About Manila’s North
Harbor
Development
Plan
1.
What is the Manila’s North Harbor
Development Plan?
In
February 2006, the former President Arroyo gave the green light for the
privatization of the ports at the Manila
North Harbor
under the Port Modernization Program. The master plan for North
Harbor—the country’s busiest but most
inefficient domestic port—was drafted together with experts from Singapore and the Netherlands. North
Harbor shall be “the jewel of Philippine ports,
comparable with Singapore, Shanghai and Hong Kong
ports.”
The
Manila North
Harbor is located in Tondo, Manila. It is one of the
11 major harbors in the Philippines.
Almost all local cargo and passenger sea vessels dock at the Manila North
Harbor. There are more
than 500 ports in the country, 240 of which are controlled by private
individuals and corporations. The Philippine Ports Authority (PPA) has
jurisdiction over all these ports.
2.
Who are
the main players in the port privatization scheme?
The
big businesses close to the former President Arroyo such as Enrique Aboitiz,
the owner of Asian Terminals, Enrique Razon of the International Container
Terminal Services, Inc., and Reghis Romero of Harbour Centre Port Terminals
Inc. Progressive Bayan Muna Patylist Representative Teodoro C. Casino publicly
came out in a press conference on September 11, 2009 claiming that the bidding
for the 25-Year Manila North Harbor Modernization Project is ridiculously
flawed and dubbed the project a sweetheart deal between the Philippine Ports
Authority (PPA) and the private consortium that is about to cop the project.
On February 4, 2011, the Supreme Court has removed the last
remaining legal hurdle for the coming in of San Miguel Corporation (SMC) as
partner Harbour Centre Port Terminal
Inc. in the P14.5 billion modernization of the said harbor. San Miguel Corp.
after the conglomerate replaced Metro Pacific Investments Corp. in the
consortium.
SMC
is under the control of Cojuangco, the uncle of the Pres. Aquino. Other players
close to the current president are Lopez, Ayala, and Henry Sy of Shoe Mart
Malls. These big businesses were known to be the source of finance of Pres.
Aquino in the last election.
3.
What are the main features of the Master Plan for
the Manila North Harbor
Modernization?
The entire project covers up to 48.5
hectares. The main highway known as Radial 10 (R10, from Manila Hotel up to
Navotas town) will be widened from the
present six-lane-road into and eight-lane expressway for the fast
transportation of cargos from various ports of the country.
The other main
features of this Public-Private Partnership: the
plan to set up a P20 B of San Miguel
Corporation which will be known as “San Miguel City” containing its grains terminal for its food
and beverages industry, logistic area, tank farm, shipping facility and other
divisions. Another is the setting up of the facilities of Eagle Cement
Corporation. Petron, one of the biggest oil industry in the Philippines, (SMC is now one of its big stock
holders) plans to put its bunker depot at North Harbor.
The 25-year
North Harbor modernization program includes
pier rehabilitation, dredging of port waterways, computerization, introduction
of new cargo handling equipment and construction of a modern passenger
terminal.
- Who
shall benefit from the PPP’s North
Harbor Development
Plan?
The
multinational corporations mainly from the United
States and Japan
and their local partners in the Philippines
will surely benefit from all these transactions. Their benefits come from loans
they provide, to planning and constructions, and the actual use of the
modernized ports. The Philippines’
main export is electronics and its main import is also electronics – a
manifestation of a country designed as backyard sweat shops of developed
countries such as the United States
and Japan.
Japan
is one of the main beneficiaries of the modernized harbor due to her huge
control of maritime shipping business. China too has a lot to gain for her
tremendous goods that flood the Philippine market.
As usual
the businesses close to the current administration are all smiles in this
scheme. Commercial and industrial developments are all for profits.
May 98% ng
kalakalan sa bansa ay kumaraan sa mga daungan. Bilang archipelago, lolong
mahalaga ang daungan bilang bahagi ng sistemang transportasyon ng mga tao at
produkto sa bansa.
Bahagi ng
baybaying dagat, pag-aaring publiko ang mga daungan. Pero inilalagay lamang ang mga ito ng gobyerno sa
pribadong kamay para sa pribadong tubo. Samantala, nasasakripiso ang pampubliko
at panlipunang kapakanan. Iilan ang nakikinabang, pero higit na marami ang
pinahihirapan.
Nagpapalago ng
yaman ang mga burukrata. Noong 1974, sa ilalim ng martial law, binuo ni Marcos
and Philippine Ports Authority (PPA) sa PD505, sinusugan ng PD857, para umano
magpaunlad ng mga terminal, pasilidad at serbisyo sa mga daungan ng bansa.
Kontrolado naman ng mga siga, sindikato at dilawan ang mga paggawa.
Sa unang apat na
buwan pa lamang ng 2009, may kabuuang kita ang PPA ng P2.11 bilyon. Ang linis
na kita ng PPA sa apat na buwan ay umaabot sa P745.27 milyon.
