Established in 2010, Urban Poor Resource Center of the Philippines, Incorporated

(UPRCP) is a non-stock, non-profit resource institution for the Filipino urban poor. It seeks to help shape public discourse and policy in favor of urban poor interests and aspirations

through its programs, in the pursuit of realizing genuine national development and ending

poverty.

Board of Directors

Chairperson Dr. Gilda Peralta

Vice-chairperson Ms. Leona Zarsuela Secretary Prof. Teresa Lorena Jopson Treasurer Ms. Myra Vieta G.Mabilin Member Prof. Melania Lagahit-Flores Executive Committee

Executive Director Luis D. Clarin

Research Kayan Nadem Cunanan Maria Ima Carmela Ariate

Education Terence Krishna Lopez& Cultural Development Roja Rivera

Projects & Services Sylva Fortuno

UPRCP, Inc.SEC Reg. CN201014025 | TIN 007-862-311

Address: Unit 202 #137 Matatag Street, Barangay Central, Quezon City

Email: uprcp.inc@gmail.com

Tel.no: (+632) 9317439

Website: www.uprcp.com

Facebook Page: Uprc Phils

EditoryalLayunin ng publikasyong UPDATE o Urban Poor Data and Analysis ang magbigay impormasyon at pagsusuri sa mga usaping mahalaga sa sektor ng maralitang lungsod. Isang layunin din ay ang pagpapaunawa ng kalagayan ng maralitang lungsod sa iba pang sektor na bumubuo sa lipunan.

Sa unang edisyon ng UPDATE, isinalarawan ang pangkalahatang kalagayan ng maralitang lungsod sa Pilipinas. Nagbigay din ng pagtingin ang UPRCP sa “centerpiece program” ng gobyerno upang mapawi ang kahirapan – ang Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps).

Inilalabas ng UPRCP ang pangalawang edisyon ng UPDATE upang patampukin ang pagsusuri sa neoliberalismo at kung paano nito inaalisan ng obligasyon ang gobyerno sa kanyang mamamayan at sa halip ay nagiging instrumento ng pag-atake sa karapatan ng maralitang lungsod.

Atake sa maralitang lungsod

Ayon sa gobyerno, ang isang pamilyang may limang tao ay nangangailangan ng Php 7, 890 (USD 174.52) kada buwan para sa mga batayang pangangailangan. Ibig sabihin, ang bawat miyembro ng pamilya ay magpapakasapat sa Php 52.60 (USD 1.16) para mabuhay sa loob ng isang araw. Ang ganitong pamantayan ay malayong-malayo sa halaga ng tunay na pangangailangan ng isang indibidwal.

Ang pamantayang ito ay ginagamit ng gobyerno upang pababain ang bilang ng mahihirap sa bansa. Ito ang ginagawa nilang palusot upang talikuran ang responsibilidad na magpatupad ng mga programang tunay na mag-aangat sa kalagayan ng maralitang lungsod.

Kabilang sa mga maralitang lungsod ang mga manggagawa. Nananatiling nakapako ang sahod ng mga manggagawa at sa ibang mga rehiyon, ito ay higit na mababa dahil sa wage regionalization. Dahil sa malaking bilang ng walang trabaho, nagiging madali para sa mga malalaking empresa at pagawaan ang pag-empleyo ng mga manggagawa sa batayang kontraktwal. Nangangahulugan ito na wala silang natatanggap na benepisyo. Labas pa diyan, wala silang karapatang mag-unyon at kung magrereklamo man sila, madali lang silang tanggalin.

Ang mga nagsisikap dumiskarte upang mabuhay ay laging nangangambang mawalis mula sa kanilang mga pinagkukuhanan ng kabuhayan. Siguro ay pamilyar naman tayo sa mga manininda sa bangketa at pedicab drivers na hinuhuli ng mga pwersa ng lokal na gobyerno.

Sa gitna ng kakarampot o walang katiyakang kumita araw-araw, pinagkakait ng gobyerno ang mga batayang serbisyong panlipunan. Nakikita ito sa kriminal na kapabayaan sa larangan ng pabahay, kalusugan, at edukasyon. Taun-taon, bumababa ang alokasyon ng gobyerno para sa serbisyong panlipunan. Ngayong 2015, 3.6% na lang ang kabuuang badyet sa kalusugan mula sa dating 4% at 0.4% na lang ang sa pabahay mula sa dating 0.8%. Kung may sakit ka at wala kang pambayad, nganga!

Kabi-kabila ang mararahas na demolisyon na ipinatutupad ng gobyerno at ng mga pribadong kumpanya sa ngalan umano ng ‘pag-unlad’. Ito ay nakaayon sa Philippine Development Plan (PDP) na ipinapatupad ng rehimen, kasama rito ang Public-Private Partnership Program (PPP). Tampok ang mga demolisyon sa North Triangle, Corazon de Jesus, at kamakailan lamang ay sa Calaanan Compound, Caloocan City. Ang balangkas ng ‘pag-unlad’ na ito ay nakaayon sa mga patakarang neoliberal. Tampok ang pribatisasyon ng lupa sa neoliberalismo. Sa pangmatagalan, wala itong maidudulot na signipikanteng pag-unlad sa buhay ng mga maralitang lungsod. Ang tanging nakikinabang dito ay ang mga malalaking dayuhan at lokal na kumpanya.

(continued on page 13)

2 Vol. 2 No. 1 July 2015UPDATE

3UPDATE Vol. 2 No. 1 July 2015

In the past decades, neoliberal globalization has imposed deregulation of labor markets and has enhanced the supremacy and freer flow of capital. This has brought about huge profits to global companies and financial institutions. Conversely, the real value of wages has regressed, inequality has become more palpable, and the value of labor power has been diminished.

Neoliberal globalization has also ushered in severe urban poverty. Being multi-dimensional, its aspects involve deprivation of different forms and can be seen in the urban poor’s lack of access to jobs, clean water, sanitation, and shelter. One of the dimensions of urban poverty is monetary. As such, the urban poor are very vulnerable to external shocks and other fluctuations of the current economic system1.

