The case for JPEPA
Perceptive observers believe the Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement, or JPEPA, notwithstanding the objections raised against it, will be able to pass muster in the Senate. Individual senators, they predict, will find it in their collective wisdom to ratify the treaty, of course after going through it with a fine-tooth comb. The accord, after all, is necessary to hasten the country’s economic development.Sure, Japan expects to derive benefits from JPEPA as well, along with similar deals struck with other countries. That is the primary reason it signed the agreement in the first place. But only the paranoid would describe it as lopsided, skewed in favor of the other side. Despite its economic clout, Japan cannot dictate—or hope to dictate—on the Philippines, or any other country for that matter, as if it were a client state. This is no longer the age of colonialism.
As explained by the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), JPEPA will result in the expansion of the country’s market in Japan, not only for its agricultural products but also for its industrial output, with close to 95 percent of its exports granted zero duties. Of course, Japan’s exports to the Philippines will also enjoy the same preferences. It is this particular trade-off that draws the ire of leftist groups. They claim that the Philippines will be flooded with manufactured products. Well, we already import cars and television sets from Japan, but no country can force consumers to increase their purchase of these items, treaty or no treaty.
Detractors train their guns on the supposed entry of toxic wastes as a result of the treaty.
There is nothing in the treaty that remotely suggests that the Philippines will allow itself to be a dumping ground for hazardous substances. Moreover, the exchange of notes between the two countries expressly prohibits it. Still, those who choose to oppose the treaty claim the assurance is not nearly enough. If so, will it help if the two governments renounce the pledge to protect people and the environment?
In any case, we are not a nation of half-wits, who will accept things that threaten to poison us and our children.
The provision on nurses and caregivers is another argument used by those who oppose ratification. As the Philippine Nurses Association tells it, Japan dangled the entry of workers as a bargaining chip to win concessions without giving something substantial in return. It looks great at first glance, but requiring the nurses to pass the licensure examination in Nihongo practically makes the provision unenforceable, or so says the group.
To the protesters, it’s like a case of the left hand taking back what the right hand gives away. But Japanese hospitals and health-care institutions really need the services of foreign nurses. The language requirement is insisted upon to ensure that the nurses, who will be working under Japanese doctors, understand the orders given them, particularly in life-and-death situations. No doubt, the nurses cannot pass the examination without prior language training. And Japanese officials are aware of that fact. That is why training is made part and parcel of the agreement, and the Japanese are footing the bill, proof of their honest intentions to hire the nurses as full-fledged professionals.
About the only valid concern raised against the treaty is the loss of customs revenue, projected at P16.1 billion in the next few years. But DTI says the additional taxes derived from an expanded export volume will more than offset the loss. If that is true, then the Senate must put its stamp of approval on the treaty at the earliest possible time.
We have not much time left. Barely a week ago, Indonesia approved a similar economic partnership agreement with Japan. And it is only the latest of the countries to have done so, after Thailand, Malaysia, and Singapore. If we fail to ratify JPEPA, these countries will reap all the benefits—to our detriment.
