Bridges, Tunnels, and Dams

[Animo]

By RONNIE E. CALUMPITA, The Manila Times Reporter and MARK IVAN ROBLAS, The Manila Times Researcher

Sen. Maria Ana Consuelo "Jamby" Madrigal fears wholesale destruction of the La Mesa forest cover if the proposed housing project for MWSS rank-and-file employees is allowed to proceed.

At least 5,000 trees would be cut, Madrigal warned, to accommodate some 1,411 houses of active and retired employees on a 58-hectare site within the watershed. The site, she added, is part of the successful reforestation project that has been going on for the past 15 years.

Madrigal is a member of the joint congressional commission hearing the proposed and existing housing projects. The commission is also investigating the MWSS for selling the 58-hectare portion of the 2,700-hectare La Mesa Dam watershed and reservoir at P3 million, its price 30 years ago.

The senator said the transaction is disadvantageous to the government; that is why she is asking the MWSS to rescind the contract.

Dangerous and destructive

"The housing project will endanger the La Mesa Dam and reservoir, which supplies potable water to four million Metro Manila residents, besides destroying the flora and fauna," Madrigal said.

The housing project for executives, Madrigal said, has set a dangerous precedent. It should be removed, she added, or more developments would follow.

Since 1991 Bantay Kalikasan has been rehabilitating denuded parts of the watershed. Of the 1,500 hectares that need to be reforested, 1,300 have been planted to 74 tree species like molave, narra, kamagong, dau and ipil.

Valeno Mendoza, watershed management specialist of Bantay Kalikasan, said it is very difficult to set up a forest stand and, at P60,000 per hectare, very costly.

"La Mesa is a paradise, having a high biodiversity," he said. "We are destroying our watershed, including La Mesa, while other countries are trying their best to protect theirs."

Internal conflict plagues the Save the La Mesa Dam, with a member accusing the top leadership of inconsistency in its stand on the construction of houses in the watershed.

Ambivalent

Mar Canonigo of the Sinag ng Bayan Foundation said he could not understand why Gina Lopez, president of Bantay Kalikasan, is so vocal against the proposed housing project for the rank and file but is quiet over the executive village, which is now nearing completion.

Any housing project, Canonigo said, whether for ordinary employees or for executives, poses the risk of contaminating the MWSS reservoir. The coalition, led by Bantay Kalikasan, should object just as vigorously to the luxurious houses being built on a 3.3-hectare site above the reservoir and less than a kilometer away from it.

Until Sinag ng Bayan broke the news, nobody had known about the 120 houses for top MWSS executives now at varying stages of completion.

According to Canonigo, Bantay Kalikasan had been excluding his group since it took a stand against the executive houses. He suspects the executives are wielding some influence within the coalition.

The noise generated from the controversy over the rank-and-file housing is meant only to divert the attention of the public from the executive housing, Canonigo said.

http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/storypage.aspx?StoryId=39747

[Animo]

Editor's Note: Published on page A16 of the May 28, 2006 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer

1. HOW does the law handle a case where people have waited 38 years for land that modern environmental laws says shouldn’t be used for housing?

The principle of rebus sic stantibus states that a fundamental change in circumstances not contemplated at the time of the agreement can lead to the termination of a contract or at the very least, excuse the fulfillment of the obligations therein.

In the La Mesa Dam issue, the change in environmental laws is a valid excuse to terminate/rescind the contract. When after 38 years, environmental laws change making housing units therein illegal, Article 1266 of the Civil Code applies. It states:

Art. 1266. The debtor in obligations to do shall also be released when the prestation becomes legally or physically impossible without the fault of the obligor.

Of course, MWSS may be released from the obligation to sell it to the claimants. But the mutually acceptable solution is the substitution of the area to some other legally and environmentally acceptable property.

2. How does the existing VIP housing affect the claim?

On the one hand, the existing VIP houses can always claim rights have already vested upon them, so they cannot be evicted there anymore.

However, the State can always exercise its police power to eject them.

Police power, one of the powers of the State (aside from eminent domain and taxation), is that which allows the state to “trample” on people’s rights to life, liberty and property for the sake of public welfare, public good, public morals, etc.

In the case at bar, the State is well within its rights to “confiscate” the residential properties within the La Mesa dam and evict persons therein in the name of police power.

The safest path to assert this is through legislation, be it through ordinance or statute. By a legislated declaration of the area as protected and the prohibition of any residential buildings therein, there will be legal basis to evict existing residents there.

And unlike eminent domain (expropriation), the eviction of the residents, will not be subject to just compensation, if this power is invoked.

3. Is it ethical for a congressman to represent the claimants?

From a purely legal standpoint, present laws do not prohibit members of the legislature to advocate private interests.

Section 14, Article VI of the Constitution states:

No Senator or Member of the House of Representatives may personally appear as counsel before any court of justice or before the Electoral Tribunals, or quasi-judicial and other administrative bodies. Neither shall he, directly or indirectly, be interested financially in any contract with, or in any franchise or special privilege granted by the Government, or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof, including any government-owned or controlled corporation, or its subsidiary, during his term of office. He shall not intervene in any matter before any office of the Government for his pecuniary benefit or where he may be called upon to act on account of his office.

Hence, a lawmaker is only prohibited from intervening in activities in relation to his present government office. Here, the issue is arguable unrelated to his public functions as a lawmaker.

But he cannot, under any circumstance, personally appear as counsel in any court of justice or before the Electoral Tribunals, or quasi-judicial and other administrative bodies. If that lawmaker has a law firm, that firm may enter such appearance for the residents/claimants. That lawmaker, however, cannot appear personally.

If he appears in talk shows and issues statements championing the cause of the La Mesa Dam residents/beneficiaries, he is still legally within his rights.

So far, the lawmaker in question committed to no transgression from a purely legal and ethical standpoint.

Appearing as an “anti-environmentalist,” however, surely hurt his political/electoral standing.

4. How to balance rights of residents/beneficiaries against the right to clean water.

Public safety and environmental issues, however, would weigh heavily against mere proprietary rights of the residents/beneficiaries of the La Mesa Dam Housing Project.

As stated above, public safety is a perfect reason to invoke the State’s police power.

(Punzalan is a solo practicing lawyer based in QC . He blogs at http://thepunziblog.blogspot.com.)
http://news.inq7.net/opinion/index.p...story_id=77265

[Animo]

Editor's Note: Published on page A16 of the May 28, 2006 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer

1. HOW does the law handle a case where people have waited 38 years for land that modern environmental laws says shouldn’t be used for housing?

The principle of rebus sic stantibus states that a fundamental change in circumstances not contemplated at the time of the agreement can lead to the termination of a contract or at the very least, excuse the fulfillment of the obligations therein.

In the La Mesa Dam issue, the change in environmental laws is a valid excuse to terminate/rescind the contract. When after 38 years, environmental laws change making housing units therein illegal, Article 1266 of the Civil Code applies. It states:

Art. 1266. The debtor in obligations to do shall also be released when the prestation becomes legally or physically impossible without the fault of the obligor.

