Transcript of Mar Roxas during the Senate
joint committee hearing on JPEPA (excerpts)

On the manner in which hearings should be conducted:

MAR: This hearing now is for senators to better understand and to have their questions answered. And it is for that reason, as I have explained in previous hearings, that the exchange is really between the Senators asking their questions and the government panel responding or failing to respond or asking for more time thereto. This is not the time for the back and forth of debate - turno o contra - 'is this good or is this not good.' That will come at a later time.

This is really for the Senators to find out for themselves what the contents of this agreement are and whether in fact we have a basis for moving forward, to move this to the floor for plenary deliberations. We always invite all those interested parties to be a part of these hearings. I understand that they feel like they have not been given a chance over the last several hearings to have their say.

This is not in any way to muscle them. They have their say. They have had their say during the first five hearings. We'll give a few minutes of this hearing to have their say so that we can then go on and continue, at least in my case to ask all questions that I need to have answered before I can make up my mind with respect to JPEPA. I've read all the position papers that were submitted. I have read all the memoranda submitted on the 23rd of October. I have read the transcripts of the previous hearings and have all of these positions that had been expressed in mind when I do in fact ask questions.

We don't want hearings to be information gathering. We want the hearings to be analysis and discussions. Eh kung information-gathering lang which has been happening - it is not such a useful or an efficient use of our time.

Ambush interview during the break:

Q: Aren't the executive's arguments becoming repetitive?

MAR: Oo, tama, ulit-ulit nga, pero hindi naman pwede na for something as important as this, na mawawalan tayo ng pasensya, because hindi naman responsible na magsabi na, 'o, hindi niyo masagot, 'di na bale, 'di na natin ira-ratify ito.' Baka naman hindi lang nila ma-express. I think kasama talaga sa trabaho namin na talagang uriratin ito. Hindi naman uriratin para i-criticize, pero uriratin para makita talaga ano ba ito. Ano ba ang kabutihan nito, ano ang negatives nito, and so we can make an informed judgment.

Q: What has been established with licensing for the Japanese factory ships?

MAR: With respect to the factory ships and the fishing is it is not automatic. The treaty in and of itself does not authorize it. The treaty in fact says they must comply with Philippine law.

Q: So what is next for the Senate joint committee on JPEPA?

MAR: We will continue now on trade and goods and merchandise. It depends on their submissions what will be discussed next week. It could be wrapped up, but I consulted Sen. Angara. He, as a former secretary of Agriculture, has asked his questions, he's received some answers, he's awaiting some of the answers. With respect to myself, as former secretary of Trade, who negotiated in both Doha and Cancun, have asked my questions, I've received some answers but am still awaiting some of the answers. So in effect, we will have the information so that I can arrive at an informed judgment.

Q: So are you satisfied with today's hearing?

MAR: On the fishing issue, there was a full discussion, that was much more clarified. The lawyers seem to agree that it will require registration, permits and licensing by Filipino authorities, that it is not automatic. What's clear to me is that the challenge in the fishing issue is not so much the regulatory process, but the policing, the insuring, that what is in the treaty is in fact followed. Maybe the safety net there is helicopter and satellite imagery to make sure that what is in the treaty, that they ought to have permits and licenses, is actually what is followed in the oceans, where nobody can see in fact what is going on.

Q: Are there any more constitutional issues to take up?

MAR: My thrust is really economic - jobs, incomes, livelihoods. There are enough lawyers to ensure this is constitutionally sound.

Q: Is it possible for more hearings next week?

MAR: We will consult the other members of the committee. But definitely for Senator Angara and I, we will have one wrap-up hearing. But there might be other concerns and issues that other people would want to revisit.