TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Issues of the day: All countries protect their farmers: SBY
Additional stock: A worker peels imported garlic at a kiosk at Kramat Jati market in East Jakarta on March 10
Change Size
A
span class="inline inline-center">Additional stock: A worker peels imported garlic at a kiosk at Kramat Jati market in East Jakarta on March 10. The Trade Ministry has allowed importers to import garlic from China and India at it tries to control the commodity’s increasing price. JP/Nurhayati
March 8, Online/Antara
President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono said that every country in the world protected their farmers, despite anti-protectionist regulations.
“Indeed, there are WTO [World Trade Organization] anti-protectionist rules and in G20 meetings we also always say we are anti-protectionist. But in reality, all countries take sides one way or another. In the case of agriculture, they side with the farmers. Therefore, conflicts, clashes or disputes can happen,” he said in Budapest on Thursday night.
Your comments:
Protecting farmers is equal to subsidizing farmers.
European farming policies have constantly changed since the late 1950s when there was a severe food shortage after World War II.
The beneficiaries of European Union (EU) farm subsidies, which reach a total of ¤55 billion (US$77.8 billion), is the tip of the iceberg.
The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) beneficiaries are France (22 percent), Germany (14 percent), Greece (6 percent), Italy (12 percent), the UK (9 percent) and others (22 percent).
The ¤55 billion policy is divided into the following areas: income support for farmers, where farmers receive direct payments provided they abide by strict standards for food supplies; rural development, which helps farmers to modernize while protecting the environment; and market support, when bad weather destabilizes markets.
For example, the UK government gives subsidies (millions of euros) so that thousands of hectares of fertile farmland are used as waste land, to prevent the overproduction of certain agricultural products.
Agricultural funds come from taxpayers’ money, so 90 percent of the population subsidizes farmers. The EU has even used taxpayers’ money to rescue the banks.
By importing the products of subsidized EU farmers (such as fruit, cereal, dairies, sugar, potatoes and meat) into Indonesia, Indonesian farmers cannot keep up with cheaper subsidized prices, so domestic agricultural products go unsold.
There’s no income for farmers here, so they move into urban areas, causing overcrowding in all cities. Africa, India and even China face similar problems.
The eradication of corruption is needed before any agricultural policy or subsidy is implemented.
Is there corruption in the EU? Yes, both on a political and corporate level.
Indonesian society has some obstacles to navigate if it is to solve the problem of corruption, but the country still has all the ingredients to create an agricultural corporation.
Lau WSH
It is curious why frozen potatoes for food service sector have not been banned from importation. I guess this is because that sector (hotels, restaurants, McD etc.) is owned and operated mainly as franchises by well-connected business people.
It is, of course, understandable that these operations need a steady supply of good quality produce. Nevertheless, there is no reason to believe that good quality potatoes cannot be grown in Indonesia albeit at a higher cost.
Many items on the banned list are widely grown in Indonesia but at a higher cost that in other countries. In many instances this has to do with the scale of operations, as many farmers only have a few acres and they cannot compete on the international market. Protecting these farmers is, from a social standpoint, a good idea.
However, this should go hand-in-hand with a comprehensive program of modernizing our agriculture and crop diversification that may give small farmers an advantage.
Henry Manoe
The policy to curb the imports of horticultural products, such as fruit (apples, oranges, grapes and durian) in pusuit of food self-sufficiency and to benefit local farmers clearly isn’t working. It is an economic nightmare for countless Indonesians.
Incompetent ministers like Hatta Rajasa, push nationalistic policies which are poorly thought out at all and even more badly implemented.
Hatta has now admitted that it was a mistake to curb garlic imports, as 95 percent of our imported garlic comes from China. Why didn’t he and his staff do some research
beforehand?
Local supplies of produce like garlic cannot fulfill local demand, yet mindless ministers, intent on their own image, cut imports. Do these ministers monkeying around with the lives of the Indonesian people see and hear what the man in the street has to say?
Tami Koestomo
They have made a right mess of food. Look at the price of meat, especially beef! If there isn’t enough local produce to supply demand at a reasonable price, then bring in imports. The same with local fruit and vegetables, which are not even that good. They are slapping ridiculous amounts of tax on imports because they are greedy, and I suspect a lot of corruption is going on here.
Joe H
