Because Mining in the Philippines is Unsustainable, Irresponsible, Toxic and Inequitable.

Tuesday, 14^th of December, 2010

1.  Mining: A Questionable Development Model

To communities immediately impacted by a mining project, mining companies “claim that they bring into the community roads, schools, health services, many of the amenities of modern living, that they create jobs, and inject a lot of money into the local economy”. To look upon mining companies as agents of development is however problematic. Many problems are encountered when countries pursue development strategies through encouraging private investment. Mining companies are not, by nature, altruistic; they are in business to make a profit and if they do not make a profit, they do not stay in business for very long. In fact the “private sector can address sustainable development concerns as long as adequate profits can be maintained.” Mining companies “exist to make profits not to help communities”.

2. Mining also imposes many costs.

Problems inherent in a mining-based development paradigm can be summarized as follows: If mining were ‘just another industry’ with positive and negative characteristics similar to most other economic activities, proposals to focus international development assistance on mining projects in developing countries would not be controversial. However mining has characteristics that raise concerns about its social costs. Mining intensively uses land and environmental resources often leading to significant and enduring environmental degradation. Because mineral commodity prices tend to be volatile, income and employment in mining can also be unstable. Mining projects necessarily deplete the mineral deposits they extract, assuring a limited and often relatively short life span for any given project. Of the costs imposed by mining, the environmental costs are perhaps the most challenging. Mines have finite lifetimes; the ore deposit is discovered, it is mined, and then the mine is closed. The economic benefits of a mine only last throughout the lifetime of a mine. The costs of a mine, however, can be high and they may exist in perpetuity (e.g. Acid Mine Drainage).

3. The Disaster Vulnerability of the Philippines

Another important topic in any discussion of mining in the Philippines is the unique vulnerability of an archipelagic nation to natural disasters. Being vulnerable to earthquakes, typhoons, and droughts, the Philippines is considered by many to be one of the most disaster prone countries in the world. The propensity of these events further exacerbates the potential environmental effects of metallic and gold mining projects; it is an extant contingency to have a mine site requiring perpetual care and attention, it is a substantially more complicated contingency to have a minesite requiring perpetual care in a situation where a torrential rain storm, from a typhoon, causes a tailings dam to overflow or where an earthquake causes a catastrophic tailings impoundment failure. Couple the intrinsic geographical vulnerability of the Philippines to natural disasters with the economic vulnerability of many Filipino communities and one begins to gain a further dimension of the strong opposition to metallic and gold mining. Moreover many communities in the archipelago are communities of subsistence farmers or subsistence fisherfolk; who live a very precarious existence at the best of time.

4. Mining and Corruption

In view of the potential for adverse environmental effects inherent in mining, it is imperative that mining be subject to a thorough regulatory framework. There are many citizens in Philippine society, however, who are of the view that the Philippines suffers from a degree of corruption so high as to render such a regulatory framework, effectively, untenable. There is a substantial body of literature documenting the extent of corruption in the archipelago. This corruption is so pervasive, many view it as being an impediment to the implementation of responsible mining in the Philippines.

5. Mining and Conflict

A particularly troublesome dimension of metallic and gold mining is conflict. Many parts of the Philippines are subject to acts of armed aggression by the armed revolutionary movements of the Communist Party of the Philippines-New People’s Army-National Democratic Front of the Philippines (CPP-NPA-NDFP), the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), and another armed group called the Abu Sayyaf, in encounters with Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP). The NPA are active nationwide in the Philippines, while the latter two groups are active on the mineral-rich Island of Mindanao. To provide security for development projects, such as mining, the (AFP) conducts security operations in the vicinity of projects in advance of their development. Armed violence is an extant reality in the Philippines. In 2007, for example, there were 64 encounters between the NPA and the AFP resulting in 126 deaths (IBON 2007).

6. Mining and Indigenous People

The government’s mining based development paradigm has immense potential to displace indigenous peoples (intense fighting broke out in August 2008 in the southern region of Mindanao leading to the displacement of an estimated 600,000 people). The 23 priority mining projects outlined by the Government encroach on 60% of already declared protected areas and another 53% of ancestral domains. Notwithstanding the successful defence of IPRA, many indigenous peoples worry about this overlap between mineralization and ancestral domain and the consequences this could have upon indigenous cultural communities. In the Philippines, indigenous peoples are considered to be “among the more marginalized of the marginalized”. If there is conflict between the multinational firms of the mining industry and indigenous people, the latter will not be in a good position to seek a favourable outcome.

7. Mining: A Sale of National Patrimony

An important aspect of Philippine opposition to the use of metallic and gold mining as a vehicle for economic development is the colonization factor experienced by Filipino people. Many Filipinos view the Mining Act of 1995, particularly the Financial or Technical Assistance Agreement (FTAA) provisions of it, as being an invitation to new colonial masters from Australia (in the case of OceanGold or CGA Masbate Gold) or Canada (in the case of Crew Minerals, now Intex Resources or Placer Dome). Many, particularly after the involvement of Canada’s Placer Dome in the Marcopper tailings spill, view foreign mining companies as being insensitive, or unconcerned, with issues of environmental protection. Ultimately, many affected communities view foreign investment in mineral resource extraction to be a disposal of the nation’s patrimony or even a loss of national sovereignty. This desire to truly control the long-run future of their nation and its resources, in a sustainable manner, is perhaps the overriding impetus to Filipino opposition to metallic mining.

Pope Benedict XVI criticized the impacts of mineral exploitation and other projects that harm the environment. “There are also scars which mark the surface of our earth, erosion, deforestation, the squandering of the world’s mineral and ocean resources in order to fuel an insatiable consumption,” he declared to 150,000 pilgrims who participated in World Youth Day activities held in Sydney, Australia. (July 17, 2008)

His Holiness called on them to “protect the environment and manage the goods of the Earth in a responsible manner,” thus confirming the Catholic Church’s concern with the serious environmental deterioration that the planet is suffering due to an irrational exploitation of natural resources, which is propelled by an economic model that favours the accumulation of wealth over the life and dignity of human beings.

The CBCP through its Diocesan Social Action Centres continues to exhort its message of concern on the state of the Philippine environment. It continues to fulfil its prophetic role in questioning mining activities in the sites of struggles (SoS). The likes of Bishop Evangelista of Marinduque, Bishop Bastes of Bicol, Bishop Gutierrez of Cotabato, Bishop Villena of Nueva Viscaya and Bishop Arigo of Palawan have been key prelates in voicing the concern of the church which heralds the upholding of the integrity of creation.

The religious members of the AMRSP and its Mission Partners continue to support and compliment the efforts of the CBCP and civil society networks through the Justice, Peace and Integrity of Creation Commission to care for and consolidate efforts in the promotion of the integrity of creation.

We support the filing of “An Act to Regulate the Rational Exploration, Development and Utilization of Mineral Resources and to Ensure the Equitable Sharing of Benefits for the State, Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities, and For Other Purposes”