World Habitat – A Call for Decent Housing

 Urban Poor Associates

25-A Mabuhay Street, Brgy. Central, Q.C.          Telefax: 4264118          Tel.: 4264119 / 4267615

Ref:  Princess Asuncion      Mobile phone: 0908 1967450     http://urbanpoorassociates.blogspot.com/

** NEWS RELEASE *** NEWS RELEASE *** NEWS RELEASE *** NEWS RELEASE **

About five hundred urban poor assembled today in Anda Circle, Bonifacio drive at 5PM to celebrate world habitat month. The group with their colorful placards calling for decent housing marched to the Ninoy and Cory Aquino monument in Padre Burgos Street, Roxas Boulevard.

The Task Force Anti-Eviction composed of various people’s organizations and NGOs such as the Urban Poor Associates (UPA) and Community Organizers Multiversity (COM) said the Ninoy and Cory monument is a reminder to everyone to help the poorest of the poor of our country through mass actions to support a call for decent and affordable housing in the city.

TFAE together with the people held a small program at the monument. Some of them rendered songs and dances. At 7PM, 500 people all together lit the candles that brighten the night. They read a statement that encourages everyone to participate in promoting adequate housing a priority.

The group also prayed that the government help in the rehabilitation of the communities and to provide mass housing to the thousands victims of disasters in Bohol and arm conflicts in Zamboanga.

Jeorgie Tenolete, president of Kabalikat in Baseco, Tondo, said, “Our community in Baseco has been long proclaimed but without the help of civil society it would not be able to survive threats of demolition. We are asking the government to implement the Baseco Development Plan to show its sincerity.”

 

“We also asked our authorities to ensure that our brother and sisters who suffered from calamity and war may not just get aid but safe and affordable housing, Tenolete added”

UPA data shows that there are 100,000 families living on waterways that are threatened of eviction.

Liza Condino, COM community organizer of fisher folk in Laguna Lake said, “the government plans of building a dike-road around the lake has a good intention to avoid flooding in the lake side, but it will cause the relocation of 45,000 families in far areas.”

Condino reiterated that they do not oppose the flood control project but it is important the government involve the people in planning the project and to explain to them that a massive moving of people will do tremendous harm to families. She wants to secure that the families can decide their own future.

TFAE also demanded that the President hasten the implementation of the covenant he signed with the urban poor on March 6, 2010 at Del Pan Sports Complex.

Ricardo Narcilla, president of United Chrislam along the waterway of Estero De San Miguel, urged the President to fast track the four on-site housing projects in Estero De San Miguel, Quiapo and San Sebastian.

Narcilla added, “Our neighbors, about 88 families, were already demolished. We fear that we will also be evicted if the housing project will not be started within the year. We know that our president hands are full, but we needed him for the implementation of the project.”

TFAE is also lobbying for the House Bill No. 2791 filed by 16 congressmen lead by COOP-NATTCO Representative Cresente Paez. It seeks to amend several sections of UDHA to strengthen the protected right of every Filipino to a decent home, and provide sanctions upon those who violate the mandate of the law.

-30-

Want to know what to do about slum dwellers? Try listening to them

Poverty Matters Blog
Guardian.co.uk
The Filipino government wants to move half a million Manila slum dwellers back to the countryside. Yet they left for a reason

The Filipino government claims it would cost about a third of the national budget to rehouse Manila's slum dwellers. Photograph: Jay Directo/AFP/Getty Images
If you have access to BBC output, I strongly recommend a programme and article about slums, aired on radio and television last week. You will be taken on a tour of a slum in Manila, learn about some of the people who live there, and hear what experts think about the future of slums.

Slums are without doubt a huge development issue. According to the programme, as many as a billion people live in them today, a number set to double by 2050. Manila is growing by 60 people an hour, making it the fastest growing city on the planet. In comparison, Indian cities are growing by about 40 people an hour, while London's rate is seven people an hour.

Anyone who has worked with people living in slums will recognise the vivacity and can-do attitude that pervades the programme (which is not to romanticise very difficult, dirty and often violent conditions).

