AFMA PSCS Report final report as of 5.9.2007 copy

Experts’ Review

Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act (AFMA)

Product Standardization and Consumer Safety

FINAL REPORT

Submitted to:

Congressional Oversight Committee on Agricultural and Fisheries Modernization

and

National Agricultural and Fishery Council

Submitted through:

Center for Research and Communication Foundation, Inc.

By

Lydia O. Martinez

AFMA REVIEW: PRODUCT STANDARDIZATION AND CONSUMER SAFETY

15 May 2007

2


Contents

Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 8

I. SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS 13

I.A The Philippine Agriculture and Food Quality and Safety System 13

I.B AFMA Goal and Objectives 27

I.C The Implementing Rules, Targets and Current Status 28

I.C.1 BAFPS Establishment, Organization and Management, and Operationalization 44

I.C.2 BAFPS Powers and Functions 47

II. FINDINGS / ANALYSIS 54

II.A AFMA PSCS and The Philippine Agriculture and Fishery Safety and Quality System 54

II.B AFMA PSCS and Its Implementation 57

II.C Stakeholders Views on AFMA PSCS 58

II.C.1 Regional Workshops 58

II.C.2 Survey of Producers’ Groups 65

II.D Important Issues and Global Development in Food Supply, Quality Control and Consumer Protection 70

III. RECOMMENDATIONS 76

III.A Agriculture and Fisheries Safety Authority 77

III. A.1 Agriculture and Fisheries Safety Authority 77

III.A.2 BAPS, Other DA Agencies and Other Agencies 80

III.A.3 Laboratory Service 82

III.A.4 Funding Under the “Extended AFMA” 84

III.B Review of Current Donor-Funded DA Projects and Other AFMA-Related Laws 85

REFERENCES 86

3


Figure

Page

Figure 1 Sample Philippine Agriculture and Fisheries Safety Agency Organizational Structure

80

Tables

Page

Table 1 Functions of Agencies Mandated by AFMA and Other Related Laws 14

Table 2 Product Standardization and Consumer Safety Services: Mandate and functions of the Philippine Government Agencies 18

Table 3 Department of Agriculture Agencies and Their Responsibilities 29

Table 4 AFMA IRR (DA AO 6, S1998) Stipulations, DA AO No. 17, S1998 Authorization and DA and BAFPS Activities To Meet Requirements of the AFMA IRR and AO No. 17 55

Table 5 Stakeholders’ Assessment of AFMA Product Standardization and Consumer Safety: General Impact 59

Table 6 Stakeholders’ Assessment of AFMA Product Standardization and Consumer Safety: Budget Allocation 62

Table 7 Stakeholders’ Assessment of AFMA Product Standardization and Consumer Safety: Implementation 63

Table 8 Stakeholders' Assessment of AFMA Product Standardization and Consumer Safety: Priority Focus for Intervention and Proposed Budget Allocation

64

Table 9A Survey of Producers’ Associations: Satisfaction with Product Standards, Quality and Safety

66

Tables

4


Page

Table 9B Survey of Producers’ Associations: Awareness of the Existence of BAFPS

66

Table 9C Survey of Producers’ Associations: Awareness of BAFPS Functions and Target Accomplishments 67

Table 9D Survey of Producers’ Associations: Awareness of the Standards Formulated by BAFPS and other Government Agencies 68

Table 9E Survey of Producers’ Associations: Awareness of Standards Being Enforced by BAFPS and Other Government Agencies 68

Table 10A Survey of Producers' Associations: Specific product standards 69

Table 10B Survey of Producers' Associations: Specific product standards 70

Table 10C Survey of Producers' Associations: Specific product standards 70

Text Boxes

Page

AFMA Chapter 7 28

AFMA IRR Definition of “Fresh agriculture and fishery products”, “Primary Processing”, and Secondary Processing”

48

Philippine National Codex Committee 52

Considerations of Food Safety 71

Food Legislation 72

The Responsibilities of the Inspection Service 73

Risk Analysis Components 74

National Reference Laboratories – Their Functions 83

Acronyms

5


ACCSQ ASEAN Consultative Committee for Standards and Quality

AFMA Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act

AFSA Agriculture and Fisheries Safety Agency

AMAS Agriculture Marketing Assistance Service

AO Administrative Order

APEC-SCSC Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation, Sub-Committee on Standards and Conformance

BAI Bureau of Animal Industry

BAR Bureau of Agricultural Research

BFAD Bureau of Food and Drugs

BAFPS Bureau of Agriculture and Fisheries Product Standards

BFAR Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources

BPI Bureau of Plant Industry

BPRE Bureau of Postharvest Research and Extension

BPS Bureau of Product Standards

CAC Codex Alimentarius Commission

CCP Codex Contact Point

CLS Central Laboratory Service

COCAFM Congressional Oversight Committee on Agricultural and Fisheries Modernization

CODA Cotton Development Authority

Codex Codex Alimentarius

DA Department of Agriculture

DA-PAS Department of Agriculture - Policy Analysis Service

DBM Department of Budget and Management

DFIMP Diversified Farm Income and Market Development Project

DOH Department of Health

DOST Department of Science and Technology

DTI Department of Trade and Industry

DTI-BPS DTI-Bureau of Product Standards

EO Executive Order

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization

FARMCs Fisheries and Aquatic Resource Management Councils

FIQS Fisheries Inspection and Quarantine Service

FIDA Fiber Industry Development Authority

FNRI Food and Nutrition Research Institute

Acronyms

6


FPA Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority

GMO Genetically Modified Organisms

HACCP Hazard Analysis Control Control Point

IGAB Improving Governance in Agriculture Bureaucracy

IPPC International Plant Protection Convention

IRR Implementing Rules and Regulations

IRS Inspection and Regulation Service

ISO International Standards Organization

ITDI Industrial Technology Development Institute

JDAO Joint Department Administrative Order

LGUs Local Government Units

LDC Livestock Development Council

LS Laboratory Service

MOA Memorandum of Agreement

MRLs Minimum Residue Levels

NFARMCs National Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Management Councils

NCC National Codex Committee

NIN National Information Network

NFA National Food Authority

NMIS National Meat Inspection Service

NNC National Nutrition Council

NRL National Reference Laboratory

NSDP National Seed Development Program

NTA National Tobacco Administration

PAS Policy Analysis Service

PCA Philippine Coconut Authority

PFDA Philippine Fish Development Authority

PNS Philippine National Standard

PQS Product Quality System

PSCS Product Standardization and Consumer Safety

RA 3720 Republic Act, Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1963

RA 4109 Republic Act, Standardization Law of the Philippines

RA 7190 Republic Act, Local Government Code

RA 7394 Republic Act, Consumer Act of the Philippines

RA 7607 Magna Carta for Small Farmers

Acronyms

7


SPS Sanitary and Phytosanitary Standards

SPUCs State and Private Universities and Colleges

SRA Sugar Regulatory Authority

SUCs State Universities and Colleges

WHO World Health Organization

8


Executive Summary

AFMA Product Standardization and Consumer Safety Component

1. The goal of AFMA is to modernize the agriculture and fisheries sectors of the country in order to enhance their profitability, and prepare said sectors for the challenges of globalization. Among the strategies to accomplish this goal is the appropriation of funds for critical production and marketing support services, including Product Standardization and Consumer Safety (PSCS) service. The vision of AFMA is “that all sectors involved in the production, processing, distribution and marketing of foods, and non-food agricultural and fisheries products shall adhere to, and implement the use of product standards in order to ensure consumer safety and promote the competitiveness of agriculture and fisheries products”.

2. Title I, Chapter 7, Sections 60-64 of the AFMA mandated the Department of Agriculture (DA) to establish the BAFPS to set and implement standards for fresh, primary- and secondary-processed agricultural and fishery products. Specifically, the powers and functions of BAFPS are: (a) formulate and enforce standards of quality in the processing, preservation, packaging, labeling, importation, exportation, distribution, and advertising of agricultural and fisheries products; (b) conduct research on product standardization, alignment of the local standards with international standards; and (c) conduct regular inspection of processing plants, storage facilities, abattoirs, as well as public and private markets in order to ensure freshness, safety and quality of products.

The State of the Philippine Agriculture and Fisheries Safety and Quality System

3. The Philippine agriculture and fisheries safety and quality system is characterized by numerous government units that have overlapping and uncoordinated standards formulation and enforcement functions. There are gaps despite the overlaps. The system is generally inefficient and reactive. It appears to prioritize food export issues. The agriculture and food standards formulation and enforcement functions are shared by the Department of Agriculture (DA), the Department of Health (DOH), the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and LGUs.

The AFMA PSCS and BAFPS and Its Status

4. The AFMA-prescribed creation of BAFPS with the promise of substantial funding in addition to the DA regular budget did not help improve the agri-fisheries safety and quality system or provide adequate support for its efficient operation. The creation of BAFPS was an attempt to integrate the agriculture and fisheries safety and quality control functions into one organization, the BAFPS. The authors of AFMA recognized the overlaps of the powers and functions of BAFPS with those of other DA agencies as well as non-DA agencies, hence the requirement for BAFPS to coordinate, collaborate, and delineate product coverage and aspects of standards development and enforcement functions with concerned agencies. This was a very

9


tall order for a brand new Bureau, with no staff, no budget, no capability and no track record.

5. The creation of BAFPS fostered a divide especially among the DA standards and regulatory agencies. BAFPS was perceived as a threat to the other agencies especially because the specific product coverage and functions with regard to standards formulation and enforcement or regulation were not provided. In fact the IRR even made it more tenuous when it elaborated on the functions that were clearly within the purview of the other agencies. AFMA’s prescription was like “superimposing” BAFPS in the existing agriculture and fisheries quality and safety system in the DA and in other agencies.

6. To make matters worse, BAFPS was never appropriated a budget since 1998. BAFPS was added to the already long list of unfunded government agriculture and fisheries quality and safety agencies. Within the 7 years of the life of AFMA, BAFPS was never really operationalized. As of the end of 2005, BAFPS had 11 personnel, of which only one with permanent position (the Director). The others are either contractual employees or staff seconded from other DA agencies. Until mid-2006, BAFPS was severely handicapped with a small office space and with limited office furniture. Its operations practically depended on funding from the DA rice, corn, high value, and livestock programs. Despite the obstacles, BAFPS managed to complete the formulation of 39 product standards (29 of which have been adopted as Philippine National Standards), and the “Code of Hygienic Practice for the Sale of Fresh Agriculture and Fisheries Products in Markets and Authorized Outlets” and “Guidelines for the Certification of Good Agricultural Practices for Fruits and Vegetables Farming”.

Stakeholders’ Views on BAFPS

7. As of the mid-2006 or 9 years after the AFMA was passed, the PSCS Component has not accomplished its objective of ensuring consumer safety and promoting the competitiveness of agriculture and fisheries products.

8. Stakeholders’ views gathered during the Regional AFMA Review Workshops showed that the PSCS has moderate impact on the commodity industries, namely, abaca and coconut, corn, grains, rice, fisheries and aquaculture, high value commercial crops, and livestock and poultry. Almost all the regions agreed that PSCS had inadequate budget for all eight commodity groups. Five out of the eight commodity groupings across all regions agreed that the PSCS implementation was poor, but special appreciation was given to the more recent activities on mycotoxin consultations and training, and red tide monitoring that is quite well-known. Priority focus for intervention include: fast track standards formulation, enforcement of standards and regulations, promotion of the use of standards, information and training for all supply chain participants and provision of accessible laboratory testing facilities. There was also a call for the review of the mandate of BAFPS, the operationalization of BAFPS, including at the local level, and the activation of the LGUs in the inspection system. The proposed budget allocation for PSCS is 6%.

10


9. A survey of producers groups selected from among the AFMA regional workshop participants was conducted to determine their awareness of the PSCS components and BAFPS and its mandate. In all regions, less than a third of the respondents are satisfied with PSCS. More than half of the respondents did not know that BAFPS exists. Awareness of BAFPS was highest among the respondents from Region 4B. Of those who were aware of BAFPS, only a little more than half of the respondents were aware of the functions and target accomplishments. Less than one-tenth of the respondents knew of standards done by BAFPS and other government agencies. There were fewer respondents who were aware of the standards enforced.

10. The current responsibilities or mandate of BAFPS are not realistic and not achievable. The mechanism for the implementation of BAFPS mandate is unworkable. BAFPS should not perform a policy function (i.e., formulation of standards) and an implementation function (i.e., enforcement of standards) at the same time. Policy should be separate from implementation in accordance with the requirements of current international best practice.

Proposed Amendments to AFMA

11. AFMA Chapter 7, Product Standardization and Consumer Safety, should be amended to strengthen the agriculture and fisheries product control, promote uniform application of consumer protection measures, more timely action to protect consumers and more cost efficient and effective use of resources and expertise. The AFMA IRR and related AOs will have to be amended as well. The proposed amendments are:

a. Establish the Agriculture and Fisheries Safety Authority (AFSA);

b. Modify the organization, powers and functions of BAFPS, and the regulatory agencies, i.e., BPI, BAI, NMIS, BFAR, FIDA, CODA, PCA, SRA, NTA, NFA and FPA.

c. Establish a Laboratory Service (LS) and a National Reference Laboratory (NRL) that conform to international standards and the world’s best practice.

d. Allocate budget for institutional and physical strengthening of the agriculture and fisheries quality and safety control system; including multi-year funding for infrastructure and facilities development and research.

e. Authorize collection of fees for services and retention of agency collections for specific and agreed upon uses.

12. The first proposed amendment to Chapter 7, Product Standardization and Consumer Safety, of AFMA is to provide for the establishment of the Agriculture and Fisheries Safety Authority (AFSA). AFSA shall integrate the agriculture and fisheries safety and quality system to achieve effective collaboration and coordination among the different agencies of DA, DOH, DTI and LGUs. The roles, organizational

11


components and activities shall be based on a typical food control agency provided in the FAO/WHO Guidelines. A proposed structure reflects the principal functions or key areas of responsibility.

13. This second proposed amendment concerns the function and organization of BAFPS. BAFPS should be made the sole standards formulation agency of government in the agriculture and fisheries sector. BAFPS will formulate new standards, and review and update existing standards to harmonize them with international standards. The coverage of BAFPS function shall include: (a) product standards for fresh and secondary processed products, both food and non-food; (b) guidelines and codes of practices; and (c) standards of hygiene. It should prioritize mandatory standards over voluntary standards in its work program. It will set priorities for research needs related to standards formulation. Standards formulation should be carried out in close coordination with BFAD-DOH. Likewise, BPS-DTI role should be recognized and followed. On the other hand, roles of the DA enforcement agencies from those of the Bureau of Customs should be differentiated..14. The third proposed amendment is the establishment of a Laboratory Service at the same level as BAFPS and the Inspection and Regulatory Service. The LS will be the new management structure for all laboratories (more aptly referred to as “service laboratories”) and a National Reference Laboratory (NRL) that is yet to be established. The organization and configuration of the service must be determined and carefully decided.

15. DA agencies which currently perform standards development function should be stripped of this power. All DA regulation and enforcement functions that are currently under BPI, BAI, NMIS, BFAR, FPA, NFA, PCA, SRA, NTA, and CODA should be consolidated under an Inspection and Regulation Service (IRS). The function would include product quality and safety, and plant and animal health inspection and regulation. The role of the LGUs in enforcement should be clarified to avoid confusion that leads to conflict as well as gaps.

16. BAFPS should continue to act as Codex Contact Point (CCP). It should also be host and Secretariat to the National Codex Committee (NCC), the SPS Enquiry and Notification Point.

17. Market development and market promotion activities fall under the purview of and should be turned over by the regulatory agencies to AMAS. For most regulatory agencies, product research and development could be performed by government research or academic institutions. These activities are usually funded with resources from commodity programs or BAR anyway. They also compete for resources within the agency.

18. The fourth amendment is the establishment of a Central Laboratory Service (CLS) to address the critical issues of the state, utilization, performance, staffing and funding of all laboratories that are so important to standards formulation and regulation. The AFSA shall have overall supervision of the CLS, but BAFPS shall have specific auditing role consistent with the mission and functions of the AFSA.

12


19. For the fifth amendment, the “extended AFMA” funding should make specific provisions for multi-year funding for infrastructure, facilities and equipment; research for standards setting; and research related to agriculture and fisheries safety issues.

20. To address the eternal funding constraints, some services could be shifted to a “user fee” system which simply means user pays for services, for example, inspection for certification/accreditation/permits, and laboratory services. The fifth revision should authorize all concerned agencies to retain all fees collected by the agency to be used to sustain operation instead of being turned over to the Bureau of Treasury.

Review of AFMA – Related Laws and Current Donor Projects

21. The review and amendment of AFMA is the best time to conduct a comprehensive review of the Philippine agriculture and fishery safety system, especially if the policy makers choose to adopt an integrated system to minimize duplication and eliminate the gaps and enhance efficiency as recommended in this report.

