ARENDA URBAN POOR FEDERATION INC. (AUPFI)
March 1, 2010
Position Paper
REPEAL PORTION OF EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 854 RELATIVE TO THE REVOCATION OF PRESIDENTIAL PROCLAMATION NO. 704
A. THERE IS NO BASIS FOR THE REVOCATION OF PROCLAMATION NO. 704
1. The DENR Region IV-A Report re: proposed revocation of Proclamation No. 704., dated November 26, 2009, contain false, misleading and inaccurate assessment of the situation.
a. There is not a single structure or establishment that was “washed out” within the area covered by Proclamation No. 704.
The area being presented and referred to as totally submerged and washed out by typhoon Ondoy is a community called Purok 8 of Lupang Arenda. PUROK 8, although part of Lupang Arenda, IS NOT PART OF THE PROCLAIMED SITE. Said community is now totally abandoned.
b. While it is maybe true that the proclaimed site lies below the 12.5 mean low water level set by Laguna Lake Development Authority (LLDA), it is not this situation that caused the waist-high flooding within the proclaimed site during the typhoon Ondoy.
The whole proclaimed site is protected by the Metro Manila Flood Control Project (Lakeshore dike). The realignment of the dike to protect the whole proclaimed site was provided through the Memorandum of Agreement of 2003 entered into and by the National Agencies, which the office of the President was well aware of and duly approved.
The real cause of the flooding was due to the unfinished portion of the dike near the Pumping station where the lake water passed through.
The flooding was further aggravated by the negligence on the part of the agency-in-charge in closing the 4 manually-operated gate valves at the height of the typhoon.
With the completion of the Metro Manila Flood Control Project, the whole area of Proclamation 704 would no longer be susceptible to flooding.
2. The third premise stated in the Executive Order NO. 854 is not true.
a. EO 854 third premise stated, “Whereas, there are about 100,000 families presently living within and outside the proclaimed sites which obstruct the flow of water along the Napindan channel and the Manggahan floodway”
b. Again, the Purok 8 is the one clearly and visibly obstructing the flow of water along the Napindan channel, and not the area covered and within the Proclamation No. 704.
3. There was no adequate consultation with the concerned LGU’s and stakeholders.
a. There was clearly an attempt on the part of the government not to disclose the revocation.
b. The concerned LGUs are in the position to verify and validate the objective situation of the proclaimed site.
4. The recommendation lack technical evaluation to support and validate the findings of DENR.
a. The creation of technical working group to conduct further investigation, technical evaluation and submission of comprehensive report was correctly suggested by Undersecretary for staff bureaus Manuel Gerochi on December 4, 2009. However, the suggestion was apparently rejected.
B. The revocation of Proclamation No. 704 will render useless all past efforts and resources spent both by the government and the occupants, and will erode the confidence and thrust of the people in the government’s policy and programs.
1. Aside from the P2B fund for the implementation of Metro Manila Flood Control Project, the government had to secure additional fund for the realignment of the dike provided by the Memorandum of Agreement of 2003 just to protect the whole areas covered by Proclamation N0. 704.
The realignment paved the way for implementing various self-help development projects by the occupants of Proclamation No. 704 and infusion of local government units fund for various infrastructure projects in the proclaimed site.
2. The signing of the Memorandum of agreement built and strengthened the thrust and confidence of the stakeholders in the government’s policies and projects. The revocation of the proclamation will certainly cause the erosion of their trust.
C. The revocation and the ensuing relocation program will be expensive and only create bigger social problem
1. The government will be spending P12B just to relocate the 60,000 families. Said fund can be effectively use for other projects of the government.
2. This will only disrupt the lives of the 60,000 affected families who have fully adjusted and living a normal life in the proclaimed site.
3. The scarcity of available relocation sites will only aggravate the problem.
D. It is more practical and economical for the government to implement solutions to the problems affecting the viability of the proclaimed site as socialized housing project.
1. Increasing the height of the dike to 2 meters.
2. Improving the drainage system within the proclaimed site.