In the Philippines, agencies that provide basic social services such as health and education have been targets for privatization or are already privatized. Some services of the Philippine General Hospital, for example, are run by public-private partnerships. Consequently, many of the penniless clients who have no choice but to avail of these services need to pay up. It is the private partners who will benefit the most from this. The unregulated prices of oil; privatized utilities; and the high costs of importation have led to the unrelenting rise of prices of basic goods and commodities. The government continues to give these companies tax incentives while failing to implement controls on prices. It can be said that the poor in the cities are victims of the market’s dictates on governance many times over. Because the Philippine government finds big businesses vital for development and modernization, the controls are very lax. Ayala Land Inc. (ALI), which counts Mitsubishi as one of its investors, has developed a project in Sitio San Roque, Quezon City. The project being marketed as Vertis North has caused the eviction of thousands of urban poor. The same thing has happened with the project in Santa Clara, Batangas. Spearheaded by the government with Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC) funding the research and development, thousands were forced to leave. While millions continue to be displaced, only a handful of real estate developers continue to rake in cash with the help of the government.

Many workers and employees from the private and public sectors reside in urban poor areas. Because of the collusion between the government and private enterprises, policies that cheapen wages are in place and are even violated. As people from the rural areas migrate

to the urban centers with the hope of finding jobs, they just become potential prey to contractual work or informal work.

It is important to understand how neoliberalization adversely affects the urban poor sector. The urban poor have always been stigmatized yet the impoverishment that they experience is a clear manifestation of the symptomatic structural problems of the government.

In this light, UPDATE features critical articles that will help us understand the reasons why the urban poor are deprived in many ways. The first one is Atty. Alnie G. Foja’s notes on neoliberal policies embedded in the Urban Development and Housing Act (UDHA) of 1992. She assesses the contradictory practice of development for the urban poor but in the hands of private entities. The second one is Pio Verzola’s article questioning who development in Metro Manila is for. He discusses how business establishments have obstructed waterways with the permission of the government. He posits that these businesses cause floods and not the urban poor settlements.

It is vital to look at some of the critical questions that frame urban poverty in the Philippines. The government has failed to alleviate poverty through the Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT) scheme of the Department of Social Work and Development (DSWD). In fact, the CCT has just become a cash cow for corrupt government officials.

We need to understand the reasons why the m i l i t a n t urban poor movement has been advancing. Moreover, there is value in expos ing a n d

opposing the genuine reasons that cause poverty and denigration not only of the poor but also of the entire Philippine people.

Neoliberalization and the Filipino Urban Poor

Neoliberalization and the Filipino Urban Poor

1. Mathur, Om Prakash. (August 2013). Urban Poverty in Asia. Philippines: published for the Asian Development Bank.

(Photo credit: Yahoo!)

4UPDATE Vol. 2 No. 1 July 2015

Housing program and urban development

RA 7279 or the Urban Development and Housing Act (UDHA), is touted as a pro-poor m e a s u r e a i m e d primarily at uplifting the conditions of the underprivileged and homeless citizens in urban areas by making available to them decent housing at affordable cost. This may be so at first glance, for scattered in the various sections of this law are supposed reference to this noble objective. In fact, it comes first in the Declaration of State Policy and Program Objectives.

However, a closer look at the wordings of the law will show that the unusual and irreconcilable mixture of housing program for the homeless poor and urban development in a single piece of legislation, is a fatal defect. As discussed below, housing program for the homeless poor when lumped into an urban development program results to the driving away of the poor from their urban settlements to far-flung resettlement areas in order to give way to “urban development” which provides opportunities for big businesses to have big profits. This is what has been happening under the auspices of the UDHA.

Can housing for the underprivileged and homeless citizens and urban development really go hand in hand? Development based on what and for whom? Can the government implement urban development without hurting the poor’s right to decent and affordable housing?

Basic concepts to be clearly defined are: What developments are allowed? In what context is a housing project decent and affordable? How will a housing program benefit the poor in the long run?

A housing program via resettlement to far-flung undeveloped communities may pass as decent and

affordable under UDHA definition but this detaches the beneficiaries from their main sources of livelihood in the urban areas without any provision for the same opportunities in the resettlement areas. This makes resettlement projects not viable in the long run. Beneficiaries end up abandoning the shelters given them because they are forced between the painful choice of having shelter versus having food on their stomach. As some beneficiaries put it: Resettlement is a case of “from danger zone to death zone.”

If development negates the poor’s right or access to decent and affordable housing, then, it is a case of one program that cancels the other.

How to uplift the conditions of the underprivileged and homeless citizens?

As is worded, the objective is to “uplift the conditions of the underprivileged and homeless citizens in urban areas and in resettlement areas by making available to them decent housing at affordable cost, basic services, and employment opportunities”

On Resettlement and On-Site Development

Resettlement is as important an objective as on-site development. On–site Development is defined as the process of upgrading and rehabilitation of blighted and slum urban areas with a view of minimizing displacements of dwellers in said areas, and with provisions for basic services xxx”. But while On-Site Development is written in the law, its wordings are couched in such a way that preference of other modes of housing or land acquisition may be had, as follows: “Where on-site development is found more practicable and advantageous to the beneficiaries, the priorities mentioned in this section shall not apply. The local government units shall give budgetary priority to on-site development of government lands.” Thus, if on-site development is not found more practicable and advantageous to the beneficiaries, resettlement can always be resorted to. This interpretation is also justified by the fact that the law placed upon the LGU’s the very heavy burden of giving budgetary priorities to on-site development. Do LGU’s have the capacity to finance on-site development? How many sites have local governments developed? Do the beneficiaries’ opinion on what is more practicable and advantageous figure in the decision-making process? The law does not say so.

Rational use and development of urban land

Rational use and development of urban land is also an objective of the program. At the same time though, rational use and development is required to bring about the

Housing the homeless pooror driving away Urban Dysfunction?

Housing the homeless poor

By: Atty. Alnie G. Foja

Photo credit: Henry Enaje

4 Vol. 2 No. 1 July 2015 5UPDATE Vol. 2 No. 1 July 2015

development of urban areas conducive to commercial and industrial activities which can generate more economic opportunities for the people.

Innocuous as this may seem, this may actually contradict the very objective of decent housing at affordable cost because development of urban areas conducive to commercial and industrial activities is likely to result to eviction of the poor dwelling in the areas to be developed.