22. DA and COCAFM should revisit the on-going projects to review the relevance and consistency of the current efforts under those projects with the Agriculture and Fishery Control objectives under the proposed AFMA amendment. DA should ensure that the projects are aligned with the objective of strengthening of the agriculture and fishery control system to protect the Filipino consumer as well as consumers of the Philippine export products equally and promotes the competitiveness of Philippine products in the domestic as well as foreign markets.

13


I. SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS

I.A The Philippine Agriculture and Fisheries Quality and Safety System

1. The agriculture and food standards formulation and enforcement functions are shared by the Department of Agriculture (DA), the Department of Health (DOH), the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and the local government units (LGUs). The powers, roles and responsibilities of these agencies are defined by at least six laws that directly relate to AFMA, including:

(a) Standardization Law of the Philippines of 1964;

(b) Food, Drugs and Devices, and Cosmetics Act of 1963, as amended by Executive Order 175, Series of 1987,

(c) Local Government Code of 1991;

(d) Consumer Welfare Act of 1998;

(e) Fisheries Code of 1998, and

(f) Executive Order 338 of 2001.

The Standardization Law of the Philippines

2. The Standardization Law of the Philippines (Republic Act 4109) enacted in 1964 established the Bureau of Product Standards (BPS) under the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) (then the Department of Commerce) as the National Standards Body (NSB) of the Philippines. BPS supports industry and protects consumers' welfare through: development and promulgation of standards, product testing and certification; accreditation of competence and capability of testing and calibration laboratories; accreditation of management system of certification bodies; national registration scheme for quality assessors; international cooperation on standards and conformance; and training programs on international standards, product certification and other standardization activities.

3. Primarily, the BPS undertakes the development, promulgations and promotion of Philippine National Standards (PNS) to ensure the Philippine consumers will get the value of their money. BPS provides services to the public and provide necessary technical infrastructure to make Philippine companies more competitive. BPS in involved in the development and application of national, regional and international standards, of which many are developed in partnership with technical committees and working groups. As Philippine representative in the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), BPS ensures that Philippines' voice is heard, worldwide.

14


Table 1Functions of Agencies Mandated by AFMA and Other Related Laws

LawsFunctions

Standards Development & Promotion

Technical Services & Research

Industry Compliance & Consumer Protection

Agriculture & Fisheries Modernization Act (AFMA) of 1997

RA 8435 BAFPS with:

BAI, BFAR, BPI, BPRE, CODA, FIDA, FPA, NMIS, NTA, PCA, PFDA, SRA, and AMAS, AMAS, BAR, & PAS;

DOH - BFAD & NNC

DOST - ITDI

DTI – BPS

BAFPS with:

BAI, BFAR, BPI, BPRE, CODA, FIDA, FPA, NMIS, NTA, PCA, PFDA, SRA & BAR

DOH - BFAD & NNC

DOST – ITDI

BAFPS with:

BAI, BFAR, BPI, BPRE, CODA, FIDA, FPA, NMIS, NTA, PCA, PFDA & SRA

DOH - BFAD & NNC

Fisheries Code of 1998 RA 8550 BFAR, BFAR-FIQS, PFDA BFAR, PFDA BFAR, BFAR-FIQS, PFDA

LGUs

Consumer Act of the Philippines of 1991

RA 7394 DOH-BFAD

DA

DTI

DOH-BFAD

DA

DTI

DOH-BFAD

DA

DTI

Magna Carta for Small Farmers of 1991

RA 7607 BPI BPI BPI

Local Government Code of 1990

RA 7190 LGUs LGUs LGUs

Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act of 1963 As Amended by EO 175 of 1987

RA 3720, EO 175 S 1987

DOH-BFAD DOH-BFAD DOH-BFAD

Phil. Standardization Law RA 4109 DTI-BPS DTI-BPS DTI-BPS

Other Enactments NFA-FDC

DOST-ITDI

NFA-FDC

DOST-ITDI

DOST-ITDI

15


Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act of 1963 (RA 3720) As Amended by Executive Order 175 of 1987

4. The Bureau of Food and Drugs was given the authority administer and enforce the laws regarding the safety and purity of foods and cosmetics, and the purity, safety, efficacy and quality of drugs and devices being made available to the public. In the implementation of the law, the Department of Health (DOH) was tasked to: (a) establish standards and quality measures for foods, drugs and devices and cosmetics; (b) adopt measures to ensure pure and safety supply of foods and cosmetics, and pure, safe, efficacious and good quality drugs and devices in the country; (c) adopt measures to ensure the rational use of drugs and devices, such as, but not limited to, banning, recalling or withdrawing from the market drugs and devices which are not registered, unsafe, inefficacious or of doubtful therapeutic value, the adoption of an official National Drug Formulary, and the use of generic names in the labeling of drugs; and (d) strengthen the Bureau of Food and Drugs. 5. The Commissioner of Customs in Manila or the Regional Food and Drugs Supervisor is required to cause the delivery to BFAD samples taken at random from every incoming shipment of food, drugs, devices and cosmetics which are being imported or offered for import to the Philippine giving notice to the owner or consignee.

Consumer Act of the Philippines of 1991 (RA 7394)

6. The Consumer Act of the Philippines (RA 7394) was enacted to protect the interest of the consumer, promote his general welfare and to establish standards of conduct for business and industry. The law mandates the government:

(a) to develop and provide safety and quality standards for consumer products, including performance or use-oriented standards codes of practice and methods of tests;

(b) to assist the consumer in evaluating the quality, including safety, performance and comparative utility of consumer products;

(c) to protect the public against unreasonable risks to injury associated with consumer products; and

(d) to undertake research on quality improvement of products and investigation into causes and prevention of product related to deaths, illness and injuries.

7. The law spelled out the responsibilities of the DOH, DA and DTI in the development and enforcement of standards of quality and safety of products under their respective authorities. The DOH would enforce the rules and regulations with respect to food, drugs, cosmetics, devices and substances; the DA with respect to product related to agriculture; and the DTI with respect to other consumer products and, to develop and provide safety and quality standards for consumer products. The concerned departments were mandated to establish consumer product quality and safety standards which shall consist of the following:

16


(a) requirements as to performance, composition, contents, design, construction, finish, packaging of a consumer product;

(b) requirements as to kind, class, grade, dimensions, weights, material;

(c) requirements as to the methods of sampling, tests and codes used to check the quality of the product;

(d) requirements as to precautions in storage, transporting and packaging; and

(e) requirements that a consumer product be marked with or accompanied by clear and adequate safety warnings or instruction, or requirements respecting the form of warnings or instructions.

8. The concerned departments were instructed to: (a) adopt existing standards or formulate, develop and propose consumer product quality and safety standards together with business and consumer sectors in specialized technical committees organized for the purpose; (b) upon promulgation of the standards, publicize them and conduct information campaign; (c) make appropriate order for recall, prohibition or seizure from public sale or distribution, consumer products that is found to be injurious, unsafe and dangerous; and direct the manufacturer, distributor, or seller of such defective products to extend any or all of the remedies to the injured person; (d) take measures to make a list of new consumer products and cause the publication by the respective manufacturers or importers of such list of products with their description; (e) establish consumer product standards and grant the Philippine Standard Certification mark after determining the product’s compliance with the relevant standard; (e) refuse admission into the Philippines of any consumer product that fails to comply with an applicable consumer product quality and safety standard or rule, is or has been determined to be injurious, unsafe and dangerous, is substandard; or has a material defect.

9. In addition to their powers, functions and duties under existing laws, the concerned departments were given the following functions and duties: (a) undertake researches, develop and establish quality and safety standards for consumer products in coordination with other government and private agencies closely associated with these products; (b) inspect and analyze consumer products for purposes of determining conformity to established quality and safety standards; (c) levy, assess, collect and retain fees as are necessary to cover the cost of inspection, certification, analysis and test of samples of consumer products and materials submitted; (d) investigate the causes of and maintain a record of product-related deaths, illnesses and injuries; (e) accredit independent, competent non-government bodies, to assist in monitoring the market for the presence of hazardous or non -certified products and other forms of violations, other appropriate means to expand the monitoring and enforcement outreach of the department in relation to its manpower, testing and certification resources at a given time; and (f) accredit independent competent testing laboratories.

17


10. The mandates of the DA under the Consumer Act were elaborated by AO 9 of the 1993 Series. In this AO, eight Bureaus of the DA were given powers to create Product Quality and Safety Standards. These are the National Food Authority (NFA), Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI), Bureau of Animal Industry (BAI), Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR), Sugar Regulatory Administration (SRA), Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority (FPA), Philippine Coconut Authority (PCA) and the National Meat Inspection Commission (now National Meat Inspection Service or NMIS). These agencies and the Fibre Industry Development Authority and the National Tobacco Administration already have existing standards formulation mandates, while the NMIS and BFAR have new laws strengthening their standards formulation and enforcement functions.

The Local Government Code of the Philippines of 1991 (RA 7190)

11. The Local Government Code granted every local government unit (LGU) the powers for its efficient and effective governance, and those which are essential to the promotion of the general welfare, including promotion of health and safety of its inhabitants. Local government units were likewise granted other powers, functions and responsibilities for provision of basic services and facilities, including agricultural support services, services and facilities related to general hygiene and sanitation (such as enforcement of fishery laws quality control of copra, fish ports, public markets, slaughterhouses).

12. The LGUs were mandated to discharge the functions and responsibilities of national agencies and offices devolved to them, including to regulate and inspect meat, fruits, poultry, milk, fish, vegetables and other foodstuffs; to regulate the slaughter, sale and disposition of animals for human consumption as well as powers to adopt quarantine regulations and prevent the introduction of disease, among others.

Fisheries Code of 1998 (Republic Act 8550)

13. The Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998 (RA 8550) was enacted on 19 February 1998 to ensure the attainment of the following objectives of the fishery sector:

(a) Conservation, protection and sustained management of the country’s fishery and aquatic resources;

(b) Poverty alleviation and the provision of supplementary livelihood among municipal fisherfolk;

(c) Improvement of productivity of aquaculture within ecological limits;

(d) Optimal utilization of off-shore and deep-sea resources; and

(e) Upgrading the post-harvest technology.

18

AFMA EXPERTS’ REVIEW: PRODUCT STANDARDIZATION AND CONSUMER SAFETY

Table 2Product Standardization and Consumer Safety Services Mandate and Functions of Philippine Government Agencies1

GOP AgencyProduct(s) Covered

Mandate, Powers & Functions

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Bureau of Agriculture and Fisheries Product Standards

All agricultural, livestock and fisheries and aquaculture products

Formulate and enforce standards of quality in the processing, preservation, packaging, labeling, importation, exportation, distribution and advertising of agricultural, livestock and fisheries and aquaculture products;

Conduct research on product standardization, alignment of the local standards with the international standards; and

Conduct regular inspection of processing plants, storage facilities, abattoirs, public and private markets in order to ensure freshness, safety and quality of products.

Bureau of Animal Industry

Meat and meat products, including animal by-products

Recommend policies and procedures on the flow of livestock products and the proper preservation and inspection of such products;

Prescribe standards for the quality of manufacture, importation, labeling, advertising, distribution and sale of livestock, poultry and allied industries;

Recommend plans and programs, policies, rules and regulations and provide technical assistance in their implementation;

Promulgate regulations for the preparation, sale, traffic in, shipment and importation of viruses, serum, toxin or analogous products used for the treatment of domestic animals Issue, suspend and revoke licenses for dispensing or maintenance of

establishments for its preparation and treatment; Issuer licenses for its importation, and inspect such products.

Regulate the sale of veterinary biologics and medicinal preparation;

Protect the interest of the consumer, promote his general welfare and establish standards of conduct for business and industry. develop and provide safety and quality standards for consumer products,

1 Sources of Information: FAFST, Report on Global Competitiveness for Philippine Agribusiness – Product Quality System; SEARCA, Improving Governance in Agriculture Bureaucracy; DA Report on Strengthening Quality Assurance and Other Regulatory Services for Diversified Farm Income and Market Development Project.

19




including performance or use-oriented standards codes of practice and methods of tests;

assist the consumer in evaluating the quality, safety, performance and comparative utility of consumer products;

protect the public against unreasonable risks to injury associated with consumer product; and

undertake research on quality improvement of products and investigation into causes and prevention of product related to deaths, illness and injuries; and

Supervise and regulate the establishment, operation and maintenance of slaughterhouses, pet shops, kennel, veterinary clinics/hospitals, stock/stud farm, corrals, zoos for the breeding, treatment, sale or trading or training of animals Issue certificate of registration upon proof that the facilities of such establishment

for animals are adequate, clean and sanitary and will not be used for, nor cause pain and/or suffering to the animals; and

Revoke or cancel certificate or registration for non-compliance as to standards set by BAI as to the establishment’s adequacy, cleanliness and sanitation.

National Meat Inspection Service

Meat and meat products

Promulgate and implement policies, procedures, guidelines, rules and regulations governing post-production flow of livestock and meat and meat products (both locally produced and imported) through the various stages of marketing and proper handling, inspection, processing, storage and preservation of such products; protect the interest, health and general welfare of the meat consuming public;

Ensure the production of clean, healthy and sound meat food; Provide technical supervision over LGU meat inspection work and assistance in their

technical capability building; Evaluate and accredit meat plants; Enforce meat inspection laws, rules and regulations; Provide laboratory services to the meat industry; Perform inspection on imported meat and meat products;

Provide technical assistance in meat plant development; and Promote consumer information, protection and assistance programs.

Bureau of Fisheries Fisheries and Formulate and implement a Comprehensive Fishery Research and Development

20




and Aquatic Resources

aquaculture products

Program aimed at increasing resource productivity improving resource use efficiency, and ensuring the long term sustainability of the county's fishery and aquatic resources;

Establish and maintain a comprehensive Fishery Information System; Provide advisory services and technical assistance on the improvement of quality of

fish from the time it is caught (i.e., on board fishing vessels, at landing areas, fish markets, to the processing plants and to the distribution and marketing chain);

Advise and coordinate with LGUs on the maintenance of proper sanitation and hygienic practices in fish markets and fish landing areas;

Implement and inspection system for import and export of fishery / aquatic products and fish processing establishments consistent with international standards to ensure product quality and safety;

Enforce all laws, formulate and enforce all rules and regulations governing the conservation and management of fishery resources, except in municipal waters and to settle conflicts of resource use and allocation in consultation with the NFARMC, LGUs and local FARMCs;

Develop value-added fishery products for domestic consumption and export; and Assist the LGUs in developing their technical capability in the development,

management, regulation conservation and protection of the fishery resources. Formulate rules and regulations for the conservation and management of straddling

fish stocks and highly migratory fish stocks.

Philippine Fisheries Development Authority

Management, operations, and development of regional commercial fish port complexes located throughout the Philippines;

Establishment of ice plants and cold storages, municipal fish ports, warehouses, factory buildings & other structures;

Conduct of training on Hazard Analysis Critical Control Points and Good Manufacturing Practices and on the operation and management of municipal fish port; and

Monitoring, compilation, and dissemination of fishery statistics and information necessary in the conduct of business activities and policy formulation.

Bureau of Plant Agricultural crops, Prepare a program for the selection, production and certification of improved planting

21




Industry seed and plant materials quality, GMOs

materials as well as guidelines for its implementation; Recommend plant quarantine policies and prescribe rules and regulations for the

prevention, control and eradication of pests, diseases and injuries to plants and plant products;

Recommend plans, programs, policies, rules and regulations to the Secretary and provide technical assistance in the implementation of the same;

Prevent the introduction of exotic pests in the country and prevent further spread of plant pests already existing from infested to pest-free areas;

Enforce phytosanitary measures for the export of plants, plant products and regulated articles;

Supervise and control the existing filed inspections and control services and seed testing laboratories;

Supervision, coordination, and monitoring of production, purification and maintenance of breeder and foundation seeds of all recommended cultivars;

Accreditation of seed growers and plant nursery operators; Conduct crop protection using the regional crop protection centers; Establish pesticide laboratories all over the country; Monitor levels of pesticide residue in crops to protect local and international

consumers from possible health hazards; Check on possible indiscriminate use and application of pesticides on food crops and

other agricultural products; Determine pesticides degradation rates for different crops to be able to establish

"waiting times" and prepare recommendations to improve/change agricultural practices;

Determine and evaluate practices on the use of pesticides for possible modification resulting in acceptable low residues in agricultural products;

Perform technical analyses on formulated pesticide products; Monitor the level of chemical residues of agricultural crops and by-products and

recommend policies for safety of consumers; and Promote use of organic fertilizer and integrated pest management.