Of course, MWSS may be released from the obligation to sell it to the claimants. But the mutually acceptable solution is the substitution of the area to some other legally and environmentally acceptable property.

2. How does the existing VIP housing affect the claim?

On the one hand, the existing VIP houses can always claim rights have already vested upon them, so they cannot be evicted there anymore.

However, the State can always exercise its police power to eject them.

Police power, one of the powers of the State (aside from eminent domain and taxation), is that which allows the state to “trample” on people’s rights to life, liberty and property for the sake of public welfare, public good, public morals, etc.

In the case at bar, the State is well within its rights to “confiscate” the residential properties within the La Mesa dam and evict persons therein in the name of police power.

The safest path to assert this is through legislation, be it through ordinance or statute. By a legislated declaration of the area as protected and the prohibition of any residential buildings therein, there will be legal basis to evict existing residents there.

And unlike eminent domain (expropriation), the eviction of the residents, will not be subject to just compensation, if this power is invoked.

3. Is it ethical for a congressman to represent the claimants?

From a purely legal standpoint, present laws do not prohibit members of the legislature to advocate private interests.

Section 14, Article VI of the Constitution states:

No Senator or Member of the House of Representatives may personally appear as counsel before any court of justice or before the Electoral Tribunals, or quasi-judicial and other administrative bodies. Neither shall he, directly or indirectly, be interested financially in any contract with, or in any franchise or special privilege granted by the Government, or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof, including any government-owned or controlled corporation, or its subsidiary, during his term of office. He shall not intervene in any matter before any office of the Government for his pecuniary benefit or where he may be called upon to act on account of his office.

Hence, a lawmaker is only prohibited from intervening in activities in relation to his present government office. Here, the issue is arguable unrelated to his public functions as a lawmaker.

But he cannot, under any circumstance, personally appear as counsel in any court of justice or before the Electoral Tribunals, or quasi-judicial and other administrative bodies. If that lawmaker has a law firm, that firm may enter such appearance for the residents/claimants. That lawmaker, however, cannot appear personally.

If he appears in talk shows and issues statements championing the cause of the La Mesa Dam residents/beneficiaries, he is still legally within his rights.

So far, the lawmaker in question committed to no transgression from a purely legal and ethical standpoint.

Appearing as an “anti-environmentalist,” however, surely hurt his political/electoral standing.

4. How to balance rights of residents/beneficiaries against the right to clean water.

Public safety and environmental issues, however, would weigh heavily against mere proprietary rights of the residents/beneficiaries of the La Mesa Dam Housing Project.

As stated above, public safety is a perfect reason to invoke the State’s police power.

(Punzalan is a solo practicing lawyer based in QC . He blogs at http://thepunziblog.blogspot.com.)
http://news.inq7.net/opinion/index.p...story_id=77265

[Animo]

Editor's Note: Published on page A16 of the May 28, 2006 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer

1. HOW does the law handle a case where people have waited 38 years for land that modern environmental laws says shouldn’t be used for housing?

The principle of rebus sic stantibus states that a fundamental change in circumstances not contemplated at the time of the agreement can lead to the termination of a contract or at the very least, excuse the fulfillment of the obligations therein.

In the La Mesa Dam issue, the change in environmental laws is a valid excuse to terminate/rescind the contract. When after 38 years, environmental laws change making housing units therein illegal, Article 1266 of the Civil Code applies. It states:

Art. 1266. The debtor in obligations to do shall also be released when the prestation becomes legally or physically impossible without the fault of the obligor.

Of course, MWSS may be released from the obligation to sell it to the claimants. But the mutually acceptable solution is the substitution of the area to some other legally and environmentally acceptable property.

2. How does the existing VIP housing affect the claim?

On the one hand, the existing VIP houses can always claim rights have already vested upon them, so they cannot be evicted there anymore.

However, the State can always exercise its police power to eject them.

Police power, one of the powers of the State (aside from eminent domain and taxation), is that which allows the state to “trample” on people’s rights to life, liberty and property for the sake of public welfare, public good, public morals, etc.

In the case at bar, the State is well within its rights to “confiscate” the residential properties within the La Mesa dam and evict persons therein in the name of police power.

The safest path to assert this is through legislation, be it through ordinance or statute. By a legislated declaration of the area as protected and the prohibition of any residential buildings therein, there will be legal basis to evict existing residents there.

And unlike eminent domain (expropriation), the eviction of the residents, will not be subject to just compensation, if this power is invoked.

3. Is it ethical for a congressman to represent the claimants?

From a purely legal standpoint, present laws do not prohibit members of the legislature to advocate private interests.

Section 14, Article VI of the Constitution states:

No Senator or Member of the House of Representatives may personally appear as counsel before any court of justice or before the Electoral Tribunals, or quasi-judicial and other administrative bodies. Neither shall he, directly or indirectly, be interested financially in any contract with, or in any franchise or special privilege granted by the Government, or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof, including any government-owned or controlled corporation, or its subsidiary, during his term of office. He shall not intervene in any matter before any office of the Government for his pecuniary benefit or where he may be called upon to act on account of his office.

Hence, a lawmaker is only prohibited from intervening in activities in relation to his present government office. Here, the issue is arguable unrelated to his public functions as a lawmaker.

But he cannot, under any circumstance, personally appear as counsel in any court of justice or before the Electoral Tribunals, or quasi-judicial and other administrative bodies. If that lawmaker has a law firm, that firm may enter such appearance for the residents/claimants. That lawmaker, however, cannot appear personally.

If he appears in talk shows and issues statements championing the cause of the La Mesa Dam residents/beneficiaries, he is still legally within his rights.

So far, the lawmaker in question committed to no transgression from a purely legal and ethical standpoint.

Appearing as an “anti-environmentalist,” however, surely hurt his political/electoral standing.

4. How to balance rights of residents/beneficiaries against the right to clean water.

Public safety and environmental issues, however, would weigh heavily against mere proprietary rights of the residents/beneficiaries of the La Mesa Dam Housing Project.

As stated above, public safety is a perfect reason to invoke the State’s police power.

(Punzalan is a solo practicing lawyer based in QC . He blogs at http://thepunziblog.blogspot.com.)
http://news.inq7.net/opinion/index.p...story_id=77265

[amras]

as far as I'm concerned, there is really nothing to discuss here. It's so obvious that La Mesa watershed is an important ecosystem, and destroying even a part of it can result to a major catastrophe. why do the senate have to do these investigations? why can't they just declare the place a protected area?

[amras]

as far as I'm concerned, there is really nothing to discuss here. It's so obvious that La Mesa watershed is an important ecosystem, and destroying even a part of it can result to a major catastrophe. why do the senate have to do these investigations? why can't they just declare the place a protected area?

[amras]

as far as I'm concerned, there is really nothing to discuss here. It's so obvious that La Mesa watershed is an important ecosystem, and destroying even a part of it can result to a major catastrophe. why do the senate have to do these investigations? why can't they just declare the place a protected area?