Does the UDHA provide for a definite solution to housing needs of those who will be affected by this development? Again, resettlement seems to be the convenient answer.

Reduction in urban dysfunctions

Alarmingly, rational use and development of urban land is also aimed at the reduction in urban dysfunctions, particularly, those that adversely affect public health, safety and ecology. The law does not specifically define what urban dysfunctions are. But as worded, urban dysfunctions could refer to those who dwell on danger zones and those who are accused of cluttering the water passageways. If this is so, then UDHA legalizes or rationalizes the reduction of urban dysfunctions (read: eviction of those living in places that adversely affect public health, safety and ecology). Where to now, homeless urban poor? Again, resettlement seems to be the convenient answer.

Balanced urban and rural interdependence

The program is also intended to bring about “balanced urban and rural interdependence.” But in practical terms, what does a housing program got to do with urban and rural interdependence? The burden of urban and rural interdependence must not be lumped with a housing program as this will involve the overhauling of the government’s development priorities. Does resettlement bring about urban and rural interdependence?

For urban and rural interdependence to materialize,

the government should first expand development or employment opportunities from the urban to the rural areas so that resettlement in these rural areas will become viable. People will follow development or employment opportunities wherever they may be found even without the government forcing them into relocation.

A glaring fact that the government needs to accept and take into consideration: People crowd the metropolis because it is in these areas that they find their means to live. And so, any resettlement area sans sources of livelihood will never work. People will always go back to where they find their means to live.

People’s participation in the urban development process

Encourage more effective people’s participation in the urban development process is also an objective. But business-driven development can never be for the needy.

What of people’s right to participate in the urban development process? This right to participate in the context of development and as validated by government’s existing practice, is a token, at best. At its worst, it can be abused as an imprimatur of acceptance by the society or by the affected community of urban development that displaces the community “in the meantime”. A case of, “please bear the inconvenience, the government is working to improve our urban landscape. Meantime, we shall relocate you to far-flung areas.”

It does sound well and good, only that, in the areas where they will be relocated, there are no job opportunities nor sources of livelihood. They are far from the nearest hospital or public school. Transportation cost alone restricts the beneficiaries from finding works elsewhere. Can they then be faulted if they decide to abandon their “homes” and go back to where they were plucked from?

Housing the homeless poor

Map of demolitions provided by Dr. Arnisson Andre Ortega

6UPDATE Vol. 2 No. 1 July 2015

The cycle of migration is repeated. In the process, huge wastage of government money for resettlement projects is incurred.

The lesson is, if the homeless urban poor are resettled to areas that do not support and sustain livelihood, housing woes are not effectively addressed. Rather, it perpetuates the cycle of migration and the waste of taxpayers’ money. In between, demolitions and forced evictions are resorted to resulting to loss of lives and livelihood.

Improving the capability of LGUs

The law is also said to improve the capability of LGUs. No question, the LGUs’ capability must really be improved because the LGUs are the primary implementers of the law.

But how does the UDHA capacitate the LGUs? Do LGUs have the funds to house its homeless poor?

Who are the beneficiaries?

The underprivileged and homeless citizens are said to be the beneficiaries of the UDHA. They are “individuals or families residing in urban and urbanizable areas whose income or combined household income falls within the poverty threshold as defined by the National Economic and Development Authority and who do not own housing facilities. This shall include those who live in makeshift dwelling units and do not enjoy security of tenure”.

Do LGUs have accurate and updated database of the beneficiaries in their localities? Knowing and identifying the intended beneficiaries is one important requisite of a government housing program.

Have the HUDCC and the LGUs designed a system for registration of beneficiaries as provided under Section 17? If yes, is this system accurate and up to date? Are there measures in place to guard against tampering and manipulation?

National Urban Development and Housing Framework

The law refers to a national development and housing framework, and yet, the law’s implementation is charged to the LGUs. How will this work?

Socialized housing as the primary strategy

Socialized housing is the primary strategy according to Section 15. “Sec. 15. Policy - Socialized housing, as defined in Section 3 hereon, shall be the primary strategy in providing shelter for the underprivileged and homeless. xxx xxx xxx”

Section 3 r, in turn, defines what socialized housing is, as follows:

"Socialized housing" refers to housing programs and projects covering houses and lots or home lots only undertaken by the Government or the private sector for the underprivileged and homeless citizens which shall include sites and services development, long-term financing, liberalized terms on interest payments, and such other benefits in accordance with the provisions of this Act;”

If socialized housing, the primary strategy, is to be undertaken by the Government or the private sector, then why are the LGUs charged with the implementation of the UDHA? Or why is socialized housing to be undertaken by the private sector? And how?

Public rental

Section 12 states that “a scheme for public rental housing may be adopted”. Do we have an existing program or scheme for this? If yes, does it give hsecurity of lease at an affordable rate for a long enough period? Public rental housing at an affordable rate guaranteed for a sufficient number of years may be explored as one of the solutions but this is not given sufficient attention in the law.

Land Use, Inventory, Acquisition and Disposition

Is Section 7 on land use and inventory properly undertaken by the LGUs? Are the inventories updated every 3 years? Making an inventory of the government’s lands and transparency as regards this information is another important requisite of a government housing program.

Housing the homeless poor

Photo credit: Neen Sapalo

6 Vol. 2 No. 1 July 2015 7UPDATE Vol. 2 No. 1 July 2015

Basic services on resettlement areas

Section 21 states:SEC. 21. Basic Services. – Socialized housing or resettlement areas shall be provided by the local government unit or the National housing Authority in cooperation with the private developers and concerned agencies with the following basic services and facilities.a. Potable water;b. Power and electricity and an adequate power distribution system;c. Sewerage facilities and an efficient and adequate power distributionsystem; andd. Access to primary roads and transportation facilities.

The provision of other basic services and facilities such as health, education, communications, security, recreation, relief and welfare shall be planned and shall be given priority for implementation by the local government unit and concerned agencies in cooperation with the private sector and the beneficiaries themselves.

The local government unit, in coordination with the concerned national agencies, shall ensure that these basic services are provided at the most cost-efficient rates, and shall set a mechanism to coordinate operationally the thrusts, objectives and activities of other government agencies concerned with providing basic services to housing projects.

