of the QR will also increase imports and depress
“palay” prices.

3. Powers of the President. Upon the recommendation of NEDA and as advised by the National Food Authority Council
(NFAC), the President “may increase, reduce, revise or adjust existing rates of import duty up to the bound rate” of rice
tariffs. In case of “imminent or forecasted shortage,” the draft IRR provides that the President may allow the importation of
rice at a lower applied tariff “for a limited period and/or specified volume” to address the situation.

4. Creation of the Rice Competitiveness Enhancement Fund (RCEF). A fund that will be created from tariff revenues of
rice imports and will be used to directly support rice farmers and fund innovative undertakings of the government to further
strengthen the rice industry. It aims to provide key interventions to support farmers and enhance their competitiveness
and profitability, including farm machinery and equipment to improve farm operations, rice seed development,
propagation, and promotion, expanded rice credit, and extension services. The RCEF will be allocated to rice producing
areas and earmarked as follows:

1. 50% will go to the Philippine Center for Postharvest Development and Modernization (PhilMech) to provide
farmers with rice farm machineries and equipment;
 2. 30% will be released to the Philippine Rice Research Institute (PhilRice) to be used for the development,
propagation and promotion of inbred rice seeds to rice farmers and the organization of rice farmers into seed
growers’ associations engaged in seed production and trade;

3. 10% will be made available in the form of credit facility with minimal interest rates and with minimum collateral
requirements to rice farmers and cooperatives to be managed by the Land Bank of the Philippines and the
Development Bank of the Philippines; and

4. 10% will be set aside to fund extension services by PhilMech, Agricultural Training Institute (ATI), and the
Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA) for teaching skills on rice crop production,
modern rice farming techniques, seed production, farm mechanization, and knowledge/ technology transfer
through farm schools nationwide.

5. Rice industry road map. The Department of Agriculture (DA), together with relevant agencies, will have to formulate a
Rice Industry Roadmap to spell out the critical interventions that need to be put in place to assist the small rice farmers,
especially those that will be most affected by the tariffication. DA Secretary Emmanuel Piñol issued Special Order No. 358
which created a National Rice Roadmap Team.

6. Issuance of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Import Clearance for Rice for the Sole Purpose. The law allows unlimited
importation of rice as long as private sector traders secure a phytosanitary permit from the Bureau of Plant Industry and
pay the 35% tariff for shipments from neighbors in Southeast Asia. This covers even rice importation for the purposes of
donation during calamities and emergency situations. In these instances, the agency/office/organization or private entities,
if they are based in the Philippines, will be required to secure phytosanitary import clearances (SPSIC).

7. National Single Window Program. A proposed measure the setting up of a single window system for rice by the Bureau
of Customs to address rice smuggling.

8. Exclusion and transfer of the regulatory function of the National Food Authority (NFA) to the Bureau of Plant
Industry (BPI). NFA will retain its power to maintain a rice buffer stock which will be used in emergency situations and to
sustain the government's disaster relief programs. Rice for this purpose will be sourced solely from local farmers.

9. Special Rice Safeguard. The Implementing Rules and Guidelines (IRR) provides for a Special Rice Safeguard to help
protect local rice farmers from sudden or extreme price volatilities. These will be imposed in accordance with RA 8800 or
the Safeguard Measures Act and its IRR.

10. Priority beneficiaries of mechanization. There are 1,100 producing towns that have been identified as priority
beneficiaries of mechanization in the form of tractors, transplanters, harvesters, dryers, and rice milling equipment.

11. Rice Farmer Financial Assistance program. Focuses on rice farmers, cooperatives, and associations adversely
affected by rice tariffication. Also allocates tariff revenues in excess of Php10 billion to the Rice Farmer Financial
Assistance program to compensate rice farmers who will lose income as a result of the measure. A portion of the excess
tariff will be allocated to titling rice lands, expanded crop insurance, and crop diversification program.