[Animo]

These officials do not always like to think in the future. They couldn't even pass that Heritage bill that was supposed to stop destroying and rebuilding heritage structures in the country.

[Animo]

These officials do not always like to think in the future. They couldn't even pass that Heritage bill that was supposed to stop destroying and rebuilding heritage structures in the country.

[Animo]

These officials do not always like to think in the future. They couldn't even pass that Heritage bill that was supposed to stop destroying and rebuilding heritage structures in the country.

[jbkayaker12]

In other words the stupidity of some Filipinos once again is in a mess. Big environmental mess.

[jbkayaker12]

In other words the stupidity of some Filipinos once again is in a mess. Big environmental mess.

[jbkayaker12]

In other words the stupidity of some Filipinos once again is in a mess. Big environmental mess.

[overtureph]

CONTROVERSIES
Dammit, he’s been for the common man all his life …
why shouldn’t he support a project for workers?


First posted 08:09am (Mla time) June 04, 2006
By Gerry Lirio
Inquirer



Editor's Note: Published on page Q4 of the June 4, 2006 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer

REP. Edcel Lagman walks into the session hall of the House of Representatives in Quezon City like he were entering his own home. His steps are short and slow, but there’s no ignoring his presence.

Now on his fourth term as representative of the first district of Albay, Lagman wears his passionate stand on issues on his sleeve. “I am issue-oriented,” he declares and indeed, the man often eschews party politics in favor of candor.

As a House staff member observes, people who hear his strong words end up either loving or hating the 64-year-old lawmaker.

That doesn’t seem to bother the gray-haired Lagman. Speaking up, whatever the cost, seems to run in the family. Lagman’s brother, Hermon, also a lawyer and an anti-Marcos activist, disappeared and is presumed to have been salvaged by the military at the height of martial law in 1977. Filemon, his youngest brother more popularly known as Ka Popoy, who once joined the underground Left, was murdered at the UP campus a few years back.

Speaking up

The eldest in a brood of five, Lagman himself has been known to be a firm and outspoken oppositionist since the time of President Marcos. A recent tussle involved the Catholic Church which took issue with his public support of family planning that some quarters have interpreted as a “two-child policy.”

More controversial still is Lagman’s latest crusade: the staunch defense of a proposed housing site at the La Mesa Dam that, environmentalists claim, could contaminate the water supply of some 12 million Metro Manila residents. Characteristically, he seems unfazed at the brickbats thrown his way.

To environmentalists fighting for the preservation of the watershed, Lagman offers no apology for pushing for the housing project secured by employees of the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) 38 years ago through a collective bargaining agreement that the Supreme Court upheld in January 1975. The housing project, which involves 58 hectares of the 2,700-hectare La Mesa Dam facility, will benefit 1,411 families and is located north of the La Mesa reservoir.

“My advocacy is principally for the welfare of the working man, and that’s why I am helping them pro bono (for free),” says this congressman who was born on Labor Day, May 1,1942. He has been handling the case since 1998, he says, and has known the workers’ union’s former president, Genaro Bautista, from way, way back.

Lagman says the paranoia of environmentalists is just that--paranoia. “It has no basis.” He dismisses as misinformed the well-meaning signatories opposing the project. Quoting former officials of the MWSS, the Public Works, and the Environment and Natural Resources departments, he insists that the project is not environmentally critical and that mitigating measures can be put in place.

Lagman cites former DENR Secretary Victor Ramos’ letter to then Sen. Heherson Alvarez on June 3, 1997, which stated that the housing project “is not considered environmentally critical.”

Same sentiments

DENR Director Corazon Davis echoed the same sentiments on May 4, 2001 in a letter to MWSS Administrator Jose Mabanta, adds the congressman.

“Let us then give our arguments to the DENR, and let the DENR decide,” Lagman declares.

The Albay representative clearly sees the issue as one involving the haves and have-nots. “When poor men attempt to venture into something which is a little better than their wretched existence, like a having a house and lot of their own, monkey wrenches are thrown their way. But when rich men deign to elevate themselves further even to high heavens, they get their way virtually unopposed,” he says.

Quoting the SC decision, he adds: “The common man, like, for example, a salaried employee is entitled not only to a little more food in his stomach, a little more clothing on his back, and a little more shelter over his head--but also a lot, even small, where he can build his house and establish a permanent abode. The government, as the biggest employer, should be the first to help its employees in the solution of the housing problem.”

Walking a tightrope

Lagman admits that he is walking a tightrope in fighting a giant institution like the ABS-CBN Foundation, a critic of the housing project, as well as environmental groups that seem to have the moral high ground on the issue. But while he says he’s sensitive to public opinion, the congressman points out that being a local politician, his popularity--or notoriety, as his detractors would call it--as a result of his stance on national issues does not get in the way of his political career. “In local politics, what matters most is that one can address the needs of his district. That’s basic. No amount of advocacies in Congress will earn one the respect and support of his constituencies if he fails them.”

The seasoned politician got his start in government in 1967, when former Executive Secretary Rafael Salas, one of his UP law professors, asked him to join the legal staff in Malacanang. “I am a Salas boy,” declares Lagman, an honor student at UP. Soon enough, however, he became bored with his job at the Palace and decided to accept the offer by Supreme Court Justice Fred Ruiz Castro to join his staff. “I gained a lot of knowledge and self-confidence there. But the job was monastic, I had to leave.” In 1970, he joined the staff of then Sen. Salvador Laurel. “We worked so hard, because Doy wanted to be president,” he reveals.

Shortly after the February 1986 EDSA revolution, Lagman was appointed budget undersecretary, with today’s Foreign Secretary Alberto Romulo, as his boss. In 1987, he ran and was elected to Congress under House Speaker Ramon Mitra’s Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino.

He has since been strongly advocating for laws seeking to put a cap on debt servicing, limiting the number of children, the abolition of the death penalty, the protection of Filipino workers, consumers and students, and the prevention of summary execution and involuntary disappearance, among others.

Undeterred

Some of his bills have passed the House, but failed to make it through the Senate. He has remained undeterred, pushing for his bills through his second, third and now, his fourth term. “The Senate is the graveyard of legislation,” he laughs, unmindful of the probable violent reactions from his colleagues at the other chamber.

In his own House a few months back, Lagman came under fire from his own colleagues in the opposition when he raised “prejudicial questions” at the height of the hearings on the impeachment of President Arroyo. “I was accused of having turned my back to the progressive movement by defending GMA. I have not. I remain steadfast on my advocacies. My anti-impeachment position has only infused credibility to the defense of GMA (Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo). It has elevated the rule of law over partisan hyperbole. What I did was purely a legal pursuit. (The opposition) should have come more prepared.”

Lagman is one of the 23 remaining original members of the 1987 Congress who religiously go to the session hall to attend sessions and committee hearings, regardless of the many issues calendared for floor deliberations. “It has become a habit for old hands like us. We are ready to debate anyone on any issue. This is a deliberative body, and we should be worth it. You wouldn’t see a different Edcel Lagman, not in the next few years. I have no plans of retiring yet.”

