Is the Laguna Lake Development Authority (LLDA) becoming an ironic oxymoron? When it was created in 1966 by virtue of Republic Act No. 4850, LLDA was tasked to “carry out the development of the Laguna Lake region with due regard and adequate provisions for environmental management and control, preservation of the quality of human life and ecological systems, and the prevention of undue ecological disturbances, deterioration and pollution.” But it now appears that the opposite is happening. Not only has Laguna de Bay worsened throughout the years, it seems that the very government agency tasked to solve the problem has grown cold to efforts both by local government units and the private sector to address the issue of flooding in communities near the lake. Meanwhile, residents living near Laguna de Bay face the prospect of spending Christmas and New Year submerged in knee-deep waters as the continued run-off from the rivers surrounding the lake strain its capacity.
Congressional hearings
This is just one of the many factors that were discussed during a recent hearing convened by the House Committee on Southern Tagalog Development led by 2nd District Representative Ramil Hernandez on November 24.
The hearing, attended by Biñan City Mayor Arman Dimaguila, Calamba City Representative Cha Hernandez, and Santa Rosa City Mayor Roy Gonzales, centered on the urgent need for action on Laguna Lake, which has breached its critical high threshold of 12.50 meters last July.
Since then, water levels at the lake have continued to rise to 13 meters this November, putting communities living near the lake at even greater hardship.
No piecemeal solutions
During the hearing, Laguna representatives pressed the urgency of crafting a “comprehensive policy framework” that will finally put an end to Lagunenses’ flooding woes.
“Hindi na pwede ang ‘business as usual’ approach. Hindi na pwede ang pira-pirasong solutions… We need to review all existing flood-control projects, we need to determine once and for all if dredging spillways or smart tunnels are viable and environment-friendly solutions,” Hernandez said in his opening message.
Dimaguila, himself a proponent of dredging Laguna de Bay itself, added that local government units (LGUs) along Laguna de Bay will be powerless to act on the problem unless there is a concerted effort by national government agencies to resolve the issue.
"Alam namin ang problema. It's about time for the national government to address this problem. Either be it dredging or spillway. Magiging acceptable sa amin as long as we could present our constituents ng isang komprehensibong pag-aaral at tamang solusyon para maiwasan ang pagbaha dulot ng pag-swell ng Laguna Lake,” he said.
Catching up with urbanization
One of the chief resource persons at the hearing was renowned urban architect Felino “Jun” Palafox, who for years had (unsuccessfully) pressed successive administrations to craft long-term programs that will ensure that the development of Metro Manila and its suburbs will not come at the expense of environmental protection and the safety of its residents.
Palafox lamented that many of the programs and projects he had submitted to the government to solve the perennial problem of flooding in Metro Manila had fallen on deaf ears.
“We're not in implementation. Analysis paralysis, I think, [as well as] lack of political will and visionary leadership,” was how he put it.
Increasing capacity
One of the major solutions proposed by Palafox is increasing the lake’s capacity to address the issue of flooding.
Responding to a question by Representative Dimaguila, Palafox expressed his support to proposals to dredge the lake, along with other long-term solutions such as the Parañaque Spillway Project.
While some officials had claimed that such a proposal to dredge the lake will entail huge costs for the government, the urban architect saw billions more lost in wasted economic opportunities and hardships brought by the flooding.
“We should do a cost-benefit analysis. We lost a lot of opportunities. We should also do a beneficiary-sufferer analysis. How many poor people have suffered, ano'ng cost ng human lives by not doing those,” Palafox explained.
Self-defeating?
So why is the LLDA hell-bent in opposing plans to dredge the lake?
It should be noted that in its social media posts, LLDA officials claim that dredging the lake itself is a “self-defeating” tactic as the space left behind by dredging will immediately be filled with water and silt.
“Ang LLDA ay sumusuporta sa 'targeted dredging', ang i-prayoridad ang mga lugar na talagang barado o masyadong mababaw o makipot tulad ng river mouths, deltas, waterways, at mismong outlet. Sa mga lugar na ito, ang dredging ay nakakatulong sa daloy at sirkulasyon ng tubig at nakakabuti sa water quality ng lawa,” one particular social media post read out.
Which, by the way, is what exactly San Miguel Corporation (SMC) is doing through its Better Rivers PH initiative in at least three major rivers in Laguna. The effort started in 2023 and SMC has pledged to expand it to all waterways in Laguna.
One glimmer of an answer can be found in the official statement of LLDA officials who attended the hearing: “Naka-design po ang Laguna Lake Development Authority as an income generating agency, wala tayong budget na ina-allot ang national government to finance large infrastructure projects. Kaya nga po yung mga big-ticket projects ngayon ay idinadaan po sa LLDA board for approval.”
Given the recent revelations of billions in pesos that were wasted on substandard or even ghost flood-control projects, one cannot help but wonder whether certain officials of the LLDA were also complicit in the large-scale robbery of public funds.
#WeTakeAStand #OpinYon #OpinYonCoverStory #LLDA #SMC