Responsive governance
Malacañang announced that the long-awaited Executive Order on the administration’s mining policy was signed by the President. The contents of the EO will be disclosed today.
The affected communities and environmental advocates hope the EO prioritizes the life and health of the people and the carrying capacity of our ecosystems, defined by Republic Act 7942, the Mining Act of 1995.
While the government looks at getting the bigger slice of the revenue pie from mining, the value of the ecosystem services that nature provides us and the affected communities should not be disregarded.
The lack of public consultation and transparency, mining in watersheds and protected areas, presence of the military in certain areas, unregulated quarrying and small scale mining and the pollution from mine tailings in the farming and fishing villages are serious issues that require action from the government. Several local government units had banned mining in their localities.
It must be stressed that these issues impact the residents’ quality of life, the integrity of our life support system and even social and political stability, which the EO must address, if it is to be meaningful.
Likewise, in setting parameters for mining permits to be granted, even if there is social acceptance, the reality that we are the third most disaster prone country in the world should be taken into consideration. Subsequent laws such as RA 9729, the Climate Change Act of 2007 and RA 10121, the Disaster Risk Reduction and Management (DRRM) Act of 2010 require the integration of climate change and DRRM in each policy, program and project of government. This is another area where the coordination of government agencies with the local government units and the collaboration with the various stakeholders cannot be dispensed with.
With a forest cover estimated by scientists to be hovering between 6 percent to 7 percent (take note, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources cannot even come up with the real state, given the advance technology at government’s disposal), is mining a must in this biologically abundant country, infamous as it is as the hottest of the hot spots in terms of species and habitat loss and destruction and a disaster epicenter at that?
In his speech before the participants of the International Conference on Public Administration and Governance two weeks ago, President Benigno Aquino III shared his firm belief “that the mission of government is to take actions to create fairer outcomes for society.” He acknowledged that the disparity in the world “between the rich and the poor, between the powerful and the powerless, has widened over the last few decades. This has led to turmoil in the Middle East, and to some extent, to the political discord we have heard about in the West.”
He need not look far. In our own communities, appalling poverty still exists, especially the fisherfolk and their families, the farmers and children as the poorest.
Despite steps being taken by the administration to fight poverty and corruption, there is still much that needs to be done.
While other sectors don’t believe that the EO will make any difference, I am reserving my comments until the text is released. Hopefully the EO on mining will help narrow the great divide engulfing the rich and the poor.
* * *
I wonder if President Aquino’s call to alleviate the plight of the poor is listened to by some public officials. It is especially distressing that recently flashy cars were delivered for the public officials’ use. Recently, Cebu City’s mountain barangays were recipients of the Innova car, among other service vehicles, which are definitely a want, not a need, for the people in the mountain barangays. Taxpayers’ money is used for their gasoline allocation and maintenance.
How many hundreds of millions are expended for gasoline, a fossil fuel, which could find better use in the investment of health and education?
Only the barangay officials stand to be happy with such a gift, which the public would perceive as preparation for the 2013 elections. Let it not be forgotten that the President issued guidelines for vehicle purchase. Were they complied with?
A lot of us have been to these barangays. Their basic needs are most wanting. The people don’t even have a decent water system and toilets. Why can’t funds be allocated instead for health care facilities, sanitation, livelihood training, information technology and preparing the people and the ecosystem to be resilient amid this climate crisis? Are DRRM trainings given priority?
Why can’t a genuine and active barangay development council (BDC) be in place so that constituents can be parties in making decisions for their barangays? To our dismay, the barangay kap is still the king of the community. If we take a look at the Local Government Code, the BDC should be the policy-making body and not the local chief executive, as some people, still would like to believe.
Unfortunately, the Department of Interior and Local Government in Cebu City chose to look the other way. We, at Philippine Earth Justice Center, Inc., have not received the written response of the DILG Officer in Cebu City inquiring about the level of compliance of barangays in the establishment of BDCs, despite a directive from a DILG Undersecretary. Under R.A. 9485, the Anti-Red Tape Act, the response should be made by the public official in writing within five to 10 working days. Months have elapsed. This is not the responsive governance that people deserve to have.
