The new DENR Secretary, a high profile anti-mining activist, has created a stir among industry players. Last July 03, JB Baylon posted in his wall the following:
THEY'RE STARTING TO
SPEAK OUT:
The UP MINERS
The UP 49ers
Mapua's Association
of Geologist and Geological Engineering Majors
The UP Gems
The UP GeoSoc
The USEP (Davao)
mining engineering students...
challenging those
who insist that there is NO responsible mining in the Philippines, and that
mining has nothing positive to contribute to our communities and society….
We shall wait for the other watermelon
activists - green outside, red inside - to come and support the DENR Sec. Then
we'll have great fireworks, fire on them, the works on pro mining groups.
Then another friend wrote in an article in BWorld last
July 04.
"responsible mining, which can mean many things to
different stakeholders, will just be hollow rhetoric. The reality is that
natural resource management in the country is characterized by corruption, poor
governance, and agency capture." -- Cielo Magno, "Beyond Responsible Mining", http://www.bworldonline.com/content.php?section=Opinion&title=beyond-responsible-mining&id=129865
I think this is a half factual, half emotional assessment.
Jobs, hospitals, roads, schools, housing, farm support, etc. given by some big
mining companies in many areas -- not by national or local government, not from
taxes or royalties. These are real benefits to the people.
Cielo suggested that she has “yet to see the net benefits of these
contributions to sustainable development. The purpose of these contributions is
to ensure continuous operation of mining in the area. They are not even link to
local development plans. They reduce tax liabilities of companies.” And that I’m
anti-government J
I replied the following:
1. Am not anti-government per se, but anti-BIG govt,
anti-welfarist and tax-hungry govt.
2. Re sustainable development, I saw Rio Tuba river with
mining, much much cleaner than Pasig or Marikina or Bulacan rivers with no
mining.
3. Re local devt plans, I saw Bataraza town proper vs
Brgy Rio Tuba, the former gets lots of mining taxes and fees and it looks like
a big barangay, the latter pays lots of taxes and fees and it looks like a
small modern municipality.
4. Re corruption of mining sector, I know that. Also
corruption in forest sector, health sector, education sector, defense sector,
etc.
5. Re long-term implication of community services by big
mining firms, I like that. More private sector, more civil society role in
community devt. Principle of Subsidiarity. What can be done by local govt, do
not give to the national or central govt. What can be done by civil society, do
not give to local govt.
"When mining ends", many of these employed
people are already well-off, their kids are well-education and become
professionals and/or entrepreneurs someday.
A free hospital by a private company has more long-term
vision than a hosp managed by a Mayor or Governor with 3-years timeframe for
re-election. A hosp that requires major repairs or impt equipment can be funded
by a firm with long-term stake in that facility, than a Mayor or Governor who
would rather use the money to hire more hosp personnel who are their pol
supporters. These new, politically-loyal hosp employees can be used for
unofficial campaign work in the next election, never mind the new eqpt needed
by the hosp and the patients.
We should have more big, responsible mining firms, less
govt welfarism and tax hungryism :-)
When I went to Rio Tuba, my seatmate in the plane was a
doctor, Manila-based doctor. His father was a mining employee there, was able
to send him to a medical school. Now that doctor goes to Rio Tuba occasionally
to render community service for free, medical mission for free, sagot lang ni
mining company ang travel nya. No need for hotel, the doctor stays in their old
house.
Among the enemies of responsible mining are the central
planners in government and foreign aid institutions, and their consultants.
Why? They hate to see that the money for public housing, charity hospitals,
charity schools (or private hosp and schools that give free or highly
subsidized services) community roads, etc. do not go through the hands of
government. Thus, that mining-owned hospital, mining-owned school, mining-owned
housing, mining-constructed roads in Rio Tuba, are a farce, or "hollow
rhetorics" and "reduce tax liabilities" by the mining firms, as
pointed out by Cielo in her article.
And that explains why I am anti-BIG government,
anti-welfarist government, anti-central planning. Central planning is for the
insecure and ego-tripping bureaucrats and politicians.
And it is an irony or double talk of many people. They
oh-so-distrust government and politicians, yet they want more government, more
politicians, to run and regulate their lives or other people's lives. In this
case, if I were a big mining company and I want to put up a 2nd hospital for
the community in my new reservation area, the government and many NGOs will
hate me because the money will not go through the government (BIR then
Treasury, then Congress, to DOH or LGU) as my location and hospital design and
hiring of personnel may "not even link to local development plans"
and are made only to "reduce tax liabilities of companies". Things
should be within the plan, the government plan, central plan.
I distrust big government, big number of politicians and
bureaucrats, big welfare and entitlement. Hence I advocate minimal government.
But some people also distrust government then demand that we should trust more
power, more tax collections and spending by government. Weird.
Let us assume that the tax-hungry groups are correct that
the state -- via the national and/or local governments -- should get as big as
possible from the revenues of mining, say 70% of the taxable income (ie, net of
capex, depreciation of equipment like bulldozers, spending on fuel, salaries,
etc.). But that 70% should not all go to the state, portion of it, say half,
can be used by the mining company direct to the communities -- build new school
buildings, new hospital, new roads, new public housing, sports stadium, etc. --
in and outside the mining area.
This way, even if the mining firm has already closed, the
schools, hospital, etc. are still there. Whether the govt, national or local,
will maintain them or donate them to the cockroaches, is up to it.
See also:
Mining 42: Presentation and Debate at UP PALS-NCPAG, November 14, 2014
No comments:
Post a Comment