The above provision appears comforting at first glance until one wonders how this is going to be implemented. If the housing is undertaken by the LGU or the national government in cooperation with a private company, how will the government compel the private company to provide other basic services and facilities?

Implementation by the LGU – how and which LGU is to ensure that the other basic services are implemented?

Thus, I recommend the repeal of the UDHA for the following reasons: 1) The law is fatally defective as it lumped housing program into urban development;2) The law tasked the LGUs as the primary implementers when sources of funding are from the national or other agencies; 3) Funding allocation in Section 42 is volatile and fixed on fluctuating factors. This indicates lack of seriousness in addressing the housing problems;4) The law does not clarify how a database of beneficiaries will be created and no separate funding for this is allocated;5) The hidden intention of the law is to relocate or resettle urban informal settlers. Unfortunately, the program does not address and finance the development of resettlement

areas. So many questions and issues are left unanswered. There are no measures undertaken to ensure that the reset t lement areas will thrive as s u s t a i n a b l e communities of real people. Rather then housing the poor urban informal settlers, they are, as a result, viewed and treated as urban dysfunctions and are driven away from danger zones to death zones. This is a scheme that only promotes the cycle of migration and perpetuates wastage of taxpayers’ money. 6) The current practice by government agencies on housing and by the LGUs show that development is prioritized at the expense of the homeless poor. This is evidenced by the relentless demotion of communities in various cities and the occurrence of fires in these communities.7) I am unable to find self-executing sections in the law that will directly benefit the homeless poor;8) The law lacks the fundamentals of a successful housing program (according to me), as follows:a) Correct framework: Housing the poor is government’s primary obligation. The private sector’s participation may be tapped but main implementer should be the government. Any profit that the private sector wishes to derive should not be borne by the beneficiaries;b) Decent and affordable housing alone do not meet the criteria. In addition, decent and affordable housing should be located in communities that support the beneficiaries’ livelihood. Decent and affordable housing in places that sustain life;c) National agency implementer that will work hand in hand with the LGUs and not the other way around;d) Secure and fixed funding, sufficient enough to carry out, at least, the minimum target;e) Inventory of government lands and buildings; andf) Database of intended beneficiaries per LGU. Database must be maintained by a national agency in order to insulate it from political abuse.9) The law does not sufficiently explore other modes of housing the homeless poor. For example, even in industrialized countries, the focus is not on home ownership only. Public rental and the likes may be explored. 10) There is no penal provision for those who, in the guise of implementing the UDHA, are found to have violated the rights of the homeless and urban poor community settlers.

Housing the homeless poor

Photo credit: Interaksyon.com

The 4th session of the Urban Poor Study Group entitled “Filipino Urban Poor’s Right to the City I” was held on the 19th of June at the Ateneo de Manila University (AdMU). Professor Michael D. Pante, Chairperson of Ugnayan ng mga Makabayang Guro sa Ateneo (UMAGA), expressed his eagerness on activities like this, “We feel that discussions involving the academe and the concerned sectors are very productive and can encourage the formulation of practical solutions.”

Professor Chester Arcilla of the University of the Philippines (UP) – Manila stressed the main objective of the Group when he opened the session, “What we want to do is communicate concepts pertinent to the needs and struggles of the urban poor sector on one hand and provide a venue for people’s organizations immersed in poor communities to impart concrete experiences on the other hand. We can move things forward with the synthesis of the lessons from both parties involved.”

Two speakers from the Geography Department of the College of Social Sciences and Philosophy, UP Diliman were invited. The first lecturer, Dr. Arnisson Andre Ortega, shared a radical interpretation of Henri Lefebvre’s “Right to the City”. He noted that Lefebvre’s notion of ouvre or labor means working together to create urban spaces. Moreover, urban space is a space for heterogeneity. In poor countries like the Philippines, ouvre is eroded because of the dialectics of use and exchange value. Consequently, land has become an object of speculation. This has implications on property rights and the city as well as on the urban areas as politico-territorial entities.

Entitled “Food in the City”, Dr. Kristian Saguin showed cases on the cultivation of food in the city. This kind of production emerges from two trends. The first one is the need to provide food and green space in the cities with an emphasis on exchange value. The second one is the struggle of the urban poor to maintain control over their communities and their involvement in the production of urban space. Towards the end, he demonstrated how some urban poor communities collectively make decisions that

contribute to the Metro’s production of space. There were also some examples of inhabitants asserting their right to occupy and use produced space for subsistence.

The urban poor’s perceptions on their right to housing; their diminished role in the development of urban centers; how they are systematically disenfranchised in a multitude of ways; and how they advance their ‘right to the city’ were just some of the issues raised during the open forum. To close the study session, Dr. Ortega and CJ Changco handed school supplies for the Balik Eskwela program of the Kalipunan ng Damayang Mahihirap (KADAMAY). This would benefit the school children of Sitio San Roque, a community

that has been partially demolished. Professor Arcilla’s students also turned over copies of the Comprehensive Land Use Plans of the cities that comprise Metro Manila. “This is symbolic of the spirit of the Urban Poor Study Group. We can do research and the urban poor organizations can use the knowledge to advance campaigns against demolition, for instance,” Hannah Catiis, the representative of the class, noted.

Twenty-seven participants including a PhD candidate from the University of Sydney; graduate students of sociology, geography, political science; the Ecumenical Institute for Labor, Education, and Research (EILER); Anakpawis Partylist; and KADAMAY participated in the 4th session of the Urban Poor Study Group. This succeeds the 3rd session themed “Social Justice in the City: Towards Alternative Housing for the Poor.” In the previous session, Dr. Ernesto Serote of the School of Urban and Regional Planning (SURP) was invited.

If you are interested in joining the future sessions or if you have any inquiries, please don’t hesitate to get in touch with us at uprcp.inc@gmail.com.

4th urban poor study session co-sponsored with UMAGA tackles “Right to the City”

A new development agenda to replace the failed Millenium Development Goals (MDGs) promises a world free of poverty, hunger, disease, and want by 2030. Leaders of member states of the United Nations will once again gather for the UN Summit in September 2015 to adopt the Post-2015 Development Agenda, a set of seventeen Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and targets.

