There is something fishy in the issuance by the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) of a ban on the sale of pink salmon and pompano at wet markets starting December 4.
The ban was apparently tacked on the Fisheries Administrative Order (FAO)195 which was issued in 1999 because Senate President Loren Legarda does not see the FAO prohibiting the sale of pink salmon and pompano at wet markets.
‘'Maybe it should be reviewed to be in tune with the needs of the industry. And I have no doubt that our dear President Bongbong Marcos, who is focusing on fixing and cleaning the problematic system in the Department of Agriculture and its attached agencies, particularly BFAR, will be on top of this,’’ Senator Raffy Tulfo said in a privilege speech delivered in today’s plenary session.
‘’I am sure he will have a balanced approach in protecting our local fisher folks as well as our vendors and consumers with regard to the importation of fish and fish products,’’ he added,
Tulfo said he sees three weak points of the BFAR order and FAO 195:
- FAO 195 is about the importation of fish and fishery products. Why then in the implementation of the law and FAO 195? Their regulation and campaign should be done in ports and in coordination with the Bureau of Customs. Why are they making a show at wet markets with these fish vendors.
- Second and this is confusing. According to the Fisheries Code: Fishery products may be imported only when the importation has been certified as necessary by the Department in consultation the FARMC (National Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Management Council) but as an exception fish imports for canning/processing purposes only may be allowed without the necessary certification.
‘’Something smells fishy here. In the law, the exception from the need of a Certification of the Necessity to Import o CNI only applies to canning/processing purposes PERO sa FAO 195
naisama ang institutional buyers like hotels and restaurants from being allowed to import without the need to for the CNI (But in FAO 195, institutional buyers such as hotels and restaurants were included in the importation of fish but the lowly vendors are banned.
- Ang tanong, sino ang magaling na nagdagdag nito sa FAO 195 (Who is the smart aleck that added a provision in FAO 195?) Ang mayayaman na restaurant at hotel nakalusot sa pag-import ng isda pero ang mahihirap na tindera hindi pwede (The rich hotels and restaurants were given the privilege to import but the poor vendors were not) This is a clear violation of equal protection. Malinaw na discrimination ito laban sa mga maliliit na tindera sa mercado (There is a clear discrimination against the small market vendors). And more importantly, BFAR went beyond the provisions of the law!
- Third. Bakit pampano at salmon ang biglang pinatigil sa pagbebenta at hindi yung ibang mga imported na isda tulad ng cream dory (Why was the sale of pink salmon and pompano prohibited and other imported fish such as cream dory?). Ang daming ibang imported fish products sa market (There are many imported fish in the market). Is someone trying to boost the sale of other imported fish na di na mabenta?(that are not saleable?),’’
Senate Majority Leader Joel Villanueva referred Tulfo’s privilege speech to the Senate agriculture committee of Senator Cynthia A Villar.
Legarda asked BFAR to submit to Congress its reason for the implementation of the 22-year-old order.
‘’The more I read FAO 195, the more I’m confused,’’ she said.