Who is to blame for the floods wrought by last week’s monsoon rains? There is no shortage of possible culprits. Some point to informal settlers who have no choice but to set up their shanties in “dangerous” locales, such as creeks, estero, waterways and shorelines. They thus become the first victims of any natural calamity, while at the same time are blamed for causing the flooding in the first place because of the congestion they create and their heedless garbage disposal habits.
Others point to the lack of solid waste management, so that garbage and the other detritus of modern life—I’ve spotted old sofas, broken-down appliances, household pets and even a decrepit vehicle or two among the piles of waste washed away by the floods—which clog waterways and drains.
Fingers point as well to local government officials and national agencies, including the MMDA, the DPWH, housing agencies, the DENR—for lack of foresight and planning. This is especially true in the design and construction of flood mitigation projects, which people have been talking about for nearly 50 years (how long have we been paying a “flood control tax” when we watch movies, and how much has been raised?) but for which little has been shown.
Neither has the private sector—especially developers of housing projects and real-estate ventures—been blameless. Studies have shown private developments encroaching on waterways, if not built atop them. Many subdivisions have likewise been located in flood basins, swamps, mangrove forests and other land features designed by nature as catchment areas for the overflow from rivers and seas. Builders have even put up housing developments on the slopes of mountains and hills, with inadequate provisions for preventing erosion and resulting landslides.
The obvious answer, of course, is that all of them—us—are guilty, and have contributed one way or another to the flooding and other weather-related calamities which have disrupted, if not destroyed, the lives of hundreds if not thousands, of Filipinos.
* * *
But as the saying goes, if “everyone” is responsible, then “no one” will take responsibility, because “someone else” will be blamed.
Which is why I applaud the action of MMDA Chair Francis Tolentino, for putting on “floating” status the chief of the flood mitigation office. This was mainly for neglecting to ensure that there was enough gasoline to make the flood pumps run, and neglecting to run the pumps of an underpass, causing it to flood.
In his defense, the flood mitigation chief said his was merely a custodial duty and the gasoline tankers could not make it through the flooded streets. But isn’t one of the responsibilities of a manager that of anticipating eventualities? Shouldn’t he have ordered the back-up supply of gasoline to run the pumps with the first reports of heavy rainfall? Why wait until the streets are flooded before making sure your facility will do what it has been designed for?
Why can’t other officials follow this example? Who allowed all those informal settlers to build along important channels that make sure floodwaters flow from our cities to Laguna Lake and Manila Bay? If not the mayor, then what about the barangay chairmen who tolerated what was happening under their very noses? (They may even have been among the settlers themselves.) What about those responsible for issuing building permits and monitoring the waterways and structures like the Manggahan floodway?
Who will point the necessary fingers and file the charges?
* * *
In our e-mail group at TOWNS (The Outstanding Women in the Nation’s Service), there’s been a very interesting exchange of opinions on the ultimate causes of last week’s floods.
Let me just cite one particular exchange. Mel Alonzo, now on the board of the Bases Conversion and Development Authority, opined that: “If only our local officials would be vigilant in not allowing informal settlers in the danger zones such as the river banks where there are no facilities for waste disposal, we would have less deaths and garbage blocking the drainage system.
“Until the local officials look beyond these settlers as captive voters this problem will persist. And yet it is within their authority and responsibility to prevent the construction of informal housing in these dangerous areas.”
“I agree with you Mel,” replied oceanographer Laura David, pointing out that we could still work out a “win-win situation” among informal settlers, the government and the public at large.
“If the politicians built proper safe housing options for the informal settlers we will have a safer populace and they (politicians) can still win their votes.
“I think a common misconception is that the informal settlements are rent-free. In reality, these families still pay rent to ‘land-lords’ anywhere from a few hundred to a few thousand a month.
“They also pay electricity since they all have Meralco kuntadors (meters) and they pay a much higher water bill than those attached to MWSS since they pay by the balde (pail) or by the number of minutes they use to fill up their own containers. Families can spend for water up to four times that of a typical middle-class family. It’s actually expensive to be poor in Manila. But this also means that these families do have the capacity to pay.
“If municipalities (would only) use less money for basketball courts and useless posters and focus these resources on medium-rise, low-cost housing, I think Manila (and other cities) would be so much better (off).”
To my knowledge, these are just off-the-cuff observations of concerned women, moved to comment on recent events, but based on scholarship, experience and observation. What do more knowledgeable authorities have to say?