The Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) has strongly opposed a bill filed in Congress seeking to create a Philippine Trade Representative Office (PTRO), similar to the US Trade Representative (USTR), saying it will just create inefficiency and redundancy in trade negotiations, which are currently undertaken by a competent government body.
The creation of PRTO was meant to address the alleged lack of one efficient office that formulates and carries out the country’s trade policies to promote and protect domestic products as well as the local market and economy from unfair trade practices.
The said bills are also meant to address the stakeholders’ needs and the right of the people to participate in economic decision-making. Both goals are aimed at promoting greater accountability of trade negotiators with regard to trade and investment agreements, more coherence and cohesiveness in trade negotiating strategy, and to involve Congress in formulating a negotiating mandate before any negotiations take place.
In a position paper dated July 11, 2014 submitted to Rep. Romeo M. Acop, chairperson of the House committee on government reorganization, DTI Secretary Gregory L. Domingo conveyed his strong reservations over House Bill Nos. 1690 and 2770 entitled, "An Act Creating the Philippine Trade Representative Office, Appropriating Funds Therefor and For Other Purposes.”
"The Department puts forward its strong reservations on the passage of the proposed legislative measure because they derogate upon the functions and jurisdiction of the DTI, the agency which has developed expertise in trade negotiations and in forging trade agreements with other countries,” Domingo said.
Domingo pointed out that trade policy is a function expressly conferred by law to DTI under Executive Order No. 133.
Given such mandate, Domingo said the DTI has the expertise in formulating and implementing industrial and investment policies as well as domestic trade policies.
Segregating the inextricably-linked trade and industry policies causes ineffectiveness in both areas, thereby hindering their full potential to serve overall national interest.
Splitting international trade from domestic trade and transferring it to the PTRO will cause redundancy and overlapping of work with the DTI.
The bill has proposed to carve out the various line agencies sitting in the Tariff and Related Matters to comprise PTRO.
But Domingo said this may result in administrative nightmare not only it will require huge resources but also because this will cause dislocation land demoralization of people. This will also undermine the rationalization undertaken by various industries.
"DTI, for instance, is currently implementing its rationalization plan, which may be nipped in the bud should the proposed transfer be carried out,” Domingo said.
The DTI position paper further cited a discussion paper prepared by the Philippine Institute for Development Studies which pointed out that the proposed creation of a wholly-separate Cabinet-level agency dedicated solely to international trade negotiations may not be feasible due to budgetary and fiscal constraints and other political distractions.
PIDS instead proposed that a second option is the strengthening of the current TRM system, particularly the role of the Bureau of International Trade Relations (BITR).
"Creating another agency with the same functions as an existing institution would create redundancy in powers and a layer of bureaucracy, thus leading to inefficiency,” he added.//
DTI objects to creation of trade representative office in bill