The new agenda pledges that nobody will be left behind. Could this be the end in sight for the suffering inflicted on the workers, farmers, and the world’s poor?

Millenium, sustainable development goals and the urban poor

The urban poor in the Philippines are confronted with problems of depressed wages, falling income, massive unemployment and underemployment, and price hikes.

Consequently, poor workers and the unemployed are pushed to live in slum areas in the cities. According to UN-Habitat, Asia has 60% of the world’s total slum population and many more live in slum-like conditions in areas that are officially designated as non-slums.

The existing condition of unequal distribution and inaccessibility of land in rural areas aggravate massive rural to urban migration through policies including land use conversion, land grabbing, and contracts for foreign monopolies.

In the context of accelerated globalization, urban poverty has worsened as decades of adherence to neoliberal policies continue. Even the so-called developing countries in the region are unable to create sufficient jobs and social services for their rapidly growing population. This is the end for the MDGs - a set of broken promises.

Now, the final draft of the outcome document for the UN Summit is seemingly comprehensive in form. However, the SDG, like its predecessor, is not only without flaws but fails to target the root causes of perennial urban and rural poverty.

This position of the UPRCP resonates with the Asia Pacific Regional Coordinating Engagement Mechanism’s (AP-RCEM) Political Declaration that recognizes globalization and the neoliberal development agenda as the cause of deep and entrenched inequalities of wealth; power and resources between countries; between rich and poor; and between men and women and other social groups. The

majority of the world’s population is still held hostage by systemic injustices and the long-standing problems of poverty, landlessness, unemployment, precarious employment conditions, environmental degradation, indebtedness, discrimination, and violence.

These UN processes in which the UPRCP engages in through the AP-RCEM platform have allowed the organization to give voice to the sector in such inter-governmental discourses. These have also led us to translate the technical UN language to one that is comprehensible for the grassroots.

For the urban poor, “sustainable” means available for all and lasting. Sustainability is addressing the root causes of poverty. In agricultural and pre-industrial countries like the Philippines, the root causes of poverty can be attributed to: 1. the existing condition of a failed land

reform that leads to unequal distribution and inaccessibility of land and underperformance of the different sectors in rural areas and 2. the backward and underdeveloped Filipino industry. Notably, the country relies on handicraft production, service economy, and informal economy as its own industries. These cannot sustain a viable and people-oriented national economy. On the onset however, big private corporations, mostly foreign-backed, seemingly soar high in key urban cities.

Road to perdition

The neoliberal economic policy imposed upon less developed countries has been exposed as unsustainable as early as the Asian financial crisis in 1997.Yet these so-called emerging markets that adhere to this Western-imposed economic policy continue to suffer from rising prices of imports, falling export prices, and ever-expanding debt burden.

Given free rein on the market and the limited role of states in monetary policies, accumulation of profits and private capital by the few monopoly capitalists has never been warrrantless. Workers wages are depressed and social spending constrained.

For as long as neoliberalism remains the dominant system in the world’s economic system, there will be no sustainable development that will benefit the world’s poor and resolve hunger and poverty.

Sustainable development goals: the road to 2030 under the neoliberal economic policy

UPRCP joins the AP-RCEM CSO Forum on Sustainable Development on May 2015 in Bangkok. The article was

presented during the Forum through several interventions and short presentations.

By: Myra Vieta G. Mabilin

10UPDATE Vol. 2 No. 1 July 2015

You want to clear Manila’s waterways?

Clear these firstBy: Pio Verzola, Jr.

You want to clear Manila’s waterways? Clear these first

The government of big landlord-big bourgeois scions Noynoy Aquino and Mar Roxas has recently announced a plan to clear Metro Manila’s waterways of some 20,000 informal settler families. Their reason is that urban poor shanties are a big (if not the biggest) factor in clogging these waterways and thus in worsening floods during the rainy season.

This has fanned the already raging fires of debate between those social sectors that hate the urban poor aka informal settlers aka squatters aka homeless poor aka scum of the earth, and those social sectors who support (or consider themselves part of) the urban poor and who believe that they are people with rights, not scum of the earth.

I will have more to say later about the points being debated by both sides. But for now, let me just focus on one simple question: What kinds of structures will be affected if we are truly serious and determined in declogging Metro Manila’s waterways? And since I don’t have the luxury of time to write a research tract on this subject, let me just focus on the very heartland of Manila that district that surrounds the old Spanish city called Intramuros.

Consider Map 1A, showing the area beyond the eastern ramparts of Intramuros now traversed by Taft Avenue (including Lagusnilad) and Padre Burgos and

overlooking Manila City Hall, the National Museum (the old Congress building). In 1898 and the early American period, the entire area was traversed by a complex tidewater creek called Canal de Balete and its tributaries.

Now let’s see how the area looks now, first in Google Map (Map 1B):

Notice that the original Canal de Balete has been drastically trimmed off. Its natural system of tributaries and runoff rivulets are now almost totally covered by concrete roads, the National Museum, the Manila City Hall, the Philippine Normal University, Hotel Indah Manila (formerly YMCA), and surprise SM City Manila. The surviving Estero de Balete a zombie of its old self despite efforts at rehabilitation remains a stagnant and stinking dark-gray cesspool in the dry season, and a slow-flowing and greenish cesspool that doesn’t fully flush its detritus in the rainy season. Should we look far and wide for reasons why? Should we look far and wide for reasons, too, whenever we see Lagusnilad turn into an Olympic-size swimming pool during heavy downpours? I don’t think so.

Map 1 B

MAP 1A. Waterways such as creeks and esteros crisscrossed the very heartland of Manila until the early American period. This shows the Manila City Hall area in an old Spanish map circa 1898.

Map 1 C

And next in Google Earth (Map 1C):

10 Vol. 2 No. 1 July 2015 11UPDATE Vol. 2 No. 1 July 2015

You want to clear Manila’s waterways? Clear these first

“Clear the waterways” ba kamo? Umpisahan kaya natin sa mga istrukturang ito na bumabara sa daloy ng tubig sa pinaka-pusod ng Maynila.