Cotton Cotton and cotton Promulgate and enforce rules and regulations to govern cotton production, distribution

22




Development Administration

products and use of certified cottonseeds, pest control, and other quarantine measures. Produce breeder, foundation and registered seeds and supervise certified seed

production by private cottonseed growers and set and enforce standards and procedures for seed production and marketing.

Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority

Fertilizer and pesticides, organic or inorganic

Promulgate and enforce rules and regulations for the registration and licensing of fertilizer and pesticide handlers and products.

Establish and implement regulations governing import and export of fertilizer and fertilizer inputs and pesticides, as well as domestic production and marketing, including efficacy and quality, and environmental impact, product safety and agri-occupational health.

Establish and enforce tolerance levels and good agricultural practices for use of pesticides

Restrict or ban use of pesticides, as needed. Prevent importation of agricultural commodities containing pesticide residues above

the accepted tolerance levels. Monitoring of pesticide residues in selected crops.

Fiber Industry Development Authority

Fiber crops and fiber products

Promote the integrated development of the fiber industry in all its aspects from research, production, processing, marketing and trade regulation;

Enforce fiber standards and regulatory measures in order to maintain good quality fiber traded in both local and foreign markets;

Improve farm productivity, thereby, increasing farmers' income; and, Regulate and control grading and baling establishments.

National Tobacco Administration

Tobacco products Promulgate rules and regulations on the production, standardization, classification, grading and trading of tobacco products

Philippine Coconut Authority

Coconut, coconut products

Establish and enforce standards for domestic trade and export of copra and its by-products.

23




National Food Authority

Rice and corn Register and license grain handlers (including machinery) and manufacturers of goods where grains are used as ingredients and collect corresponding fees as authorized; and

License import/export of grains.

Food Development Center, NFA, DA

All food products Testing and standards development; Product development; Training; Pilot processing; and Quality and safety assessment.

Sugar Regulatory Administration

Sugar and sugar by-products

Provides an agro-industrial research service laboratory to all sectors of the sugar industry;

Analyzes sugar, molasses, juice and bagasse for quality control purposes; and Analyzes all agro-based related materials to the sugar industry.

Bureau of Postharvest Research and Extension

All agricultural crops Prevention and control of mycotoxin, and pests and diseases toward food preservation and safety by:

Conducting studies on postharvest pests and diseases; Management of pests; Cataloguing of microbial cultures isolated; Operation and maintenance of mycotoxin laboratory; Screening, evaluation and formulation of natural plant products for the control of

postharvest pests; Laboratory trial of ultrasonic cleaning of chemical residues and microbial

contaminants on vegetables; Bioecological studies: Behavioral Study and Establishment of Rearing Techniques

for Insects of Economic Importance; Bioecological Control of Banana Crown Rot with Epiphytic Fungi; and Postharvest Diseases Management Strategies and Storage Life Extension.

24




DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

Bureau of Food & Drugs, DOH

Processed food Establish standards and quality measures for processed foods; Inspection and licensing of establishments in accordance with Good Manufacturing

Practices of regulated establishments such as manufacturers, packers/repackers, distributor, importers, exporters, wholesalers, outlets, groceries, supermarkets, other commercial outlets;

Evaluation and registration of regulated products based on set standards of safety, efficacy, purity and quality of regulated products, processed foods (imported and local), advertised local products and processed food products intended for export;

Market monitoring of products for adulterated products, expired and unregistered products;

Laboratory analysis of regulated products such as collected samples from routine monitoring, products which are subject of complaints from consumers, products for registration and donated products;

Evaluation and monitoring of advertisements and promotions of tri- media such as television, radio and print ads like newspaper and magazine;

Policy formulation, drafting of rules and regulations, administrative orders and standards, issuance of bureau circulars/bureau memoranda and guidelines;

Public assistance and information such as rendering the following services: product information, health advisories, and consumer assistance for complaints, and client assistance for consultancy, seminars and trainings;

Legal functions such as disposition of consumer complaints re: adulterated food, misbranded food products, advertisement and promotional regulations;

Administrative functions for human resource development: enhancement of skills and knowledge of personnel through training; and

Special functions related to food such as implementation of food fortification program, salt iodization, and milk code.

National Nutrition Council

All food products Coordinate national food and nutrition policies and strategies, including nutritional standards, e.g.

25




DEPARTMENT OF TRADE & INDUSTRY

Bureau of Product Standards

All products not covered by DA and DOH2

Development, promulgations and promotion of Philippine National Standards (PNS); and Development and promulgation of standards, product testing and certification; Accreditation of competence and capability of testing and calibration laboratories; Accreditation of management system certification bodies and private emission

testing centers; National registration scheme for quality assessors; International cooperation on standards and conformance; Training programs on ISO 9000/PNS 1000, ISO 14000/PNS 17000, ISO/IEC

17025, product certification and other standardization activities; and Development, implementation and coordination of standardization activities.

Standards development.

DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

Industrial Technology Development Institute

All food products Technology transfer; Tests, analysis, calibration; Training; Technical information; Design and fabrication; and Use of laboratory and pilot plant facilities.

2 All standards developed by DA have to be submitted to BPS for numbering to be promulgated as Philippine National Standard.

26


14. Chapter III of the Fisheries Code of 1998 provided the reconstitution of Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) as a line Bureau of the DA with the following functions related to fish quality and standards:

(a) provide advisory services and technical assistance on the improvement of quality of fish from the time it is caught (i.e., on board fishing vessel, at landing areas, fish markets, to the processing plants and to the distribution and marketing chain);

(b) advise and coordinate with Local Government Units (LGUs) on the maintenance of proper sanitation and hygienic practices in fish markets and fish landing areas;

(c) implement an inspection system for import and export of fishery/ aquatic products and fish processing establishments consistent with international standards to ensure product quality and safety; and

(d) develop value-added fishery-products for domestic consumption and export.

15. Furthermore, the Fisheries Code provides for the strengthening of the Fisheries Inspection and Quarantine Service (FIQS) in BFAR for purposes of monitoring and regulating the importation and exportation of fish and fishery/aquatic resources. The FIQS shall have the following functions:

(a) conduct fisheries quarantine and quality inspection of all fish and fishery/ aquatic products coming into and going out of the country by air or water transport, to detect the presence of fish pest and diseases and if found to harbor fish pests or diseases shall be confiscated and disposed of in accordance with environmental standards and practices;

(b) implement international agreements/commitments on bio-safety and bio-diversity as well as prevent the movement or trade of endemic fishery and aquatic resources to ensure that the same are not taken out of the country;

(c) quarantine such aquatic animals and other fishery products determined or suspected to be with fishery pests and diseases and prevent the movement or trade from and/or into the country of these products so prohibited or regulated under existing laws, rules and regulations as well as international agreements of which the Philippines is a State Party;

(d) examine all fish and fishery products coming into or going out of the country which may be a source or medium of fish pests or diseases and/or regulated by existing fishery regulations and ensure that the quality of fish import and export meet international standards; and

(e) document and authorize the movement or trade of fish and fishery products when found free of fish pests or diseases and collect necessary fees prescribed by law and regulations.

27


Restructuring the Department of Agriculture, Providing Funds Therefore, And Other Purposes” or Executive Order (E.O.) 338 of 2001

16. Executive Order 338 was never implemented. It was an attempt to clarify the roles of the different agencies under the DA, including BFAR as well as the National Fisheries Research and Development Institute (NFRDI).

R. A. 7607 - Magna Carta for Small Farmers 17. This Act recognizing BPI expertise and inherent functions on pesticide residue analysis and pesticide formulation, seed production and certification, research, technology transfer and crop protection made BPI as the sole agency mandated to: (a) monitor the level of chemical residues of agricultural crops and by-products and recommend policies for safety of consumers; and promote use of organic fertilizer and integrated pest management

I.B AFMA Goal and Objectives

18. The goal of AFMA is to modernize the agriculture and fisheries sectors of the country in order to enhance their profitability, and prepare said sectors for the challenges of globalization. The main strategies to accomplish this goal are (a) the provision of an adequate, focused and rational delivery of necessary support services; and (b) the appropriation of funds for the support services and other purposes. Among the critical production and marketing support services recognized by AFMA is Product Standardization and Consumer Safety (PSCS) service. The vision of AFMA is “that all sectors involved in the production, processing, distribution and marketing of foods, and non-food agricultural and fisheries products shall adhere to, and implement the use of product standards in order to ensure consumer safety and promote the competitiveness of agriculture and fisheries products”.

19. Chapter 7, Sections 60-64 of the AFMA mandated the Department of Agriculture (DA) to establish the BAFPS to set and implement standards for fresh, primary- and secondary-processed agricultural and fishery products. The powers and functions of BAFPS were detailed as follows:

a. Formulate and enforce standards of quality in the processing, preservation, packaging, labeling, importation, exportation, distribution, and advertising of agricultural and fisheries products,

b. Conduct research on product standardization, alignment of the local standards with the international standards; and

c. Conduct regular inspection of processing plants, storage facilities, abattoirs, as well as public and private markets in order to ensure freshness, safety and quality of products.

28


AFMA Chapter 7 – Product Standardization & Consumer Safety

Section 60. Declaration of Policy– It is the policy of the State that all sectors involved in the production, processing, distribution and marketing of foods, and non-food agricultural and fisheries products shall adhere to, and implement the use of product standards in order to ensure consumer safety and promote the competitiveness of agriculture and fisheries products

Section 61. Bureau of Agriculture and Fisheries Product StandardsThe Department, within six (6) months after the approval of this Act, and in consultation with the Department of Trade and Industry and the Bureau of Food and Drugs, shall establish the Bureau of Agriculture and Fisheries Product Standards (BAFPS).

Section 62. CoverageThe BAFPS shall set and implement standards for fresh, primary- and secondary-processed agricultural and fishery products.

Section 63. Powers and FunctionsThe BAFPS shall have the following powers and functions:

Formulate and enforce standards of quality in the processing, preservation, packaging, labeling, importation, exportation, distribution, and advertising of agricultural and fisheries products;

Conduct research on product standardization, alignment of the local standards with the international standards; and

Conduct regular inspection of processing plants, storage facilities, abattoirs, as well as public and private markets in order to ensure freshness, safety and quality of products.

Section 64. Pool of Experts and AdvisersThe BAFPS may coordinate, seek the services of, and consult with both private and governmental agencies; research institutes educational establishments and such other individuals and entities with expertise in the field of product standards and consumer safety.

Source: Republic Act 8435

I.C The Implementing Rules, Targets and Current Status

20. The implementation of AFMA was guided by the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) contained in the DA Administrative Order No. 6 - 1998 and issued on 10 July 1998. The IRR provisions can be classified into two types - - (a) those relating to the establishment, organization and management, and operationalization of BAFPS; and (b) those concerning the powers and functions, and details of activities of BAFPS. The IRR provisions are presented below according to the above classification3. The AFMA IRR and the BAFPS AO 17 provisions, and their status are summarized in Table 3.

3 Quoted from Department of Agriculture Administrative Order 6, Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA 8435, dated July 10, 1998.

29


Table 3AFMA IRR (DA AO 6, S 1998) Stipulation, DA AO No. 17, S 1998 Authorization and DA and BAFPS Activities to Comply with

AFMA IRR and AO No. 17

AFMA IRR Section Stipulation DA AO 17, S 1998 Authorization Status as of 31 Dec. 20054

BAFPS Establishment, Organization and Management, and Operationalization

Rule 61.1

DA to establish BAFPS on or before 30 July 1998; and

Designate BAFPS Director

Sec. 1

Established BAFPS with the issuance of the DA AO No. 17 issued on 4 December 1998

Designation of BAFPS Director

BAFPS is under the Office of the Secretary

BAFPS was created by DA AO No. 17 on 4 December 1998

Ms. Concepcion Lizada was designated 1st Director

AO No. 1, Series of 2000 was issued on 28 January 2000 amending AO No. 17

Rule 61.2

Appointment of BAFPS Director by the President and 2 or more Assistant Directors on recommendation of DA Secretary;

One Assistant Director assigned to concerns on consumer issues; and

Incorporation of a Consumer Protection Division in BAFPS

Sec. 9

BAFPS Organizational Structure in “Annex A” included 2 Assistant Director positions, one in-charge of Consumer Protection

BAFPS organizational structure also includes a Consumer Affairs Div., with a Consumer Protection Section and a Consumer Education & Advocacy Section

Tasks broadly defined in “Annex B” includes consumer protection and consumer education activities

Mr. Gilberto Leyese was appointed OIC Director on 16 July 2001 after resignation of Dr. Lizada and then Director on 19 September 2005

BAFPS sent proposal to Sec. Angara for approval of creation of 67 positions for staffing requirements of BAFPS on 19 October 1999

Sec Lorenzo requested DBM for the creation of 37 plantilla positions on 11 December 2002

DBM approved 17 positions in 2004 but letter was released only on 16 March 2005

No Assistant Director position has been approved, hence none appointed

The BAFPS organization as specified in AO No. 17 Series of 1998 included a Consumer Services Div.

30



Rule 61.3

Considering existing Phil. agriculture and fisheries product standards, and the related functions and powers of various DA and non-DA agencies and offices, BAFPS Task Force (per Section 64) to propose: specific rules and

activities of BAFPS; and

if necessary and appropriate, the approach/manner and timing of consolidation of the functions and their associated resources currently with other agencies within BAFPS

Sec. 8

The BAFPS Task Force provided for in Section 64 of RA 8435, together with representatives of other government agencies and the private sector, shall serve as the BAFPS Advisory Committee

The Task Force completed its work and stood down.5

5 Cecil McMurray. Institutional and Physical Strengthening of the Bureau of Agriculture and Fisheries Product Standards. Technical Report, Department of Agriculture, (May 2006)

31



Rule 62.1

BAFPS coverage shall include standards on consumer health and safety standards related to consumer health and safety and efficient trade of raw, fresh, primary and secondary processed agricultural and fisheries products, both food and non-food.

Upon BAFPS’s recommendation, issuance of DA AO specifying the full listing of the products covered by BAFPS on or before 30 Dec. 1998

Sec. 3

Formulate and enforce standards of quality of agriculture, livestock and fisheries and aquaculture products in collaboration and coordination with DTI and BPS, DOST, BFAD and DOH, SPUCs, LGUs, and the private sector, including POs and NGOs

Enforcement to include formulation and implementation of standards utilized in enforcement of quarantine rules and regulations

Development of Philippine National Standards is in full swing

No AO specifying full listing of products covered by BAFPS was issued on or before 30 Dec. 19986

Listing of products covered by BAFPS has been deliberated with BFAD and other agencies.

Report on proposed delineation of functions between BAFPS and other DA regulatory agencies submitted to DBM on 9 October 2003 after consultation with DBM, COCAFM and DA-Personnel Services Division

Delineation of functions still being discussed with BFAD only7

Report on proposed delineation of functions between BAFPS-DA and BFAD-DOH submitted to DBM on 12 December 2003

BAFPS has decided to focus on food safety issues and formulation/ harmonization of standards for primary- and secondary-processed agricultural and fisheries products.6

6 BAFPS Accomplishment Report, First Quarter, January – March 2004, Code VII-057 BAFPS Accomplishment Report, First Quarter, January – March 2004, Code VII-06

32



Sec. 7.2

The Department, through BAFPS, shall enter into a Memorandum of Agreement with each of the following agencies with similar functions, defining, among others, such aspects of product standards and regulations as product coverage, areas subject to regulation and consumer arbitration: BPS, DTI; BTRCP, DTI; BFAD, DOH; NFA, DA; ITDI, DOST; FNRI, DOST; PNRI, DOST; National Biosafety Committee; SPUCS

MOA with other agencies defining aspects of product standards and regulations (e.g., product coverage, areas subject to regulation, and consumer arbitration) was not signed.

A general Memorandum was prepared and signed off by BAFPS and the DA in February 2005. However, none of the nominated agencies have committed to the Memorandum.8


33



Rule 63.1

Consultation by BAFPS with BAI and BFAR on the delineation of functions in relation to the Animal Welfare Act of 1998 and the Fisheries Code of 1998

Issuance by the Secretary of Agriculture of an AO embodying agreements on the delineation of functions

Sec. 5

On matters related to fisheries product standards, BAFPS to coordinate with BFAR and PFDA as provided in the Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998 (RA 8550)

DA Secretary shall issue an AO defining the specific relationship of BAFPS with BFAR and PFDA

BAFPS has not coordinated with BFAR and PFDA and no discussion on delineation of functions were also conducted.

Required DA AO defining specific relationship of BAFPS with BFAR and PFDA has not been issued.

BAFPS has not formulated standards for fish and fish products

Rule 64.2

Creation of the BAFPS Task Force on or before 30 July 1998 to formulate the design of the BAFPS

Sec. 8

The BAFPS Task Force provided for in Section 64 of RA 8435, together with representatives of other government agencies and the private sector, shall serve as the BAFPS Advisory Committee

BAFPS Task Force was created by AO 6, 1998 Series.