Lagman is married to Cielo, a retired schoolteacher, with whom he has seven children, four boys and three girls, including former Albay Representative Krisel Lagman-Luistro.




Copyright 2006 Inquirer. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


http://news.inq7.net/sunday/index.ph...story_id=78027

[overtureph]

CONTROVERSIES
Dammit, he’s been for the common man all his life …
why shouldn’t he support a project for workers?


First posted 08:09am (Mla time) June 04, 2006
By Gerry Lirio
Inquirer



Editor's Note: Published on page Q4 of the June 4, 2006 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer

REP. Edcel Lagman walks into the session hall of the House of Representatives in Quezon City like he were entering his own home. His steps are short and slow, but there’s no ignoring his presence.

Now on his fourth term as representative of the first district of Albay, Lagman wears his passionate stand on issues on his sleeve. “I am issue-oriented,” he declares and indeed, the man often eschews party politics in favor of candor.

As a House staff member observes, people who hear his strong words end up either loving or hating the 64-year-old lawmaker.

That doesn’t seem to bother the gray-haired Lagman. Speaking up, whatever the cost, seems to run in the family. Lagman’s brother, Hermon, also a lawyer and an anti-Marcos activist, disappeared and is presumed to have been salvaged by the military at the height of martial law in 1977. Filemon, his youngest brother more popularly known as Ka Popoy, who once joined the underground Left, was murdered at the UP campus a few years back.

Speaking up

The eldest in a brood of five, Lagman himself has been known to be a firm and outspoken oppositionist since the time of President Marcos. A recent tussle involved the Catholic Church which took issue with his public support of family planning that some quarters have interpreted as a “two-child policy.”

More controversial still is Lagman’s latest crusade: the staunch defense of a proposed housing site at the La Mesa Dam that, environmentalists claim, could contaminate the water supply of some 12 million Metro Manila residents. Characteristically, he seems unfazed at the brickbats thrown his way.

To environmentalists fighting for the preservation of the watershed, Lagman offers no apology for pushing for the housing project secured by employees of the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) 38 years ago through a collective bargaining agreement that the Supreme Court upheld in January 1975. The housing project, which involves 58 hectares of the 2,700-hectare La Mesa Dam facility, will benefit 1,411 families and is located north of the La Mesa reservoir.

“My advocacy is principally for the welfare of the working man, and that’s why I am helping them pro bono (for free),” says this congressman who was born on Labor Day, May 1,1942. He has been handling the case since 1998, he says, and has known the workers’ union’s former president, Genaro Bautista, from way, way back.

Lagman says the paranoia of environmentalists is just that--paranoia. “It has no basis.” He dismisses as misinformed the well-meaning signatories opposing the project. Quoting former officials of the MWSS, the Public Works, and the Environment and Natural Resources departments, he insists that the project is not environmentally critical and that mitigating measures can be put in place.

Lagman cites former DENR Secretary Victor Ramos’ letter to then Sen. Heherson Alvarez on June 3, 1997, which stated that the housing project “is not considered environmentally critical.”

Same sentiments

DENR Director Corazon Davis echoed the same sentiments on May 4, 2001 in a letter to MWSS Administrator Jose Mabanta, adds the congressman.

“Let us then give our arguments to the DENR, and let the DENR decide,” Lagman declares.

The Albay representative clearly sees the issue as one involving the haves and have-nots. “When poor men attempt to venture into something which is a little better than their wretched existence, like a having a house and lot of their own, monkey wrenches are thrown their way. But when rich men deign to elevate themselves further even to high heavens, they get their way virtually unopposed,” he says.

Quoting the SC decision, he adds: “The common man, like, for example, a salaried employee is entitled not only to a little more food in his stomach, a little more clothing on his back, and a little more shelter over his head--but also a lot, even small, where he can build his house and establish a permanent abode. The government, as the biggest employer, should be the first to help its employees in the solution of the housing problem.”

Walking a tightrope

Lagman admits that he is walking a tightrope in fighting a giant institution like the ABS-CBN Foundation, a critic of the housing project, as well as environmental groups that seem to have the moral high ground on the issue. But while he says he’s sensitive to public opinion, the congressman points out that being a local politician, his popularity--or notoriety, as his detractors would call it--as a result of his stance on national issues does not get in the way of his political career. “In local politics, what matters most is that one can address the needs of his district. That’s basic. No amount of advocacies in Congress will earn one the respect and support of his constituencies if he fails them.”

The seasoned politician got his start in government in 1967, when former Executive Secretary Rafael Salas, one of his UP law professors, asked him to join the legal staff in Malacanang. “I am a Salas boy,” declares Lagman, an honor student at UP. Soon enough, however, he became bored with his job at the Palace and decided to accept the offer by Supreme Court Justice Fred Ruiz Castro to join his staff. “I gained a lot of knowledge and self-confidence there. But the job was monastic, I had to leave.” In 1970, he joined the staff of then Sen. Salvador Laurel. “We worked so hard, because Doy wanted to be president,” he reveals.

Shortly after the February 1986 EDSA revolution, Lagman was appointed budget undersecretary, with today’s Foreign Secretary Alberto Romulo, as his boss. In 1987, he ran and was elected to Congress under House Speaker Ramon Mitra’s Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino.

He has since been strongly advocating for laws seeking to put a cap on debt servicing, limiting the number of children, the abolition of the death penalty, the protection of Filipino workers, consumers and students, and the prevention of summary execution and involuntary disappearance, among others.

Undeterred

Some of his bills have passed the House, but failed to make it through the Senate. He has remained undeterred, pushing for his bills through his second, third and now, his fourth term. “The Senate is the graveyard of legislation,” he laughs, unmindful of the probable violent reactions from his colleagues at the other chamber.

In his own House a few months back, Lagman came under fire from his own colleagues in the opposition when he raised “prejudicial questions” at the height of the hearings on the impeachment of President Arroyo. “I was accused of having turned my back to the progressive movement by defending GMA. I have not. I remain steadfast on my advocacies. My anti-impeachment position has only infused credibility to the defense of GMA (Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo). It has elevated the rule of law over partisan hyperbole. What I did was purely a legal pursuit. (The opposition) should have come more prepared.”

Lagman is one of the 23 remaining original members of the 1987 Congress who religiously go to the session hall to attend sessions and committee hearings, regardless of the many issues calendared for floor deliberations. “It has become a habit for old hands like us. We are ready to debate anyone on any issue. This is a deliberative body, and we should be worth it. You wouldn’t see a different Edcel Lagman, not in the next few years. I have no plans of retiring yet.”

Lagman is married to Cielo, a retired schoolteacher, with whom he has seven children, four boys and three girls, including former Albay Representative Krisel Lagman-Luistro.




Copyright 2006 Inquirer. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


http://news.inq7.net/sunday/index.ph...story_id=78027

[overtureph]

CONTROVERSIES
Dammit, he’s been for the common man all his life …
why shouldn’t he support a project for workers?