Rice tariffication and inflation

The newly approved Rice Tariffication Law, approved by Congress on November 2018, will remove the National Food Authority’s
(NFA) power to import and distribute cheaper rice. With Senator Cynthia Villar as the principal author, the measure was prepared
jointly by the Committees on Agriculture and Food, on Ways and Means, and on Finance. It is in substitution of Senate Bill Nos.
1476, 1689, 1839, taking into consideration Proposed Senate Resolution Nos. 143, 146 and House Bill No. 7735, with Senators
Ralph Recto, Leila De Lima, Joel Villanueva, Risa Hontiveros, Grace Poe, Sherwin Gatchalian and Cynthia Villar as
authors.

Pres. Rodrigo Duterte signed into law the Rice Tariffication Bill which was imposed recently on March 5, 2019. The law was
prompted because of the surging inflation of rice price during the last quarter of 2018 after the rice stocks of NFA ran out. Further,
according to Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) data, rice was the number one contributor to inflation in September 2018, while
food items in the consumption basket accounted for more than half of the inflation rate in the same month. Consumers bought
regular-milled rice at an average price of Php 37.89/kg (US$ 0.72/kg) and well-milled rice at Php 41.93/kg (US$ 0.80/kg). Prices of
rice have continued to go up since then. Farmers enjoyed the highest buying price for “palay” which was recorded at Php 22.00/kg.
The rise in rice prices, both at the farm-gate and retail levels, contributed significantly to inflation. As Filipinos continue to struggle
with inflation, the government found ways to temper rising inflation. One way of doing it is by passing the Rice Tariffication Bill.

On the other hand, according to the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA), rice tariffication will directly benefit
farmers and the poor through lower rice prices and increased government assistance to the agricultural sector. The newly-signed
law provides for the establishment of the Rice Competitiveness Enhancement Fund (RCEF), which will pipe in Php10 billion (US$
190.84) annually to the rice sector for the next six years. The RCEF is allocated for the procurement of farm machinery and
equipment, rice development, propagation and promotion, as well as expanded rice credit and extension services.
Meanwhile, the NEDA is taking the lead in crafting the Implementing Rules and Guidelines (IRR) of the Rice Tariffication Law along
with the Department of Budget and Management, Department of Agriculture, and other concerned government agencies to ensure
the country’s smooth transition to a new rice regime. This draft IRR takes into account the feedback and concerns brought up by
various stakeholders during the drafting of the bill and after it was signed into law.

The following sections present the objectives, key provisions and possible implications and issues associated with the enactment of
the Rice Tariffication Law.

Effects of rice tariffication

Positive

1. Lower retail prices for consumers. Possible savings for the consumers as it allows no limit in terms of the volume of
imports which will eventually stabilize prices. However, in the long run, the economy could benefit more from the adoption
of import tariffs than implementation of QRS which limit the entry of commodities and may lead to unstable prices.

2. Address the rice shortage. Would address the urgent need to improve availability of rice in the country, prevent artificial
rice shortages, reduce the prices of rice in the market, and curtail corruption and cartel domination in the rice industry.

3. Lower inflation rates. The law will also reduce government's role in rice importation and lead to more rice imports by the
private sector, thus, lowering rice prices and help tame inflation.

4. Interventions to support rice farmers. RCEF will provide key interventions to support farmers and enhance their
competitiveness and profitability, including farm machinery and equipment to improve farm operations, rice seed
development, propagation, and promotion, expanded rice credit, and extension services. Likewise, it will open up a
window for farmers to export and contribute to the world market.

Negative

1. New law lacks safety nets for Filipino farmers. Farmer groups clamor that the new law will make them compete with
cheap rice imports, making them more penniless. Measures should be in place to ensure that Filipino farmers will not
suffer with the rice tariffication law and that "safety nets" are available for farmers. While it has its good points, the lack of
government regulation worries stakeholders.

2. Potential displacement of farmers, NFA employees, accredited NFA retailers, rice millers and rice by-product
producers. Aside from the obvious displacement of rice farmers, NFA employees, and some 90,000 accredited NFA rice
retailers nationwide, the deregulation of rice imports goes beyond the industry. Some of the businesses and industries
that will be affected by liberalized rice importation includes the following:

1. Millers. There are around 6,600 registered rice millers all over the country, employing 55,000 workers. Industry
stakeholders, in a position paper, said that a complete milling facility costs from Php 30 million (US$572,519.08)
to Php 50 million (US$954,198.47)1 . This would place the value of the whole industry itself at Php200 billion
(US$ 3.82 billion) to Php300 billion (US$ 5.73) ( (Orly Manuntag, Confideartion of Grains Retailers Association
of the Philippines).