Sa pagtumal ng
pandaigdigang negosyo mula gitnang 1970’s, ipinatupand noong 1980’s ang
neoliberal na patakaran ng liberalisasyon (luwagan ang kalakalan at
pamumuhunan), pribatisasyon (ibenta ang pag-aari ng gobyerno sa mga pribadong
kapitalista), at deregulasyon (alisin ang mga restriksyon ng gobyerno sa
negosyo).
Sa kapitalismo,
panlipunan na ang paggawa at produksyon. Pero pribado ang pagkamal sa
nalilikhang yaman. Nakatuon laman ang produksyon para sa pagpapalaki ng tubo na
pinipiga sa pagsasamantala sa pinakamenos na gastos sa pinakamaigsing panahon.
Kakabit ng
industriya ang transportation. Mahalaga ito para pabilisin and sirkulason ng
capital at maganap ang bentahan sa pamilihan para sa pagkamal ng tubo. Sa
bagong teknolohiya, pinabilis lamang ang krisis ng labis-labis na produksyon
para sa tubo. Maaaring maging “moderno” ang daungan pero nakatali pa rin ang
bansa natin sa atrasadong kalagayan, sa dayuhang pautang, pamumuhunan at
kalakalan. Maaring maging “moderno” ang kasangkapan pero talamak pa rin ang
korapsyon sa pamahalaan.
Sa
pinansyalisasyon ng ekonomiya, ang pinapalaki lamang ay salapi mula sa salapi
(halimbawa, sa stocks) nang walang kaugnayan sa tunay na ekonomya. Nang pumutok
ang bula sa high-tech at sa housing sa US, pumasok sa resesyon at depresyon ang
buong kapitalistang daigdig. Pinakamatindi ang epekto sa mahihirap na bansa.
Noong 1992, ibiniga ang “Smoke Mountain Development Plan” ng
gobyerno sa R-II Builders ni Regis Romero kasama ang reclamation. 1996, ibiniga ng PPA ang 15-ektarya sa
Harbour Centre Port Terminal (HCPT) ng mga Romero. Noong 2011, binigyan
ng permanenteng commercial permit ng PPA
ang Harbour
Centre.
- Social
Costs of the PPP’s North
Harbor Development
Plan
In
September 2006, the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) announced that it
would demolish all urban poor communities from the Manila Hotel up to Navotas
town and Radial 10 in Tondo. The demolitions, which have already begun even
without the completion of the bidding process, are intended to clear large
tracts of land for the use of the North
Harbor's future big
business owner.
Sa Terms of Referance (ToR) ng Manila North Harbor
Modernization Project (MNHMP) na may petsang January 2006, walang malinaw na
probisyon sa relokasyon ang pamilya.
Sa section 7.04 (page 13) ng Concession Agreement ng MNHMP,
nakasaad na “the agencies, the relocation of the squatters at its own account
or on the account of the government.” Pero walang tinukoy na paglilipatan sa
mga idedemolis.
The privatization of the North Harbor
will deprive 141,500 families or 849,000 individuals of their homes and
livelihoods. Affected communities around the North Harbor
include Parola, Isla Puting Bato/Breakwater, Collector's Road, Radial 10 and
Barangay 105 which comprises the communities of Aroma, Gloriakrap and Happyland
and Sitio Damayan.
Many Tondo residents also
derive their incomes from the North
Harbor. The harbor
employs up to 5,000 Tondo residents, among them 1,000 workers of United
Dockhandler's Inc, 350 workers of Pier 8
Arrastre and Stevedoring Services, Inc.; 400 workers of North Star Port
Development Corporation; 250 workers of Isla Puting Bato Arrastre and
Stevedoring Corporation; and 250 workers of Veterans Shipyard. Another 1,500
workers are employed by some 200 companies with contracts for various lines of
service at the harbor. Massive displacement of Manila North
Harbor’s workers and
employees is the implication. The privatization plan has no provisions for
their alternative employment. Also to be affected by this scheme are the 2,500
employees of the PPA nationwide.
- Why is SM2
connected to this problem?
The more
or less 141,500 families or a little less than a million individuals are the
urban poor families affected by such privatization of the Manila North
Harbor. These are among
the most oppressed sectors of our society. They are unfairly labeled as
“squatters”, criminals, and “eye sores”. Oftentimes, they are treated as
garbage (without dignity) to be dump in far away relocation sites deprived of
their livelihood and basic social services such as water and electricity. They
are denied of their rights to live and to be treated as human beings. All these
in the context of the current anti-poor ideology laden with insatiable profits
and value systems where humans are subsumes under economic development. Always,
the poor families and communities do not fit with the picture of affluent
commercial and industrial districts.
The
immense affluence of the few is the very reason for the destitution of the poor
majority. The urban poor settlements have always been the product of imbalance
systemic development where the big business interests prevail. The current
governance continues to promote private-public partnership (3Ps). And those who
own wealth hold the power either to control or dominate those who have little
or nothing. Thus, the culture of silence and submissiveness is created. Thus
resulting in peoples’ powerlessness. Yet, the only strength of the poor, the
deprived and the oppressed is their organization. But the powerful uses
“carrots and sticks” to divide and conquer the poor and their organization.