SO 411 S 2001, creating the Technical Committees of BAFPS was issued on 03 September 2001

SO 96 S 2002 issued on 14 February 2002 created additional Task Forces for International Food Standards.

Rule 64.3

Preparation of the Terms of Reference, funding and manpower requirements of BAFPS for the DA Secretary’s approval not later than 30 September 1998.

Sec. 4

The specific scope, timetables and mechanisms of implementation of the BAFPS functions shall be formulated in collaboration with the concerned agencies and promulgated through issuance by the Secretary of Agriculture and/or Memoranda of Agreement among the concerned agencies

No MOA was signed. Documentation approved by the DA Secretary

showing BAFPS TOR, funding, and manpower requirements of BAFPS is in the form of AO No. 1 S 2000 issued by Sec. Edgardo Angara on 28 January 2000 amending AO No. 17 S 1998 to revise the functions and organizational structure of BAFPS

34



BAFPS Powers and Functions

Rule 63.1.1

The powers and functions of BAFPS to include formulation and enforcement of quality standards

Sec 1

BAFPS has the following powers and functions as defined in the AFMA and the IRR:oformulate and enforce

standards of quality in the processing, preservation, packaging, labeling, importation, exportation, distribution, and advertising of agriculture, livestock and fisheries and aquaculture products;

oconduct research on product standardization, and alignment of the local standards with the international standards; and

oconduct regular inspections of processing plants, storage facilities, abattoirs, as well as public and private markets in order to ensure freshness, safety and quality of products

BAFPS functions were enumerated in the DA AO No. 17, series of 1998 which established BAFPS. However, said AO repeated the IRR provision on the need for an issuance by the DA Secretary and/or a Memo of Agreement detailing the specific scope, timetables and mechanisms of implementation of BAFPS functions.

AO No. 1, Series of 2000 was issued on 28 January 2000 amending BAFPS’ functions and organization structure provided in AO No. 17 series of 1998. (Annex B)

Standards completed with PNS Number9: Corn (shelled, grits) Vegetables (broccoli, cauliflower,

cabbage, bulb onion) Fruits (saba/cardaba banana, pummelo,

mango, pineapple, durian) Virgin coconut oil Coffee beans Pili nuts Table eggs Cutflowers (chrysanthemum-spray type,

chrysanthemum-standard, orchid-spray, carnation, anthurium, roses)

Organic agriculture specification

9 BAFPS Website; Cecil McMurray. Institutional and Physical Strengthening of the Bureau of Agriculture and Fisheries Product Standards. Technical Report, Department of Agriculture, (May 2006)

35



Standards for finalization10: Fruits (mangosteen, papaya,

calamansi/calamondin) Vegetables (carrot, tomato) Chilled young coconut water Nata de coco - raw Coco coir Fresh milk Organic Rice Organic fertilizer Organic muscovado sugar Tilapia fillet (fresh/frozen) Seaweeds Boneless dried danggit Deboned marinated milkfish

Research required (which has been limited to date) has been contracted out and was overseen by the Technical Committee established on each standard on size distribution of fruit and vegetables.11

10BAFPS Website; Cecil McMurray. Institutional and Physical Strengthening of the Bureau of Agriculture and Fisheries Product Standards. Technical Report, Department of Agriculture, (May 2006)

11Cecil McMurray. Institutional and Physical Strengthening of the Bureau of Agriculture and Fisheries Product Standards. Technical Report, Department of Agriculture, (May 2006)

36



Sec, 6.12

Recommend to the Secretary the designation of appropriate agencies empowered to enforce the regulatory provisions of RA 8435, consistent with existing laws

No recommendation was submitted to the DA Secretary.

Rule 63.1.2

Development and implementation of standards and codes of practice for food safety and efficient trade

Sec. 6.1

Develop and implement codes of practice and guidelines for food safety, postharvest handling, primary and secondary processing, packaging, labeling, advertising, distribution and marketing of agriculture, livestock and fisheries and aquaculture products

Guidelines prepared are:12

Code of Hygienic Practice for the Sale of Fresh Agriculture and Fisheries Products in Markets and Authorized Outlets

Guidelines for the Certification of Good Agricultural Practices for Fruits and Vegetables Farming

Sec. 6.4

Transmit standards promulgated as national standards to BPS of DTI for assignment of PNS number

All completed/finalized standards transmitted to BPS for assignment of PNS number.

12 BAFPS Website, May 2006

37



Rule 63.1.3

Assistance to government offices and agriculture and fisheries enterprises in establishing the scientific basis for food safety and nutrition standards and codes of practice; and harmonization of these standards with the international standards and codes of practice

Sec. 6.5

Assist government offices and enterprises to establish the scientific basis for food safety and trade standards, and codes of practice and harmonize these with internationally standards and practices

This is done through the Technical Committees organized for the standards formulation.

Rule 63.1.4

Coordination with government offices and agriculture and fishery enterprises on development of early warning system on international developments on food safety and nutrition standards and codes of practice

Sec. 6.6

Monitor and disseminate developments and trends in international food safety standards and codes of practice, ensure timely assessment of impact on domestic products and determine appropriate courses of action

Monitoring and dissemination of developments and trends in international food safety standards by BAFPS needs to be improved.

Prior to the creation of the Philippine National Codex Committee (NCC), BAFPS assisted in the preparation and presented position papers in Codex Committee meetings and other fora.

Since the creation of NCC, Sub-committees and task forces under the NCC are now responsible for preparation of country positions on identified Codex issues, and endorse these to the Technical Com., which in turn endorses to the Executive Com.

Rule 63.1.5

Ensuring the participation of all affected parties, government and non-

Sec. 6.2

Ensure participation of representatives of all concerned parties in the formulation of standards and codes of practice

BAFPS involves other GOs, academic institutions, professional organizations, industry representatives and consumer organizations in drafting standards through the Multi-sectoral

38



government, in standards and codes of practice

Technical Committees and during public consultation.13

Sec. 6.3

Form multi-sectoral committees to formulate national standards, and subject these standards to periodic review and revision, if necessary

Sec. 6.18

In cooperation with the Agribusiness Marketing Assistance Service (AMAS), actively involve industry associations and professional organizations in standards development and implementation

Rule 63.1.6

Establishment and maintenance of database, management information system, monitoring and evaluation system, and research on food commodity and food safety and nutrition standards in collaboration with NIN and research institutions.

Sec. 6.10

Establish and maintain, in collaboration with NIN the database, MIS, M&E, research and other information related to commodity and food safety standards

Development of BAFPS Information System is on-going.14

13 BAFPS Accomplishment Report for CY 200414 BAFPS Accomplishment Report, First Quarter (January-March) 2004, Code VII-12

39



Rule 63.1.7

Conduct of product testing, surveillance and inspection of food handling, processing and storage facilities, including abattoirs, fish ports and landing areas and markets, for compliance with approved standards and codes of practice, and

Establishment and operation of testing centers and research laboratories

Sec. 6.13

Conduct product testing, surveillance and inspection of food handling, processing and storage facilities, including abattoirs, fish ports and landing areas and markets, for compliance with approved standards and codes of practice, and establish and operate testing centers and research laboratories for this purpose

Inspections are only carried out in markets and abattoirs.15

Sec. 6.11

In collaboration with the Bureau of Agricultural Research (BAR) and appropriate research institutions and SPUCs conduct research related to agriculture and fisheries product standards

Research required (which has been limited to date) has been contracted out and was overseen by the Technical Committee established on each standard on size distribution of fruit and vegetables.14

Rule 63.1.8

Establishment of an inspection and certification system including third party accreditation and professional certification system for standards professionals

Sec. 6.14

Establish an inspection and certification systems including third party accreditation to ensure the cost-effective and efficient implementation of standards and codes of practice

Started in connection with formulation of Guidelines for Organic Produce and the Certification of Good Agricultural Practices.14


40



Rule 63.1.9

Provision of organization and expertise to ensure effective participation in international deliberations on food safety and trade standards in collaboration with DA Policy Analysis Service

Sec. 6.7

Provision of organization and expertise to ensure effective participation in international deliberations on food safety and trade standards in collaboration with DA Policy Analysis Service

BAFPS recommended and endorsed participation of Philippine experts from standards-related organizations in international deliberations on standards.

Participation in these meetings is limited because of lack of budget.

This function was essentially given to NCC. NCC has instituted a process for prioritizing the Codex Meetings important for Philippine issues. NCC has also instituted a process for selection of appropriate delegates to the Codex Com. Meetings. NCC is temporarily “housed” by NAFC and has no operational budget, much less budget for participation in Codex Meetings.

Rule 63.1.10

BAFPS serve as the Philippines’ National Enquiry Point for SPS and other food safety and standards concerns

Sec. 6.8

BAFPS serve as the Philippines’ National Enquiry Point for SPS and other food safety and standards concerns

BAFPS serves as the National Codex Contact Point but performance needs to be improved.

As the Codex Contact Point BAFPS should the “home” of the NCC and should act as the secretariat of the NCC. BAFPS is not agreeable to this arrangement.

DA Policy Research Service acts as SPS notification point while BAFPS serves as enquiry point on food safety and standards concerns.

Sec 6.9

Represent DA in inter-agency bodies involved with standardization and consumer protection

Regularly done.

41



Rule 63.1.11

Determination and implementation of recall of products not fit for human consumption or pose hazards to health of humans, plants and animals.

Sec. 6.15

In collaboration with appropriate offices and entities, determine and implement the recall from the market of commodities found to be unfit for human consumption or pose a hazard to humans, animal or plant health, and undertake procedures for the destruction or disposal of confiscated commodities

No recalls have ever taken place in the Philippines.16


42



Rule 63.1.12

Levy and collection of fees for services to be managed under a revolving fund proposed by DA to DBM to be created in the 1999 Appropriations Act

Sec. 6.17

Levy and collect fees for inspection, testing certification and other services. Provided, that the schedule of fees shall be determined in consultation with the Department of Finance, Commission on Audit and the Department of Budget and Management (DBM), and subject to the approval of the Secretary of Agriculture, except in instances where the collection of said fees is provided for under other laws. Provided further, that such fees shall be deposited to the Bureau of Treasury for the DBM, which shall hold the fees in trust for the designated agency to be disposed of in pursuance to the 1999 Appropriations act or form part of the corporate funds of the concerned government corporation

No revolving funds were appropriated for BAFPS

43



Rule 64.1

Coordination with both private and government sectors

Sec. 7.1

In view of the specialized technical and legal expertise needed in product standards development, formulation and implementation, the BAFPS shall coordinate, seek the services of, and consult with both private and government agencies, research institutes, educational establishments and such other individuals and entities with expertise in the field of product standards and consumer safety

This is a regular BAFPS activity as part of the standard formulation process.

44


I.C.1 BAFPS Establishment, Organization and Management, and Operationalization

21. On or before July 30, 1998 the Secretary shall issue an AO to establish the BAFPS and designate the BAFPS Director. As the BAFPS is being organized, the Secretary may designate an officer of the Department to serve in a concurrent capacity as BAPFPS Director. (Rule 61.1)

Status: On 3 December 1998 DA Acting Secretary William D. Dar issued AO No. 17 - 1998 establishing BAFPS under the Office of the Secretary for the effective implementation and enforcement of agriculture and fisheries product standards. The said AO likewise specified and elaborated BAFPS powers and functions consistent with Section 63 of AFMA and the IRR. It also required BAFPS to coordinate with DA and non-DA agencies with similar functions. The Secretary also designated Ms. Concepcion Lizada as the first BAFPS Director.

On 19 October 1999 BAFPS submitted a proposal for 60 staff positions. On 9 October 2001, DA Secretary Leonardo Q. Montemayor committed to Secretary Boncodin of DBM the abolition of 97 vacant positions from the various agencies and bureaus for the creation of 60 new positions for BAFPS. However, the DA Personnel Division found out that most of the positions offered were already filled up.

On 11 December 2002 DA Secretary Luis P. Lorenzo wrote to Secretary Boncodin on the abolition of 67 vacant positions for the creation of 37 BAFPS permanent plantilla positions including the availment of one (1) legal expert and one (1) toxicological expert as local consultants. In March 2003, the Presidential Management Staff under the Office of the President wrote a letter to Secretary Boncodin instructing her to approve the regularization of BAFPS positions and its inclusion in the 2005 national budget. It was only in March 18, 2004 that the DA Personnel Division certified that the 67 vacant positions to fund the creation of 37 positions of BAFPS are still vacant. On 14 December 2004, BAFPS complied with the request of DBM to submit the Bureau’s activities based on its mandated powers and functions under AFMA.

On 19 January 2005, BAFPS was informed by DBM that only 3 out of the 67 positions offered by DA are funded and the rest were not since they have been vacant for a long time. Nevertheless, DBM approved on 16 March 2005 17 positions for designated sections of BAFPS, namely:

a) Office of the Directorb) Standards Development Divisionc) Laboratory Services Divisiond) Technical Services Division.

45


Hiring for the 17 approved positions is in the final stage. However, BAFPS still needs to comply with requirements set by the DBM in the March 2005 approval of the 17 positions, including:

a) Submission to DBM of the Program, Activity and Project (PAP) Structure;

b) Confirmation of the savings of the Personal Services budget to fund the approved 17 positions; and

c) Submission of Reports on Funded Vacant/Vacated Regular Positions and Positions filled.

Furthermore, DA needs to submit a proposal to rationalize the product standards activities, facilities, resources and systems within the parameters and timeline of the DA Rationalization Program. DA has yet to meet the above DBM requirements.

22. The BAFPS shall be headed by a Bureau Director and two or more Assistant Directors appointed by the President upon the recommendation of the Secretary. One of the Assistant Directors shall be concerned with consumer issues and the BAFPS shall incorporate a Consumer Protection Division. (Rule 61.2)

Status: The BAFPS is headed by a Bureau Director who was appointed on 19 September 2005 after having been OIC since 16 July 2001. The BAFPS Organizational Structure in “Annex A” of AO 17, Series 1998 included 2 Assistant Director positions managing the Product Standards and Technical Services and, Industry Compliance and Consumer Protection. Under the Product Standards and Technical Services are the Standards Development and Promotion and Technical Services Division. On the other hand, Industry Compliance and Consumer Protection include the Industry Compliance and Consumer Affairs Division.

On 28 January 2000 Secretary Edgardo J. Angara issued AO No. 1 -2000 (Amending Administrative Order No. 17- 1998) amending the organizational structure of BAFPS abolishing the previous designation of two (2) Assistant Directors This was replaced by one (1) Assistant Director under which three (3) divisions were created, namely (1) Standards Development, Harmonization and Promotion Division, (2) Standards Enforcement, Industry Compliance and (3) Technical Services Division and Consumer Affairs and Special Projects Division.

However, the latest version of its organizational chart approved by the DBM in its letter of 16 March 2005 approving the staff complement of BAFPS, the final three (3) divisions are Standards Development Division, Laboratory Services Division and Technical Services Division. As of the end of 2005, BAFPS had 11 personnel: one with permanent position (the Director), 4 seconded from FIDA, 4 contractual (including a janitor), one each seconded from BPI and BAI.

46


23. The organization and design of the BAFPS shall consider the existing Philippine agriculture and fisheries product standards, the related functions and powers of the various agencies and offices of the Department and other agencies of government, including those provided under the Fisheries Code of 1998. On the basis of the review the BAFPS Task Force referred to in Section 64 shall propose the specific rules and activities of the BAFPS, and if necessary and appropriate, propose how and when functions and their associated resources currently with other agencies may be consolidated within the BAFPS. (Rule 61.3)

Status: The BAFPS Task Force was organized by Section 8, AO 6 - 1998 (the AFMA IRR) and was involved in the organizational phase of the BAFPS.

24. The BAFPS TF shall consult with the BFAR and the BAI on the appropriate delineation of their respective functions in consideration of the provisions of the Animal Welfare Act of 1998 and the Fisheries Code of 1998, as well as practical considerations of the logistics, ease of administration, adequacy of budgets and personnel and agency capability. Their agreements shall be embodied in Departmental Amos jointly drafted by for the approval of the Secretary. In collaboration with the appropriate agencies, the BAFPS shall have the following powers and functions. (Rule 63.1)

Status: Sec. 6, AO 17 - 1998 reiterated the need for BAFPS to coordinate with BFAR and PFDA. However, the relationship between BAFPS and BFAR and PFDA has never been defined. BFAR insists that the Fisheries Code is their operative law.

