Major sugar industry groups expressed broad support for increased government funding, modernization, stronger regulation and greater transparency in the sugar industry, but differed sharply over proposals to expand the composition of the Sugar Regulatory Administration’s Sugar Board.
The contrasting positions emerged during the House Committee on Agriculture and Food hearing on Tuesday, Aug. 4, where lawmakers began deliberations on six measures seeking reforms to the Sugarcane Industry Development Act (SIDA) and, in some proposals, the charter of the SRA.
The Confederation of Sugar Producers Associations (CONFED), United Sugar Producers Federation (UNIFED) and National Congress of Unions in the Sugar Industry of the Philippines (NACUSIP) were among the stakeholders that submitted their positions as Congress considers changes to a law that has governed government support for the industry for more than a decade.
Despite differences on governance, the groups generally supported proposals to increase the annual SIDA appropriation, modernize farms and mills, strengthen research and climate resilience, improve access to government programs and make sugar policy more transparent and data-driven.
- Broad support for P5-billion SIDA fund
CONFED backed proposals to increase the annual SIDA allocation to P5 billion and supported proportional allocation of development funds across sugar-producing districts.
The group also supported programs for mill efficiency, workforce development, modernization, stronger monitoring of the sugar market and regulation of imported sugar and sugar substitutes.
CONFED expressed support for provisions in Negros Occidental Third District Rep. Javier Miguel Benitez’s House Bill No. 9088, or the proposed TUBO Act of 2026, that would expand the SRA’s regulatory reach over sugar, substitutes such as high-fructose corn syrup, molasses and other sugarcane products.
It also supported a proposed 24/7 industry hotline and digital dashboard that would provide stakeholders with real-time information on sugar prices, imports and weather advisories.
CONFED, however, said the proposal to reduce the minimum size of block farms eligible for support from 30 hectares to 10 hectares should first undergo consultation with farm technicians and stakeholders.
It also questioned whether funding had been specifically provided for a proposed Mill Efficiency Improvement Program.
UNIFED similarly supported increasing SIDA funding from P2 billion to P5 billion, along with modernization, mechanization, mill upgrading, soil rejuvenation, integrated monitoring, climate resilience and productivity programs.
It recommended that a substantial portion of the increased funding be directed toward farm-to-market roads, irrigation and other infrastructure.
- Sharp disagreement over Sugar Board seats
The clearest division among the groups involved proposals to change the composition of the Sugar Board.
CONFED said it favors adding representatives from only two sectors, labor and agrarian reform beneficiaries, to the board.
The federation said it supports wider consultations with stakeholders but stopped short of endorsing a significantly larger governing board.
UNIFED took a stronger position and said it “vehemently opposes” expanding the Sugar Board.
The federation argued that the SRA is a regulatory agency tasked with balancing the interests of farmers, millers, workers, consumers and industrial users rather than serving as a representative body for individual sectors.
“The SRA is a regulator, not a congress of private interests,” UNIFED said in its position.
It warned that turning sectoral representatives into voting members could transform the Sugar Board into a negotiating chamber where members would be expected to defend their constituencies.
UNIFED said stakeholders should instead participate through public hearings, advisory councils, industry associations and other consultation mechanisms.
- Workers push for broader representation
NACUSIP, meanwhile, supported both the TUBO Act and House Bill No. 8376 of Deputy Speaker Raymond Democrito Mendoza, which proposes broader representation in the Sugar Board.
The labor group argued that workers, agrarian reform beneficiaries, small producers and consumers directly affected by Sugar Board decisions should have a formal voice in policymaking.
It said broader representation could prevent regulatory decisions from being dominated by the most organized or capital-intensive interests.
NACUSIP also backed data-driven rules on sugar importation, arguing that import decisions should be based on verified domestic supply, demand projections and transparent buffer-stock levels rather than ad hoc pressure.
The group supported stronger social protection under the TUBO Act, including emergency cash assistance, input subsidies, price support and temporary loan relief for small planters, agrarian reform beneficiaries and workers affected by market or production shocks.
It also called for the publication of supply-and-demand estimates, import recommendations, voting records and utilization reports for industry development funds.
- Sugar Order 8, SRA leadership raised
NACUSIP used its position paper to again challenge Sugar Order No. 8, which authorized the importation of 424,000 metric tons of refined sugar during crop year 2024-2025.
The group called for the resumption of an investigation into the import program and for the publication of the minutes surrounding the issuance of the order.
It also reiterated its call for the replacement of SRA Administrator Pablo Luis Azcona and the planter and miller representatives on the Sugar Board, criticizing the agency’s handling of the industry and the red-striped soft scale insect infestation.
The SRA and its officials have previously defended government interventions in the sugar market as necessary to maintain adequate supply and stabilize prices.*
[sibwp_form id=1]