Risky sanitary gap

The Mexican government opened a risky sanitary hole to the efficient protection barrier that it built over many years and that has allowed it to avoid pests and diseases and that agriculture, livestock, aquaculture and fishing are competitive.

He did it with the purpose of achieving an ambitious and unattainable objective: to reduce the price level of the basic food basket in the country.

The official formula provides that with the elimination of “bureaucratic obstacles” to imports, marketers will bring the products of the basic basket with lower prices and will be able to offer them to consumers in better conditions.

What is at risk? The protection and food security of Mexico is at risk.

Why are you putting yourself at risk? Because self-regulation is granted –as not even the most neoliberal governments do– to importing businessmen, in terms of health, safety and agri-food quality.

In other words, the importers themselves will be responsible for pests and diseases not reaching Mexico, unless the businessmen themselves decide to request that Senasica supervise them as it has done up to now.

The day before yesterday (October 19, 2022) the decree was published creating the Universal License to exempt from the payment of tariffs and phytosanitary and animal health regulations, the products of the basic basket imported by companies that register in a list of suppliers/importers. It entered into force as of yesterday and only until February 28 of next year.

With this, Mexico enters slippery terrain in terms of food safety, with the purpose of helping to reduce inflation in Mexico.

However, in the end, the Mexican government limited the tariff and sanitary exemption.

It will only be for those importers who register in the registry, who have background and experience in importing products. And for a limited time.

Previously, Senasica and Cofepris were the object of presidential disrepute. The least of the qualifiers that the chief executive gave them is that they are bureaucratic.

In the urgency to take measures that, from the government calculation, will affect the reduction of inflation, this tariff and health exemption is put into effect.

Senasica protects the national agricultural sector.

It must be remembered that Mexico is the tenth world power producer of food and the seventh exporter with more than 45,000 million dollars in sales.

The value of agricultural and fishing production is 1 billion 199,371 million pesos.

With a lot of work, effort and training of human capital, Senasica has positioned itself as an internationally recognized authority.

What risks does this new policy imply? Basically 3.

1.- It puts at risk the health of families, the health of the national land, its plants and animals because the companies do not have the experience or infrastructure to monitor the phytozoosanitary fence.

2.- It affects the national agri-food production.

3.- The loss of confidence in the phytosanitary system by Mexico’s trading partners puts agricultural exports at risk and could lead to litigation for the possible violation of trade agreements.

Despite all these warnings made by the representatives of the agricultural sector, the Universal License is already a reality.

And what does the Secretary of Agriculture and Rural Development, Víctor Villalobos, say?

The official assures that the Universal License is temporary, limited and does not mean that the agency he heads abandons its responsibility to protect agricultural health and the health of the population.

Villalobos appeared yesterday before the Committee on Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries and Rural Development of the Senate of the Republic and there he faced concerns about the measures included in the Opening Agreement Against Inflation and Famine and which entered into force yesterday by virtue of the decree, ruled out risks in food imports.

I wish it so. But the truth is that it would have been less risky and more effective to monitor and sanction intermediaries and commercial chains that offer sales prices up to 3.8 times higher than the prices they pay to the producer. Or not?

marcomaresg@gmail.com