Their programme offered many lessons, but I particularly heeded the one my colleague Claire Melamed constantly highlights – the importance of listening to poor people about what they want. It is unusual to get such a long look at the lives of slum dwellers from their own perspective.

The main issue is the insecurity of land – they have no right to be where they are. The Filipino government wants to move half a million slum dwellers back to the countryside.

But there are good reasons people have left the land they have lived on for generations to seek a better life in precarious wooden shacks next to rubbish tips. A combination of conflict, climate change (slum dwellers claim there are more typhoons and floods in rural areas) and chronic poverty makes life in the countryside unbearable. There are no jobs. Meanwhile, in the slum, we hear of people graduating from university and seeing real prospects for the next generation.

The only sustainable way to repopulate the countryside is to provide opportunities there. In the programme, we hear of guards being placed around evicted slums to prevent previous occupants returning. Rather than move people on, the slums can be slowly formalised, with public goods provided. This has happened in many cities. In others, the slums were just demolished.

There are always reasons to move people off their land, and usually "development", that most treacherous of terms, is one of them. But there is a rule I apply to these kinds of actions: if the solution prescribed by a politician or "philanthropist" also happens to be in their own private interest, be sceptical. (Which does not mean some solutions are not win-win, especially in the long term.)

Housing aside, it is the intangibles associated with a life built up over decades that are lost when people leave their land, whether in cities or countryside. Remove them to another part of the country and they are dependent on others, with no political voice or organisation.

The Filipino government estimates the cost of rehousing slum dwellers in Manila at about a third of the national budget; it is cheaper to ship them off to the countryside. This coming from a government that, the UNDP suggested in 2007, loses $2 billion of its budget to corruption annually. Those creaming off this money are the same hypocrites claiming it is too expensive to house poor people better.

Slum dwellers are organising themselves to defend against government aggression and what they believe is the threat of arson. "We will barricade, we will fight for our freedom and security of tenures," says one community leader.

Their fight has strong precedents. All over the world, as urbanisation has gathered pace, country people have arrived in cities. They have set up their shacks (black plastic bags strung up on sticks) and slowly converted them into more acceptable living quarters, buying a few bricks every month, volunteering at the school, pressuring the local council to provide running water. With the international media spotlight on them, they have a greater chance of success. Governments can get away with less than they used to now.

It is a hopeful story, but one curious aspect of humanity seems to be its ability to pull together in a crisis, only to fall apart when things become more comfortable. I remember a visit I made to families in the south of Bogota who had lived through the process of urbanisation. They looked back on that period of coping and difficulty with nostalgia. That was when there was a community, they said – not like now. Today, all the kids are out for themselves and drugs have become a problem. It was the struggle for better living conditions that brought them together.

Paul Mason, the reporter on the BBC programme, ended on a more optimistic note. Citing British slum history as a precedent, he suggested that the generation of kids sloshing around the wet slum may one day take what they have learned about organisation and cohesion into the wider world.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/poverty-matters/2011/aug/23/what-to-do-about-slum-dwellers

MANILA ESTEROS BRIEFING PAPER

Data by Urban Poor Associates

Background

Five Esteros surrounding Malacanang are due for immediate demolition, namely, San Miguel, San Sebastian, Quiapo, Uli-Uli and Aviles, according to oral or written notices given the people. This is to prevent devastation, such as, was wrought by Typhoon Ondoy, which submerged a big portion of Metro Manila in 2009. President Noynoy Aquino is concerned about saving lives when calamities happen. However the residents of these esteros who have lived long years in the area, when interviewed, denied they have experienced damaging loss of lives and properties, even during Typhoon Ondoy.

If floods hit Manila, the esteros are not the only areas endangered; no area will be spared, according to the people. What is needed, they said, are precautionary measures to evacuate the residents in areas prone to flooding immediately. Round the clock advisory of rainfall by PAG-ASA can be instituted, and an immediate warning can be given when the water from the dams is going to be released. A ready site for evacuation is needed. These are the people’s suggested solutions. For the estero residents, removing them and transferring them to a distant place outside their work area is not an option that will help them survive socially and economically. From the interviews the following are cited as the compelling reasons to allow them to stay where they are.