First posted 08:09am (Mla time) June 04, 2006
By Gerry Lirio
Inquirer



Editor's Note: Published on page Q4 of the June 4, 2006 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer

REP. Edcel Lagman walks into the session hall of the House of Representatives in Quezon City like he were entering his own home. His steps are short and slow, but there’s no ignoring his presence.

Now on his fourth term as representative of the first district of Albay, Lagman wears his passionate stand on issues on his sleeve. “I am issue-oriented,” he declares and indeed, the man often eschews party politics in favor of candor.

As a House staff member observes, people who hear his strong words end up either loving or hating the 64-year-old lawmaker.

That doesn’t seem to bother the gray-haired Lagman. Speaking up, whatever the cost, seems to run in the family. Lagman’s brother, Hermon, also a lawyer and an anti-Marcos activist, disappeared and is presumed to have been salvaged by the military at the height of martial law in 1977. Filemon, his youngest brother more popularly known as Ka Popoy, who once joined the underground Left, was murdered at the UP campus a few years back.

Speaking up

The eldest in a brood of five, Lagman himself has been known to be a firm and outspoken oppositionist since the time of President Marcos. A recent tussle involved the Catholic Church which took issue with his public support of family planning that some quarters have interpreted as a “two-child policy.”

More controversial still is Lagman’s latest crusade: the staunch defense of a proposed housing site at the La Mesa Dam that, environmentalists claim, could contaminate the water supply of some 12 million Metro Manila residents. Characteristically, he seems unfazed at the brickbats thrown his way.

To environmentalists fighting for the preservation of the watershed, Lagman offers no apology for pushing for the housing project secured by employees of the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) 38 years ago through a collective bargaining agreement that the Supreme Court upheld in January 1975. The housing project, which involves 58 hectares of the 2,700-hectare La Mesa Dam facility, will benefit 1,411 families and is located north of the La Mesa reservoir.

“My advocacy is principally for the welfare of the working man, and that’s why I am helping them pro bono (for free),” says this congressman who was born on Labor Day, May 1,1942. He has been handling the case since 1998, he says, and has known the workers’ union’s former president, Genaro Bautista, from way, way back.

Lagman says the paranoia of environmentalists is just that--paranoia. “It has no basis.” He dismisses as misinformed the well-meaning signatories opposing the project. Quoting former officials of the MWSS, the Public Works, and the Environment and Natural Resources departments, he insists that the project is not environmentally critical and that mitigating measures can be put in place.

Lagman cites former DENR Secretary Victor Ramos’ letter to then Sen. Heherson Alvarez on June 3, 1997, which stated that the housing project “is not considered environmentally critical.”

Same sentiments

DENR Director Corazon Davis echoed the same sentiments on May 4, 2001 in a letter to MWSS Administrator Jose Mabanta, adds the congressman.

“Let us then give our arguments to the DENR, and let the DENR decide,” Lagman declares.

The Albay representative clearly sees the issue as one involving the haves and have-nots. “When poor men attempt to venture into something which is a little better than their wretched existence, like a having a house and lot of their own, monkey wrenches are thrown their way. But when rich men deign to elevate themselves further even to high heavens, they get their way virtually unopposed,” he says.

Quoting the SC decision, he adds: “The common man, like, for example, a salaried employee is entitled not only to a little more food in his stomach, a little more clothing on his back, and a little more shelter over his head--but also a lot, even small, where he can build his house and establish a permanent abode. The government, as the biggest employer, should be the first to help its employees in the solution of the housing problem.”

Walking a tightrope

Lagman admits that he is walking a tightrope in fighting a giant institution like the ABS-CBN Foundation, a critic of the housing project, as well as environmental groups that seem to have the moral high ground on the issue. But while he says he’s sensitive to public opinion, the congressman points out that being a local politician, his popularity--or notoriety, as his detractors would call it--as a result of his stance on national issues does not get in the way of his political career. “In local politics, what matters most is that one can address the needs of his district. That’s basic. No amount of advocacies in Congress will earn one the respect and support of his constituencies if he fails them.”

The seasoned politician got his start in government in 1967, when former Executive Secretary Rafael Salas, one of his UP law professors, asked him to join the legal staff in Malacanang. “I am a Salas boy,” declares Lagman, an honor student at UP. Soon enough, however, he became bored with his job at the Palace and decided to accept the offer by Supreme Court Justice Fred Ruiz Castro to join his staff. “I gained a lot of knowledge and self-confidence there. But the job was monastic, I had to leave.” In 1970, he joined the staff of then Sen. Salvador Laurel. “We worked so hard, because Doy wanted to be president,” he reveals.

Shortly after the February 1986 EDSA revolution, Lagman was appointed budget undersecretary, with today’s Foreign Secretary Alberto Romulo, as his boss. In 1987, he ran and was elected to Congress under House Speaker Ramon Mitra’s Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino.

He has since been strongly advocating for laws seeking to put a cap on debt servicing, limiting the number of children, the abolition of the death penalty, the protection of Filipino workers, consumers and students, and the prevention of summary execution and involuntary disappearance, among others.

Undeterred

Some of his bills have passed the House, but failed to make it through the Senate. He has remained undeterred, pushing for his bills through his second, third and now, his fourth term. “The Senate is the graveyard of legislation,” he laughs, unmindful of the probable violent reactions from his colleagues at the other chamber.

In his own House a few months back, Lagman came under fire from his own colleagues in the opposition when he raised “prejudicial questions” at the height of the hearings on the impeachment of President Arroyo. “I was accused of having turned my back to the progressive movement by defending GMA. I have not. I remain steadfast on my advocacies. My anti-impeachment position has only infused credibility to the defense of GMA (Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo). It has elevated the rule of law over partisan hyperbole. What I did was purely a legal pursuit. (The opposition) should have come more prepared.”

Lagman is one of the 23 remaining original members of the 1987 Congress who religiously go to the session hall to attend sessions and committee hearings, regardless of the many issues calendared for floor deliberations. “It has become a habit for old hands like us. We are ready to debate anyone on any issue. This is a deliberative body, and we should be worth it. You wouldn’t see a different Edcel Lagman, not in the next few years. I have no plans of retiring yet.”

Lagman is married to Cielo, a retired schoolteacher, with whom he has seven children, four boys and three girls, including former Albay Representative Krisel Lagman-Luistro.




Copyright 2006 Inquirer. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


http://news.inq7.net/sunday/index.ph...story_id=78027

[overtureph]

CONTROVERSIES
Memories of fireflies push him to dip his fingers
into the troubled waters of La Mesa Dam


First posted 08:06am (Mla time) June 04, 2006
By Agnes Prieto
Inquirer



Editor's Note: Published on page Q3 of the June 4, 2006 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer

HE’S a provinciano at heart despite his master’s degree in industrial engineering from Stanford University and several more years spent abroad. Jaime “JJ” Fernandez still savors memories of swimming and fishing in rivers in his hometown in Cagayan de Oro, Misamis Oriental, living close to the beach and coming home late at night amidst a torch parade provided by fireflies. So who can blame him if he’s determined to preserve every inch of green that he can from the creeping concrete of urban blight?

