Reap refutes BGA allegations

RECORDER REPORT

LAHORE: Basmati rice exports have grown from 347,000 metric tons in 2000-1 to 1,138,000 metric tons in 2010-11, recording a total increase of 228 percent averaging 23 percent per annum for the last 10 years.

This has been claimed in a statement issued by the spokesman of Rice Exporters Association (Reap) here on Saturday.

Reap took strong exception to a Basmati Growers Association (BGA) recent statement that the Basmati rice exports were stagnant for the last many years because of the restriction of the mandatory membership of Reap and its monopoly over exports.

BGA further said in their press release that the Basmati rice exports in the last fiscal year had dropped to 0.7 million tons.

Clarifying the actual position, Reap spokesman stated that the Basmati rice exports had grown from 347,000 M tons in 2000-2001 to 1,138,000 M tons in 2010-2011. In value Basmati rice exports increased from 171 million dollars in 2000-2001 to 953 million dollars in 2010-2011 an increase of 457 percent averaging 46 percent increase per year.

The above figures by no means could be termed as stagnation but a very healthy growth instead, the statement added.

The total rice export has increased from 462 million dollars in 2000-2001 to 2.091 billion dollars in 2010-11 recording an increase of 353 percent or an average increase of 35 percent per annum which is a remarkable growth by any standards.

The actual exports of Basmati rice during the last fiscal year from July 2011 to June 2012 stood at 969,000 tons and not 700,000 tons as reported by BGA which although is 15 percent less than last year but has been attained in spite of a very tough competition with India and 200 dollars decrease in Indian basmati prices as compared to Pakistan; a highly bullish local market 35 percent more than last year coupled with a debilitating energy crisis and crop shortages of both super basmati and PK 385 Basmati. At present, Pak Super Basmati in the local market is PKR 3,650 per 40 kg which is not at all workable for export.

Entire population of legal age and legal entities of Pakistan can become a member of Reap by producing a copy of NTN certificate and membership of any chamber. Reap has 1,500 members from all over the country, holds election every year, has healthy opposition and a member exporting one container or thousand containers are all equal and has one vote. It cannot be termed as a monopoly because Reap does not restrict any one from export and does not promote price manipulation.

The BGA further alleged that mandatory membership condition by Reap are shackles which should be broken to free rice export from un-necessary restrictions and obstacles. If you become a member of Reap you have to write on your bag your registration number so that any complaint from abroad can be traced back to the relevant exporter. Secondly, the member has to abide by the rules and specifications set forth by Reap for admixture level, damaged grains and other fractions to qualify to print the words “Basmati Rice” on the bags. If these are the shackles which BGA wants to remove than we are afraid they want to go back to the era of 90’s before QRC when blending of rice was the order of the day and Pakistani basmati had lost its identity because of the lack of quality control measures. It is only after the mandatory membership of Reap and pre-shipment inspection by QRC developed by Reap primarily for EU later implemented by Mincom for all exports of rice upon its great success in EU markets, Reap spokesman added.

Basmati Growers Association (BGA), which is neither a registered trade body with DTO nor with SECP, has insufficient representation of the stakeholders as defined by TRIPS. They wish to own Basmati G I exclusively as growers, offering a two years respite after which they intend to clamp down with regulatory charges and regimentation as owner of Basmati G I through collective marks in Pakistan.

Reap’s view point is that our heritage in Basmati should be owned by the Government of Pakistan on behalf of the people of Pakistan instead of allowing its membership to any private grouping of people or company for rent seeking purposes and for purposes of blackmailing the genuine Basmati farmers, dealers, millers, traders, exporters and possibly even consumers that form the basmati stakeholders’ chain in Pakistan. The growers are the just one link of the chain they alone cannot represent the entire rice chain.

A sui-generis geographical indications law was approved in the Strategic Trade Policy Framework 2009-2012 and TDAP was given the mandate to get it finalised and enacted on a fast track basis.

TDAP was also given the mandate and authorisation to hold ownership of all G I of Pakistan on behalf of the people of Pakistan that is most desirable. In fact what we need is homonymous G I that allows for Pakistani Basmati that we define and Indian Basmati that they define. We need policy decisions here. India and Pakistan both can protect each others homonymous G.I as well as the common “Basmati” exclusively between Pakistan and India. Reap advised BGA to concentrate on development of new varieties to compete with India, improve their harvesting techniques, harvest crop after properly drying it to avoid any aflatoxin, use proper harvesters to avoid percentage of broken rice in paddy resulting in losses to themselves and the country; and plant only basmati variety instead of hybrid varieties in the area of G I to which they are aspiring to own. It is on record that Reap strongly opposed the opening of rice trade with India unless level playing field is provided for farmers and traders of Pakistan.

BGA were nowhere to be seen in protecting the farmers’ rights for equal facilities and compensation before opening of trade with India, Reap spokesman concluded.