25. In addition to those from government agencies, the pool of experts shall also include experts from the private sector and concerned industry associations, POs and NGOs. (Rule 64.1)

Status: Sec. 71, AO 17 - 1998 provided that BAFPS shall coordinate, seek the services of, and consult with both private and government agencies, research institutes, educational establishments and such other individuals and entities with expertise in the field of product standards and consumer safety in view of the highly technical and legal expertise needed in the standards, development and implementation. For standards development/formulation, BAFPS coordinates with private and government agencies through the Technical Committees which has representation from industry stakeholders, Goes, and NGOs, research institutions and academic institutions. BAFPS has yet to tap legal experts.

Under the World Bank-assisted Diversified Farm Income and Market Development Project (DFIMP), BAFPS hired on February 13, 2006 Dr. Cecile McMurray as Senior Technical Advisor to advise on strengthening safety and quality assurance systems for market development. In particular, the consultant worked on the institutional and physical strengthening of BAFPS recognizing that the current system of control was not as effective as it should be. Along with the international expert were two local exports, Domingo F. Casaba and Dr. Maxima E. Flakier commissioned to work on Streamlining of

47


Quarantine Services of the Department of Agriculture and Development of Rationalization Plan of the Department of Agriculture Regulatory Laboratory, respectively.

26. The multi-sectoral BAFPS Task Force is hereby created to formulate the design of the BAFPS. On or before July 30, 1998, the Department Assistant Secretary charged with Regulatory and Consumer Services or another officer as designated by the Secretary shall assume the chair of the BAFPS TF. The BAFPS TF shall enable multi-sectoral consultations and the sharing of resources for the organization and early operationalization of the BAFPS. The Chairperson of the BAFPS TF is hereby authorized to draw resources from the concerned agencies such as, but not limited to: BPI, BAI, LDC, NMIC, BFAR, NFA, NNC, FDC and BAR in order to organize a secretariat for the BAFPS TF and the initial operations of the BAFPS. (Rule 64.2)

27. The TF shall be appointed from the pool of experts by the Secretary upon the recommendation of the TF Chairperson. The BAFPS TF shall prepare the terms of reference, funding and manpower requirements of the BAFPS for approval by the Secretary not later than September 30, 1998. (Rule 64.3)

28. Upon approval by the Secretary of the design an initial workplan of the BAFPS, the BAFPS TF shall cease to exist. The pool of experts will, however, continue to provide technical assistance to the Department on matters related to the BAFPS. (Rule 64.4)

Status: The TF was activated to prepare the BAFPS terms of reference, funding and manpower requirements and ceased to exist after that. Sec. 8, AO 17 – S 1998 appointed the BAFPS TF to serve as BAFPS Advisory Committee together with representatives of other government agencies and the private sector. It was kept busy in the early days of the BAFPS’ existence.

I.C.2 BAFPS Powers and Functions

29. The coverage of the BAFPS shall include standards related to consumer health and safety and efficient trade of raw, fresh, primary and secondary processed agricultural and fisheries products, both food and non-food. On or before December 30, 1998 the Secretary, upon the recommendation of the BAFPS, shall issue a Department AO specifying the full listing of the products covered by the BAFPS. (Rule 62.1)

Status: A matrix on the delineation of functions between BAFPS and other regulatory agencies under DA was submitted to DBM on 9 October 2003 based on the consultation meeting with DBM, COCAFM and DA-Personnel Division. Similarly, a copy of the proposed delineation of functions between BAFPS and BFAD-DOH was submitted to DBM on 12 December 2003. BAFPS had deliberations on the listing of product coverage with BFAD and few DA agencies but still DA has not issued an AO specifying the full listing of the products covered by BAFPS.

48


Definition per DA Administrative Order No. 6, Series 1998 (Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA 8435) dated 10 July 1998:

“Fresh agricultural and fishery products” refers to agricultural and fisheries products newly taken or captured directly from its natural state or habitat, or those newly harvested or gathered from agricultural areas or bodies of water used for aquaculture (e.g., fish sold fresh).

“Primary processing” refers to the physical alteration of raw agricultural or fishery products with or without the use of mechanical facilities (tuna sold as sushi, dressed chicken).

“Secondary processing” refers to the physical transformation of semi-processed agricultural or fishery products (dried fish).

Source: Republic Act 8435

30. In collaboration with the appropriate agencies, the BAFPS shall have the following powers and functions. (Rule 63.1)

30.a. To formulate and enforce standards of quality that will ensure human health and safety and efficiency in the consumer consumption, marketing and trade of agricultural and fisheries products, both for export and import. Enforcement shall include the formulation and implementation of standards utilized in the enforcement of quarantine relative to products for human consumption. (Rule 63.1.1)

30.b. Develop and implement in association with the Department, and Other Departments, selected SUCs and LGUs, the codes of practice and guidelines for the food safety and efficient trade standards in postharvest handling, primary and secondary processing, packaging, labeling, advertising, distribution and marketing of agricultural and fisheries products. (Rule 63.1.2)

Status: The MOA with other agencies defining aspects of product standards and regulations required under AO 17, S 1998, Section 7.2 has not been signed.

Notwithstanding the authorizations granted by AO 17 – Series 1998 for standards formulation and enforcement, BAFPS activities were focused on standards formulation, mainly due to lack of resources, both staff and budget. Standards development is in full swing mostly for plant products and mostly voluntary and not mandatory standards.

49


BAFPS has finalized the following standards:

Product PNS Number

Anthurium PNS/BAFPS 23:2005 ICS 65.020.20

Banana (saba/cardaba) PNS/BAFPS 08:2004 ICS 65.020.20

Broccoli PNS/BAFPS 16:2004 ICS 65.020.20

Bulb onions PNS/BAFPS 14:2003 ICS 65.020.20

Cabbage PNS/BAFPS 17:2004 ICS 65.020.20

Calamansi/calamondin PNS/BAFPS 30:2006 ICS 65.020.20

Carnation, fresh PNS/BAFPS 02:2003 ICS 65.020.20

Carrot PNS/BAFPS 38:2006 ICS 65.020.20

Cauliflower PNS/BAFPS18:2004 ICS 65.020.20Chrysanthemum (live flowering potted plants

PNS/BAFPS 03:2003 ICS 65.020.20

Chrysanthemum (spray type) PNS/BAFPS 05:2003 ICS 65.020.20

Chrysanthemum (standard) PNS/BAFPS 04:2003 ICS 65.020.20

Coffee beans (green) PNS/BAFPS 01:2003 ICS 65.020.20

Corn, grits PNS/BAFPS 15:2004 ICS 65.020.20

Corn, shelled PNS/BAFPS 10:2004 ICS 65.020.20

Durian PNS/BAFPS 12:2004 ICS 65.020.20

Eggs (table) PNS/BAFPS 35:2005 ICS 65.020.20

Lettuce (head) PNS/BAFPS 19:2004 ICS 65.020.20

Mango (fresh) PNS/BAFPS 13:2004 ICS 65.020.20

Mangosteen PNS/BAFPS 31:2006 ICS 65.020.20

Orchid (spray type) PNS/BAFPS 06:2003 ICS 65.020.20

Organic Agriculture PNS/BAFPS 07:2003 ICS 65.020

Papaya PNS/BAFPS 33:2006 ICS 65.020.20

Pili nuts PNS/BAFPS 34:2005 ICS 67.080.10

Pineapple PNS/BAFPS 09:2004 ICS 65.020.20

Pummelo PNS/BAFPS 11:2004 ICS 65.020.20

Roses PNS/BAFPS 24:2005 ICS 65.020.20

Tomato PNS/BAFPS 26:2006 ICS 65.020.20

Virgin coconut oil PNS/BAFPS 22:2004 ICS 67.200.10

50


Standards for finalization include:

Product PNS Number

Bangus, boneless

Danggit

Nata de coco, raw PNS/BAFPS 32:2005 ICS 67.080.01

Organic fertilizer

Tilapia, fillet

Young coconut water, chilled PNS/BAFPS 28:2005 ICS 67.160.20

Standards in different stages of consultation include:

Product PNS Number

Coco Coir

Meat cuts

Milk, fresh PNS/BAFPS 11:2004 ICS 65.020.20

Rice

BAFPS also developed the “Code of Hygienic Practice for the Sale of Fresh Agriculture and Fisheries Products in Markets and Authorized Outlets” and “Guidelines for the Certification of Good Agricultural Practices for Fruits and Vegetables Farming”.

30.c. Assist government offices and agriculture and fishery enterprises to establish the scientific basis for domestic food safety and nutrition standards and codes of practice and the alignment of these with internationally accepted standards and practices. (Rule 63.1.3)

Status: Local experts from the members of the Technical Working Group of Corn Quality Management from PHTRC, NFA, BPRE, BAI and BFAD were tapped to conduct trainor’s training on the prevention and control of aflatoxin in 2005.

30.d. Coordinate with government offices and agriculture and fishery enterprises to develop an early-warning system on developments and trends in international food safety and nutrition standards and codes of practice, to enable adequate domestic adjustment in these. (Rule 63.1.4)

Status: BAFPS has no activities related to this function.

51


30.e. Ensure the participation of representatives of all affected parties, both government and non-government in the formulation of agricultural and fishery product standards and codes of practice for commodity and food safety and efficient trade. (Rule 63.1.5)

Status: BAFPS established Technical Committees and Task Forces with participation from both government and non-government sectors in the formulation of standards and codes of practice (including international standards. Special Orders 411, S 2001 and 96 – Series 2002 were issued for the purpose.

30.f. Establish and maintain, in collaboration with the NIN and the appropriate research institutions and SUCs, the database, Management Information System (MIS) and M&E, and research on commodity and food safety and nutrition standards. (Rule 63.1.6)

Status: Collaboration with NIN on establishing and maintaining database is on-going.

30.g. Rule 63.1.7 Conduct product testing, surveillance and inspection of food handling, processing and storage facilities, including abattoirs, fish ports and landing areas and markets, for compliance with approved standards and codes of practice, and establish and operate testing centers and research laboratories for this purpose. (Rule 63.1.7)

Status: BAFPS conducts inspection only of markets and abattoirs.

30.h. Rule 63.1.8 Establish an inspection and certification system including third party accreditation and a professional Certification System for commodity standards professional to ensure cost-effective implementation of standards and codes of practices. (Rule 63.1.8)

Status: BAFPS conducts first party certification scheme for Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) and third party accreditation for organic agriculture.

30.i. In collaboration with the Department PAS, provide organization and manpower expertise to ensure effective preparations and background for government participation in the deliberations on international food standards, including those related to the WTO, SPS), FAO, WHO, Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC), the Office Internationale des Epizootics, the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) and other international bodies formulating international food safety and efficient trade standards, and, subject to the direction of the Secretary, be responsible for government participation in the deliberations of the above international bodies. (Rule 63.1.9)

52


Philippine National Codex Committee

The Codex National Committee was established under the Joint Department Administrative Order No. 1, S 2005 (DA) or No. 2005-0028 (DOH) signed between the Department of Agriculture and Department of Health on 25th November 2005. This JDAO was established pursuant to the Codex Asian Regional Guidelines which provides that each member-country must establish an NCC primarily to advise governments on the implications of various standardization and food control issues which have arisen and are related to the work undertaken by the CAC and to support the work of the Codex Contact Point.

The NCC is composed of (1) Executive Committee, (2) Technical Committee, and (3) Sub-Committees and Task Forces. The NCC is composed of government agencies, non-government organizations, and the industry sector with an interest in the nature and content of Codex texts. It includes food control agencies, scientific and technical institutions, trade bodies, consumers, farmer organizations, and food manufacturers. The BAFPS shall be the National Secretariat of the NCC. In the initial operation, the National Agricultural and Fishery Council (NAFC) Fisheries and Aquaculture Section (FAS) shall act as interim Secretariat in coordination with BAFPS.

The objectives of the NCC are:

To provide a mechanism for integrating Codex decisions and activities into the programs of food control agencies, and those of other government and non-government organizations with responsibility to ensure the safety of foods;

To ensure that Codex food standards, guidelines, codes of practice and other recommended measures reflect national interests and local capabilities and do not hinder food trade;

To serve as a venue for government agencies, non-government organizations, and industry associations, to work together in the development of country positions on pertinent Codex issues, and in the evaluation and dissemination of Codex texts; and

To institutionalize the establishment of technical expertise for cost-efficient and effective country participation in Codex meetings.

The expected outputs of the NCC are: Identified priority Codex issues and country positions on these issues; Scientific database in support of country positions; A mechanism for facilitating the integration of relevant Codex decisions into the

national food standards and food safety control programs; An integrated work plan and budget for the generation of scientific data,

preparation of country positions, and for effective participation in Codex activities;

A National Codex Information System (NCIS); Selection of appropriate technical expert/s in the country delegation to Codex

meetings.

Source: Joint Department Administrative Order No. DA-01 and DOH 2005-0028, S 2005

Status : BAFPS role in providing organization and manpower expertise to ensure effective participation in Codex Alimentarus Commission meetings is minimal. This function is performed by the newly organized Philippine National Codex Committee (NCC) which is temporarily housed in NAFC and

53


exists with a small budget support from NAFC, BAFPS, DA agencies and DOH agencies. The critical NCC activities - - government and private sector collaboration in the development of country positions on pertinent Codex issues, and in the evaluation and dissemination of Codex texts; establishment of technical expertise for cost-efficient and effective country participation in Codex meetings; and participation in Codex Committee meetings - - are not funded. BAFPS should be host and Secretariat of the NCC, but it is not.

30.j. Serve as the Philippines’ National Enquiry Point for SPS and other food safety and standards concerns. (Rule 63.1.10)

Status: BAFPS performs this function but needs to improve especially with respect to the timely transmission/submission to CAC of the Philippine position on standards issues as well as dissemination of information on meetings as well as standards.

30.k. Determine and implement, in collaboration with the appropriate offices and entities, the recall from the market of commodities that are determined to be unfit for human consumption. Provided, that confiscated commodities are to be destroyed. (Rule 63.1.11)

Status: No recalls have been implemented

30.l. Levy and collect fees for its inspection, testing and certification services. Provided further, that such fees shall be managed under a BAFPS revolving fund, proposed by the Department to the DBM to be created in the 1999 Appropriations Act. (Rule 63.1.12)

Status: No revolving fund was created in the 1999 Appropriations Act.

54


II. FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS

II.A AFMA PSCS and the Philippine Agriculture and Fishery Safety and Quality System

31. The Philippine agriculture and fisheries safety and quality system is characterized by numerous government units that have overlapping and uncoordinated standards formulation and enforcement functions. (Table 4) There are gaps despite the overlaps. The system is generally inefficient and reactive. It appears to prioritize food export issues. And based on the recent cases of foodborne illnesses and deaths, the system is not working. For example, the fisheries sector was forced to be serious in certification of fish manufacturing plants, especially the HACCP approach when the United States Food and Drug Administration imposed this requirement of all facilities for its products to be allowed entry into the United States. More recently, the European Union issues, also on fishery products, forced the BFAR undertake serious system overhaul (i.e., organizational and procedural adjustments), albeit unsuccessfully, mainly to comply with the import requirements and be recognized as a Philippine “competent” authority. However, there are well-known accomplishments of the DA in the areas of control of foot and mouth disease and the prevention of the Avian Influenza Virus infection, the control of mango pulp weevil infestation, the regulation of the use of chlorpyrifos in mangoes, among others. The DA should be commended for its role in making the Philippines the only significant poultry producer that has not been affected by the pandemic.

32. The government has not appropriated funds for PSCS. The AFMP for 2000-2004 did not contain such a budget line item. The only funding AFMA got were the salaries of the Director and personnel detailed from other DA agencies. BAFPS was fortunate to have been granted funding support by the DA commodity program. Budget has not been made available for even the basic requirements of hiring qualified personnel; procurement of adequate facilities and their operation, including laboratories and equipment; research, training and information collection and dissemination activities; and participation in international fora on food safety.

33. AFMA was an attempt to integrate the agriculture and fisheries safety and quality control system into one organization. Government was determined to achieve effective collaboration and coordination among agencies across the entire food or supply chain through the establishment of BAFPS. AFMA is indeed headed in the right direction. However, DA needs to make significant progress in food safety and quality and consumer protection. The fragmented food supply chain and large numbers of small producers involved in food chain increases the risk of food exposure to unhygienic environments, contamination and adulteration. The continuing poor posharvest handling, processing and storage of food by the small businesses caused by lack of appropriate facilities and knowledge and expertise in technology application pose problems.

55


Table 4DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AGENCIES AND THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES1

AGENCY FOCUS REG LIC INSPReg. LAB

Res. LAB

ACC CERT

Bureau of Agriculture and Fisheries Product Standards

BAFPS Raw, primary- and secondary-processed agriculture and fisheries products

Bureau of Animal Industry BAI Quarantine - Live animals (and milk) includes Veterinary Service, Vaccines, Aflatoxin in animal feeds

National Meat Inspection Service

NMIS Meat2 and meat products

Sugar Regulatory Administration

SRA Focuses on Sugar and Sugar products

Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources

BFAR Quarantine – live fish and their primary products canned tuna and frozen products

?