Want to see another example? Let’s proceed southbound along Taft Avenue. This time, let’s inspect the current maps of this particular section of the famous Ermita district, Map 2A (a screen capture from Google Earth) and Map 2B (from Google Maps):

Now carefully compare these maps with their equivalent section in the old 1898 map. Notice that this other major tributary of Canal de Balete flows downstream northwest-ward, roughly parallel and to the west of what is now Taft Avenue. The swampy ox-bow loop of the waterway in the upper-left corner of the old map is now covered by the Teodoro Valencia (formerly Agrifina) Circle and the Rizal Park’s giant relief map.

Following the waterway upstream, we see that it ran southeast between what is now Manila Doctors Hospital and the towering Times Plaza near UN Avenue’s LRT station, then right smack into the World Health Organization. After that, the now-lost waterway would

have cut across the NBI and Supreme Court compounds, exited in the vicinity of the Philippine General Hospital, and farther on would have ran along some length of Taft Avenue all the way to Herran. At that point it would have extended into a small creek and rivulets in the vicinity of the Philippine Christian University and the Philippine Women’s University.

That waterway through the Taft-Ermita area is now lost, perhaps replaced by gutters, culverts and drainage mains, all underground and easily clogged by garbage from the big universities, office buildings, shops and restaurants in the area. Move along now, folks, no urban poor squatters to blame here.

So, I ask again, “clear the waterways” ba kamo? Umpisahan kaya natin sa mga istrukturang ito na bumabara sa daloy ng tubig sa pinaka-pusod ng Maynila.

I haven’t had time to double-check the paths of all other late 19th-century and early 20th-century waterways in and around Manila. But it’s almost certain that a tributary and confluence of the Estero de Bilibid (now disappeared), which more than a hundred years ago ran in front of the Presidio y Carcel Publica in Spanish times (now Manila City Jail), are now covered partly by Lerma St., partly by the Quezon Boulevard along the Recto underpass-overpass area, and partly by the Far Eastern University Campus. Upstream, this same Estero de Bilibid tributary ran roughly along what is now España Boulevard.

Sections of the complex Estero de San Miguel, now either lost or drastically constricted, have given way to commercial buildings, some industries, universities, and old residential neighborhoods (mostly middle-class, interspersed with slum housing) from eastern Quiapo and San Sebastian to Tanduay and San Miguel. A couple of big commercial properties have practically smothered estero sections that run through (or under) them, although Adamson University takes pride in its estero rehabilitation program. I haven’t even talked about the buried, dead, and dying esteros of the Binondo and Sta. Cruz-Quiapo business districts.

So, again, “clear the waterways” ba kamo? Umpisahan kaya natin sa mga istrukturang ito na bumabara sa daloy ng tubig sa pinaka-pusod ng Maynila?

Map 2 A

Map 2 B

12UPDATE Vol. 2 No. 1 July 2015

I wrote this blog piece in July 2013, at the height of the Aquino government’s campaign to clear Metro Manila waterways of their informal-settler communities, estimated at 100,000 families living as “squatters” near or on top of the waterways. “We are targeting 20,000 of them to be cleared and relocated in 2013,” said a DILG official in October 2013.

The main justifications invoked by the government in demolishing the homes of informal-settler families (ISFs) along waterways are that: (a) they are living in dangerous (geohazard) zones susceptible to floods and earthquakes; and (b) they are major pollutants and cause of waterway clogging because of lack of proper sewerage and waste disposal.

The government also invokes other arguments applicable to non-waterway ISF communities, such as (c) they are squatting on private land that the owner wants cleared, or on public land that the government needs for other uses; and (d) these ISFs are better off in any case if they move to relocation sites.

Epilogue to “You want to clear Manila’s waterways? Clear these first.”

“You want to clear Manila’s waterways?”

Now I’ll be honest with you. I don’t really wish that these venerable buildings and thoroughfares are demolished. Many of these structures are of historical value and of continuing social service to the public. Instead of demolishing them, maybe we are better off to just carefully study and implement alternative ways of improving Metro Manila’s drainage system without majorly disrupting the city’s normal day-to-day life.

But if this callous government would insist on demolishing entire “squatter” communities and uprooting 20,000 urban poor families who have nowhere else to go (except maybe pour into the streets in mass protests if not into hills to join the NPA), then may I respectfully suggest that we start the demolition campaign by targeting some of these choice structuralculprits, sitting pretty right in the heartland of Manila.

Map 2 C

The defect with these arguments is that they are good on paper but highly dubious if not outright fallacious in reality.

On the “geohazard” argument: It is true that many Filipinos—and not just informal settlers—live in geohazard zones. But why does the government pick on urban poor communities for relocation, but allow oil storage facilities along Pasig River, or big schools like Ateneo and Marian along the West Valley Fault? So many indigenous villages are situated on what the government classifies as landslide-prone zones, and yet they are able to cope through such simple indigenous and collectively implemented methods as riprapping, vegetative sloping, and self-relocation. In short, the solution (in most cases) is not to relocate entire communities, but to improve on-site infrastructure to minimize if not totally eliminate the said geohazards.

If the law is meant to harass rather than protect people’s rights, then I insist on equal harassment under the law.

12 Vol. 2 No. 1 July 2015 13UPDATE Vol. 2 No. 1 July 2015

“You want to clear Manila’s waterways?”

On the “pollution and clogging” argument: This isn’t supported by hard data that quantifies the real sources of solid and liquid waste being disposed on Metro Manila watherways. It is merely premised on some statistics showing the bigger lack of toilets and private sewage facilities among urban poor communities. Again, why does the government single out these communities, when the pollution, garbage, and clogged-drainage problems are metro-wide, have complex chains of sources and causes (including big industrial and commercial operations) and ultimately goes back to government shortcomings in public utilities and infrastructure? Again, the solution (in most cases) is not to relocate entire communities, but to improve general metropolitan services and on-site infrastructure in urban poor communities.

I could write a long separate article on the “ownership and land-use” argument, but it isn’t just pro-urban poor rights advocates who have become very critical of the government’s extreme bias in favor of private land ownership and privately-initiated real estate development, while being remiss in its commitment and duty to maximizing public use (including an expanded program of public mass housing and security of tenure) for public lands.

