Response to Chamber Of Mines (CoM) - 13 Feb 2012

1. International organisations respond to Chamber of Mines and
Chamber of Commerce and Industry
Statement on behalf of MiningWatch Canada, Indigenous Peoples Links (PIPLinks)
and the Working Group on Mining in the Philippines-UK
13 February 2012
We are writing, as concerned international organisations, in response to press adverts and statements
by the mining industry and their supporters regarding the ‘leaked’ draft Executive Order on mining
(apparently titled “Institutionalizing and Implementing Reforms in the Philippine Mining Sector,
Providing Policies and Guidelines, and for Other Purposes).
The Chamber of Mines (COMP) and associated advocates, including the Philippine Chamber of
Commerce and Industry (PCCI), are pressuring the Office of the President with unsubstantiated
accusations that the proposed changes “will drive away future investments in the industry and
imperil existing projects”i and that it “would unduly delay all on-going projects, stop short all
exploration activities, as well as the issuance of new mining permits.”ii
This seems to be more of the same alarmist rhetoric that has been recycled by these organizations on
a number of occasions over the years. The industry claims it is for responsible mining, and yet when
measures are proposed that would ensure responsible mining the cries go up that they are unfair and
uncompetitive.
It is worth looking at some of the objections raised. One article notes “there is a proposal to increase
taxes on the extractive industries … large-scale miners feel it will make the country uncompetitive in
the race to get top-grade mining investors.”iii In reality, many countries receive, or are negotiating, a
far greater return in revenues from mining than the Philippines receives. And, as was made very clear
at the recent International Conference on Mining in Mindanao in presentations by representatives
from Revenue Watch and the Tax Justice Network, the Philippines stands out in global comparisons
for having extremely low taxes and royalties from mining.iv The same news article argues that the
real foot-print of the industry is limited, yet the experience of large-scale mining in the Cordillera, as
elsewhere, is that river ecosystems and agriculture have been damaged in provinces far away from
specific mining locations.
Another news article criticises the body advising on the EO for being made up of environmentalists,
such as the Department of the Environment!v Given the DENR is currently the department with
ultimate responsibility for deciding on mining leases (already complicated by its dual functions in
promoting mining as well as protecting the environment), it is absurd to criticise it as an
'environmentalist', and anti-industry body. Addressing the conflicting functions of the DENR is
essential separating the authority responsible for monitoring and enforcement of environmental laws
and making it independent from the authority that issues mining licenses.
The same news article complains about an idea allegedly in the draft EO called TEV - or “total
economic valuation.” It states that a total cost or benefit evaluation for a mining project is a bad idea,
especially as other countries don't have such a policy. This is not true. In fact, the Canadian
government has developed a similar tool to evaluate the value of ecological goods and services of
Canada’s ecosystems in order to provide the government with the necessary “balanced information in

2. 2
their decision-making process with the true costs of development or conservation.”vi The United
Nations is also engaged in a three year project to measure the 'Economics of Ecosystems and
Biodiversity'. The United Nations Principles of Responsible Investment and the United Nations
Environmental Programme Financial Initiative also acknowledge that for sustainable development
environment costs have to be internalized.vii Conducting these analyses in the Philippines would
expose the true cost to the Filipino people of the current and planned mining operations across large
expanses of their vulnerable and bio-diverse natural resource rich archipelago. A TEV is absolutely
essential in such a context, and must be complimented by a policy which considers the long term
total social, environmental and cultural cumulative impacts and ensures that adequate returns are
guaranteed for the Filipino people and the risks to their continued well-being are minimized. Without
such policy reform, the term 'responsible mining' in the Philippines will continue to be a myth.
The Chamber of Mines has resorted to full page adverts in response to the EO boasting of the
purported economic benefits of mining. Yet, these economic benefits are a complete fiction when
considered in the Philippine context. What the Philippines has experienced, (and will experience in a
much more dramatic manner in the future if the industry is allowed to dictate the terms of
engagement), is instead, major economic, social, cultural and environmental costs as evidenced by
the fact that:-
mining is the only economic sector in the country in which the poverty incidence, including
income poverty, has risen over the last decadeviii while being the sector with by far the biggest
social and environmental footprint;ix
the current legislative framework results in minimal actual return to the Philippine Economy
given that it is based principally on raw material export, excessively generous tax incentives
and a policy which provides for the effective transfer of ownership of mineral resources to
100% foreign owned corporations who are allowed to repatriate their profits;x
mining as it is currently pursued leads to massive lost opportunity costs as a result of its
destructive effect on the country's bountiful natural resource base which, if protected, will
provide sustainable income from agriculture, fisheries and tourism.
mining on the scale currently envisaged in the Philippines is inconsistent with the Department
of Agriculture target to make the country self-sufficient in rice by 2013, and the requirement
to feed a population of 130 million people by 2030. This can't be achieved if open cast mines
are allowed in water catchments such as Tampakan in South Cotabato.
human costs are associated with environmental disasters triggered as a result of irresponsible
mining in Mindanao and throughout the country;
there have been serious violations of the civil and political, economic, social and cultural,
human rights and environmental rights by the mining industry in the Philippines of local and
indigenous communities which have been recognized and condemned by UN human rights
and OECD monitoring bodies;xi
there are significant and very long term costs associated with the post-mining phase that have
yet to be adequately addressed such as guaranteeing that the mining industry is obliged to
clean up and make safe all of the existing and future mining waste which poses inter-
generational threats to the environment, sustainable livelihoods and human rights;xii
mining is proposed on a massive scale (hundreds of mining tenements covering vast portions
of the country) in the Philippines. This threatens the enjoyment of constitutional rights not
just of local and indigenous communities, but of all Filipinos, both of this and future
generations, to a balanced and healthful ecology including their rights to life, food, water and
to the natural resources necessary to guarantee their continued survival and development.

