WE write you to express our extreme disappointment over the series of news regarding your recent pronouncements. One is the report on the possibility of DENR’s lifting the ban on mining applications and
reconsidering even those that have been rejected. It seems that you have clearly sided with the mining industry versus the will of the Filipino people who have persistently asked that this destructive business be limited if not banned completely.
You have also recommended that areas where mining companies are operating be turned into mineral reserves so that the government can collect a higher percentage of the companies’ income. While it may seem like a good idea, surely you are aware of the downside which far outweighs its potential income benefit. If that is done, the mining company would have rights over everything in the area and not be subject to the laws that are precisely meant to protect our resources—like the NIPAS on protected areas, IPRA on the rights of indigenous peoples, and EO 23 on the logging moratorium in natural and residual forests. The companies would also have the right to all the water in their reserve, to the detriment of communities living there. All these are unacceptable.
We are shocked that, together with MMDA Chair Francis Tolentino, you have recommended to revisit incineration as a garbage solution. The Clean Air Act was an enlightened piece of legislation which recognized the ills of incineration. You should have been the first to oppose this move in order to protect our people and environment from the dioxins, furans, heavy metals and other toxic by-products of incineration. Although Chairman Tolentino gave assurances that new technologies can keep emissions at a minimal level, there is no safe level of exposure to some of these highly toxic substances, particularly dioxin, and there is yet no “high tech” incinerator that can completely prevent harmful emissions. Besides, as the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act, another piece of progressive legislation recognizes, waste can be converted to badly needed resources, so burning waste is tantamount to burning money. It also worsens climate change because virgin materials require more energy to process. The option provided by RA 9003 is the win-win solution. We believe you can do much better by enforcing it and rejecting the quick fix of incineration.
We likewise lament a report that you had recommended the exploitation of the West Philippine Sea for its oil.
Such recommendation speaks of one who does not take global warming seriously. You should be the first to advise the President to shift away from the fossil fuel economy, since studies have clearly shown that the Philippines is blessed with more than enough renewable energy sources to power our development far into the future. Exporting the oil for economic gain is not worth the suffering and losses that will be caused by climate change. According to studies, developing countries will suffer more from climate change than developed countries. So the global inequality will continue to widen, thanks to our own pursuit of short-term monetary earnings.
Green Convergence believes that at this point in time, when the environment has been so devastated, DENR should do all in its authority to prioritize the environment. There are many ways by which we can advance national development through programs that would sustainably utilize our natural patrimony.
Sec. Paje, while we appreciate your being available for dialogues with civil society, we are disheartened that you have not shown bias for the environment and DENR operates with the “business-as-usual” outlook. We believe your role in the Cabinet is to push for environmental protection and enhancement. We are truly saddened that you have not fulfilled this mandate as we hoped you would.
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
