INTRODUCTION
I am sure you are all aware of the recent good news about how well our economy is doing.

In the midst of all this good fortune, we should worry about the bad news which is — that, among other things, we have even more to lose now than ever before in case of disasters.

Of course, our people’s lives are always our priority in times of danger. But precious livelihood, new infrastructure and painstakingly-accumulated wealth maybe also be wiped out by disasters.

This is the bottom line in disaster management.

In addition to protecting the health and safety of our people from the ravages of calamities, our unremitting efforts in disaster management also prevent damage to our economic resources and social cohesion, and thus enhance our global competitiveness.
PEACE AND DEVELOPMENT
And we shall uphold peace over war or violence, for only peace can be the stoutest shelter of democratic development.

We must be worthy of our freedom, by assuming the burdens of peace as gallantly and as patiently as the burdens of war.

The economic growth we are now experiencing could not have been possible without a stable political foundation, based on the bed-rock principles of democracy. The Philippines is proving to the world that economic progress and social cohesion can indeed be achieved without curtailing people’s freedoms.

Filipinos too have had to fight their own battles to protect and maintain democracy in this country. We honor the heroism and vision of Filipino leaders who fought to build an independent nation based on the universal ideals of representative democracy, the rule of law, and respect for human rights.

In this manner also was forged the agreement regarding a transitional arrangement called the Southern Philippines Council for Peace and Development (SPCPD), between the government and the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) which, as your president, I see as an important step leading to the comprehensive, just and lasting solution to the long-standing problems of Mindanao.

The SPCPD is intended to be a transitory body that will oversee peace and development efforts in Mindanao. It will, however, be just that. It is not and will not become a substitute for governance in place of local government units whose exercise of authority and autonomy is guaranteed by the Local Government Code of 1991.

I realize that it is natural for people to be apprehensive when trying something new. Let us cast aside our fears. The times we are living in are rapidly changing, and they call for innovative ways to deal with conflicts and problems.

It is time for us to abandon our parochial and insular way of looking at things. We can no longer look at Zamboanga, Cotabato, Basilan and other areas in Mindanao in isolation. We have to give priority to the greater welfare of the majority who are already tired of confrontation and conflict, and who wish to embrace the sweeter fruits of peace and development. Definitely, all Filipinos, not just Mindanaoans, will benefit from such a comprehensive, just and enduring peace that is accompanied by sustainable development.

Let me say that the gains of our nation over the past four years are based on the dividends of peace and development arising from our greater political stability and social cohesion — now, as compared to previous periods. All this has been built up from our unity in diversity, our solidarity behind our common vision of “Philippines 2000!!!”, and our teamwork in facing the challenges of the future.

I therefore ask you now of the National Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC), Regional Disaster Coordinating Councils (RDCCs), Provincial Disaster Coordinating councils (PDCCs), City Disaster Coordinating Councils (CDCCs), Municipal Disaster Coordinating councils (MDCCs), and the Barangay Disaster Coordinating Councils (BDCCs) — to help in the information drive in the southern Philippines so that our people therein, regardless of religion, social status, ethnic origin — Christians, Muslims, Lumads and everyone else — to be clarified on the real issues in the so-called SPCPD formula which, in the government’s view, will lead to peace and development in the long-term.
DISASTER CONSCIOUSNESS WEEK
Disaster preparedness protects lives and promotes livelihood. Disaster preparedness is good for families, workers, businessmen, investors, and consumers. Disaster preparedness benefits the rich as well as the poor, the educated and the ignorant, the young and the senior citizens, the urban dwellers and the rural residents, Christians and Muslims, and our indigenous peoples.

You, who are active in disaster management, will certainly recognize the many public benefits of your activity. As we observe natural disaster consciousness week, it is useful to review how well we can assure our people the full benefits of disaster preparedness.

First of all, let me congratulate one and all for the admirable efforts to enhance disaster consciousness that you have mounted for this week. The display of disaster management resources, such as rescue and communications equipment, medical and relief material, and the skills of specially trained personnel is remarkable.

These demonstrations of available capabilities bolster our confidence in our growing strength for responding to disasters. But more than the appreciation of any specific equipment or skill, the activities i have witnessed testify to the indomitable will and competence of our leaders, managers, personnel, partners and allies in disaster management.

The observance of natural disaster consciousness week itself has become even more effective in promoting public awareness since July 1989 when I first initiated this as Secretary of National Defense and NDCC Chairman. In addition to government agencies, you have also engaged the involvement of many other groups, such as professional associations, private radio communications clubs, the safety organization of the Philippines, and national and local media.

Indeed, you have brought the message to the nation that the best time to attend to disaster management is when and where there is yet no disaster.

The central level capabilities for disaster management and response of such organizations as the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), the Philippine National Police (PNP), the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC), the Department of Health (DOH), the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), and the Department of Science and Technology (DOST) are well established.

Calamity after calamity have amply shown the readiness and effectiveness of these government agencies in performing their respective tasks in weather forecasting; earthquake monitoring; communications and warning; early evacuation of high-risk areas; rescue and emergency operations; relief goods and services distribution; medical assistance; damage assessment and reporting; and coordination of disaster response activities.
ASSESSMENT OF CRITICAL WEAKNESSES
But Typhoon “Rosing” and other typhoons which ravaged the Bicol Region, the Southern Tagalog provinces and the Visayas last year, and caused heavy casualties, exposed a critical weakness in our disaster management infrastructure, and that is — local chief executives and local government units exhibited wide variations of performance in responding to the disaster, from excellent to passing to substandard to criminal neglect.