On the “relocation” argument: Much has already been written about the government’s relocation programs that are so promising on paper but disappointing in reality, and need not be repeated here. Throughout the world, among policy makers, there is now much rethinking about urban planning approaches in favor of on-site development, not relocation. Clearly, what the country needs is a comprehensive program of socio-economic development that allows for a broad and balanced approach to solving the problem of urban housing and urban congestion.

Such a program must give the highest attention to genuine land reform and national industrialization—the first if only to rebalance migration from the over-congested cities back to revitalized rural areas, and the second to provide livelihood to the millions who live in the cities and other non-agricultural areas. Only in that context can we better plan the location and shape of urban communities in ways that foster social justice, equality, and sustainability.

Kung gaano kalaki ang dadambungin na higanteng tubo ay ganoon din katindi ang pasistang atake sa maralita at mamamayan. Walang puwang ang mga maralitang lungsod sa inaasam nilang ‘pag-unlad’ kaya nabubuo ang mga kuntsabahan sa pagitan ng mga kinauukulan at mga malalaking negosyo. Sa ganitong paraan, nagiging ligal ang paggamit ng dahas upang palayasin ang mga maralitang lungsod sa kanilang komunidad at pinagkukunan ng kabuhayan.

Ito ay nakababahala. Ayon sa tala ng Kalipunan ng Damayang Mahihirap (KADAMAY), umabot na sa 16 lider-maralita ang pinaslang sa limang taong panunungkulan ni Noynoy. Tuloy-tuloy din ang panggigipit at harassment sa mga maralitang lungsod na lumalaban.

‘Di pagagapi

Matindi man ang dinadanas, nagagawa pa rin ng mga maralitang lungsod na igpawan at mangibabaw sa sitwasyon. Sa gitna ng papatinding kahirapan, patuloy ang kanilang pagpupunyagi para sa kanilang karapatan sa nakabubuhay na sahod, disente at regular na trabaho, serbisyong panlipunan o kahit sa simpleng usapin na mabuhay ng marangal sa bansa.

Nababalitaan natin ang laganap na mga pagkilos ng mga manggagawa na malaking bahagi ng maralitang lungsod. Mula sa pakikipagnegosasyon para sa dagdag-sahod at benepisyo, pagsasampa ng mga kaso laban sa mga kumpanyang nagpapatupad ng kontraktwalisyon, at iligal na pagtatanggal sa trabaho hanggang sa pagtatayo ng picketIine at pagkakasa ng mga welga.

Makasaysayan ang ginawang pagharang at pagpigil ng mga residente ng Sitio San Roque sa marahas na pagpapaalis sa kanila ng gobyerno at Ayala. Hanggang sa kasalukuyan, halos kalahati pa ng populasyon ng Sitio San Roque ang nakatirik pa rin ang mga bahay. Patuloy ang kanilang pagdedepensa para sa kanilang karapatan sa paninirahan. Nagsilbi itong ehemplo ng sama-samang pagkilos ng mga komunidad na kumakaharap sa pwersahang pagpapalayas at demolisyon.

Bilang bahagi ng lipunan, mahalagang balikan kung paano hinuhubog ng mayorya ang kasaysayan. Sa ganitong konteksto, ano ba ang maiaambag natin para makatulong sa pag-angat mula sa kahirapan at sa tunay na pag-unlad ng lipunan na pakikinabangan ng lahat?

Editoryal (Continued from page 2)

As a tribute to the life and times of urban poor sector icon Carmen “Nanay Mameng” Deunida, the Urban Poor Resource Center of the Philippines, Inc. (UPRCP) and Kalipunan ng Damayang Mahihirap (KADAMAY) staged “Nanay Mameng, isang dula” in March 2014 and February 2015.

The play was about Nanay Mameng’s struggles from her childhood during the Second World War to her married life and to the present - having witnessed 13 Presidents elected into office and yet, in her own words, “wala pa ring pagbabago” (Nothing has changed).

The 2014 play was written by Amanda Echanis. It was directed by independent dance and theater artist Edwin Quinsayas and professional theater artist and musician Noel Taylo. Staged at Tanghalang PUP (Polytechnic University of the Philippines), it was a big production with a cast of more than 40 artists from different organizations. It had three shows and generated an audience of about 2,100.

It happens one day as Nanay Mameng prepares for a speech in a tribute event that her comrades are setting up for her and then, she gets visited by her conscience - five different characters representing her in different times of her life. They help her revisit her life. These recollections show how greatly she has influenced the urban poor sector and how important her contributions to the ongoing struggles are. The whole play was a spectacle of song and dance numbers culminating in one big “rally” showing Nanay Mameng at the center.

In that first staging, Nanay Mameng was played by veteran stage and screen actress, Ermie Concepcion with support from musician Tao Aves, human rights defender Loy Villarias, stage actress Alexx Yuaga, development worker Lei Calvo, and youth activist Aila Bathan. Artists from Sinagbayan, Sining Kadamay, Tambisan sa Sining, SIKLAB, TABAKK, Pentagon Workers Union, KARATULA, Musicians for Peace, and Art Action Network also lent their support. Filmmakers Adjani Arumpac and Brandon Relucio with musician RJ Mabilin, Gerone Centeno, and Hiyas Bagabaldo were in charge of the play’s videos. Acclaimed lights designer Katsch Catoy helmed the technical direction and lights design along with Kristine Malagueno.

The success of the first staging led to another run this year at Miriam College’s Little Theater. Once again collaborating with Art Action Network, UPRCP and KADAMAY produced an entirely different play, in terms of form and staging concept. Using expressionistic and magical-realism, this year’s play had only eight characters on stage and was bereft of big production numbers. Instead, it dealt more introspectively into the life of Nanay Mameng and connected it to the different issues of the urban

Urban poor sector pays tribute to beloved icon via “Nanay Mameng, isang dula”

poor sector - landlessness, j ob le s sness , low wages, eviction, health and education, among others.

It starts with Nanay M a m e n g waking up in her hospital bed after her brain surgery in 2013. After she wakes

up, she meets a creature, “Sakit”, who represents her disease and embodies the cancer of society. Throughout the play, they battle it out on the stage that transforms from a hospital room into different milieus, depending on the realities of Nanay Mameng and “Sakit”.

