2 MIN READ

By SHERWIN DE VERA
www.nordis.net

VIGAN CITY—Farmer organizations have criticized President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s recent executive orders on rice pricing and agricultural procurement, calling them “superficial measures’ that fail to address the roots of the crisis in Philippine agriculture.

On October 25, Malacañang issued EO 100, which establishes a minimum purchase price for palay (unmilled rice), and EO 101, requiring full enforcement of the Sagip Saka Act. 

The Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP) and Aminhan-National Federation of Peasant Women stated that Executive Order Nos. 100 and 101 demonstrate the government’s reliance on market-oriented reforms that favor private-sector involvement over direct state support. They characterized the orders as public relations efforts aimed at seeming concerned for farmers while upholding neoliberal agricultural policies.

Amihan said EO 100 offers no real protection for rice farmers as long as market forces remain dominated by landlords, traders, and financiers.

“Walang ngipin o parusa ito sa mga hindi susunod, at wala ring mekanismo ang gubyerno para hilahin pataas ang presyo ng palay dahil napakaliit na bahagi ng kabuuang ani ng palay ang procurement ng National Food Authority,” the group stated.

(This has no teeth or penalties for those who will not comply, and the government has no mechanism to raise the price of palay because the National Food Authority’s procurement covers only a very small portion of the total harvest.)

Under the directive, the NFA remains limited to buffer stocking, preventing it from buying a significant share of the total harvest.

Amihan pointed to the government’s weak procurement system and ongoing importation under the Rice Liberalization Law as the reasons why local farm-gate prices remain low.

“Para itaas ang presyo ng palay, dapat palakihin ang palay procurement ng NFA, bilhin direkta sa mga magsasaka, sa makatarungang presyo,” the group said.

(To raise the price of palay, the NFA should increase its procurement and buy directly from farmers at a fair price.)

They argue that without increased state procurement, penalties for price manipulation, and support for production, such as subsidies, irrigation, and post-harvest facilities, the order would have little effect on farmers’ incomes.

Meanwhile, KMP criticized EO 101, saying it focuses only on procurement without addressing deeper issues such as landlessness, lack of subsidies, and import dependence.

The order allows agencies and local governments to directly purchase produce from registered farmers and cooperatives, but KMP said it lacks provisions for production credit, debt relief, and capital assistance.

According to KMP Chairperson Danilo Ramos, the measure treats farmers as “mere suppliers” rather than partners in attaining food security in the country.

“EO 101 treats farmers as mere vendors and not as main productive forces in the rural and national economy, and partners in building food self-sufficiency and national development,” said KMP Chairperson Danilo Ramos.

He warned that without mechanisms to stabilize prices or restrict cheap imports, rural producers would remain vulnerable to volatile markets. According to him, landlessness, neoliberal policies, and perennial state neglect are what undermine domestic agriculture.

KMP said EO 101 undermines the role of cooperatives by reducing them to accredited suppliers rather than empowering them to lead collective production and local industrialization.

The group reiterated their demand for comprehensive agricultural reform—state-led procurement at fair prices, production subsidies, debt condonation, and compensation for disaster losses—to ensure food self-sufficiency and rural recovery.#nordis.net