By Alex Villafania
INQUIRER.net
ENVIRONMENTALIST group Kalikasan People’s Network for the Environment (Kalikasan PNE) warned that that the Japan Philippine Economic Parntership Agreement (JPEPA) would cause more harm to the Philippines’ marine reserves and ecosystems, particularly since the trade agreement allows more exports of marine products such as tuna.
Kalikasan PNE national coordinator Clemente Bautista said Japan is one of the biggest markets for fish and JPEPA could open doors to exploitation of marine resources, as well as agricultural products, minerals and energy.
Citing a report by the Japan Tuna Federation, Bautista said Japan consumes 630,000 tons of tuna per year or 11 pounts per person. “We fear the shrinking catch qoutas will prompt Japan to move more of its giant fishing fleets to exploit Philippine seas and further deplete our country’s fish sources and marine ecosystems. When Japanese transnational fishing companies corner the country’s tuna resources through the JPEPA, we are sure that many other forms of resource depletion and marine environmental degradtion will follow,” Bautista said.
Bautista also warned that poor fishing villages, particularly in Mindanao would be incapable of buying fish as they compete with bigger 8,000-ton fishing fleets. “Fish provides 60 percent of food protein source for the average Filipino diet,” Bautista said.
Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi and Philippine President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo signed JPEPA last September 2006 but the agreement has yet to be ratified by the Senate.
Critics of JPEPA have contended that it could open the Philippines to Japanese waste imports, which is indicated in Article 29 of the agreement.
September 18th, 2007 at 3:22 pm
Are you kidding? It’s the overuse of natural resources that is killing our planet. Big corporations are raping and plundering our earth. They defile its natural resources- trees, land, water) and leave a big mess for our future generations to deal with. They dump chemical waste into rivers and seas. They overfish the oceans using huge nets that scoop up not only fish, but dolphins, sea turtles, and anything else swimming by. The burning of fossil fuels is putting so much carbon dioxide into the air, causing warm air to be trapped in the atmosphere, that the polar caps are melting. Oil corporations are tearing the tops off of mountains to get more oil, defacing the natural landscape, and destroying natural wildlife habitats. How many animal species went extint in the last decade? last year? yesterday? Are you saying that if we DON’T allow Japan to infringe on these waters, then we are worse off? We seriously need to clean up our acts and change our evil ways! We have destroyed this planet. We need to get a president in office who is going to stand up for environmental issues, and sign the Kyoto protocol to lower emissions. I am not opposing JPEPA for the sake of opposing, I am opposing it for the sake of the people who depend on what these waters provide to feed their families. Why do you think Japan wants to fish these waters anyway? Maybe because they’ve already depleted the rest of the ocean and there’s not enough fish left to meet demand. Well, they should have thought of that before they cast their nets while the fish were spawning (if the big fish aren’t able to make new baby fish, then supply is going to run out.) These trillion dollar corporations don’t care about the effects of their actions on poor people, as long as they make their money!
September 3rd, 2007 at 10:47 am
Its not only the toxic wastes issue that is being objected to in jpepa. Other equally if not more important issues are the fishery access by Japan’s factory ships & vessels in Philippine EEZ, rights in agricultural lands/public lands, nurses and caregivers (future jpepayuki!), etc.
The impact of fishery access however need to be underscored. If the United States of America, China, Korea, Taiwan, France, Spain, Italy, Australia (all of them are deep-sea fishing countries) would ask for the same fishery rights and access in Philippine exclusive economic zone, can the Philippines refuse their demand (not request) for access? Can the Philippine government stand on its position that only Japan will be allowed fishery access? Do the Philippine government have the backbone to say no to U.S.A. if it will demand such fishing right in the Philippine EEZ? What happens now to the provisions of the 1987 Philippine Constitution: reserving exclusively the EEZ to Filipinos, ensure the prosperity and independence of the nation and free the people from poverty, national sovereignty, development of a self-reliant and independent national economy effectively controlled by filipinos, the goals of having equal distribution of opportunities/income/wealth; sustained increase in the amount of goods and services produced by the nation for teh benefit of the people, promotion of industrialization and full employment, protection on Filipino enterprises against unfair foreign competition and trade practices? Are they merely motherhood statements that can readily be disregarded?
August 24th, 2007 at 10:06 am
As usual Filipinos think about the “jobs” it generate rather than developing our own indigenous technologies.
Before, South Korea stood in awe of us Filipinos as we are only 2nd to Japan in economic progress. Singapore too had admired the Philippines
They gained inspiration from us and they developed their own unique industries. Now the whole world looks at them and here we are selling our raw materials resources at pennies worth just to have any type of job. To add insult to injury, they pay us at “Filipino rates” which is incredibly cheap.
Our great “economists” claim that we cannot raise our rates because these “investors” would go elsewhere. I say let them. They not only exploit our raw materials for so cheap, they also exploit our labor for so cheap as well.
Some so called economists may not believe in this but put it this way:
Go to General Santos and ask for the price of a tuna, then go to the Japan market and ask for the price of their tuna which came from the Philippines. Check out how many hundreds (thousands?) of percent difference in price. Meanwhile the trawler owners gain big bucks and they are confident that no one can break their monopoly because the Japanese government protects them.
They say economic globalization is the key but these First World countries themselves put up subsidies and protections for their own citizens while Philippine government accept this globalization concept with open arms without even grain of salt.
Globalization is like putting an ill-fed flyweight boxer (like the Philippines) against well fed heavy weight boxers (like First World countries), beware the implications of this.
When you think of economic development and treaties, look at the secrets and economic controls that First World countries do before even talking to them. Don’t immediately believe Filipino economists just because they are US educated. Economic principles that apply to other countries do not necessarily apply to us.
And oh yeah, what’s the harping about the contract does not endanger our country becoming a waste dumping ground. If that is what they say it is then it should not be a problem adding to the contract in specific terms “absolutely no waste material-dumping in the Philippines” just to be sure. It’s only just a one paragraph addition after all.
August 23rd, 2007 at 1:20 pm
Me thinks - jpepa really stinks, particularly in allowing japan’s armada of factory ships and its support vessels (Art 28 & 29). They will practically feasting catching on tunas and other marine species in philippine EEZs using sophisticated fish finders - without us knowing it that our marine resources were already depleted and none would be left for our posterity. It is worst than illegal logging, where you could still see that there is still remaining land to be cultivated. In the seas, once it is depleted, what remains would be water with no marine fishes.
Fishing by foreign nationals in phil EEZs are not allowed as it is vested exclusively to Filipinos (Sec. 2, Art XII of 1987 Phil Constitution).
Instead of allowing japan’s factory ships, it should have been land-based tuna manufacturing/processing plants where filipino-owned domestic commercial fishing or small fishermen would be the one supplying the fish. If only our negotiators has limited japan’s entry to this type of investment, many filipinos would certainly benefit.
August 20th, 2007 at 9:46 pm
“since the trade agreement allows more exports of marine products such as tuna.
Kalikasan PNE national coordinator Clemente Bautista said Japan is one of the biggest markets for fish and JPEPA could open doors to exploitation of marine resources, as well as agricultural products, minerals and energy.
since the trade agreement allows more exports of marine products such as tuna.
Kalikasan PNE national coordinator Clemente Bautista said Japan is one of the biggest markets for fish and JPEPA could open doors to exploitation of marine resources, as well as agricultural products, minerals and energy.”
The JPEPA specific provision should have been quoted. But deep sea migratory fish like tuna is different from coastal sea fish that our small fishermen catch and our poor people eat! Methinks the conclusion is not warranted.