First are the social reasons. The older generation of estero settlers was born on the esteros and they have brought up their families there. So, too, the second generation who have just begun their married lives. For all of them the estero has provided the safety nets they needed both financially and emotionally. Social relations have been established among them that help them understand one another. In times of emergencies, such as, sickness, accidents, family problems, deaths, security issues, etc. the neighbors are the first to offer help. Their proximity to religious and charity institutions, schools, hospitals, markets, and transportation facilities, also helps them to survive the hardship of poverty by offering quick access to these institutions. Their ability to earn a living is the most important factor cited in explaining why they have to stay in the city. The tables below show what people do for work and where they do it, and how much they earn.

Estero de Quiapo, 118 Households

N.B. We interviewed all 118 families. Percentages for “Place of Work” and “Total Income” total 100%. However, under “Source of Income” some respondents who didn’t work told the interviewer they didn’t work, but didn’t add that their husbands or others in the family worked. In Estero de Quiapo only 70.6% of respondents reported on their “source of income” or that of others in the family. This situation is repeated in the other esteros.

Source of Income	Total Monthly Income		Place of Work
24.5 % are vending or peddling (newspapers, cigarettes, food items, DVDs, accessories, etc 7.8% are in the service sector (as service crews, clerks, sales representative, etc.) 4.9% are in the transport sector (driver-operators of different jeepneys, tricycles, pedicabs, heavy equipments, delivery vehicles, etc.) 13.2% are skilled workers 5.4% are unskilled workers 2.9% are in security sector (security guards, bouncers, barangay tanod, etc.) 1.0% are professionals (police, military, teacher, nurse, medical technologist, engineer, etc.) 1.5% are in government (barangay captain, kagawad, barangay tanod, etc.) 2.0% are OFWs 5.9% are pensioners 1.5% other jobs	Php 0-3,000	22%	51.7% are working within their community/barangay 23.8% are working outside their community but still within the city 18.9% are working outside the city of Manila but still within Metro Manila 2.1% outside Metro Manila/other provinces 3.5% outside of the country
	3,001-6,000	31.4%
	6,001-9,000	22%
	9,001-12,000	11%
	12,001-15,000	3.4%
	15,001-18,000	3.4%
	18,001-21,000	3.4%
	above 21,000	3.4%
ABILITY TO PAY, NEARNESS TO WORK The above data shows 46.6% of households in Estero de Quiapo have incomes of PhP6,000 and above. If 10% of income is allocated to rental expense, each family in this bracket can afford to pay a rental fee of Php600 per month; 31.4% can afford Php300 per month and 22% will need a subsidy or the government can lengthen the amortization period, or give a long grace period to start payment. 75.5% are working within their community/barangay and within the city. Only a small number, 5.6%, are working outside Metro Manila and outside the country. A majority of families live within walking distance of their jobs. Nearness to job sites is a big advantage for the types of work the people have, for example, a woman who cooks food for sale.