Some localities which have competent leadership and adequate preparation were able to take prompt action, so early evacuation was undertaken. Other communities especially in coastal and flood prone areas were substantially failed by their respective local governments before and during the emergency, so they suffered many avoidable casualties and considerable, preventable damage.

I had ordered the detailed and objective assessment of local government performance in disaster management but I have yet to receive a comprehensive report on this. I understand that, due to the absence of an appropriate assessment checklist and evaluation methodology, the Regional Disaster Coordinating Councils (RDCCs) are reluctant to assess the individual performance of governors and mayors because their assessments may be challenged as subjective.

I have, therefore, instructed the NDCC chairman to have an adequate technical assessment instrument developed and pre-tested which can yield accurate ratings of disaster management performance by local governments.

I now also call upon all local chief executives to undertake their own individual reviews to determine for themselves existing gaps and potential shortcomings in their disaster response procedures.

We need to establish a baseline assessment of capabilities present in all localities regarding various dimensions of managing response to the worst typhoons, floods, and earthquakes. Such an assessment will describe the range of variations among all local governments.

Our goal should then be to narrow the range of variations even as we progressively raise the overall quality of local governments’ disaster management. We do not want a situation where chances of people’s survival from disasters vary significantly from locality to locality because of the substandard performance or neglect by some local government units.

And we must forget that even environment pollution which has both short-term and long-range disastrous aspects is principally a man-made calamity which local government units must prevent and manage.

Indeed, the standardization of local disaster management performance will go a long way in assuring our people adequate disaster protection regardless of their location and physical environment.
USE OF CALAMITY FUNDS
National funds for calamities are appropriated by Congress in order to provide goods and services that are needed by the people and communities affected by disasters. We would like to see these funds operate more as matching counterpart funds to local calamity funds.

Disaster management is one area where we can apply the Bibingka concept that I have been advocating. The national calamity fund provides the heat from above while the resources that the governor and the mayor can muster generates the heat from below.

National calamity funds should augment and complement local calamity funds — and vice-versa — in financing the needs of disaster victims. We encourage local communities to undertake calamity mitigation programs primarily using their own resources so that national calamity funds can be used for disasters of truly national or regional scale.

We do not want the availability of calamity funds from national government to encourage unpreparedness by local governments, over-statement of calamity impact, or under-exertion in calamity damage reduction. Because of the urgency of the disaster situation, we at the national level may have tolerated these unsound practices without intending to do so in the past. These tendencies should now be corrected.

As a matter of principle, national calamity funds should primarily be utilized to immediately restore vital public utilities especially roads, bridges, telecommunications and electric power; to normalize government functions, and support self-reliant efforts of localities whenever these fall short due to the magnitude of the disaster that struck them. Calamity fund allocations, however, should not substitute for local responsibility.

National funds should also assist the people affected, regardless of the shortcomings of their respective local governments. While we should not excuse local governments from their responsibility for disaster management, we should also not allow people to needlessly suffer from the adverse effects of their local officials’ disaster management weaknesses.
DIRECTIVES AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
I am pleased to reiterate that I had signed into law last June 11 Republic Act No. 8185 which amended the Local Government Code of 1991 by granting local governments, through their respective Sanggunian, the authority to declare a calamity and thereby use their mandatorily-budgeted local calamity funds. This law enhances local authority and efficiency in disaster management, and promotes local chief executive clout as the primary disaster response manager for the community.

The law will take effect after an oversight committee has issued its implementing rules and regulations. This committee, composed of representatives from the senate and the house of representatives, as well as from the executive branch, has forty-five (45) days to complete its work.

I also instruct the NDCC to prepare proposals for my approval defining the use of calamity funds for burned public markets, municipal buildings, and other public facilities according to the principles I have just articulated and pursuant to our fire safety code.

I also reiterate my instructions issued here last year for the mayors of metro manila to organize, train and equip at least two collapsed-building rescue squads in their jurisdictions. This is not a job for firemen and the police to do alone, but must be done by a multi-disciplinary team. This is an absolute necessity which should be put in place and made operational not later than the end of august 1996.

None of us want to face the problem caused by the absence of these local capabilities only when time is running out on people already trapped in collapsed buildings. We must face the problem now and put in the capabilities well before such a disaster occurs.

I call upon the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) and the Cabinet Officer for Regional Development (CORD) for the National Capital Region (NCR) to work with the Metro Manila mayors in making this possible. I also direct that the executives of towns and cities with a population of 150,000 or more also come up with one such team in their respective areas also not later than the end of August 1996. I need not reiterate the responsibility of officials in fire prevention and fire safety. The Ozone Disco tragedy is a grim reminder to everyone — officials and civilians alike — to do preventive and preparedness measures against that kind of disaster.
CLOSING
In closing, I reiterate government’s paramount role in disaster management — and this is public information, preparedness, and effective, timely response.

While we are de-regulating or privatizing many government functions, and while we are enlisting private sector participation in a variety of public functions, disaster management remains still a government responsibility. Preparation for and response to calamities are functions within the public domain which only government agencies can truly undertake effectively. In this regard, I reiterate government’s full commitment to this essential task of public safety.

We must never weaken in our attention and vigilance in regard to disaster management. We must energize and mobilize the non-involved and the apathetic to be committed to public safety in support of the whole community. We will use disaster-free periods to broaden and deepen our disaster response capabilities. And we will use moments of disaster incidents to sharpen the application and effectiveness of such capabilities.

As I call on all of you to attend to and resolve disaster management issues, let us together dedicate ourselves to providing our people with the leadership, specialized skills and commitment that is required to keep our people safe and secure.

Thank you and good day.