Bureau of Plant Industry BPI Quarantine – fresh agricultural crops and seeds testing and certification –pesticide residues (MRLs)

Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority

FPA Licensing of premises and products – formulation of MRLs

Fiber Industry Development Authority

FIDA Fiber crops but excluding cotton

1 1Adapted from Cecil H. McMurray. Institutional and Physical Strengthening of the Bureau of Agriculture and Fisheries Product Standards. Technical Report. Diversified Farm Income and Market Development Project. DA/World Bank. Feb. 2006.

2 2 BFAD-DOH has related responsibilities.

56


AGENCY FOCUS REG LIC INSPReg. LAB

Res. LAB

ACC CERT

Cotton Development Authority

CODA Cotton and cotton fiber

Philippine Coconut Authority

PCA Coconut and coconut products

National Food Authority NFA Markets and Marketing (Rice and Corn)

Food Development Center, NFA

FDC- NFA

All food products

National Tobacco Authority

NTA Tobacco growing – dried leaves

Bureau of Post harvest Research and Extension

BPRE All products, especially rice and corn

Food Development Center – NFA

FDC – NFA

All food products

Industrial Technology Development Institute – DOST

ITDI – DOST

Processed food products

Legend: REG-Regulatory powers; LIC-Licensing powers; INSP- Inspects; Reg LAB- Laboratory carrying out regulatory functions; Res LAB- Laboratory for carrying out Research: ACC-Powers for Accreditation; LIC- Licensing power; CERT- certifies.

57


II.B. AFMA PSCS and Its Implementation

34. The enactment of AFMA with its promise of substantial funding in addition to the DA regular budget, and the creation of BAFPS did not help improve the agri-fisheries safety and quality system or provide adequate support for its efficient operation. The creation of BAFPS also fostered a divide especially among the DA standards and regulatory agencies. It was perceived as a threat to the other agencies especially because the specific product coverage and functions with regard to standards formulation and enforcement or regulation were not provided. In fact the IRR even made it more tenuous when it elaborated on the functions that were clearly within the purview of the other agencies. AFMA’s prescription was like “superimposing” BAFPS in the existing agriculture and fisheries quality and safety system in the DA and in other agencies. 35. It is lamentable that strongest resistance to BAFPS was shown by the DA agencies. Instead of collaborating, cooperating and accepting BAFPS with a possible unique supportive role, the agencies did not accept the delineation of functions. Most agencies use the existing powers and authorities given by the laws and orders which created their agencies. It is amazing how the tug of war persists to this day even though BAFPS is directly under the Office of the Secretary.

36. To make matters worse, BAFPS was never appropriated a budget since 1998. BAFPS was added to the list of government agencies involved in food quality and safety that could not be and have not been effective primarily because of lack of budget despite AFMA’s commitment for increased funding for the agriculture sector and the DA’s operations. Within the 7 years of the life of AFMA, BAFPS was never really operationalized. Until recently, BAFPS was severely handicapped with a small office space with limited office furniture, and 7 staff. Its operations practically depended on funding from the DA rice, corn, high value, and livestock programs. The failure of BAFPS to obtain approval of the staffing and budget for both personnel and operations is the principal reason for the very much delayed operationalization of BAFPS, and failure to fulfill all its functions.

37. Even with the approval of the 17 positions and the recruitment completed, the fate of BAFPS largely depends on the outcome of the studies on the rationalization of the DA. The interim measure suggested by DBM is for BAFPS to be lodged in the Office of the Secretary, specifically under the Office of the Undersecretary for Staff Operations, as part of the General Administration and Support Services since it has not been included in the AFMA. In the meantime, BAFPS activities will remain limited until the DA complies with the requirements by the DBM.

38. The current responsibilities or mandate of BAFPS are not realistic and not achievable. The mechanism for the implementation of BAFPS mandate is unworkable. An analysis of the current authorization or mandate and configuration conducted by Dr. McMurray showed that they are not achievable and not

58


appropriate17. Dr. Mc Murray pointed out that BAFPS should not be an implementing agency, but a policy setting body with oversight function and the power to scrutinize that the policies/standards are being implemented satisfactorily throughout the Philippines. Policy should be separate from implementation in accordance with the requirements of current international best practice. BAFPS should not be responsible to perform a policy function (i.e., formulation of standards) and an implementation function (i.e., enforcement of standards) at the same time.

II.C Stakeholders Views on AFMA PSCS

39. As part of the review, the team held workshops and conducted a survey of key informants in 16 regions of the country to elicit comments on the AFMA benefits to the different agricultural based industries and feedback regarding the priorities of the law

II.C.1 Regional Workshops

40. The regional workshop participants were divided into relevant commodity groupings. Each group was asked to assess the general impact, implementation and budget of the PSCS, giving the reasons for the rating; identify the major issues and concerns; and propose budget allocation for the component. The workshop outputs reflect the general lack of awareness and understanding of product quality and safety control. The participants are also generally unaware of the AFMA PSCS component and BAFPS and its powers and functions. Those who are aware of BAFPS questioned the capability of BAFPS given its delayed operationalization and lack of personnel. Nevertheless participants expressed satisfaction with well-known and recent activities of BAFPS and other related agencies (BPI and BFAR) such as, efforts on detection and control of aflatoxin and other mycotoxins, red tide monitoring, HACCP training in the fisheries sector and BAFPS standard setting activities and consultations.

General Impact of Product Standardization and Consumer Safety

41. Table 5 shows that the AFMA PSCS had generally moderate impact across commodity groups.

Abaca and Coconut. Region 4B is the rater for these commodities. Participants from this region agree that the AFMA PSCS Component had high impact on coconut industry (particularly virgin coconut oil, copra and coir), but only moderate impact on abaca industry. Coconut producers and processors are aware and conscious about product safety. There was also increased demand by consumers for high quality coconut products, e.g., virgin coconut oil. This may be an effect of the series of seminars and consultations

17 Cecil H. McMurray. Institutional and Physical Strengthening of the Bureau of Agriculture and Fisheries Product Standards. Technical Report. Diversified Farm Income and Market Development Project. DA/World Bank. Feb. 2006.

59


conducted by BAFPS and PCA in connection with the formulation of VCO standards. Unlike the coconut industry, the abaca industry was only moderately affected by the PSCS. Standards are used only in the exporters’ grading and baling facilities and not by the producers at the harvest and postharvest points of the supply chain.

Table 5Stakeholders’ Assessment of AFMA Product Standardization and Consumer

Safety General Impact

Note: Blank cell means either no discussion group for the commodity group was formed or no response. “None” means no impact.

Corn. Five out of 11 regions (Regions 3, 4A, 4B, 6, and 9) represented in the workshop are convinced that the AFMA PSCS had a moderate impact on the corn industry. The main reason for this rating is the conduct of a series of consultations and training of farmers, livestock raisers, Agricultural Technicians and other LGU agriculture personnel on prevention, detection and control of aflatoxin and other mycotoxins contamination. The five regions appreciated the consultations and demands for more of such training to cover more LGU personnel and more areas. On the other hand, respondents were concerned about the failure to operationalize BAFPS, the capability of BAFPS personnel to perform their functions, and the lack of field services by BAFPS since it has no field office. Participants from said 5 regions also want BAFPS to fast track the preparation of standards for corn and corn products. Regions 1 and ARMM participants agree that PSCS had no impact since the PSCS was not implemented in Region 1, while ARMM participants said the production program in that area focused on rice and not corn.

Grains. More than half of the regions represented (CAR, Region 12 and CARAGA) rated the PSCS implementation impact on the grains sector low. CAR participants did not feel AFMA PSCS. They gave importance to harmonizing the Philippine standards with international standards and the enforcement of these standards. They resent the fact that traders dictate quality standards. Region 12 participants did not believe that farmers got any benefits from the PSCS implementation. Farmers still have no awareness of standards, and are, therefore, not adopting them. For CARAGA Region

60


participants, lack of awareness of standards, lack of testing facilities and equipment (especially moisture tester, and lack of posharvest facilities are the reasons why they believe the PSCS did not make a difference in the grains industry. Region 10 and Region 11 participants agreed that farmers are not aware of standards and those who know do not apply the standards. Although NFA applies standards on moisture content and purity, it cannot influence producers to adopt standards except when they sell to NFA. The fact is farmers do not always sell to NFA. Some participants complained that NFA is too strict when evaluating the quality of the farmers’ grains offered to it.

Rice. Participants from Regions 4A, 5, 7 and 9 were convinced that the AFMA PSCS had moderate impact on the rice sector. Some farmers said they are not aware of standards. Those who know the standards are not strictly following them. Even improved milled rice sold does not meet the 97% purity requirement. Improper spraying can be a possible health hazard.

An equal number of regions (1, 3, 6 and ARMM) agreed on the low impact of the PSCS. Participants find NFA’s enforcement of standards lax, while producers know little about standards, and therefore do not implement them. Region 6 participants are happy with the implementation of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and organic rice production. However, they raised the issue of the lack of information dissemination on organic farming, and the absence of an organic farming certifying body at the local level.

Fisheries and Aquaculture. The majority of regions gave AFMA PSCS a moderate impact rating for a variety of reasons. For Region I, municipal ordinance on fisheries exist but are not strictly implemented. Consumer information dissemination is not implemented well. Region 2 participants pointed out the public misinformation on the quality and safety of fishery products, unsanitary processing of some products (e.g., corroded bagoong containers, and filthy fish boiling vats in the processing of smoked fish), lack of control on the use of food colors and other additives, and the failure of LGUs to implement product standards and food control due to lack of capability are manifestations that the PSCS is not making a good impact. Region 4A pointed out a lot of good things but still rated the PSCS impact moderate. These are: standards are in place; GMP and HACCP are used for quality assurance; and assistance on accreditation is provided. On the other hand, Region 5 participants believe that PSCS deserves the moderate impact rating because of: lack of awareness on product standards and consumer safety, absence of monitoring and surveillance due to lack of personnel, and politically influenced implementation of PSCS18 are some of the reasons for Region 5’s rating. Region 8’s reasons for the “moderate” rating are: selective implementation of standards, absence of fish inspection prior to sale (spoiled, and fish caught using cyanide continue to be sold), lack of qualified personnel to do inspection in the municipality, and use by buyers of standards other than BFAR’s. Region 9 is contented with the availability of standards, quality control services and training. The good red tide monitoring is the only positive

18 No clarification is available in the transcripts of the workshop reports.

61


feedback for Region 10.19 Region 10 has a number of issues, namely: limited implementation of food control, lack of equipment and qualified personnel for cyanide and formalin tests, lack of inspectors, absence of quality control in hatcheries, LGUs failed to implement food control measures, lack of political will to enforce standards, and lack of standards for processed fishery products. Lack of government fish inspection is the only reason for the “moderate” rating given by CARAGA Region.

High Value Commercial Crops. Five regions agreed that PSCS has a low impact on HVCC. Region 2 has limited awareness of standards. The activities implemented in the Region were not identifiable with AFMA PSCS. Region 3 participants believe that BAFPS has not really been operationalized mainly because it had no staff. In Region 4, they were not aware of the existence of BAFPS and agriculture and fisheries products standards. BAFPS was considered an infant agency by Region 5. The standards formulated are limited and the compliance with available standards is low. The public has limited awareness of the standards and consumer safety issues.

Livestock and Poultry. Of the 15 regions which gave ratings, six gave “moderate” impact rating. Region 3 indicated that the inadequate budget and untimely release prevented the formulation of standards for processed meat. Region 4A is concerned that standards and regulations are not enforced, and standards are not harmonized with international standards. As far as Region 5 is concerned, implementation of PSCS activities should be improved, particularly the determination of aflatoxin in feeds and biologic residues. In Region 9, improvements are needed in the packaging and labeling of meat and meat products. Region 12 adopts standards and there are regular training on standards, and regular inspection is conducted for accreditation. In ARMM, NMIS rules and regulations are strictly enforced, e.g., standards for Halal slaughtering. However, there are concerns about the prevalence of backyard slaughtering, improper labeling of products, and improper handling of live animals transport to markets.

Budget Allocation for Product Standardization and Consumer Safety

42. Almost all the regions agreed that PSCS had inadequate budget allocation (Table 6). A few regions believed that it was more appropriate to give a “none” (meaning no budget) response considering that there was really no AFMA budget allocated if budget incremental to the DA regular budget was considered. The participants feel that the PSCS budget was not enough for fundamental activities that would make a difference to the agriculture and fisheries sector as envisioned by AFMA. Funding was needed for the implementation and expansion of start-up activities, such as: standards formulation for many products; information dissemination and promotion of standards adoption; monitoring and enforcement;

19 Note that BAFPS is not involved in red tide monitoring.

62


consultation and training on quality and safety assurance measures (e.g., detection and control of aflatoxin, GMP, HACCP) for producers, processors, LGU Agriculture Staff, and consumers; set-up or upgrade of facilities and equipment for laboratory testing and make these services accessible; laboratory maintenance and operating expenses; and BAFPS and LGU personnel and personnel capability building.

Table 6Stakeholders Assessment of AFMA Product Standardization and Consumer Safety

Budget Allocation

Note: Blank cell means no discussion group for the commodity group was formed or no response. “None” means workshop participants believe no budget was allocated.

Implementation of Product Standardization and Consumer Safety

43. Five of the eight commodity groupings across all regions agree that the PSCS implementation was poor (Table 7). The reasons for this rating are practically the same as the reasons of the budget rating. Participants in the workshops made special mention the consultations and training for the detection and control of aflatoxin (especially in corn) that were started in 2005 by the Corn Program. For fisheries and aquaculture sector, red tide monitoring is quite well-known and appreciated.

Table 7Stakeholders’ Assessment of AFMA Product Standardization and Consumer Safety

Implementation

63


Note: Blank cell means no discussion group for the commodity group was formed or no response. “None” means the participants were not aware of any implementation that took place.

Priority Focus for Intervention and Proposed Budget Allocation

44. The priorities for intervention spans the AFMA mandated functions of BAFPS, including: fast track standards formulation for agriculture and fisheries products, both fresh and processed; enforcement of standards and regulations; standards promotion among producers, marketers and processors; information and training for producers, marketers and processors; consumer education; and provision of accessible laboratory testing facilities (Table 8). However, there is also a call for the review of BAFPS’ mandate; the operationalization of BAFPS, including its presence in the local level; and the activation of the LGUs’ role in the inspection system.

45. The overall average budget allocation proposal for PSCS is 5.57%, besting only Information Support, Trade and Other Services Components. Of the seven commodity groups, livestock, fisheries, and HVCC have the highest PSCS intervention requirement, proposing the highest budget allocation ranging fro 7 – 7.6%. This is probably because of the export/import orientation of these commodities.

Table 8Stakeholders' Assessment of AFMA Product Standardization and Consumer Safety:

Priority Focus for Intervention and Proposed Budget Allocation

PRIORITY FOCUS FOR INTERVENTION PROPOSED BUDGET

ALLOCATION (% of AFMA Budget)

Corn (11 Regions)

BAFPS needs to finalize quality standard for corn & consumer safety

3.7%

Set policy to allow DA to revolve the proceeds from aflatoxin examination/analysis for the procurement of reagents and other laboratory supplies

Grains (5 Regions)

None 3.0%

64


PRIORITY FOCUS FOR INTERVENTION PROPOSED BUDGET

ALLOCATION (% of AFMA Budget)

Rice (11 Regions)

None 2.8% Fisheries (16 Regions)

Formulation of standards for products. 7.2% HACCP training of producers and processors. Information campaign on consumer safety among producers and consumers. Strict enforcement of product standards. Provision of laboratories in strategic places. Training of stakeholders on product quality and safety. Ensure quality fishery products in preparation for export trading and ensure consumer safety. Competent manpower from BFAR. Finish standards proposed by the National Seaweeds Development Program (NSDP). Set-up BAFPS in the region.

65


Table 8. Cont’d

HVCC (14 Regions)

Information dissemination and enforcement of standards. 7.0% Laboratory facilities. Full operationalization of BAFPS. Upgrading of needed laboratory facilities for accredited methods of analysis (High Performance Liquid Chromatography, Atomic Absorption Chromatography, and Gas Chromatography. LGUs to regularly monitor fertilizer and pesticide residues for fruits and vegetables following meat inspection system.

Strict enforcement of the food labeling laws. Livestock & Poultry (15 Regions)

Impose sanctions to violators (users and vendors) for dispensing biologics. 7.6% Strictly implement/enforce existing policies and product standards. Review BAFPS mandate. Strengthen; provide budget and facilities from national and local governments. Craft comprehensive program on product standardization. Intensify information dissemination through tri-media. Strict enforcement of product standards for meat and meat products by LGU. Budget allocation for product standards. Upgrade and utilize existing lab facilities for antibiotic and chemical residues. Define standards. Provide complete facilities and equipment.