Fernandez, program director of the La Mesa Dam Eco-Park, is at the forefront of an ongoing battle to prevent a housing project from being built on the watershed which, according to the “Save the La Mesa Dam Coalition,” provides potable water to some 12 million residents of Metro Manila. Quoting a 2004 study by the UP National Hydraulics Resource Center, the Coalition warned against the proposed housing site in the area, saying that it could contaminate the groundwater seeping into the reservoir.

Housing project

The housing project, explains Fernandez, dates back to 1968 when former union workers and the management of the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) entered into a collective bargaining agreement that granted housing to 1,411 workers. There were previous sites initially designated for the housing project that were outside of, or downstream from, the watershed. But unfortunately for the workers, the sites were either sold by the MWSS to other parties or used for the building of the treatment plant. The current 58-hectare site inside the watershed is the third site chosen by the MWSS board for the housing project.

As one who had to clean kitchens, clear garbage cans and deliver pizzas to earn extra cash while pursuing his masters, Fernandez can sympathize with the plight of the workers. “We think they should justly be provided a suitable housing site,” he says. “But we also need to protect the reservoir.”

Fernandez’s advocacy for the environment sprung from his first hand encounters with devastations that resulted when economic needs took precedence over nature. While diving, he has seen whale sharks bleeding, their fins lopped off by fishermen eager to sell them for sharks’ fin soup. Such horrors spurred him to work for ABS-CBN Foundation’s Bantay Kalikasan, a wide detour from his industrial engineering course at the University of the Philippines in Diliman. Back home from his US masteral studies in 1993, he initially worked in land development projects. He later worked with several dot com companies.

This Ateneo High School graduate joined the environmental advocacy group Bantay Kalikasan as a consultant in 2003 and became its program director in 2005. The job became a personal crusade: “When I started going to the forest area (around La Mesa Dam), there were hardly any bird sounds; the place was hot and dry.”

The following two years showed dramatic changes, he adds proudly. “We now have 6-year-old trees that tower eight meters high, the air is cooler, and there are serpent eagles, owls and definitely more bird sounds, especially at dawn. And I saw and experienced the transformation right before my eyes.”

It was not always so. The property owned by the MWSS commonly known as the La Mesa Watershed covers an area of about 2,700 hectares and includes a lake about 700 hectares in size and 80 meters in depth. There are also treatment facilities, administration buildings, an old recreational park, a three-classroom schoolhouse, and a number of housing units for the water company’s employees that dates back to the 1950s.

Recalls Fernandez: “In 1997, about half of the forest was denuded and there were only three foreign species of forest trees. There were over 1,000 informal settlers living in the area who ravaged the forest by illegal logging and slash and burn farming or kaingin.”

Threatened water supply

Such transgressions threatened the water supply of Metro Manila, prompting Bantay Kalikasan to enter into a 15-year memorandum of agreement with the MWSS in 1999 to rehabilitate and operate the La Mesa watershed. Using funds solicited from private donors, the group set up tree nurseries that cover 1,340 hectares as of end 2005, according to Fernandez. Their target is 1,500 hectares within this year, he adds.

“Much of the success can be credited to our expert team of foresters and crew of workers, many of them volunteers, who both maintain the trees and act as foot patrols for security and protection. It is unfortunate that in the process of restoring the forest, our bunkhouse was burned, one of our workers was beheaded and his wife gang raped. The child of another worker also died,” recounts Fernandez.

To sustain their protection activities and generate steady revenues, Bantay Kalikasan joined forces with the MWSS and the Quezon City government to develop the recreation area now known as the La Mesa Eco-park in East Fairview. The park was opened to the public in April 2004.

Says Fernandez: “It was a very challenging situation because unlike other property development companies, we had no money; only a dream that hopefully people will buy into.” He adds: “Developing the park was not easy. The first step was to relocate over 200 informal settlers and then visioning the concept, with architects Francisco Mañosa and Jun Palafox enhancing the existing layout, structures and attractions in the park.”

But the efforts were worth it, he points out. “I will never forget the sense of fulfilment I got just watching a young couple with their baby in a stroller all set for a quiet family picnic under the trees. That was when I realized how much impact this project has on the lives of ordinary folk, especially their children.”

Fernandez should know. He himself has three children: Pilar, 4; Jaime, 3, and Julia, 1. Together with wife Myrna, he regularly brings the kids to the eco-park.

The park might as well be his fourth child, the way he describes its offerings proudly: “We guarantee clean restrooms, a landscaped garden and slopes planted with flowers, the landmark being the Shell flower terraces. One swampy area is now the site of the Petron outdoor amphitheater.” There’s also a pool, an orchidarium set up by Sen. Franklin Drilon as a memorial for his first wife, a fitness and nature trail, a pond for fishing, and a boating lagoon revived by the Aboitiz transport group.

It’s just too bad that the housing controversy should come up just when the project is poised to finally become self sustaining, sighs Fernandez. “What is the use of all these efforts if the integrity of the watershed is placed at risk?”

The issue, he adds, can be solved immediately by declaring the watershed as a protected area. “It does not need a Senate fact-finding committee to eventually come to this conclusion. All it needs is political will, just one stroke of the pen which will ensure the purity of the drinking water of 12 million people and the preservation of the forest and wildlife in the area,” he says.

Dreaming big

Beyond the La Mesa Eco-Park project, Fernandez continues to dream big. His wish list outlines what he’d like to do, given the chance. “I would require all developers to undertake environment-friendly projects, not only in terms of waste management but in providing buildings that allow in more natural light and require less electricity to cool. I’d like to see more communities that promote walking and biking.”

He’d also like to impose a socialized form of tax on pollutants, including cars in Metro Manila and corporations that release wastes in the environment. “The funds raised can be used to implement air pollution monitoring and control devices,” says Fernandez.

But more importantly, he adds, he’d make sure that environment laws are reviewed regularly, “to make sure that they are simple, easy to understand and enforceable, so that everyone can get involved in protecting what is rightly theirs—the future.”

——————

Learn more about the Save La Mesa Dam campaign through http://www.lamesaecopark.com



Copyright 2006 Inquirer. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


http://news.inq7.net/sunday/index.ph...story_id=78026

[overtureph]

CONTROVERSIES
Memories of fireflies push him to dip his fingers
into the troubled waters of La Mesa Dam


First posted 08:06am (Mla time) June 04, 2006
By Agnes Prieto
Inquirer



Editor's Note: Published on page Q3 of the June 4, 2006 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer

HE’S a provinciano at heart despite his master’s degree in industrial engineering from Stanford University and several more years spent abroad. Jaime “JJ” Fernandez still savors memories of swimming and fishing in rivers in his hometown in Cagayan de Oro, Misamis Oriental, living close to the beach and coming home late at night amidst a torch parade provided by fireflies. So who can blame him if he’s determined to preserve every inch of green that he can from the creeping concrete of urban blight?