3. 3
In conclusion it would appear that the Office of the President is attempting in this EO to imbue some
meaning into the hallow words ‘responsible mining’ by seeking to ensure that mining does not
violate the principles of sustainable development. The response of the industry is simply to cry foul.
The present and future generations of the Philippines deserve better.
For additional information contact:
MiningWatch Canada:
Catherine Coumans - catherine@miningwatch.ca
Indigenous Peoples Links (PIPLinks):
Andrew Whitmore - comms@piplinks.org
Working Group on Mining in the Philippines:
Frank Nally (Missionary Society of St Columban) – wgmpuk@tiscali.co.uk
Clive Wicks - clivewicks@googlemail.com
Cathal Doyle (Middlesex University Department of Law) - doncathal@gmail.com
Robert Goodland rbtgoodland@gmail.com
i
Businessmen Slam ‘Anti-Mining’ Policies, Business Mirror, 6 February 2012
ii
Draft Order Imperils Mining Sector, Manila Standard, 6 February 2012
iii
Clearing Mining Issues, Philippine Star, 8 February 2012
iv
Davao hosts int’l conference on mining in Mindanao, Mindanews, 23 January 2012
v
Nose Barrage, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 9 February 2012
vi
Canwest News Service May 25, 2010,
http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Feds+price+Canada+nature/3065309/story.html ; See also - Government of
Canada. http://www.ec.gc.ca/envirozine/default.asp?lang=en&n=B31D9D94-1; The Ecological and Economic
Foundations in Environment and Development Economics,
http://www.teebweb.org/EcologicalandEconomicFoundations/tabid/1018/Default.aspx;
http://www.euractiv.com/sustainability/nterview-pavan-news-308155
vii
Universal Ownership Why environmental externalities matter to institutional investors UNPRI UNEP Trucost
(2010)
http://www.unpri.org/files/6728_ES_report_environmental_externalities.pdf
viii
Multidimensional Poverty in the Philippines: New Measures, Evidence, and Policy Implications Arsenio M.
Balisacan1 Revised Report: 8 October 2011
http://www.undp.org.ph/Downloads/knowledge_products/poverty/20111019%20-
%20MPI%20Docs/Multidimensional%20Poverty-09oct2011.pdf
http://www.slideshare.net/no2mininginpalawan/multidimensional-poverty-09-oct-2011
ix
2007 Report of the UN Special Representative to the Secretary General on Business and Human Rights
E/CN.4/2006/97 22 February 2006 ‘The extractive sector is unique because no other sector has as enormous and as
intrusive a social and environmental footprint’
http://www.hks.harvard.edu/m-rcbg/papers/JGR%20Interim%20Report%20to%20the%20UN.pdf
x
1995 Mining Act and its Implementing Rules and Regulations
xi
UN Committee on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) Early Warning Urgent Action
Procedure letters to the Philippine Government in relation to abuses of the rights of the Subanon of Mt Canatuan in the
context of TVI Pacific Mining Project; http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cerd/early-warning.htm OECD National
Contact Point Statement in relation to Intex Resource Mindoro Nickel Project; http://www.piplinks.org/intex-resources-
found-breach-international-guidelines see also recommendation of the UN Committee on Economic Social and Cultural
Rights to the Philippines and UN Committee on Human Rights in relation to violations of human rights in the context of
mining in the Philippines
xii
It is estimated that there are in the region of 800 abandoned mines in the Philippines see C Doyle, C Wicks, F
Nally Mining in the Philippines Concerns and Conflicts available at http://www.eccr.org.uk/module-htmlpages-
display-pid-52.html