Sugar industry split as CONFED, UNIFED clash over price slump

By Dolly Yasa

BACOLOD CITY — The Philippine sugar industry’s two largest federations are at odds over how to address the steep decline in sugar and molasses prices, with one group demanding accountability from the Sugar Regulatory Administration (SRA) and another defending its embattled chief.

The Confederation of Sugar Producers Associations (CONFED) has called on the SRA to take “decisive and transparent” action on what it described as a “worsening crisis” in the industry, blaming over-importation and unmonitored artificial sweeteners for driving down farmgate prices.

In an open letter addressed to SRA Administrator Pablo Luis Azcona, CONFED President Gerardo Aurelio Valderrama Jr. said government policies—particularly excessive sugar and molasses imports—had “flooded the market, depressed prices, and left producers without buyers or bargaining power.”

“At the heart of this crisis is a series of policy decisions—most notably the over-importation of sugar and molasses—that have flooded the market, depressed prices, and left producers without buyers or bargaining power,” CONFED said.

The group also cited the “unmonitored influx of artificial sweeteners,” claiming it has distorted market demand and triggered what it described as “a full-blown market destabilization.”

CONFED questioned why the SRA failed to anticipate the effects of oversupply despite having access to production and withdrawal data.

“Why was this situation not foreseen? Were the implications of oversupply and the presence of sugar substitutes like artificial sweeteners not considered in your planning and import decisions? What risk assessments were made prior to approving additional import volumes?” it asked.

Citing Section 2(B) of Executive Order No. 18, series of 1986, CONFED reminded the SRA that its mandate is to maintain a balance between production and demand “to ensure stabilized prices at a level reasonably profitable to producers and fair to consumers.”

“The situation we now face is not simply an unfortunate market trend but the consequence of poor planning, lack of coordination, and failure to protect the industry from foreseeable risks,” the group said.

CONFED urged the SRA to release an immediate action plan to stabilize prices, protect farmers and millers, and regulate the influx of artificial sweeteners, while calling for “inclusive, transparent, and honest” collaboration with all industry stakeholders.

“Leadership requires accountability,” CONFED said. “Given the recent corruption scandals that have rocked the country, we strongly urge the SRA to act decisively, in full view and with the interest of the people who stand to lose the most.”

Valderrama emphasized that the future of the country’s sugar sector—and thousands of livelihoods—depends on the agency’s next steps.

However, the United Sugar Producers Federation (UNIFED) countered CONFED’s accusations, coming to the defense of SRA Administrator Azcona.

UNIFED President Manuel Lamata said the decline in sugar prices at the start of the milling season should not be blamed on the SRA but on those “agitating the market through grandstanding.”

“If there is someone to be blamed for the low price of sugar at the start of the milling season, we should look at the very people who have been agitating the market through their grandstanding,” Lamata said.

He accused Valderrama of “orchestrating the controversy to undermine SRA leadership,” saying market sentiment only shifted after CONFED began raising concerns about over-importation and oversupply.

“Up until they started talking about importation, over-importation, and oversupply, the market was quiet, and we were expecting better prices than what we saw last week,” Lamata said.

He expressed full confidence in Azcona’s leadership, describing him as a reform-minded administrator who “has shown wisdom beyond his years” and “proven his commitment to improving the industry.”

Lamata credited Azcona with implementing several reforms, including upgrading SRA research facilities, forming partnerships with foreign institutions, creating task forces against sugarcane diseases, and introducing measures that raised farmgate prices in recent crop years.

He also criticized Valderrama’s leadership, saying he “has an axe to grind” against the SRA following his short stint on the Sugar Board.

“That open letter was not a knee-jerk reaction to the low price of sugar and molasses,” Lamata said. “That person was obviously looking for the perfect timing to lash back and blame Paul (Azcona) for not getting his desired price, just like a petulant child.”

Lamata further noted that CONFED and the National Federation of Sugarcane Planters (NFSP) skipped important industry consultations, including the Philsutech Convention in August where Azcona announced that all sugar for the current crop year would be classified as “B” or domestic sugar.

He accused CONFED leaders of hypocrisy, saying they previously participated in sugar importation discussions they are now condemning.

“That importation program they are talking about was discussed months ago and went through consultations,” Lamata said. “Yet, they kept mum for three months and when milling was about to open, started talking of importation which they know would influence market prices.”

Lamata urged the SRA to reconsider partnerships with groups that “cannot and will never see any good in anyone other than themselves.”

“It’s time that SRA stops working with ingrates and hypocrites,” he said, questioning whether CONFED’s open letter truly reflected the position of its member associations or “just the ranting of a scorned old man.”

CONFED later issued a sharper statement through Valderrama alleging that “the sugar industry, long a cornerstone of our agricultural and economic landscape, is under threat—not just from global market pressures, but from within.”

“Over the past several years, we’ve watched as respected organizations and federations have been dismantled or weakened—not because of mismanagement or lack of relevance, but because of a consistent and aggressive campaign of bullying and intimidation led by a single individual, Manuel Lamata of UNIFED,” Valderrama said.

He argued that the issue is not about policy differences but about personal attacks that sow fear, mute experienced voices, and fracture unity.

“Instead, he targets people personally, sowing fear in meetings, and silencing experienced voices through harassment and humiliation. He thrives not on unity, but on division—using power not to build, but to break,” Valderrama added.

“What’s most alarming is not just the behavior itself, but how long it has been allowed to continue,” Valderrama added.

He called for an end to such tactics and urged transparency about what he described as a deliberate weakening of institutional strength.

“Silence, fear, and complicity have created a space where one person can systematically undermine decades of collective effort, simply because few are willing to speak out. This stops now. The public deserves to know that the sugar industry’s decline in institutional strength is not accidental,” Valderrama said.

“It is the result of a calculated effort to centralize influence by eliminating opposition—not through ideas, but through intimidation,” Valderrama added.

Valderrama pressed industry leaders to replace fear with respect, accountability, and inclusion for farmers, workers, consumers, and future stewards of the sector.

He appealed to members still within affected organizations to stand firm and to the public to ask hard questions and demand better.

“Because no one—no matter how loud, connected, or intimidating—should be allowed to bully an entire industry into silence. Let’s reclaim our voice, and with it, the future of sugar,” Valderrama said.