The Philippine Plastics Industry Association (PPIA) strongly opposed moves to amend RA 9003 or the solid waste management law, which is being finalized by the House of Representatives Committee on Ecology.
PPIA President Danny Ngo said that RA 9003 is a good law as he cited positions by concerned government agencies and non-government organizations (NGOs). He, however, said that the law has yet to maximize its potential.
Thus, he urged, “Let its full potential be realized first before attempting to change it.”
Instead, Ngo strongly urges lawmakers to revisit the IRR first for the failure of implementing a good law.
Ngo noted that the Department of Environment and Natural Resources Undersecretary for Policy, Planning, and International Affairs Atty. Jonas Leones said an interview stating that RA 9003 is a good law.
Ngo said that the DENR official even mentioned the adoption of new technologies such as the Waste-To-Energy projects which have yet to be allowed in the Philippines to resolve the alarming surge in solid garbage generation entering and piling up steadily on landfills every day. He cited that this technology aims to hit two birds with one stone: beef up the country’s waste treatment and disposal and generate sustainable energy.
Leones also mentioned that utilization of such facilities was already initiated last 16th congress and was revived by Senator Sherwin Gatchalian in this 18th Congress by authoring Senate Bill No. 1789, or the proposed "Waste-to-Energy Act".
According to Ngo, the PPIA firmly believes that RA 9003 is flexible in adopting such technologies, noting that many evironment-sensitive countries in Europe, the US, Japan, even neighbor Singapore have been adopting technology for decades now, significantly curbing their waste residual problem and at the same time boosting their power supply.
In addition, Ngo said that environmental NGOs likewise cited that RA 9003 as a good law, but they complained about the law’s implementation, not the law itself. Environmental groups allegedly filed a complaint with the Supreme Court against the National Solid Waste Management Commission (NSWMC or Commission) for the slow implementation of the Non-Environmentally Accepted Products (NEAP).
Under Section 29, the law mandates that the Commission prepare a list of NEAP one year after the law has taken effect. Section 30 of the law bans the selling of products placed, wrapped, or packaged with NEAP after the phase-out period. According to them, this requirement has been long overdue with the Commission.
According to the group, the solid waste problem is a recurring situation in local government units (LGUs) because there are "no clear guidelines on support and coordination" from the national government and they can only perform so much within their authority.
Under the law, the LGUs are required to prepare and submit their 10-year Solid Wastes Management Plan to the NSWMC for implementation. Each barangay or cluster of barangays is required to have a Material Recovery Facility (MRF) that would sort the recyclables intended for recyclers. But the majority have not complied with this. Hence, many LGUs nationwide have issued their respective ordinances banning the use of plastic bags and some SUPs just to get rid of this troublesome responsibility.
Ngo explained that NEAP is not based merely on reports or perceptions. The law requires the identified replacement must not be more than 10 percent of the cost of the disposed-of product.
While Section 5 of the IRR states the phasing out of a NEAP must be supported with scientific and economic evidence, which in practice is the conduct of a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). This is comparing the phased-out product vs. the replacements on their possible adverse impacts on the environment and the economy.
In the numerous LCAs conducted here and abroad, the present identified acceptable replacements have been proven to have more Global Warming Potential (GWP) than plastic packaging. This finding is supported by an NSWMC Resolution in favor of plastic bags vs. cotton bags. The PPIA upholds such findings as the industry only adheres and accepts science-based evidence like an LCA conducted on the local-based situation.
Ngo emphasized that even key government studies are not likely prescribing amending a good law like RA 9003 if the failure is only in the implementation.
The PPIA position is in line with the findings and recommendations of the Trade and Industry Department (DTI) and the Philippine Institute of Development (PIDS) in their study "An Analysis of Regulatory Policies on Solid Waste Management (SWM) in the Philippines: Ways Forward (January 2021)".
The study revealed that the Philippines' solid waste management is not a holistic one. Given the bureaucratic realities, too much transfer of responsibility to the LGUs without concrete national support is a weak vertical integration.
Hence, the implementation of the law suffers from a mediocre grounding in its almost two decades of implementation. As a result, illegal dumpsites still exist, waste generation remains unabated, material recovery becomes suboptimal, technology and facility investments are subpar, and public and private participation are wanting.
Ngo stated that the key provisions of RA 9003, if only properly addressed, would have conveniently and strategically allowed for the imposition of systematic and structured remedies.