To settle the perennial debate on what should be prioritized more—food security or housing—a member of the House minority bloc on Monday pushed for the immediate passage of the proposed National Land Use Act (NLUA).
Liberal Party Rep. Teddy Brawner Baguilat Jr. of Ifugao made the statement amid conflicting views on the land-conversion moratorium being pushed by the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR).
“There is no debate actually. Both food and shelter are important for our people’s survival if only we carefully plan the use of our resources as a nation and as an ecosystem, and not just at the local government level,” Baguilat said.
“But we do need to determine where and which of our 14 million alienable and disposable lands classified as agricultural would be more suitable for food production or as built-up areas for housing, urban expansion and infrastructure,” he added.
Earlier, Vice President Maria Leonor G. Robredo, Budget Secretary Benjamin E. Diokno, Finance Secretary Carlos G. Dominguez III, Trade Secretary Ramon M. Lopez and Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Ernesto M. Pernia submitted a position paper to Malacañang asking President Duterte not to endorse the moratorium on land conversion, saying this will only delay housing projects. Baguilat expressed apprehension that if the 2-percent growth rate of the country’s population continues, 142 million Filipinos may be fighting for food and water by 2045 if natural resources are not currently protected and conserved.
With the increase in population, the lawmaker said the demand for housing will also multiply. “While it may be true more built-up areas will be needed to cater to the housing needs of Filipinos these areas may not necessarily come from the remaining 4 million prime agricultural lands planted to rice and corn across the country,” Baguilat said.
“These 4 million hectares are merely part of the 14 million hectares of the total alienable and disposable lands generally classified as agricultural, meaning not public lands or forest areas. Therefore, it is vital that appropriate land-use planning should be done in the whole country to determine the land allocation for settlements without compromising our remaining rice and corn lands,” he added.
According to Baguilat, the moratorium for conversion is just a reiteration of the DAR’s mandate to protect prime agricultural lands under the comprehensive agrarian-reform law. “It is imperative to determine the amount of land local governments have actually reclassified to nonagricultural. Based on Section 20 of the Local Government Code, LGUs [local government units] are only allowed to reclassify 5 percent of their agricultural land for non-agricultural purposes,” Baguilat said. Citing a study of environmental planner Dr. Elmer Mercado on the rate of conversion in Rizal province from 2002 to 2012, Baguilat noted the “dramatic increase” of built-up areas, including settlements, in the towns of Antipolo, Baras, San Mateo, Rodriguez and Tanay.
In Antipolo alone, Baguilat said built-up areas surged from 1,193.21 hectares in 2002 to 6,999.27 hectares in 2012, or 487 percent.
Meanwhile arable lands planted to cereals fell from 3,551.90 hectares to a mere 284.72 hectares and open canopy forests dropped from 2,527.22 hectares to 746.32 hectares, he added. “One only need to go to Antipolo to confirm such a conversion rate of forests and arable areas. Since it is near Mega Manila, this urban expansion may be expected. But we are losing even our critical watersheds and ricelands fast to this kind of urban demand,” Baguilat said.
Moreover, he said, other provinces once branded as the rice bowls of the country, like Laguna, Bulacan, and even Nueva Ecija, are losing their prime agricultural lands too fast to conversion.
“I also have doubts on whether the housing units constructed from these conversions really did cater to the majority of the population who still have no permanent residency or nowhere to live at all,” Baguilat said.
If the NLUA is passed, Baguilat said this will compel the whole country to determine what areas need to be protected for long-term use and which are more appropriate for other or multiple uses.
“It has been languishing in Congress for the past 23 years already. It almost passed in the 15th Congress but was questioned in the Senate. This 17th Congress, I do hope there will be more support for the passage of this bill,” he said.
The current version of the NLUA in the 17th Congress was recently passed at the committee level in the House of Representatives.
Baguilat, one of the authors of the bill, said the measure recognizes the need and proposes for a rational, holistic and just allocation, utilization, management and development of the country’s land.