Abaca (Region IVB)

None. 5.0% Coconut: VCO, Coir, Copra (Region IVB)

None. 5.0%

II.C.2 Survey of Producers’ Groups

46. Producers groups were selected from among the AFMA regional workshop participants. They were requested to fill-out the questionnaire on the respondents’ awareness of the PSCS component, BAFPS and its mandate. A total of 181 respondents representing 16 regions participated in the survey. (Tables 9A-9E and Tables 10A-10C)

47. In all regions of the country, less than a third of the respondents are satisfied with the AFMA PSCS (Table 9A). More than half of the respondents from Regions 11 and 12 were satisfied with the PSCS. In contrast, CARAGA and ARMM had the least satisfied respondents. Those who are not satisfied make up less than a fourth of the respondents. Very few were very satisfied and represented only three regions (2, 9, and ARMM). Less than half of the respondents did not know or could not answer probably because they were unaware of this AFMA component.

66


Table 9ASurvey of Producers’ Associations:

Satisfaction with Current Product Standards, Quality and Safety.

Note: Totals may not add-up due to rounding off.

Table 9BSurvey of Producers’ Associations: Awareness of existence of BAFPS


48. More than half of the respondents do not know that BAFPS exist, while a fourth were aware (Table 9B). Awareness of BAFPS was highest among Region 4B respondents. On the other hand, three quarters of the Region 3 respondents were unaware of BAFPS.

67


49. Of those who knew about BAFPS’ existence, only a little more than half were aware of is functions and target accomplishments (Table 9B). More than two thirds of the respondents do not know the functions and the target accomplishments of BAFPS (Table 9C).

50. Less than on tenth of the respondents know of standards that have been formulated by BAFPS or other government agencies (Table 9C). Close to two thirds have no awareness of the Philippine standards.

Table 9CSurvey of Producers’ Associations: Awareness of BAFPS functions and target

accomplishments


51. The respondents are even less aware of the standards that are being enforced by BAFPS or other government agencies (Tables 9D and 9E). Less than one tenth of the respondents are aware of the standards enforced, while more than two thirds are not aware.

Table 9DSurvey of Producers’ Associations: Awareness of the Standards that have been

Formulated by BAFPS and other Government Agencies

68



Table 9ESurvey of Producers’ Associations: Awareness of the Standards that are being

Enforced by BAFPS or other Government Agencies


52. The lack of awareness was evident in the responses when asked to enumerate standards they know, the agencies that have formulated standards and

69


agencies that enforce standards (Tables 10A – 10C)). For example, some respondents appear to be confused with some of the buzz words they hear (e.g., GMP, HACCP, and ISO), identifying them as standards.

Table 10ASurvey of Producers' Associations: Awareness of Specific Product Standards that

have been Formulated by BAFPS and Other Government Agencies

Region Specific Product Standards

CAR

Size standards for flowers Corn Rice Banana

Region 2 Meat packaging Grains Hybrid seeds Livestock products

Inbred seeds

Region 3 GMP HACCP

Region 5 Pili nut standards CODEX Identification of aflatoxin in fuels

Region 6 Chlorpyrifos maximum residue level accepted in Japan and USA Cypermethrin maximum residue level accepted in Japan and USA

Region 7 Vegetable Poultry Egg Corn

Rice

Region 9 HACCP CODEX ISO GMP

Region 10

Pesticide residues Abaca Size and quality standards Vegetables Insecticide residue Mangoes Soil-less growing Tuna Banana Pineapple Coconut Rice

Region 11 Rice Mango Banana Pineapple

Coconut Region 12 Banana Rubber

Table 10BSurvey of Producers' Associations:

70


Awareness of Specific Government Agencies that have Formulated Standards

Region Government Agencies that Have Formulated Standards

Region 5 BAFPS DOST FIDA BFAD

Region 6 Philippine Quarantine ServiceRegion 9 DTI BPS

Table 10CSurvey of Producers' Associations

Awareness of Specific Government Agencies that are Being Enforcing Standards

Region Government Agencies Enforcing Standards

Region 5BAI

BFARBPI

II.D Important Issues and Global Developments in Food Safety, Quality, Control and Consumer Protection

Food Safety, Quality and Consumer Protection20, 21

53. Food safety may defined as all conditions and measures necessary during the production, processing, storage, distribution and preparation of food to ensure that when eaten, it does not present an appreciable health risk. Food safety implies absence or acceptable levels of contaminants, adulterants, naturally occurring toxins or any other substance that may make food injurious to health on an acute or chronic basis.

Food quality can be considered a complex characteristic of food that determines its value or acceptability to consumers. Food quality is about all positive or negative attributes that influence the value the consumer gives on the product. This includes positive attributes such as the origin, color, flavor, texture, nutritional content and processing method of the food; and negative attributes, such as spoilage, contamination with filth, discoloration, and off-odors.

Considerations of Food Safety

Food safety is an essential public health issue for all countries. Foodborne

20 Adapted from: Assuring Food Safety and Quality: Guidelines for Strengthening National Food Control Systems. FAO/WHO. Rome .2003

21Committee on World Food Security, 25th Session Report, May-June 1999).

71


diseases due to microbial pathogens, biotoxins, and chemical contaminants in food represent serious threats to the health of thousands of millions of people.

The integration and consolidation of food industries and the globalization of the food trade are changing the patterns of food production and distribution. Food and feed are distributed over far greater distances than before, creating the conditions necessary for widespread outbreaks foodborne illness.

Increasing urbanization leads to greater requirements for transport, storage and preparation of food. In developing countries, food is often prepared by street vendors. In developed countries, up to 50% of the food budget may be spent on food prepared outside the home. All these changes lead to situations in which a single source of contamination can have widespread, even global consequences.

Globalization of the food trade offers many benefits to consumers, as it results in a wider variety of high quality foods that are accessible, affordable and safe, meeting consumer demand. The global food trade provides opportunities for food-exporting countries to earn foreign exchange, which is indispensable for the economic development of many countries. However, these changes also present new challenges to safe food production and distribution and have been shown to have widespread repercussions on health.

Food safety programs are increasingly focusing on farm-to-table approach as an effective means of reducing foodborne hazards. This holistic approach to the control of food-related risks involves consideration of every step in the chain, from raw material to food consumption. Hazards can enter the food chain on the farm and can continue to be introduced or exacerbated at any point in the chain.

Although significant progress has been made in many countries in making food safer, thousands of millions of people become ill each year from eating contaminated food. The emergence of increased antimicrobial resistance in bacteria causing disease is aggravating this picture. The public is increasingly aware of the risks posed by pathogenic microorganisms and chemical substances in the food supply. The introduction of new technologies, including genetic engineering and irradiation, in this climate of concern about food safety is posing a special challenge. Some new technologies will increase agricultural production and make food safer, but their usefulness and safety must be demonstrated if they are to be accepted by consumers.

Until recently, most systems for regulating food safety were based on legal definitions of unsafe food, enforcement programs for the removal of unsafe food from the market and sanctions for the responsible parties after the fact. These traditional systems cannot respond to existing and emerging challenges to food safety because they do not provide or stimulate a preventive approach. During the past decade there was a transition to risk analysis based on better scientific knowledge of foodborne illness and its causes. This provides a preventive basis for regulatory measures for food safety at both national and international levels. The risk-based approach must be backed by information on the most appropriate and effective means to control foodborne hazards.

Source: Assuring Food Safety and Quality: Guidelines for Strengthening National Food Control Systems. FAO/WHO. Rome .2003

54. Food control is defined as:

72


“. . . . a mandatory regulatory activity or enforcement by national and local authorities to provide consumer protection and ensure that all foods during production, handling, storage, processing and distribution are safe, wholesome and fit for human consumption; conform to safety and quality requirements; and are honestly and accurately labeled as prescribed by law.”

55. The Philippines has commitments under international trade agreements. The World Trade Organization (WTO) and ASEAN Free Trade agreements cover trade liberalization as well as supplemental and complementary issues such as, the application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Measures and equivalence; harmonization of standards; reciprocal recognition of tests and certification of products; and introduction of greater transparency in standards and conformance.

56. The FAO/WHO Guidelines states that most country food safety and quality systems typically have the following components:

a. Food related laws, regulations and standards – Laws traditionally consist of legal definitions of unsafe food, and the prescription of enforcement tools for removing unsafe food from commerce and punishing responsible parties. Food laws and regulations must be relevant and enforceable. An inadequate food law will have a negative impact on the effectiveness of food control activities. Updated standards are also important.

Food legislation should:

Provide a high level of health protection; Include clear definitions to increase consistency and legal security; Be based on high quality, transparent, and independent scientific advice following risk

assessment, risk management and risk communication; Include provision for the use of precaution and the adoption of provisional measures

where an unacceptable level of risk to health has been identified and where full risk assessment could not be performed;

Include provision of for the right of consumers to have access to accurate and sufficient information;

Provide for tracing of food products and for their recall in case of problems; Include clear provisions indicating that primary responsibility for food safety and

quality rests with producers and processors; Include obligation to ensure that only safe and fairly presented food is placed on the

market; Recognize the country’s international obligations particularly in relation to trade; and Ensure transparency in the development of food law and access to information.

Source: Assuring Food Safety and Quality: Guidelines for Strengthening National Food Control Systems. FAO/WHO. Rome. 2003

73


b. Food related control management – This pertains to the establishment of a leadership function and administrative structures for: (a) development and implementation of an integrated national food control strategy; (b) operation of a national food control program; (c) securing funds and allocating resources; (d) setting standards and regulations; (e) participation in international food control related activities; (f) developing emergency response procedures; and carrying out risk analysis.

c. Inspection Services – Qualified, trained, efficient and host food inspection service is essential to the administration and implementation of food laws. The reputation and integrity of the food control system is only as good as the integrity and skill of the inspectors.

The responsibilities of the inspection service include:

Inspecting premises and processes for compliance with hygienic and other requirements of standards and regulations;

sampling food during harvest, processing, storage, transport or sale to establish compliance, to contribute data for risk assessments and to identify offenders;

recognizing forms of food decomposition by organoleptic assessment; identifying food which is unfit for human consumption; or food which is otherwise deceptively sold to consumers; and taking the necessary remedial action;

recognizing, collecting and transmitting evidence when breaches of law occur, and appearing in court to assist prosecution;

encouraging voluntary compliance by means of quality assurance procedures;

carrying out inspection, sampling and certification of food for import/export inspection purposes when so required;

in establishments working under safety assurance programs such as Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP), conduct risk based audits.

Source: Assuring Food Safety and Quality: Guidelines for Strengthening National Food Control Systems. FAO/WHO. Rome. 2003.

d. Laboratory services for physical, microbiological and chemical analyses with qualified and skilled analysts to ensure effective and efficient performance. Due to the high capital investment and maintenance and operating cost, the number and location of the laboratories must be determined in relation to the objectives of the system and the volume of work. A central reference laboratory equipped for sophisticated and reference analysis would help in effective coverage of analyses needed.

74


e. Information, Education, Communication and Training – Delivery of information, education and advice to stakeholders across the supply chain. The activities are provision o f balanced factual information to consumers; provision of information packages and educational programs for key officials and workers in the food industry; development of train-the-trainer programs; and provision of reference literature to extension workers in the agriculture and health sectors.

Risk analysis is composed of three components:

Risk assessment – a scientifically based process consisting of the following steps: (1) hazard identification; (2) hazard characterization; (3) exposure assessment; and (4) risk characterization.

Risk management – the process of weighing policy alternatives, in consultation with all interested parties, considering risk assessment and other factors relevant for the health protection of consumers and for the promotion of fair trade practices, and if needed selecting appropriate prevention and control options.

Risk communication – the interactive exchange of information and opinions throughout the risk analysis process concerning hazards and risks, risk related factors and risk perceptions, among risk assessors, risk managers, consumers, industry, the academic community and other interested parties, including the explanation of risk assessment findings and the basis of risk management decisions.

Source: Assuring Food Safety and Quality: Guidelines for Strengthening National Food Control Systems. FAO/WHO. Rome. 2003.

57. In strengthening national food control systems FAO recommends that country authorities take into consideration basic principles and values that strengthen food control activities, including:

a. Maximizing risk reduction by applying the principle of prevention as fully as possible throughout the production, processing and marketing chain; preference is for a preventive approach that controls processes by applying good practices such as good agricultural practices (GAP), good manufacturing practices, and good hygienic practices (GHP);

b. Addressing the farm-to-table continuum (or the supply chain); this calls for an integrated approach which emphasizes the vital role of the producer, processor, transporter, vendor and consumer in ensuring food quality and safety;

c. Establishing emergency procedures for dealing with particular hazards (e.g., recall of products);

75


d. Developing science-based food control strategies;

e. Establishing priorities based on risk analysis and efficacy in risk management;

f. Establishing holistic, integrated initiative which target risks and impact on economic well-being; and

g. Recognizing that food control is a widely shared responsibility that requires positive interaction among all stakeholders.

58. According to the FAO/WHO, there are at least three types of organizational arrangements for a national food control system. These are:

a) Multiple Agency System – multiple agencies are responsible for food control

b) Single Agency System – a single, unified agency for food controlc) Integrated System – a national integrated approach.

59. The Philippine system is basically a multi agency system which leads to problems like duplication of regulatory activities, increased bureaucracy, fragmentation and lack of coordination or even conflict between bodies involved in policy, monitoring and control of product safety. FAO/WHO suggests that in revising food control system, governments consider the Integrated System to achieve effective collaboration and coordination between agencies. The typical organization of such a system consists of four operational levels:

1. Level 1 – Formulation of policy, risk assessment and management, and development of standards and regulations.

2. Level 2 – Coordination of food control activity, monitoring, and auditing.3. Inspection and Enforcement. Single Agency System – a single, unified

agency for food control.4. Integrated System – Education and training.

60. FAO/WHO recommends that governments consider a model which calls for the establishment of an autonomous national agency for activities at Levels 1 and 2, with existing multi-sectoral agencies retaining responsibility for Levels 3 and 4 activities. The role of the competent autonomous national agency is to establish national food control goals, and undertake strategic and operational activities necessary to achieve those goals. Other functions of such an agency at the national level may include:

Revising and updating the national food control strategy as needed;

Advising relevant ministerial officials on policy matters, including determination of priorities and use of resources;

76


Drafting regulations, standards and codes of practice and promoting their implementation;

Coordinating the activity of the various inspection agencies and monitoring performance;

Developing consumer education and community outreach initiatives and promoting their implementation;

Supporting research and development; and

Establishing quality assurance schemes for industry and supporting their implementation.

77


III. RECOMMENDATIONS

III.A Amendment of the AFMA

61. AFMA Chapter 7, Product Standardization and Consumer Safety, should be amended to strengthen the agriculture and fisheries product control, promote uniform application of consumer protection measures, more timely action to protect consumers and more cost efficient and effective use of resources and expertise. The AFMA IRR and related AOs will have to be amended as well accordingly.

62. The amendments proposed are:

a. Establish the Agriculture and Fisheries Safety Authority (AFSA);

b. Modify the organization, powers and functions of BAFPS, and the regulatory agencies, i.e., BPI, BAI, NMIS, BFAR, FIDA, CODA, PCA, SRA, NTA, NFA and FPA.

c. Establish the Laboratory Service (LS) and a National Reference Laboratory (NRL).

d. Allocate budget for institutional and physical strengthening of the agriculture and fisheries quality and safety control system; including multi-year funding for infrastructure and facilities development and research; and

e. Authorize collection of fees for services and retention of agency collections for specific and agreed upon uses.

III.A.1 Agriculture and Fisheries Safety Authority22

63. The first proposed amendment to Chapter 7, Product Standardization and Consumer Safety, of AFMA is to provide for the establishment of the Agriculture and Fisheries Safety Authority (AFSA). AFSA shall integrate the agriculture and fisheries safety and quality system to achieve effective collaboration and coordination among the different agencies of DA as well as DOH.

64. The following roles, organizational components and activities are based on a typical food control agency described in the FA/WHO Guidelines for Strengthening National Food Control Systems.

22 The Authority is proposed to cover Fisheries since the sector is still under the Department of Agriculture.

78


a) AFSA Mission

AFSA mission shall be to protect the health and safety of consumers, promote trade, and prevent fraudulent practices by ensuring that agriculture and fisheries products traded meet the highest standards of safety and quality provided by law.

b) AFSA Role and Activities

AFSA shall be an autonomous body accountable to the DA as DA has responsibility for the significant part of the agriculture and fisheries supply chain or the “farm-to-table” continuum. DA will agree with DOH on the delineation of powers and functions to minimize overlaps and promote efficiency.

