DPR members Wanti-Wanti policy on the elimination of the import quota, proposed review

Jakarta – Member of the House of Representatives Commission IV Daniel Johan has given a number of records related to the idea of ​​removing the strategic import quota for commodity. According to him, the idea must be carefully considered, because it has serious consequences for the plight of farmers, fishermen and domestic breeders, and has the potential to disrupt national food security. “We certainly support transparent and fair policy reforms, but removing an open import quota without a strong control system is very risky. Don’t let the intention of opening the market access to be a way for foreign products to flood the domestic market, killing people,” Daniel Johan said on Saturday (4/13/2025). Daniel emphasized that the import quota has so far served as a state control instrument to protect the domestic food sector. According to him, the import setting system must remain to be free from the practice of rental, monopoly and cartel games. Browse to continue the content “that needs to be addressed is the management of the quota, not deleted. The commodity balance system must be exported openly and accountable, and based on actual data on production and national consumption,” the PKB legislature said. Daniel agrees that the practice of import quota has so far has many gaps and has the potential to jeopardize the agricultural sector and national food security. In different evaluations and discussions, the import quota system is not only ineffective, but also a source of protracted structural problems. “The import quota policy has been discriminatory in a discriminatory way, opens a large space for imported cartels, and is a fertile field for practicing quota purchase and selling that leads to the losses of farmers and consumers,” Daniel said. Daniel encouraged the government to immediately lead the system from the quota to rates. Through the tariff system, it is of the opinion that the import process will be more transparent, fair and effective in maintaining economic stability while protecting farmers and local industries. “Because if the wrong system can threaten the purpose of food security and the well -being of farmers. Trade balances and local superior products must be the most important grip in policy making,” Daniel said. Daniel, especially for commodities that are not produced domestically, such as garlic or onions, assessed that the application of 0 percent rates does not harm anyone because there is no local competitor. “The imports must still be selective and consider the trade balance and product replacement in bilateral cooperation. For commodities that are not produced domestically, such as garlic and onions, the 0 percent tariff is sufficient and no one is damaged because there is no local competitor,” he explained. However, Daniel reminded that the protection of local farmers should remain a priority. One is through direct subsidies that allow domestic products to remain competitive for imported goods. “The application of rates does not mean opening the widest as widely as possible. The import should still be selective and consider the balance of the national trade balance and the replacement of interproduction in bilateral cooperation,” Daniel said. Furthermore, Daniel ensured that the House of Representatives Commission IV would continue to oversee and remind the government that every step of policy reform would not come from the principle of food sovereignty, social justice and protection of farmers and local operational businesses. “Do not allow the reforms to leave new injuries to farmers and national food companies. The state may not relate food security in the interests of a handful of imported offenders,” he concluded. (EVA/YAHS) HOEGENG Awards 2025 Read the inspiring story of the exemplary police candidate here