This story
was taken from Bulatlat, the Philippines's alternative weekly
newsmagazine (www.bulatlat.com, www.bulatlat.net, www.bulatlat.org).
Vol. V, No. 9, April 10-16, 2005
Analysis
There is deception as
government withholds vital information on the downstream oil industry, offering
only promises that steps are being taken to mitigate the impact of oil price
hikes. The government’s handling of this situation is reflective of statements
made in relation to, say, the violent dispersal of protesters last April 7 in
Manila. Answers lead to more questions as important questions are not properly
answered.
BY DANILO ARAÑA ARAO Government pronouncements
tend to deceive rather than enlighten and the people, as a result, get more
confused as questions are not properly answered and as official answers engender
more questions. There was an apparent
inconsistency in the statements of government officials, for example, on last
week’s arrangements that went with the chartered flight of President Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo to Rome to attend the burial of Pope John Paul II. The police,
for their part, initially denied the violent dispersal last April 7 of
cause-oriented groups in Manila protesting political repression but later
admitted that scores were hurt because protesters became unruly. In a 335-slide
presentation titled “Knowing the Enemy,” the military meanwhile denied that
cause-oriented and media groups were called enemies of the state but admitted
that some individuals including media practitioners are being monitored on
suspicion that they have links with the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP).
The issues of oil price
hikes and oil deregulation prove to be no exception. Last week, oil companies
increased the pump prices of diesel and gasoline by P0.50 per liter ($0.01,
based on an exchange rate of P54.57 per U.S. dollar) while liquefied petroleum
gas (LPG) was hiked by P11 ($0.20) for every 11-kilogram cylinder. No less than
the government admitted that this hike will not be the last as crude oil prices
continue to increase. Even then, the Macapagal-Arroyo
administration offers some hope for relief among consumers. The Department of
Energy (DoE) stressed that the administration is open to rolling back the tariff
on imported crude oil and refined petroleum products from five percent to three
percent. This is on the condition, however, that Congress passes the bill to
reform the value-added tax (VAT). Oil
tariff increase Last January, the
government decided to increase the oil tariff from three percent to five percent
as a temporary revenue-generating measure. At that time, the government promised
to restore the tariff to three percent once a bill raising specific taxes by as
much as P2 per liter on petroleum products was approved. The latter, however,
did not push through due to opposition by cause-oriented groups and concerned
legislators. However, there is a possibility that petroleum products will be
covered by the VAT, based on proposals by pro-administration legislators. Section 6 of Republic Act
No. 8479 (Downstream Oil Deregulation Act of 1998) states that “a single and
uniform tariff duty shall be imposed and collected both on imported crude oil
and imported refined petroleum products at the rate of three percent.” The
President, however, is allowed to “reduce such tariff rate when in his (or her)
judgment such reduction is warranted.” The adjustment of the tariff rate may
begin on January 1, 2004 or “upon implementation of the Uniform Tariff Program
under the World Trade Organization and ASEAN Free Trade Area commitments.” The
tariff will then be automatically adjusted “to the appropriate level
notwithstanding the provisions under this Section.” The government did not
disclose that the objective of this section in RA 8479 is to eventually reduce
the tariff rate, especially considering that the WTO and other trade bodies are
pushing for either reduced tariff rates or a zero-tariff regime. That the
government decided to increase the tariff of imported crude oil and refined
petroleum products is simply an act of desperation which also gave an
opportunity for oil companies to increase prices of locally-sold petroleum
products at that time. 52 rounds
of hikes In its research, IBON
Foundation, an independent think tank, stressed that from the start of oil
deregulation in April 1996 (under Republic Act No. 8180 which was eventually
declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in November 1997) to March 2005,
there were 52 rounds of oil price hikes, “compared to only 23 rounds” from
January 1971 to March 1996 when there was a “semblance of regulation” on the
downstream oil industry. (IBON said that 1995 was not included as it had no data
on oil price movements.) It is not surprising that
groups like IBON and Kontra Kartel (A Movement of Citizens Against Oil Cartel
and Oil Deregulation Law) are pushing for the scrapping of the tariff of
imported crude oil and refined petroleum products, as well as specific taxes on
locally-sold petroleum products. Its call, however, does not end there as the
scrapping of RA 8479 is continually raised and the consequent nationalization of
the downstream oil industry is pushed. The government, at this
point, prefers to engage in policy measures like the setting up of a review
panel to study the impact of oil deregulation and encouraging oil firms to
provide discounts on the sale of diesel to jeepney drivers. Just like the state
of affairs in the political arena, the government is indeed trying to condition
the minds of the people to accept as a given the deregulation of the downstream
oil industry. Its failure to properly
answer questions being raised by the people will eventually not just result in
even more questions in the near future, but also in more mass actions to expose
the failure of deregulation. Bulatlat © 2004 Bulatlat
■
Alipato Publications Permission is granted to reprint or redistribute this article, provided its author/s and Bulatlat are properly credited and notified. Gov’t Deceives Filipinos
on Oil Price Hikes, Deregulation
52 oil price hikes since 1996
Bulatlat