Land use plan
AGES ago, I proposed to various government administrations how our land resources should be allocated. The thrust was to provide the highest gainful employment to as many Filipinos as possible. I cited Japan’s experience during the General MacArthur US occupation, the reform and land use plan of Taiwan and South Korea. And lastly the People’s Republic of China, where land is used for the rapid industrialization of the mainland Chinese.
After WWII, the land use and land reform policy in our country became a product of politics not of ideology. The political talk was that the landed rich – the “hacienderos” – were exploiting the poor tenants, share crop farmers, farm workers etc. And that if the heroic “politician” was elected, he would see to it that the poor will earn enough from his farm crops so that he will become well off to support himself and his family. During the era of Quezon, almost every Filipino who wanted to become a farmer could become the owner of 24 hectares of land, provided that he settled in Mindanao. General Paulino Santos was in charge of the homestead distribution, especially in what is now Gensan (General Santos) and surrounding area.
Even areas that did not produce rice and corn like the island of Mactan would have been subjected to land reform. Thanks to the resistance and objection of Cebuanos, we now have an Export Processing Zone in Mactan which has run out of land and which zone employs thousands who earn a total payroll of millions of pesos a month. The challenge, therefore, for Congress is how to encourage and allow the use of land for industrial and commercial use and, of course, human habitation. Even land that has been subjected to land reform should be allowed to be sold and converted to other uses. Perhaps the only exception would be land that is well irrigated and can produce at least two crops a year. With over a hundred million Filipinos who are increasing at the rate of 2.3% a year, I do not believe we can produce rice and corn to make ourselves self-sufficient. Thailand, Vietnam, Burma, and other countries that have big rivers like the Mekong river can produce rice even for export. They have enough land and water. It goes without saying that the ecological balance should be maintained.
The Department of Agrarian Reform should be “right-sized” so that many of its functions could be transferred to other departments of government, like Justice, Agriculture, Local Governments, etc. The bureaucratic red tape that has been installed by the DAR for their own selfish interest should be abolished. Imagine if you have a hectare of land that is beside the “munisipyo,” you need the approval of the office to sell or transfer it to your own heir. If you have a fishpondtry operating it without any interested person that is well connected with DAR trying to take it away from you. And if you have a ranch – some DAR personnel suffer from blindness because they cannot see the cattle grazing on the land. In so far as they are concerned, that land is not exempted from land reform.
I don’t think anyone will dispute that China started as a Maoist Communist country. Today it is a progressive state that is trying hard to become a world power. And it all started with a “capitalist roader” – Deng Xiaoping – who changed its ideology to one that is “Socialist with Chinese characters.” In short, besides the rich 300 million Chinese who have become capitalists, the government’s economic policy is capitalist, although the government remains Communist.