Estero de San Sebastian, 79 Households

Source of Income	Total Income		Place of Work
29% of the households are vending (newpapers, cigarettes, fish, meat, fruits, vegetables, drinks, viands, rice cakes, cooked food, jewelries, DVDs, sari-sari store and carinderia). 9.4% are in the service sector (sales, merchandiser, salesgirl, salesboy, recruitment agent, cashier, teller, clerk, service crew, bar tender, etc.) 5.8% are in the transport sector (drivers or operators of pedicab, tricycle, jeepney, taxi, delivery vehicle, truck, heavy equipment, etc.) 12.3% are skilled laborers (mason, carpenter, welder, electrician, plumber, steelman, house painter, foreman, supervisor, etc.) 5.8% are unskilled laborers (kargador, labandera, baby sitter, janitor, janitress, foreman, supervisor, etc.) 1.4% are employed in the security sector (security guard, bouncer, barangay tanod, traffic enforcer); professionals (police, military, teacher, nurse, medical technologist, engineer and OFWs.) 1.4% are professionals (police, military, teacher, medical technologist, engineer) 3.6% are pensioners 1.4% are OFWs. 0.7% are government officials (barangay captain and kagawad)	Php 0-3,000	13.9%	22.4% are working within the community/barangay 49.0% are working outside the community but within the city 21.4% are working outside the city but within Metro Manila 5.1% are working outside Metro Manila/other province 2.0% are working in other countries
	3,001-6,000	8.9%
	6,001-9,000	26.6%
	9,001-12,000	21.5%
	12,001-15,000	11.4%
	15,001-18,000	2.5%
	18,001-21,000	6.3%
	above 21,000	8.9%
ABILITY TO PAY, NEARNESS TO WORK Estero de San Sebastian has a higher number of household—77.2% who can pay a rental fee of P600/month. Some 8.9% can pay P300 per month. A lower number of families 13.9% will need a subsidy or easier terms of payments. San Sebastian is better-off economically than the other esteros studied. 92.8% are working within their community/barangay and within the city. 7.1% are working outside Metro Manila and outside the country. The jobs of the estero people are tied to the area where they live. If relocated far away they will not be able to find work easily.

Estero de Aviles, 129 Households

Source of Income	Total Income		Place of Work
38.6% of the households are vending (newpapers, cigarettes, fish, meat, fruits, vegetables, drinks, viands, rice cakes, cooked food, jewelries, DVDs, sari-sari store and carinderia). 2.6% are in the service sector (sales, merchandiser, salesgirl, salesboy, recruitment agent, cashier, teller, clerk, service crew, bar tender, etc.) 3.4% are in the transport sector (drivers or operators of pedicab, tricycle, jeepney, taxi, delivery vehicle, truck, heavy equipment, etc.) 6.0% are skilled laborers (mason, carpenter, welder, electrician, plumber, steelman, house painter, foreman, supervisor, etc.) 5.2% are unskilled laborers (kargador, labandera, baby sitter, janitor, janitress, foreman, supervisor, etc.) 1.3% are employed in the security sector (security guard, bouncer, barangay tanod, traffic enforcer); 3.4% are professionals (police, military, teacher, nurse, medical technologist, and engineer) 0.9% are OFWs 0.4%% are pensioners 6% Others	P 0-3,000	20.6%	25.2% are working within the community/barangay 45.9% are working outside the community but within the city 23.9% outside the city but within Metro Manila 1.9% outside Metro Manila/other province 3.1% other countries
	3,001-6,000	22.2%
	6,001-9,000	19.0%
	9,001-12,000	20.6%
	12,001-15,000	7.1%
	15,001-18,000	0.8%
	18,001-21,000	4.0%
	21,000 above	5.6%
ABILITY TO PAY, NEARNESS TO WORK 57.1% families can pay a rental fee of P600/month; 22.2% (P300/mo.). Some 20.6% of families need a subsidy or easier terms of payments. 95% are working within the barangay/community and within the city. Only 5% are working outside Metro Manila and other countries.