Once again directed by Quinsayas and Taylo, written by a pool of writers led by Echanis, and lit by Catoy and Malagueno, it is top billed by union organizer and first-time actress Tess Dioquino (Nanay Mameng) and Tao Aves (younger Mameng) with stage actors Eshei Mesina and Jennifer Dabu playing the role of “Sakit”. Sheryl Ceasico, Nel Estuya, Alexis Betito, cultural workers Ryan Murillo, Jojo Zerrudo and Jane Balleta completed the cast.

Also in the creative pool is visual artist Rowena Bayon from UP Multisectoral Alliance taking charge of the the production design. Anino Shadow Play Collective’s Toni Muñoz did the sound design. Musicians Tony Palis and Karl Ramirez composed and arranged the theme “Awit kay Virgilio”, which was written by Quinsayas and Terence Lopez.

With 3,000 people in attendance, this year’s staging proceeds went to Nanay Mameng’s continuing medication and UPRCP’s services in urban poor communities. The play also plans to have a community tour.

UPRCP and KADAMAY note that the success of the play is much owed to the overwhelming support and solidarity from organizations outside the sector - the peasants, workers, students, academe, church, artists,

government employees, health workers, and even government agencies.

The play was in partnership with Miriam College’s Sanggunian ng mga Mag-aaral ng Miriam (Miriam

College Student Council) and the College’s volunteerism arm Institutional Network for Social Action (INSA). It was supported by the National

Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA), Council for Health and Development (CHD), Confederation for Unity, Recognition and Advancement of General Employees (COURAGE), and in part by the United

Church of Christ in the Philippines (UCCP) and Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PhilHealth).

By: Terence Krishna Lopez

Cinemaralita goes to PUP. Prof. Belly Ygot, Director of Polytechnic Uni-

versity of the Philippines’ University Center for Culture and the Arts (PUP UCCA), talks about art and protest at the CineMaralita Film Fest at Tangha-

lang PUP on Jan. 27.

Solidarity with the workers. Tanduay workers from Tanggulan Ugnayang Daluyang Lakas ng Anakpawis

sa Tanduay Distillers Inc. (TUDLA) wait for the screening of ‘Ka Bel’ on June 27.

Urban Poor Study Group III. Dr. Ernesto Serote, from the School of Urban and Regional Planning (SURP), UP Diliman, gave a lecture

on Alternative Housing for the Filipino Urban Poor on April 27.

Studying outside the university. On May 9, students from UP Manila in a study tour listen to a resident

of Sitio San Roque as she tackles the present situation of their community.

Luis D. Clarin, UPRCP’s Executive Director, closes the Cinemaralita leg at the Tanduay picket line by linking the issues and campaigns of the workers and the urban poor

on June 27.

UPRCP’s Previous Event

UPRCP WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE CONTRIBUTORS FOR THEIR ARTICLES

Prof. Chester Arcilla Mr. Edsa ManlapazMs. Myan Lordiane Odulio Ms. Cristina Ponce

San Jose Manggagawa Printing Press

ATTY. ALNIE G. FOJAAtty. Alnie Foja earned her Juris Doctor from Ateneo de Manila School of Law after graduating with a degree in Political Science at the University of the Philippines, Diliman. She is the legal consultant of Gabriela Partylist Representative Emmi de Jesus and the UP Gender Office. Aside from running Foja Law Office, she is affiliated with the Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law, and Development (APWLD) and the National Union of People’s Lawyers (NUPL).

PIO VERZOLA, JR.Pio Verzola, Jr. is a seasoned activist and media practitioner having established Northern Dispatch, a weekly based in Baguio, and Radio Sagada. He was the head of the Policy and Communications Department of IBON International from 2011 to July 2015. He does research and provides services to NGOs with his experience in internet mapping, archiving, and database management.

WE WOULD ALSO LIKE TO THANK THE FOLLOWING FOR THEIR ASSISTANCE:

Cinemaralita goes to PUP. Prof. Belly Ygot, Director of Polytechnic Uni-

versity of the Philippines’ University Center for Culture and the Arts (PUP UCCA), talks about art and protest at the CineMaralita Film Fest at Tangha-

lang PUP on Jan. 27.

Solidarity with the workers. Tanduay workers from Tanggulan Ugnayang Daluyang Lakas ng Anakpawis

sa Tanduay Distillers Inc. (TUDLA) wait for the screening of ‘Ka Bel’ on June 27.

Urban Poor Study Group III. Dr. Ernesto Serote, from the School of Urban and Regional Planning (SURP), UP Diliman, gave a lecture

on Alternative Housing for the Filipino Urban Poor on April 27.

Studying outside the university. On May 9, students from UP Manila in a study tour listen to a resident

of Sitio San Roque as she tackles the present situation of their community.

Luis D. Clarin, UPRCP’s Executive Director, closes the Cinemaralita leg at the Tanduay picket line by linking the issues and campaigns of the workers and the urban poor

on June 27.

UPRCP’s Previous Event

UPRCP WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE CONTRIBUTORS FOR THEIR ARTICLES

Prof. Chester Arcilla Mr. Edsa ManlapazMs. Myan Lordiane Odulio Ms. Cristina Ponce

San Jose Manggagawa Printing Press

ATTY. ALNIE G. FOJAAtty. Alnie Foja earned her Juris Doctor from Ateneo de Manila School of Law after graduating with a degree in Political Science at the University of the Philippines, Diliman. She is the legal consultant of Gabriela Partylist Representative Emmi de Jesus and the UP Gender Office. Aside from running Foja Law Office, she is affiliated with the Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law, and Development (APWLD) and the National Union of People’s Lawyers (NUPL).

PIO VERZOLA, JR.Pio Verzola, Jr. is a seasoned activist and media practitioner having established Northern Dispatch, a weekly based in Baguio, and Radio Sagada. He was the head of the Policy and Communications Department of IBON International from 2011 to July 2015. He does research and provides services to NGOs with his experience in internet mapping, archiving, and database management.

WE WOULD ALSO LIKE TO THANK THE FOLLOWING FOR THEIR ASSISTANCE:

Sjmm Printing Center57 P. Burgos Marilag Project 4, Quezon City

Tel : (02) 961-5691 | Email : sjmmpc@gmail.com