We will be using FairTradeWeb Version 1 at WordPress.com for the meantime.

Thanks.

For more information, contact us at adamendoza[at]gmail.com.

SENATOR MIRIAM Defensor-Santiago yesterday said she will propose a “conditional” Senate approval of the Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement (JPEPA), pointing out that the wide-ranging free trade deal needed to be amended or else be rejected by the Supreme Court for being in conflict with the Constitution.

“The JPEPA is very controversial. Amending or changing some provisions in the treaty is needed,” said Ms. Santiago, head of the Senate committee on foreign relations, adding that it is a “very, very rare” for the Senate to simply approve a treaty.

Many senators are in favor of approving the JPEPA, she said, but warned that without the amendments, the treaty will be deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

The provisions being contested involve “national treatment,” in which Japanese businesses will be treated as Filipino entities; the “most-favored nation treatment” where Japan will be equally treated with other countries with regard to other international treaties and concessions; and performance requirements, where Japanese firms are not required to transfer technology to the Philippines.

“If we insist on approving JPEPA but there are provisions against the Constitution, we can be sued by Japan in the international court,” Ms. Santiago said.

“The problem is, when we signed the JPEPA with Japan, we have not opposed the privileges for them that were included in the deal,” Ms. Santiago said. “It seems that they have tricked us.”

Fair Trade Alliance Executive Director Rene Ofreneo told BusinessWorld conditional concurrence would be favorable “if it amounts to a renegotiation.”

The group’s senior researcher, Errol A. Ramos, said the JPEPA promotes “economic imbalance.”

“We are not saying that we do not want [to be a trading partner of] Japan,” he said in a telephone interview. “We just want a fair and equitable trade treaty with them because it will be the basis of future trade agreements.”

He noted that the JPEPA is the Philippines’ first bilateral treaty after a parity rights deal with the United States following World War II.

Senate President Manuel B. Villar had said the Senate would make a decision on the JPEPA within the first quarter. Senator Manuel A. Roxas II, who heads the Senate trade and commerce committee, has decided to vote in favor of the treaty, saying the Philippines risks being cut off from the global supply chain without a free trade deal with Japan.

Under the JPEPA, tariffs on 95% of Philippine exports to Japan will be eliminated upon implementation. Import duties on industrial goods such as electronics and automobiles will be phased out within a ten-year period.

Immediately, sectors such as farming, fishing, and food processing will benefit from zero duties in Japan. As a sweetener, a limited number of Filipino nurses and caregivers will be allowed to work in Japan but they have to train first and learn Nihongo.

Japanese lawmakers have already approved the treaty and the Philippine Senate must do the same for the JPEPA to take effect.

The analysis of the Universal Access to Competitiveness and Trade, a nonprofit think-tank, estimated the JPEPA’s benefits to four industries — electronics, automotive, garments, and furniture — and found that investments could also increase by nearly $300 million to $445 million.

Upstream industries could also benefit when exporters purchase more inputs or raw materials, to the tune of $500 million to $751 million, said the think-tank, which is connected to the Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

The study was done on an assumption that exports of the four “vital” industries would go up by 20% to 30% with easier market access to Japan.

Much of the increase in export output and employment will come from semiconductor exporters (up to $1.26 billion in additional value and 135,549 new jobs), as the sector, on the average, accounts for 7% or $2.7 billion of total exports to Japan, the study showed. — B.U. Allauigan

In a last ditch effort to make solons listen to reason, Bobby Tanada and the Fair Trade Alliance (FTA) gave a rebuttal to the ‘tabla-talo’ logic of Senator Mar Roxas concerning the Japan Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement (JPEPA).

Mar Roxas, chair of the Committee on Trade and Commerce, in his ‘tabla-talo’ campaign, is saying that the Philippines stands to lose more by rejecting JPEPA. Bobby Tanada, on the other hand, says we should strike a ‘win-win’ situation, a position of equality, rather than a tabla-talo situation, a position of subservience.

Indeed, ‘tabla-talo’ is a defeatist attitude that since we cannot achieve equality, we might as well try to get what we can even under severe inequality. In other words, his logic runs – let us be blind to our position of inferiority so we can at least pick up a few crumbs. It is our colonial mentality all over again, the inability to stand up and fight for our rights. It is surrendering without putting up a fight.

Mar argues from the fact that Japan is our largest trading partner next to the US. Rejection he says means heavy economic losses. But we do not have to reject. All the FTA is asking, the middle position, is to DEFER, until we can rectify the imbalances and inequity, just a bit more time to make amendments before ratification.

We can tell the Japanese, “Hey, please wait a bit. Our government officials kept the deal a secret for a long time, and when it was presented to our legislature, they had no choice but to show the deal finally. And by that time, it was too late to make a full fledge evaluation. Of course, we will consider ratification, but please let us remove the inequalities.”

The worms started to come out in trickles. They reared their ugly faces at the senate hall, without any public consultation. Secondly, my dear Japanese friends in trade, you authored the JPEPA with very little inputs from the subservient Filipino panel. You were talking to subservient political appointees, not true traders or economists like yourselves.