Estero de San Miguel, 410 Households

Source of Income	Total Income		Place of Work
20% of the households are vending (newpapers, cigarettes, fish, meat, fruits, vegetables, drinks, viands, rice cakes, cooked food, jewelries, DVDs, sari-sari store and carinderia). 7.5% are in the service sector (sales, merchandiser, salesgirl, salesboy, recruitment agent, cashier, teller, clerk, service crew, bar tender, etc.) 10.6% are in the transport sector (drivers or operators of pedicab, tricycle, jeepney, taxi, delivery vehicle, truck, heavy equipment, etc.) 10% are skilled laborers (mason, carpenter, welder, electrician, plumber, steelman, house painter, foreman, supervisor, etc.) 7.8% are unskilled laborers (kargador, labandera, baby sitter, janitor, janitress, foreman, supervisor, etc.) 3.8% are employed in the security sector (security guard, bouncer, barangay tanod, traffic enforcer); 1.2% are professionals (police, military, teacher, nurse, medical technologist, and engineer) 0.8% are government officials (barangay captain and kagawad) 2.6% are OFWs 2.1% are pensioners 1.4% Others	P 0-3,000	11.6%	22.3% are working within the community/barangay 53.5% are working outside the community but within the city 18.4% are working outside the city but within Metro Manila 1.4% are working outside Metro Manila/other provinces. 4.5% are working overseas.
	3,001-6,000	19.0%
	6,001-9,000	17.8%
	9,001-12,000	24.7%
	12,001-15,000	8.4%
	15,001-18,000	5.4%
	18,001-21,000	4.0%
	21,000 above	9.1%
ABILITY TO PAY, NEARNESS TO WORK 69.4% can pay a rental fee of P600/month; 19% (P300/mo.). A lower number of families, 11.6%, need a subsidy or easier terms of payments. 94.2% are working in their community/barangay and in Metro Manila. 1.4% are working outside Metro Manila and 4.5% are working outside the country.

CONCLUSIONS. Some 74.4% of the people on the esteros studied or worked within their community/barangay and within the city. Another 14.4% work outside Metro Manila and outside the country. A big majority of the household earners are in the informal sector, very dependent on the economic infrastructures that the city provides, such as schools, offices, restaurants, churches and construction activities.

Relocating the Estero residents outside the City of Manila will adversely affect their economic capability. First to suffer because of the loss of jobs will be the education of children and food for the family, which will lead to malnutrition. The ability to pay monthly amortization for on-site upgrading is sure; government will recover its investment. An average percentage of 62% of families in the esteros can pay P600 per month. In distant relocation sites which the people do not choose and do not like the government recovers very little of its investment, maybe as low as 10%. However, if people like what the government does, they repay, for example, in the Community Mortgage Program.

To dislocate all the households on the esteros in effect will add to the already increasing number of poor people nationwide who are hungry and malnourished.

It is easier for a family with a monthly income of PhP6,000 to survive in the city where they are now, because the cost of living is cheaper compared to that in the resettlement areas, according to resettled families interviewed. Transportation costs are minimal in the city, schoolchildren walk to their schools; workers also walk. Basic commodities such as fish, vegetables, meat, etc. are cheaper, according to people we interviewed from the resettlement areas. When one gets sick in the city, hospitals are nearby reducing medical costs, they said.

The receiving municipalities have no capacity to provide mass employment to the relocatees. A massive employment scheme would be needed to accommodate the families to be resettled, who runs into the thousands. Addressing employment problems should be the priority before uprooting families. Slum upgrading is a better development scheme for the urban settlers. Both the government and informal settlers will save an enormous sum of money from this.

The buildings designed by Palafox Associates are meant to make people on the esteros safe from flooding. Families will not be living on ground levels. They will be able, if there is flooding, to move to the second floor of their houses. If even this doesn’t save them, they can be evacuated as the people said on page 1 of this paper.

The buildings will have toilets and liquid waste treatment so the people will not pollute the river, an accusation often made by critics of the urban poor. There will be no families living on stilts in the water of the esteros that could block the flow of water that creates flooding. Also the families have already in some esteros (in parts of San Miguel Estero, for example) begun to clean the esteros.

The buildings designed by Palafox can be combined with gardens, mini parks, and tea and coffee shops that will make the community very attractive and a place tourists will like to visit.

The people in the esteros say they have not suffered much from flooding in the past, even during Ondoy. If the welfare of the poor is our aim, there is no need to move them for their health’s sake. If the reason for moving people is because their communities are not nice looking, then help the people improve their housing as Palafox Associates does.

If we all try to make the esteros a safe and beautiful site for families we can do that. As planned by Palafox Associates there is provision made for all the concerns of government, such as, water flow, dredging, toilets, and care for the waters of the estero.

Our old distant relocation methods did not solve the problem: 30%-40% of the families returned to the city and the slums. Government didn’t get its money back. Why don’t we try this new approach that is already successfully done in other Asian cities, such as, Bangkok and Surabaya.