Fernandez, program director of the La Mesa Dam Eco-Park, is at the forefront of an ongoing battle to prevent a housing project from being built on the watershed which, according to the “Save the La Mesa Dam Coalition,” provides potable water to some 12 million residents of Metro Manila. Quoting a 2004 study by the UP National Hydraulics Resource Center, the Coalition warned against the proposed housing site in the area, saying that it could contaminate the groundwater seeping into the reservoir.

Housing project

The housing project, explains Fernandez, dates back to 1968 when former union workers and the management of the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) entered into a collective bargaining agreement that granted housing to 1,411 workers. There were previous sites initially designated for the housing project that were outside of, or downstream from, the watershed. But unfortunately for the workers, the sites were either sold by the MWSS to other parties or used for the building of the treatment plant. The current 58-hectare site inside the watershed is the third site chosen by the MWSS board for the housing project.

As one who had to clean kitchens, clear garbage cans and deliver pizzas to earn extra cash while pursuing his masters, Fernandez can sympathize with the plight of the workers. “We think they should justly be provided a suitable housing site,” he says. “But we also need to protect the reservoir.”

Fernandez’s advocacy for the environment sprung from his first hand encounters with devastations that resulted when economic needs took precedence over nature. While diving, he has seen whale sharks bleeding, their fins lopped off by fishermen eager to sell them for sharks’ fin soup. Such horrors spurred him to work for ABS-CBN Foundation’s Bantay Kalikasan, a wide detour from his industrial engineering course at the University of the Philippines in Diliman. Back home from his US masteral studies in 1993, he initially worked in land development projects. He later worked with several dot com companies.

This Ateneo High School graduate joined the environmental advocacy group Bantay Kalikasan as a consultant in 2003 and became its program director in 2005. The job became a personal crusade: “When I started going to the forest area (around La Mesa Dam), there were hardly any bird sounds; the place was hot and dry.”

The following two years showed dramatic changes, he adds proudly. “We now have 6-year-old trees that tower eight meters high, the air is cooler, and there are serpent eagles, owls and definitely more bird sounds, especially at dawn. And I saw and experienced the transformation right before my eyes.”

It was not always so. The property owned by the MWSS commonly known as the La Mesa Watershed covers an area of about 2,700 hectares and includes a lake about 700 hectares in size and 80 meters in depth. There are also treatment facilities, administration buildings, an old recreational park, a three-classroom schoolhouse, and a number of housing units for the water company’s employees that dates back to the 1950s.

Recalls Fernandez: “In 1997, about half of the forest was denuded and there were only three foreign species of forest trees. There were over 1,000 informal settlers living in the area who ravaged the forest by illegal logging and slash and burn farming or kaingin.”

Threatened water supply

Such transgressions threatened the water supply of Metro Manila, prompting Bantay Kalikasan to enter into a 15-year memorandum of agreement with the MWSS in 1999 to rehabilitate and operate the La Mesa watershed. Using funds solicited from private donors, the group set up tree nurseries that cover 1,340 hectares as of end 2005, according to Fernandez. Their target is 1,500 hectares within this year, he adds.

“Much of the success can be credited to our expert team of foresters and crew of workers, many of them volunteers, who both maintain the trees and act as foot patrols for security and protection. It is unfortunate that in the process of restoring the forest, our bunkhouse was burned, one of our workers was beheaded and his wife gang raped. The child of another worker also died,” recounts Fernandez.

To sustain their protection activities and generate steady revenues, Bantay Kalikasan joined forces with the MWSS and the Quezon City government to develop the recreation area now known as the La Mesa Eco-park in East Fairview. The park was opened to the public in April 2004.

Says Fernandez: “It was a very challenging situation because unlike other property development companies, we had no money; only a dream that hopefully people will buy into.” He adds: “Developing the park was not easy. The first step was to relocate over 200 informal settlers and then visioning the concept, with architects Francisco Mañosa and Jun Palafox enhancing the existing layout, structures and attractions in the park.”

But the efforts were worth it, he points out. “I will never forget the sense of fulfilment I got just watching a young couple with their baby in a stroller all set for a quiet family picnic under the trees. That was when I realized how much impact this project has on the lives of ordinary folk, especially their children.”

Fernandez should know. He himself has three children: Pilar, 4; Jaime, 3, and Julia, 1. Together with wife Myrna, he regularly brings the kids to the eco-park.

The park might as well be his fourth child, the way he describes its offerings proudly: “We guarantee clean restrooms, a landscaped garden and slopes planted with flowers, the landmark being the Shell flower terraces. One swampy area is now the site of the Petron outdoor amphitheater.” There’s also a pool, an orchidarium set up by Sen. Franklin Drilon as a memorial for his first wife, a fitness and nature trail, a pond for fishing, and a boating lagoon revived by the Aboitiz transport group.

It’s just too bad that the housing controversy should come up just when the project is poised to finally become self sustaining, sighs Fernandez. “What is the use of all these efforts if the integrity of the watershed is placed at risk?”

The issue, he adds, can be solved immediately by declaring the watershed as a protected area. “It does not need a Senate fact-finding committee to eventually come to this conclusion. All it needs is political will, just one stroke of the pen which will ensure the purity of the drinking water of 12 million people and the preservation of the forest and wildlife in the area,” he says.

Dreaming big

Beyond the La Mesa Eco-Park project, Fernandez continues to dream big. His wish list outlines what he’d like to do, given the chance. “I would require all developers to undertake environment-friendly projects, not only in terms of waste management but in providing buildings that allow in more natural light and require less electricity to cool. I’d like to see more communities that promote walking and biking.”

He’d also like to impose a socialized form of tax on pollutants, including cars in Metro Manila and corporations that release wastes in the environment. “The funds raised can be used to implement air pollution monitoring and control devices,” says Fernandez.

But more importantly, he adds, he’d make sure that environment laws are reviewed regularly, “to make sure that they are simple, easy to understand and enforceable, so that everyone can get involved in protecting what is rightly theirs—the future.”

——————

Learn more about the Save La Mesa Dam campaign through http://www.lamesaecopark.com



Copyright 2006 Inquirer. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


http://news.inq7.net/sunday/index.ph...story_id=78026

[overtureph]

CONTROVERSIES
Memories of fireflies push him to dip his fingers
into the troubled waters of La Mesa Dam


First posted 08:06am (Mla time) June 04, 2006
By Agnes Prieto
Inquirer



Editor's Note: Published on page Q3 of the June 4, 2006 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer

HE’S a provinciano at heart despite his master’s degree in industrial engineering from Stanford University and several more years spent abroad. Jaime “JJ” Fernandez still savors memories of swimming and fishing in rivers in his hometown in Cagayan de Oro, Misamis Oriental, living close to the beach and coming home late at night amidst a torch parade provided by fireflies. So who can blame him if he’s determined to preserve every inch of green that he can from the creeping concrete of urban blight?

