Budget/Finance - National Agricultural and Fishery Council ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The AFMP and the Budget 4.6.11 The AFMP was prepared in accordance with the Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP) for 2001 to 2004. The MTPDP contained the blueprint for the planned achievement of the broad-based and sustainable development for the country. It sought to operationalize the AFMA-defined principles in modernizing the agriculture and fisheries sector and specified in detailed the mandated programs and stream of public investments necessary. 4.6.12 The AFMP provided the strategic context for the annual budget. It presented the strategic framework to harmonize and unify the various agriculture and fishery development programs, projects and activities in the country. It likewise afforded the Congress and DBM the sound bases for the review and support of the annual budget proposals in support of agriculture and fisheries sector modernization. Past accomplishments, constraints faced and the long-term vision and short- to medium-range plans that will assure the continued support for farmers and fisherfolks regardless of changes in the political arena, set the stage for the crafting of the AFMP budget for 2001 – 2004. 4.6.13 The AFMP rationalized and translated the AFMA’s provisions for increased budgetary support to modernize the agriculture and fisheries sector. It had been pointed out that the “historically inadequate government support to agriculture is one major cause of the under-performance of the sector”. 2 AFMA is an attempt to remedy the situation. AFMA Funding Provisions 4.6.14 AFMA provides for an initial year (1999) funding of P20 billion in addition to the 1998 DA budget. Under Rule 112, the DBM was mandated to include in the President’s budget program, and correspondingly release, P20 billion for the period 2000 to 2004 (at least P17 billion per year in addition to the DA’s 1998 appropriation of P2.771 billion). The P20 billion a year will provide for the needed steady flow of public investment support to the agriculture and fisheries sector. The planned allocation is enumerated in Table 4.6.1. 2 Department of Agriculture, The Philippine Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Plan 2001-2004. 4.6 - 4
Table 4.6.1 Planned Annual Budget Allocation of PhP20 Billion Funds for AFMA For FY 2000 – 2004 Implementation Particulars % of Amount In PhP Total Billion 1. Irrigation 30.00 6.00 2. Post-harvest Facilities 10.00 2.00 3. Agro-Industry Modernization Credit and Financing 10.00 2.00 4. Other Infrastructure 10.00 2.00 5. Research and Development (R&D) 10.00 2.00 6. Marketing Assistance 8.00 1.60 7. Salary Supplement of Extension Workers / Extension Services 6.00 1.20 8. Capability Building 5.00 1.00 9. National Agriculture and Fisheries Education System 5.00 1.00 10.National Information Network 4.00 0.80 11.Rural Non-Farm Employment Training 1.75 0.35 12.Identification of Strategic Agriculture and Fisheries Development Zones 0.25 0.05 Total 100.00 20.00 4.6.15 Starting the year 2001 R&D well as agriculture and fisheries extension shall each have annual budget allocation of not be less than 1% of agriculture Gross Value Added or GVA (including livestock and fisheries) reported by the National Statistics Coordinating Board (NSCB) 2 years before the current budget year. For example, for 2001, 1% shall be based on the 1999 GVA. For each, these should translate to not less than the following (in billion pesos): 2001, P5.06; 2002, P5.22; 2003, P5.47; 2004, P5.97; 2005, P6.29; and 2006, P7.31. These computations were based on 1% of the nominal values of GVA excluding forestry for each year. Planning and Financial Management Organization for AFMA 4.6.16 Rule 111.1 of AFMA required the DA to “identify all of its offices, agencies, functions, programs, projects and activities whether regular or related to GATT adjustments, including the corresponding appropriations, and classify these according to the specific items/categories provided in items (1) through (12) of Section 111” (as shown in Table 4.6.2). As such, the corresponding planning and financial management systems of the DA and other AFMA implementing agencies should have been restructured and rationalized along the lines of the AFMP. They should have included the monitoring and evaluation of physical accomplishments vis-à-vis budget/financial performance in the implementation of the AFMA. 4.6 - 5
Page 1 and 2: 4.6. BUDGET/FINANCE Rationale and O
Page 3: implementation only fund attributio
Page 7 and 8: Table 4.6.2. DA + GATT + AFMA Appro
Page 9 and 10: Pre-AFMA Years: 1993 - 1998 4.6.22
Page 11 and 12: AFMA Years: 1999 - 2005 4.6.25 It w
Page 13 and 14: Table 4.6.7. Actual Obligations vs.
Page 15 and 16: Table 4.6.9. DA and AFMA Expenditur
Page 17 and 18: Rice program and the remittance of
Page 19 and 20: Commodity/ AFMA Component Postharve
Page 21 and 22: Focus Area by AFMA Component By Com
Page 23 and 24: DA to Institutionalize Agency-wide

Budget/Finance - National Agricultural and Fishery Council ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?