The JPEPA controversy ultimately boils down to the issue of subservience.

Will it really result in huge economic losses? Do we lose more with JPEPA or lose more without it? It is a case of a lesser evil. One of the many terribly unequal provisions revolves around the entry of Japanese ‘factory ships’ to take away our dwindling tuna, resulting in the dislocation of millions of already-dislocated marginal fishing communities. Is this not a huge loss? The gains of JPEPA in trade are for the upper crust and leaves the marginals more destitute.

It is pathetic that the ‘moderate’ Trade Union Congress of the Philippines (TUCP) is for JPEPA provided they get a bit of cash for workers, namely, a ‘safety net’ of P2 billion for dislocated workers. They are mercenaries willing to sell our souls for a song, for thirty pieces of silver in their hands. They do not care if the deal is one-sided as long as they get their piece of the pie. The Japanese must be laughing at us that it is so cheap to buy our support for a one sided deal, namely P2 billion, which is a drop in the bucket if you think of entire industries, like tuna and sardines, permanently dislocated.

Miriam, on the other hand, is obsessed with the legal issue of the constitution. As a lawyer, she views this as a real threat. But she cannot see beyond the legal aspects. She cannot read in between the lines on provisions which will dislocate marginal communities. As long as the legal hurdles are addressed, everything is fine with her.

Her ‘conditional concurrence’ is a lame-duck excuse to get the deal ratified no matter what, the order from Malacanang. Conditional concurrence sweeps under the rug all the legal inconsistencies of JPEPA, hoping it does not blow up into our faces later. The logic is – let’s get this over and done with, as the boss says, and think of consequences later.

Bobby says our JPEPA is inferior to the agreements entered into by Japan with Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand. We get the raw end of a deal and we agree to it. “We are not against economic partnership with any country, in this case Japan, because this is not inevitable under a more globalized economic environment. But we must be cautious about entering into these trade arrangements so that in the end it will truly serve and support the national development agenda of the country,” Bobby adds.”

FTA further pointed out that “it is not true that more market opening will happen if there is JPEPA, in fact, as of now, close to 90% of Philippine exports to Japan are already enjoying duty free access to Japan, whether there is JPEPA or not. On the other hand, local industries will suffer because JPEPA allows the entry of used clothing (ukay ukay) and second hand vehicles to the Philippines.”

The problem is our solons who vote on JPEPA for the wrong reasons, namely political – Malacanang says so; or we can sweep the legal problems under the rug. It is as if they are arguing on the economic aspects when deep down their agenda is political. Politics will bring us all down.

“During the heated public hearings on the controver-sial economic and trade treaty with Japan, Sen. Mar Roxas clearly indicated his grave doubts about its feasibility and beneficial effects on the Philippines. But he now favors its ratification even though it would bring only “token benefits” to Filipinos. As he put it, they will only “draw or lose” in the event of its implementation.

Why this strange turnaround by Roxas? Why is he singing a different tune this time? And why is he even trying to convince his fellow senators to ratify a patently defective pact?”

Mata also echoes the sentiments of the Alliance:

“Has Roxas so soon forgotten the wise advice of former Senator Wigberto Tañada, his own party mate in the Liberal Party of which he (Roxas) is the president? Tañada, one of the constitutionalists who testified that the JPEPA contained numerous provisions in clear violation of the Philippine Constitution, had urged Roxas to offer a ‘win-win’ formula, and not just a ‘draw or lose’ option.”

with a VERY strong statement:

“…in the coming 2010 presidential elections, Filipinos will have another chance to choose the kind of leader that they have longed for, one who will lead the country to victory, and certainly not a presidential wannabe who can only offer a “draw or lose” in a crucial issue like the controversial JPEPA, and not a “win-win” formula that is a mark of a true and strong national leader.”

Link to Mata’s full column here.

Tañada sinalungat si Roxas sa pagsuporta sa JPEPA
FairTrade renews call for JPEPA renegotiation
Strange turnaround on JPEPA

The Fair Trade Alliance urged the government anew to renegotiate the Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement (JPEPA) after Senator Manuel Roxas II has favored its full ratification.

Former senator Wigberto Tañada, lead convenor of the multi-sectoral FairTrade, said the alliance is hoping that Roxas would still change his mind on the controversial deal with Japan.

“FairTrade thought that Sen. Roxas, after several public hearings on JPEPA, was able to see the economic balances in the treaty and the serious constitutional flaws, and that it was inferior to the agreements entered into by Japan with Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand,” Tañada said.

“The Filipino people cannot accept a ‘tablo-talo’ (tie-lose) scenario. What we want is a win-win situation, a mutually beneficial economic partnership,” he added.

Tañada clarified that the group is not against economic partnership with any country, saying it is inevitable under a more globalized economic climate. But he said that the country must be cautious in entering into trade agreements.

The JPEPA, which has been signed by President Arroyo and ratified by the Japanese parliament, will lift all tariffs on about 80 percent of Philippine exports to Japan.