AFSA shall formulate agri-fisheries product control policy and provide advise to all concerned Departments on all matters concerning agri-fisheries products control;

AFSA shall formulate the budget for the agri-fisheries product safety and quality control system and shall be accountable to the DA;

AFSA shall coordinate the implementation of agri-fisheries control measures;

AFSA shall be responsible for the identification of legislative needs; monitoring the efficiency and effectiveness of law enforcement and food surveillance activities; commissioning research, etc.;

AFSA shall coordinate, monitor and audit national agency, local agency and local government units agri-fisheries products control activities, including food analysis, inspection, enforcement and education;

AFSA shall oversee the management of a Central Laboratory Service

AFSA shall use reserve enforcement powers in effect in the event that enforcement bodies default or are negligent in their duties.

c) AFSA Management Board

AFSA shall be governed by a Management Board (MB) with a Chairperson and Directors. The number, conditions of appointment or engagement, tenure of the members of the MB will be specified by the AFMA amendment. Representatives from the DA, DOH, DTI, DILG, and DOF may be appointed to the MAB. Other members of the MAB should have experience or expertise in one or more of the following fields:

Public health and epidemiology

79


Food science and technology

Agriculture and fisheries production

Agricultural science and animal health

Agricultural marketing and trade

Human nutrition

Food laws

Public administration

Consumer rights and affairs

The MB shall have the following responsibilities:

(1) Formulate broad policy and resource framework for AFSA activities within the law;

(2) Provide advise to all concerned Departments on matters relating to the AFSA mandate;

(3) Provide overall coordination;

(4) Set-up the scientific or technical committee that will assist and advise the Board in matters of scientific nature, providing scientific inputs in agriculture and fisheries safety and quality control decisions-making processes, including: scientific and technical questions relating to food safety and hygiene, and risk assessment; food standards and codes of practice; research; nutritional value and content of food and labeling; implementation and administration of inspection services; and monitoring and evaluation including regulatory impact assessment.

(5) Set-up the Consultative Committee that will facilitate broad consultation with producer, industry, trade and consumer groups, and provide views and advice to MB on food safety and quality and regulation.

(6) Appoint the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the AFSA. The MB shall decide the extent of the delegation of its authority to the CEO.

(7) Oversee AFSA and scrutinize its performance to ensure it is transparent, fair and efficient. The MB shall be accountable for all the actions and operations of the AFSA.

d) AFSA Organizational Structure

A possible organizational structure for AFSA is shown in Figure 1. The proposed structure reflects the principal functions or key areas of responsibility, namely: (i) Analysis and Surveillance/Research; (ii) Standards; Inspection; and (iii) Support Services/Communication. AFSA

80


could perform the Standards and Inspection functions through contracts with BAFPS and the Inspection agencies of the DA (e.g., BPI, BAI, NMIS, etc.) provided the powers and functions of these agencies are modified as discussed in the following sections.

Source: Assuring Food Safety and Quality: Guidelines for Strengthening National Food Control Systems. FAO/WHO. Rome. 2003

65. The AFSA mission, roles and functions and organizational structure discussed above should serve as general guide in the formulation of its detailed organization, terms of reference and operational plans at an appropriate time with the assistance of technical experts.

III.A.2 BAFPS, Other DA Agencies and Other Agencies

66. This second proposed amendment concerns the function and organization of BAFPS. BAFPS should be made the sole standards formulation agency of government in the agriculture and fisheries sector. BAFPS should formulate new standards, and review and update existing standards to harmonize them with international standards. The coverage of BAFPS function should include: (a) product standards for fresh and secondary processed products, both food and non-food; (b) guidelines and codes of practices; and (c) standards of hygiene. It should prioritize

81


mandatory standards over voluntary standards in its work program. It will set priorities for research needs related to standards formulation. Standards formulation should be carried out in close coordination with BFAD-DOH. For processed products, BAFPS will have to agree on the specific product coverage with BFAD-DOH. The current practice of BFAD-DOH covering only tertiary processed products (e.g., canned or bottled products) could already be specifically provided in the agreement. Likewise, BPS-DTI role in assignment of number for standards to be adopted as national standards should be recognized and followed. On the other hand, roles of the DA enforcement agencies should be differentiated from those of the Bureau of Customs, to avoid recurrence of cases of some Customs personnel usurping the power of the enforcement agencies by reversing the DA enforcement agencies’ decisions. Manuals of procedures should be updated and disseminated for everybody’s guidance and compliance.

67. BAFPS should continue to act as Codex Contact Point (CCP) to facilitate continuous contact and information exchange with the Codex Commission. Like all its other functions, BAFPS needs capability upgrading and operational budget support to perform this function.

68. Ideally, the CCP should also be Host and Secretariat of the NCC. At the current state of BAFPS’ organizational development when it is still striving to perform its critical function of standards formulation with limited funding and personnel still gaining experience and training, it makes perfect sense to temporarily assign the responsibility for the NCC to another relevant DA unit or agency. NAFC seems to be an appropriate home for the NCC with NAFC’s mandate per DA Administrative Order No. 6, Series of 1998 to assist the DA in the monitoring and coordination of the agriculture and fisheries modernization process; and serve as the integrative and consultative structure for inter-agency and inter-sectoral collaboration in agriculture and fishery modernization.23

69. DA through BAFPS or NAFC should provide budget support for the implementation of the NCC activities that are essential to the attainment of expected outputs, namely: identification of priority Codex issues and country positions on these issues; scientific database in support of country positions; a mechanism for facilitating the integration of relevant Codex decisions into the national food standards and food safety control programs; an integrated work plan and budget for the generation of scientific data, preparation of country positions, and for effective participation in Codex activities; and a National Codex Information System (NCIS); and selection of appropriate technical expert/s in the country delegation to Codex meetings.

70. BAFPS should also be the SPS Enquiry and Notification Point (this function currently with the DA Policy Analysis Service). In addition, BAFPS (instead of the Department of Foreign Affairs) should be the channel of communication for information on the European Union’s Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF), a system for providing control authorities with an effective tool for the exchange of information regarding measures taken to ensure food safety. BAFPS

23 http://nafc.da.gov.ph/mandates.php accessed on 3 May 2007.

82

http://nafc.da.gov.ph/mandates.php


should promote the use of and implementation of standards. Research in connection with product standards setting should be contracted to research institutions through the BAR competitive research grants as well as through BAFPS funding. BAR should be required to clear with BAFPS all such research proposals.

71. DA agencies which currently perform standards development function should be stripped of this power. All DA regulation and enforcement functions that are currently under BPI, BAI, NMIS, BFAR, FPA, NFA, PCA, SRA, NTA, and CODA should be consolidated under an Inspection and Regulation Service (IRS). The function would include product quality and safety, and plant and animal health inspection and regulation. The role of the LGUs in enforcement should be clarified to avoid confusion that leads to conflict as well as gaps. The study findings and recommendations of Dr. Bonifacio Cayabyab24 are important inputs to the establishment of the IRS. The specific recommendations are on: (a) mechanisms for centralizing/decentralizing and sharing and integration of quarantine service; (b) sustaining the quality and quantity of service; (c) application of commercial principles and retention of income to BAI, BPI, BFAR and BAFPS; and (e) upgrading of facilities, system, and manpower components. BAFPS’ role in relation to the enforcement agencies is that of auditing the implementation of standards and enforcement of food control standards and regulations.

72. Market development and market promotion activities fall under the purview of and should be turned over by the regulatory agencies to AMAS. For most regulatory agencies, product research and development could be performed by government research or academic institutions. These activities are usually funded with resources from commodity programs or BAR anyway. They also compete for resources within the agency.

III.A.3 Laboratory Service

73. The third proposed amendment is the establishment of a Laboratory Service at the same organizational level as BAFPS and the Inspection and Regulatory Service. This amendment takes the changes in laboratory services proposed by DA Consultants Dr. McMurray25 and Dr. Flavier26 a step further. The LS will be the new management structure for all laboratories (more aptly referred to as “service laboratories”) and a National Reference Laboratory (NRL) that is yet to be established. The organization and configuration of the service must be determined and carefully decided considering the objectives of the agriculture and fishery control system and the volume of work for optimum coverage. The planning should address

24 Consultant on Streamlining of Quarantine Services under the Diversified Farm Income and Market Development Project.

25 Cecil H. McMurray. Institutional and Physical Strengthening of the Bureau of Agriculture and Fisheries Product Standards. Technical Report. Diversified Farm Income and Market Development Project. DA/World Bank. Feb. 2006.

26 Maxima E. Flavier, Ph.D. Development of Rationalization Plan of the Department of Agriculture Regulatory Laboratories. Draft Report, Department of Agriculture/World Bank. Quezon City (May 2006)

83


the critical issues of: (a) existing laboratories being under funded, under equipped, under utilized, and not to international standards; (b) lack of qualified laboratory technical personnel and existing personnel under trained; (c) duplication of laboratory analysis; and (d) lack of oversight of regional laboratories.

NATIONAL REFERENCE LABORATORIES – Their Functions

Acquire and/or develop testing methods to International Standards. If methods are acquired from outside the country, there is a need for them to be validated for use on the materials and specimens to be analysed in the Philippines.

Provide the direct linkage with other International Reference laboratories. Obtain the necessary International reference materials needed by BAFPS to ensure cross compatibility with analytical procedures as practiced internationally (Note: International Reference materials can also be used for Proficiency testing and BAFPS should only release for method validation once the material has been used for proficiency testing)

Disseminate and train staff in the associated laboratories as appropriate in the fully validated methods.

Establish a Quality Control system not only for their own use but also for affiliated laboratories.

Provide a central resource for data analysis either from its own Laboratory information system or from data acquired at Regional level. The laboratory would run a statistical and an Information Technology service to all laboratories within its purview.

Provide for and implement of statistically designed surveillance and monitoring surveys to determine the level of contaminants and the occurrence/incidence/prevalence of animal diseases etc.

Provide a “court” of last resort in cases of dispute between analytical laboratories or between laboratories and their clients.

Provide a confirmatory analysis service to outlying laboratories

Provide advice to the Department of Agriculture and Ministers as required.

Should not provide direct analytical support to the industry. The Centre should provide support to other laboratories when they need help. For instance, the Centre should provide confirmatory analysis and provide technical support and advice when required. It is not the function of the Centre to undermine the development of commercial laboratories or other laboratories in the Public Sector. In any case the Reference Centre will have oversight over the performance of other laboratories and therefore cannot be placed in a position where it can abuse its authority.

The method of operation requires that the Reference laboratory is funded by the state in order to maintain its impartiality.

Source: Cecil H. McMurray. Institutional and Physical Strengthening of the Bureau of Agriculture and Fisheries Product Standards. Technical Report. Diversified Farm Income and Market Development Project. DA/World Bank. Feb. 2006.

84


74. The LS shall be tasked with the establishment of the NRL, including crucial infrastructure needed for effective and efficient laboratory services coverage that conform to international standards and the world’s best practice. The CRL shall be furnished with superior and advanced equipment for sophisticated and advanced analyses for a brad range of food safety issues, and reference analyses. The CRL shall also perform or oversee the development and validation of national methods. Dr. McMurray provides details of the functions of the NRL.

75. The AFSA functions related to the LS would be: (a) oversight of laboratory management plans; (b) review of budgets and approve capital expenditures and maintenance and operating costs, including infrastructure developments; (c) consider issues of duplication and deployment; (d) review and comment on training programs; (e) advice DA on all matters concerning laboratories; and (f) employ experts to address particular issues. BAFPS shall conduct audits and performance assessment of laboratories to provide assurance that laboratories are performing analytical functions that conform to international standards, hence the food control standards are properly implemented and enforced.

III.A.4 Funding Under the “Extended AFMA”

76. Strengthening the Philippine agriculture and fisheries quality assurance and control system needs serious and priority attention for reasons already enunciated in AFMA, i.e., consumer safety, trade facilitation and competitiveness. To conform to the world’s best practices, this calls for institutional and physical strengthening of the entire system, from risk analysis, standards setting, regulation and enforcement, information and training, laboratory facilities and equipment, regional and international standards and safety networking, and participation in regional and international meetings, particularly those of FAO/Codex Alimentarius Commission and International Standards Organization.

77. For the fourth amendment, the “extended AFMA” funding should make specific provisions for multi-year funding for infrastructure, facilities and equipment; research for standards setting; and research related to food safety issues.

78. To address the eternal funding constraints, some services could be shifted to a “user fee” system which simply means user pays for services, for example, inspection for certification/accreditation/permits, and laboratory services. The fifth amendment should provide for the authorization for all concerned agencies to retain all fees collected by the agency and to be used to sustain operation instead of being turned over to the Bureau of Treasury.

85


III.B Review of Current Donor-Funded DA Projects and Other AFMA-Related Laws

79. The review and amendment of AFMA presents an opportunity for the comprehensive review of the Philippine agriculture and fishery safety system especially if the policy makers choose to adopt an integrated system to minimize duplication and eliminate the gaps and enhance efficiency as recommended in this report. This will include review of related laws including, the Fisheries Code of 1998, Standardization Law of the Philippines of 1964, Food, Drugs and Devices, and Cosmetics Act of 1963, as amended by Executive Order 175, Series of 1987, Local Government Code of 1991, Consumer Welfare Act of 1998, and Executive Order 338 of 2001.

80. DA and COCAFM should revisit the on-going projects and review the relevance and consistency of the current efforts under those projects with the Agriculture and Fishery Control objectives under the proposed AFMA amendment. Those projects are DFIMP, the European Union – Trade Related Technical Assistance, Economic Modernization through Efficient Reforms and Governance Enhancement, and Institutional Grant for Policy Development. DA should ensure that the projects are aligned with the objective of strengthening of the agriculture and fishery control system to protect the Filipino consumer as well as consumers of the Philippine export products equally and promotes the competitiveness of Philippine products in the domestic as well as foreign markets.

.

86


References

Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act (RA 8435)

Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act (RA 8435) Implementing Rules and Regulations (DA AO No. 6 Series of 1998)

Assuring Food Safety and Quality: Guidelines for strengthening national food control systems. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations/World Health Organization. Rome. 2003

BAFPS Accomplishment Report, First Quarter, January – March 2004, Code VII-05

BAFPS Accomplishment Report, First Quarter, January – March 2004, Code VII-06

BAFPS Accomplishment Report, First Quarter (January-March) 2004, Code VII-12

Teresina Calabia. Improving Governance for the Agricultural Bureaucracy – Regulatory Services. Technical Report, Department of Agriculture/SEAMEO Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture, Diliman Quezon City/College Laguna. Undated.

Bonifacio F. Cayabyab. Streamlining the Quarantine Services of the Department of Agriculture. Department of Agriculture/World Bank. Quezon City (May 2006) Consumer Act of the Philippines (RA 7394) DA Implementing Rules and Regulations (DA AO No. 9 Series of 1993)

Sonia Y. de Leon, Ph.D., Lydia O. Martinez, Edralina P. Serrano, Libia L. Chavez, Divina G. Sonido, Teresita R. Lalap, Lilibeth R. Cabebe, Karen A. Roscom, Farah R. Galvez, Heidi S. Gaballo, Cirene O. Cortes. Global Competitiveness of Philippine Agribusiness – Product Quality System. Technical Report. Foundation for the Advancement of Food Science and Technology, Inc., Quezon City (July 2000)

Department of Agriculture Administrative Order No. 17 Series of 1998 (Creation of BAFPS)

Maxima E. Flavier, Ph.D. Development of Rationalization Plan of the Department of Agriculture Regulatory Laboratories. Draft Report, Department of Agriculture/World Bank. Quezon City (May 2006)

National Agriculture and Fishery Council Website (http://nafc.da.gov.ph/mandates. php) accessed on 3 May 2007.

87

http://nafc.da.gov.ph/mandates.%20php

http://nafc.da.gov.ph/mandates.%20php


Joint Administrative Order: Department of Agriculture Administrative Order No. 1 Series of 2005; Department of Health Administrative Order No. 2005-28 Series of 2005 (Creation of the National Codex Committee)

Cecil McMurray, Ph.D. Institutional and Physical Strengthening of the Bureau of Agriculture and Fisheries Product Standards (BAFPS). Technical Report under the Diversified Farm Income and Market Development Project. Department of Agriculture, Quezon City (May 2006)

Rationalizing the Department of Agriculture, Providing Funds Therefor, and for Other Purposes. Draft Executive Order. Department of Agriculture, Quezon City (May 2006)

Strengthening Quality Assurance and Other Regulatory Services. Revised Final Report under the Diversified Farm Income and Marketing Development Project. Department of Agriculture, Quezon City (May 2004)

88

Date post:	25-Nov-2014
Category:	Documents
Upload:	lydia-martinez
View:	123 times
Download:	9 times

AFMA PSCS Report final report as of 5.9.2007 copy

Documents