2. Animal feeds and beer industry. A by-product of the rice milling process, the rice bran is used for making
animal and aquaculture feeds. A shortage in local unhusked rice production would also mean there would be a
drop in its by-product. If feed mills produce less, it would cause a possible increase in the prices of pork and
chicken which use rice bran as major ingredient for its feeds. Another by-product which comes from the milling
process is the brewer's rice or “binlid” which is used in manufacturing alcoholic drinks, particularly beer.

3. Biomass, construction industry. A drop in local rice output will also mean a decrease in rice hull, which is
used as fuel for biomass furnaces used in the provinces to provide electricity. Rice hulls are also used as a
binder for cement and land fillers (Orly Manuntag, Confideartion of Grains Retailers Association of the
Philippines).

3. Enable cartels of the rice trade and will throw poor sectors into a worsened state of hunger. There is no guarantee
that retail rice prices will be lower in the long run with unhampered importation. Relying on rice imports makes the country
vulnerable to higher world market prices as well as to rice production and export decisions of other countries. In 2008, for
instance, Vietnam, India and Pakistan restricted their rice exports amid rising global rice prices. Thailand also raised the
idea of creating a global rice cartel similar to that for oil exporting countries.

Some salient issues on rice tariffication

1. Rice imports are cheaper than domestically produced rice. Under a free market, the market price of rice will decline with
the influx of cheaper rice imports.

2. Liberalizing rice imports will help, but will not solve the Philippines' inflation problem.
 3. Tariff are set at 35% tariff rate on all rice imports from ASEAN countries, and a 40% tariff on all imports from non-ASEAN
countries. However, some experts claim these tariff rates are still too high, and lower rates (10% to 20%) might be more
feasible in keeping with the central goal of making rice more affordable for Filipinos. While this will result in imported rice
becoming more expensive, the flood of imported grains will still threaten local produce and worse, affects the farmers.

4. To ensure that the rice to be imported will not be infested by pathogens or pests like bukbok (weevils), the new law
requires that all private players secure “sanitary and phytosanitary import clearances” from BPI before they can import.
Past experience tells us that this could be prone to abuse (Dr. Ramon Clarete, University of the Philippines School of
Economics).

5. The Rice Fund will be put to better use if it were focused instead on improving rice farmers’ access to credit and crop
insurance (Dr. Emil Q. Javier, National Academy of Science and Technology).

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Much has been said on the ratification of the Rice Tariffication Act. However, the main concern is the negative impact of the rice
tariffication law on local farmers, saying that the “over supply” of cheap rice could adversely affect them following its implementation.
On the other hand, the law is seen to help expand the access of Filipinos to cheap rice that in return will prevent inflation pitch
brought in large part by the supply. Nevertheless, the core concern of the government should be on how to prevent 2.4 million rice
farmers and farm workers from getting poorer because of the implementation of the new law. Although special key provisions are
already laid out to protect the farmers and the consumers, the focus is on the proper implementation so that everyone should benefit
from the law.

The newly-signed law provides for the establishment of the Rice Competitiveness Enhancement Fund (RCEF), which will pipe in
Php10 billion (US$ 190.84 million) annually to the rice sector for the next six years. The RCEF is allocated for the procurement of
farm machinery and equipment, rice development, propagation and promotion, as well as expanded rice credit and extension
services. RCEF is a package of support programs to help the farmers and serve as safeguard to cushion the sudden effects of
inflation. However, it is imperative that DA to strongly support the local rice industry and diligently perform its mandated functions in
identifying eligible beneficiaries which include farmers, other farm workers, rice cooperatives and associations. Most importantly, in
crafting the IRR, research and development should be highlighted since it has been proven to help develop improved technologies
and increase farmers’ income.