Speaker Belmonte: No to mining ban

Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO

Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. said Congress would amend but not revoke the 1995 Mining Act amid a deep-seated dispute between pro- and anti-mining advocates.

“There is a need to revisit the Mining Act because of the proliferation of small mines, some of which may not be operating properly. But we have no plans to ban mining,” said Belmonte in a text message to the Philippine Daily Inquirer.

Belmonte was reacting to the heated public debate between environmentalist Regina Paz “Gina” Lopez, who is pushing for a ban on mining, specifically in Palawan, and large-scale mining groups led by Philex Mining Corp. chairman Manuel V. Pangilinan.

Lopez and Pangilinan  accused each other with lying in their respective stands on whether or not ecotourism or mining was the better alternative for Philippine development.

In the same forum, the director of the Chamber of Mines of the Philippines, Gerard Brimo, said large-scale miners should not be blamed for the environmental destruction, arguing that they spend millions to rehabilitate their old mine sites  and pay millions of pesos in taxes and royalties to the government.

Brimo said this was in contrast to small-scale mining operators who were largely unregulated and who hardly paid any taxes or gave benefits to the communities.

Ako Bicol party-list Representative Rodel Batocabe said Congress was the best forum for addressing the conflicting views on mining that surfaced Friday during the private forum held at the InterContinental hotel in Makati.

But Batocabe said that coming up with a  revised mining law acceptable to all sectors would be as difficult as passing a reproductive health bill acceptable to the Church.

Bayan Muna party-list Representative Teodoro Casiño urged that a new mining law be passed because waiting for a “fair mining policy is  a pipe dream under the  existing Mining Act.”

Casiño said even the much awaited executive order of President Benigno Aquino III on mining would not fit the bill.

“The EO won’t be able to go beyond the defects of the Mining Act of 1995 in terms of lopsided benefits to foreign-owned and -backed mining firms, its deficient environmental safeguards, its export orientation and lack of integration into the local economy,  and the disempowerment of local communities. This EO will not change the bias for exports and its resulting unbridled extraction of our mineral wealth for other economies. It seems the thrust of the EO is  merely to increase government revenues, bribe local governments with a larger piece of the pie and provide token prohibitions for environmentally critical areas,” said Casiño.

Malacañang has deferred the signing of the mining EO which proposes a competitive bidding for mining rights, imposes a wider ban on mining in select  areas, and mandates more realistic economic valuations on projects prior to approval.

Casiño said the Arroyo administration had opted to make piece-meal reforms in mining EO 270 which led to the proliferation of “large-scale, environmentally destructive mining operations.”

Casiño has filed what he dubbed as the People’s Mining Bill which proposes a centralized and strategic planning body which would identify which areas could be mined and which areas should be protected and achieve a balance between the national economic gains and environment protection.