They use the “renters” against the house owners and bribe the leaders. Or they
deploy gangsters and military to threat and or kill those who are not submissive.
- What does the
United Nation say about problems related to land and housing?
Article
25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides “Everyone has the right to a
standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his
family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social
services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness,
disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances
beyond his control”;
Article
11 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights says “The
States Parties to present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to an
adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate
food, clothing and housing, and to the continuous improvement of living
conditions. The States Parties will take appropriate steps to ensure the
international co-operation based on free consent”;
General
Comment 4, adopted by the UN Committee
on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in 1991, lays
out the seven criteria of adequate housing:
a.
Security
of tenure
b.
Adequate
services, materials, infrastructure
c.
Affordability
d.
Habitability
e.
Accessibility
f.
Location
g.
Cultural
adequacy
Housing rights involve
more than the right to access to shelter. They include the following
indivisible, interdependent and interrelated human rights:
a.
The
human right to adequate housing
b.
The
human right to an adequate standard of living
c.
The
human right to access to safe drinking water and sanitation
d.
The
human right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health
e.
The
human right to a safe and healthy environment
f.
The
human right of the child to an environment appropriate for physical and mental development
g.
The
human right to access to resources, including energy for cooking, heating and
lighting
h.
The
human right to affordability in housing, such that other basic needs are not
threatened or compromised
i.
The
human right to freedom from discrimination in access to housing and related
services based on sex, race and ethnicity, or any other status
j.
The
human right to choose one’s residence, to determine where and how to live and
to freedom of movement
k.
The
human right to freedom from arbitrary interference with one’s privacy, family
or home
l.
The
human right to security. Including legal security of tenure
m. The human right
to equal protection of the law and judicial remedies for the redress of
violations of the human right to adequate housing
n.
The
human right to protection from forced evictions and the destruction or
demolition of one’s home including in situations of military occupation,
international and civil armed conflict, establishment and construction of alien
settlements, population transfer, and development projects.
- What does the
Philippine Constitution provides?
Section
9, Article II (Declaration of Principles and State Policies)
provides “The State shall promote a just and dynamic social order that will
ensure the prosperity and independence of the nation and free the people from
poverty through policies that provide adequate social services, promote full
employment, a rising standard of living, and an improved quality of life for
all”;
Section
10, Article II (Declaration of Principles and State Policies)
provides “The State shall promote social justice in all phases of national
development”:
Section
1, Article XIII (Social Justice and Human Rights)
provides “The Congress shall give highest priority to the enactment of measures
that protect and enhance the right of all the people to human dignity, reduce
social, economic, and political inequalities, and remove cultural inequities by
equitably diffusing wealth and political power for the common good. To this
end, the State shall regulate the acquisition, ownership, use, and disposition
of property and its increments”;
- What is the
current happening under the Aquino administration?
Republic Act 7279 legitimized and
institutionalized the summary demolitions and evictions of urban poor
communities, without lawful court orders, but through a mere Notice of
Summary/Eviction, without the benefit of hearing and trial; said demolitions
and evictions are being implemented through brutal and violent police and
military assaults.
The United Nations 2007 data provides
that slum population in urban centers in the Philippines is 23,891,071. The
total Housing Needs for 2005-2010 is 3,756,072 housing units nationwide and
496,928 for the National Capital Region and that 1 in 4 residents or 556,526
families in Metro Manila live in informal settlements. Sec. Jesse Robredo of
the Department of Interior and Local Government reported on March 15, 2011 that
the “current and projected government shelter program are inadequate to fully
and effectively address the challenge.”
The data collected by human rights group
Karapatan-National Capital Region reveals that at least three (3) families are
being rendered homeless everyday in the National Capital Region due to force
demolition and eviction and they are not provided with no adequate and livable
relocations. In some instances where relocations were provided, the same are
not livable and no basic services and livelihood opportunities were provided.
On the first week of July, 2011,
your “government has ordered the Romero-led Manila North Harbour Port Inc.
(MNHPI) to stick to the terms of its concession to develop the domestic cargo
and passenger terminal (first phase of the Manila North Harbor development
plan) in Tondo, or risk having its contract revoked.” (PDI, July 5, 2011)
The implication of the warning is the
intensification of the eviction of around 849,000 individuals in the Manila
North Harbor.
Yet, the port modernization project’s Terms of Reference is silent on
relocation plans for the soon-to-be evicted families.
Almost
all of the urban poor communities in North
Harbor have been
saturated already with “community consultation” (a euphemism for public
announcement of the intention of the government to dislocate the residents),
house tagging and census – the government’s defined necessary “process” before
notice of demolition and eviction.
- What is to be
done?
The planned privatization is but one of
the many pseudo-development projects catering to the welfare of big business to
the utter detriment of the poor. It is but right for the residents of
communities surrounding the Manila
North Harbor
to continue resisting this destructive project and assert their rights to
decent housing and livelihood.
- Kuya Tito