Tañada argued that close to 90 percent of Philippine exports already enjoy a duty-free access to Japan even without JPEPA.

Tañada also warned that the deal will only allow entry of used clothing and second-hand vehicles in the Philippines.

“That is why from the very start the position of the alliance is to renegotiate the treaty because of these inherent economic and constitutional questions. The Senate must correct these patently one-sided contents in JPEPA so that it will effectively benefit Philippine industries and the Filipino people.”

Various parties want the Senate to kill JPEPA because they said it will only create low-paying jobs and allow Japan to dump toxic waste in the country.

Roxas, who heads the Senate committee on trade and commerce that reviews the JPEPA, said the Philippines may end up losing more if it failed to open up to neighboring countries.

Former Senator Wigberto Tañada, lead convenor of the multi-sectoral Fair Trade Alliance (FairTrade), is hoping that Senator Mar Roxas, who is now proposing the full ratification of JPEPA, will still change his mind.

Based from media reports, Sen. Roxas admits there is no or little gain in ratifying JPEPA, but that the country will be left behind if we do not ratify it. He said JPEPA is a case of “tabla-talo” (tie-lose).

“FairTrade thought that Sen. Roxas, after several public hearings on JPEPA, was able to see the economic balances in the treaty and the serious constitutional flaws, and that it was inferior to the agreements entered into by Japan with Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand. The Filipino people cannot accept a ‘tablo-talo’ scenario. What we want is a win-win situation, a mutually beneficial economic partnership,” Tañada said.

“We are not against economic partnership with any country, in this case Japan, because this is not inevitable under a more globalized economic environment. But we must be cautious about entering into these trade arrangements so that in the end it will truly serve and support the national development agenda of the country,” Tanada emphasized.

FairTrade also argued that it is not true that more market opening will happen if there is JPEPA, in fact as of now close to 90 percent of Philippine exports to Japan are already enjoying duty-free access to Japan, whether there is JPEPA or not. On the other hand, local industries will suffer because JPEPA allows the entry of used clothing (ukay-ukay) and second-hand vehicles to the Philippines.

“That is why from the very start the position of the Alliance is to renegotiate the treaty because of these inherent economic and constitutional questions. The Senate must correct these patently onesided contents in JPEPA so that it will effectively benefit Philippine industries and the Filipino people.

The multisectoral Fair Trade Alliance (FTA) has renewed its call for the renegotiation of the Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement (JPEPA) amid the proposal of Sen. Manuel “Mar” Roxas to prioritize the full ratification of the trade deal.

FTA lead convenor and former Sen. Wigberto Tanada expressed high hopes that Roxas, will still change his mind since admitting that there is no or little gain in ratifying JPEPA.

Roxas was reported as saying JPEPA is a case of tabla-talo (tie or lose) once it was not ratified.

“Fair Trade thought that Senator Roxas, after several public hearings on JPEPA, was able to see the economic balances in the treaty and the serious constitutional flaws, and that it was inferior to the agreements entered into by Japan with Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand. The Filipino people cannot accept a tabla-talo scenario. What we want is a win-win situation, a mutually beneficial economic partnership,” Tañada pointed out.

“We are not against economic partnership with any country, in this case Japan, because this is not inevitable under a more globalized economic environment. But we must be cautious about entering into these trade arrangements so that in the end it will truly serve and support the national development agenda of the country,” Tanada emphasized.

Fair Trade also argued that it is not true that more market opening will happen if there is JPEPA, in fact, as of now close to 90 percent of Philippine exports to Japan are already enjoying duty-free access, On the other hand, local industries will suffer because JPEPA allows the entry of used clothing (ukay-ukay) and second-hand vehicles to the Philippines.

The Fair Trade Alliance has appealed anew for a renegotiation of the Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement following the proposal of Sen. Mar Roxas to ratify the accord.

FTA head Wigberto Tanada said the Philippines should still push for renegotiation, citing the admission of Roxas that there is little, if at all, to be gained if JPEPA is ratified, except that the country will be left behind if it is not.

“Fair Trade thought that Senator Roxas, after several public hearings on JPEPA, was able to see the economic balances in the treaty and the serious constitutional flaws, and that it was inferior to the agreements entered into by Japan with Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand,” Tanada said.

The Filipinos should accept only “a win-win situation, a mutually beneficial economic partnership” and not settle for a “tie-lose” scenario, he added.

FTA clarified it is not against economic partnerships with any country as this is inevitable in a globalized economic environment, but that the government must ensure that any trade arrangement it enters into will “truly serve and support” the national development agenda.

The lobby group further said that “close to 90 percent of Philippine exports to Japan are already enjoying duty-free access to Japan, whether there is JPEPA or not.”

On the other hand, FTA said local industries stand to suffer since JPEPA allows the entry of used clothing and second-hand vehicles to the Philippines.

“The Senate must correct these patently one-sided contents in JPEPA so that it will effectively benefit Philippine industries and the Filipino people,” Tanada said.