Fernandez, program director of the La Mesa Dam Eco-Park, is at the forefront of an ongoing battle to prevent a housing project from being built on the watershed which, according to the “Save the La Mesa Dam Coalition,” provides potable water to some 12 million residents of Metro Manila. Quoting a 2004 study by the UP National Hydraulics Resource Center, the Coalition warned against the proposed housing site in the area, saying that it could contaminate the groundwater seeping into the reservoir.

Housing project

The housing project, explains Fernandez, dates back to 1968 when former union workers and the management of the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) entered into a collective bargaining agreement that granted housing to 1,411 workers. There were previous sites initially designated for the housing project that were outside of, or downstream from, the watershed. But unfortunately for the workers, the sites were either sold by the MWSS to other parties or used for the building of the treatment plant. The current 58-hectare site inside the watershed is the third site chosen by the MWSS board for the housing project.

As one who had to clean kitchens, clear garbage cans and deliver pizzas to earn extra cash while pursuing his masters, Fernandez can sympathize with the plight of the workers. “We think they should justly be provided a suitable housing site,” he says. “But we also need to protect the reservoir.”

Fernandez’s advocacy for the environment sprung from his first hand encounters with devastations that resulted when economic needs took precedence over nature. While diving, he has seen whale sharks bleeding, their fins lopped off by fishermen eager to sell them for sharks’ fin soup. Such horrors spurred him to work for ABS-CBN Foundation’s Bantay Kalikasan, a wide detour from his industrial engineering course at the University of the Philippines in Diliman. Back home from his US masteral studies in 1993, he initially worked in land development projects. He later worked with several dot com companies.

This Ateneo High School graduate joined the environmental advocacy group Bantay Kalikasan as a consultant in 2003 and became its program director in 2005. The job became a personal crusade: “When I started going to the forest area (around La Mesa Dam), there were hardly any bird sounds; the place was hot and dry.”

The following two years showed dramatic changes, he adds proudly. “We now have 6-year-old trees that tower eight meters high, the air is cooler, and there are serpent eagles, owls and definitely more bird sounds, especially at dawn. And I saw and experienced the transformation right before my eyes.”

It was not always so. The property owned by the MWSS commonly known as the La Mesa Watershed covers an area of about 2,700 hectares and includes a lake about 700 hectares in size and 80 meters in depth. There are also treatment facilities, administration buildings, an old recreational park, a three-classroom schoolhouse, and a number of housing units for the water company’s employees that dates back to the 1950s.

Recalls Fernandez: “In 1997, about half of the forest was denuded and there were only three foreign species of forest trees. There were over 1,000 informal settlers living in the area who ravaged the forest by illegal logging and slash and burn farming or kaingin.”

Threatened water supply

Such transgressions threatened the water supply of Metro Manila, prompting Bantay Kalikasan to enter into a 15-year memorandum of agreement with the MWSS in 1999 to rehabilitate and operate the La Mesa watershed. Using funds solicited from private donors, the group set up tree nurseries that cover 1,340 hectares as of end 2005, according to Fernandez. Their target is 1,500 hectares within this year, he adds.

“Much of the success can be credited to our expert team of foresters and crew of workers, many of them volunteers, who both maintain the trees and act as foot patrols for security and protection. It is unfortunate that in the process of restoring the forest, our bunkhouse was burned, one of our workers was beheaded and his wife gang raped. The child of another worker also died,” recounts Fernandez.

To sustain their protection activities and generate steady revenues, Bantay Kalikasan joined forces with the MWSS and the Quezon City government to develop the recreation area now known as the La Mesa Eco-park in East Fairview. The park was opened to the public in April 2004.

Says Fernandez: “It was a very challenging situation because unlike other property development companies, we had no money; only a dream that hopefully people will buy into.” He adds: “Developing the park was not easy. The first step was to relocate over 200 informal settlers and then visioning the concept, with architects Francisco Mañosa and Jun Palafox enhancing the existing layout, structures and attractions in the park.”

But the efforts were worth it, he points out. “I will never forget the sense of fulfilment I got just watching a young couple with their baby in a stroller all set for a quiet family picnic under the trees. That was when I realized how much impact this project has on the lives of ordinary folk, especially their children.”

Fernandez should know. He himself has three children: Pilar, 4; Jaime, 3, and Julia, 1. Together with wife Myrna, he regularly brings the kids to the eco-park.

The park might as well be his fourth child, the way he describes its offerings proudly: “We guarantee clean restrooms, a landscaped garden and slopes planted with flowers, the landmark being the Shell flower terraces. One swampy area is now the site of the Petron outdoor amphitheater.” There’s also a pool, an orchidarium set up by Sen. Franklin Drilon as a memorial for his first wife, a fitness and nature trail, a pond for fishing, and a boating lagoon revived by the Aboitiz transport group.

It’s just too bad that the housing controversy should come up just when the project is poised to finally become self sustaining, sighs Fernandez. “What is the use of all these efforts if the integrity of the watershed is placed at risk?”

The issue, he adds, can be solved immediately by declaring the watershed as a protected area. “It does not need a Senate fact-finding committee to eventually come to this conclusion. All it needs is political will, just one stroke of the pen which will ensure the purity of the drinking water of 12 million people and the preservation of the forest and wildlife in the area,” he says.

Dreaming big

Beyond the La Mesa Eco-Park project, Fernandez continues to dream big. His wish list outlines what he’d like to do, given the chance. “I would require all developers to undertake environment-friendly projects, not only in terms of waste management but in providing buildings that allow in more natural light and require less electricity to cool. I’d like to see more communities that promote walking and biking.”

He’d also like to impose a socialized form of tax on pollutants, including cars in Metro Manila and corporations that release wastes in the environment. “The funds raised can be used to implement air pollution monitoring and control devices,” says Fernandez.

But more importantly, he adds, he’d make sure that environment laws are reviewed regularly, “to make sure that they are simple, easy to understand and enforceable, so that everyone can get involved in protecting what is rightly theirs—the future.”

——————

Learn more about the Save La Mesa Dam campaign through http://www.lamesaecopark.com



Copyright 2006 Inquirer. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


http://news.inq7.net/sunday/index.ph...story_id=78026

[jbkayaker12]

Informal settlers in La Mesa watershed has already done severe damage to this fragile watershed by way of its slash and burn farming. Denuded parts of the only rainforest in Metro Manila is being rehabilitated by concerned citizens and now they are going to bring in people to live permanently that will only degrade the watershed even more. I hope they have an environmental study on the effects of all these families moving in on the watershed and the consequences it might bring to this fragile ecosystem.

I hope it's not true that Gina Lopez, the head of Bantay Kalikasan which is spearheading the rehabilitation of the watershed, turning a blind eye on the housing developments for the executives of MWSS. The only rainforest in Metro Manila should remain as that a rainforest and not a subdivision.

Authorities better think clearly about the concerns which will affect the majority of the people in Metro Manila and not just the few employees of MWSS.