All mineral resources in public and private lands within the territory and exclusive economic zone of the Republic of the Philippines are owned by the State.
It shall be the responsibility of the State to promote their rational exploration, development, utilization and conservation through the combined efforts of government and the private sector in order to enhance national growth in a way that effectively safeguards the environment and protect the rights of affected communities.Resolve that the House regrets a Mining Free Cagayan de Oro City The government side has made its argument plain and simple in the aspect of economic well being and cost-benefit analysis. The government explained the fact that any activity that uses natural resources as baseline for production purposes entails considerable damage to our environment. May it be farming, fishing or mining, all need “exploiting” Mother Nature for the benefit of the people and the state.It is the belief of the government that some areas of Cagayan de Oro are fit and perfect for mineral exploration for the reasons that these places are naturally mineral rich and are hard to till for agricultural or food production functions.
Hence, mining in these areas must be allowed not only to extract minerals but might as well provide additional source of income for the locals. The government acknowledges the damage that mining can do to the environment but by virtue of responsible mining and proper enforcement of the mining law, this perceived ecological injury can simply be mitigated.It is therefore the stand of the government that mining should not be banned in the City of Cagayan de Oro since this industry is among the major income boosters not only of the city but of the entire country. In sum, the government presupposes that to ban mining is also depriving the people of Cagayan de Oro to have a decent livelihood and hindering the country to reach its full potential in reaching the summit of “economy” via mining industry.Meanwhile, the opposition argued that environment well-being and the people’s safety must not be outweighed by economic reasons or by the so-called livelihood opportunities brought by mining industry. The opposition has made it clear that mining in Cagayan de Oro City has contributed to the severity of the then typhoon Sendong that claimed hundreds of lives in the city.
Opposition believed that Cagayan de Oro City must be a mining-free zone considering that the city’s landscape is prone to flooding more so if siltation (due to mining) continues.Instead of scouring the land for mineral deposits, the opposition proposes that these areas of the city where mining is at its peak, be converted into tourists spots or agricultural zones. On the issue of decent livelihood for the locals where mining is situated, the opposition has presented several alternatives such as employing these mining industry workers to the city’s malls and other big commercial centers instead of introducing them to mercury or other toxic substances while extracting mineral deposits.It is therefore the contention of the opposition that mining is not the only solution in leveraging our economy hence, there is no need to expose the city of Cagayan de Oro to future major disasters that are considerably aggravated by mining.
Reaction: “The Philippines is one of the world’s most highly mineralized countries, with untapped mineral wealth estimated at more than $840 billion. ” (source: US Department of State, Oct. 2009) The debate has presented several talking points to reflect upon whether or not to make the city of Cagayan de Oro be a mining free zone.First, one must consider that the city is lying above rich mineral deposits that would certainly allow mining industries to tap this mineral reserve to fuel our economy. Second, Cagayan de Oro city harbors several river systems that drain to Macajalar Bay where bulk of pollutants due to mining and illegal fishing practices are deposited. Third, mining in Cagayan de Oro City (responsible and indiscriminate mining alike), are rapidly growing along with the increase of the volume of toxic chemicals use in mineral extraction.
Fourth, unprecedented population growth in the city, forces some of the people to venture into mining with the hope of alleviating their economic condition amidst foreseen danger brought by mining to them and the environment. The government side conveyed the importance of mining in terms of economic growth and local employment. Indeed they showed us how mining can change the lives of our fellow Kagay-anons while tapping the resources that are hidden beneath the soil of the city. However, the government failed to establish the legality of this mining operation.
They failed to affirm that the alleged responsible mining in the city has a legal basis to stand on provided the fact that until now there is no Mining Permit to Operate has been granted yet as far as Cagayan de Oro City is concerned. The permit that these miners bank on is no more than the Permit to Explore the city’s mineral reserve, therefore, the government side should have asserted that Cagayan de Oro City is still a mining-free zone and all mining operations within its territorial jurisdiction are deemed illegal.It should have been the thrust of the government to convince the opposition that mining permit to operate should be granted to those companies that are capable of mitigating the effect of displacement to both the people of Cagayan de Oro and all other living entities in the affected ecosystem. Economic importance is just part and parcel of the benefits of mining, road rehabilitation and accessibility to that mining zone should have been emphasized by the government.
One must remember that access to a certain vicinity will soon be followed by leap of civilization and this so-called access can be provided by mining operators. The government should have been vocal enough to lobby the advantages of mining not just in terms of monetary considerations that it can bring to the people and to our economy but likewise they should have presented the entry of beneficial infrastructures that this mining industries will give to the concerned communities.Lastly, the government failed to give risk reduction measures and clear policies why should mining be permitted in the city of Cagayan de Oro, knowing that they already admitted that mining operation has its corresponding Pro’s and Con’s and the advantages outweighs the negative impact of the said industry. On the other hand, the opposition also failed to establish a concrete reason why should mining be banned in the city aside from interposing that mining poses danger to the environment and the people.Their argument is based on natural calamities –in this case extreme flooding, that is allegedly due to mining.
Flooding per se is not the immediate result of mining but of siltation that can be aggravated by irresponsible mining. Illegal logging, erroneous land use and massive land erosion can also be the culprits that give rise to siltation and not by mining alone. Again, the opposition failed to defend its claim that Cagayan de Oro City should be a mining free zone while focusing only to monetary considerations and employment that commercial centers can give to our people in lieu of engaging into mining.In sum, the debate was a total success in steering the minds of some passive audiences like me. It made me think beyond my biases and has made me realized the importance of listening to both sides no matter what, in order to eradicate the grip of my ignorance in the arena of mining.
Virtually, Filipinos are living on the bed of minerals yet this mineral reserve cannot be just explored or extracted not because we don’t have the capacity to do so but due to the fact that our country is highly volatile to natural calamities.
