Implementing waste recycling laws

Who was that senatorial candidate who boldly declared that if elected, he would not propose any new laws because we already have enough? Crazy as he might have sounded to some, there is a ring of truth to his words. We do have enough laws. The real problem is that we are far too slow in implementing them—even though we are too fast in passing them. Yes, that is the grand irony of our legislative system: we keep churning out new laws, yet we neglect to implement them. Equally ironic is that we do not revisit our old laws that clearly need to be updated. In fact, the “new” laws we need are those that refine and modernize existing ones—not add to the pile of unread statutes collecting dust.

Talking of ironies, one of the most glaring is how our environmental laws are being ignored—ironically treated like garbage. Republic Act No. 9003, the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000, is a prime example. Despite its clear and detailed mandates, it is often overlooked. Our waste management laws, in a literal and figurative sense, are being wasted. While there's nothing wrong with being passionate about fighting corruption, should we not be just as passionate about fighting pollution? In fact, pollution and corruption are often two sides of the same coin. There is a direct connection between the two—especially when it comes to solid waste.

A lot of money changes hands in the hauling and dumping of waste by local government units (LGUs), which is precisely why some corrupt mayors resist implementing recycling and segregation laws. It is, as the legendary detective Sherlock Holmes would say, elementary. The more waste is segregated at the household level, the less there is to haul and dump. That means fewer trips for garbage trucks, which in turn means less money earned through hauling contracts. But here's the kicker: some mayors make money from both hauling and dumping—two separate revenue streams that thrive on inefficiency. So, what’s the solution? As naïve as it may sound, perhaps it starts with the people convincing their mayors to “moderate their greed.”

The truth is, even with proper waste segregation and recycling, mayors and LGUs could still generate income—just not through corruption. They could follow the law by bringing waste not to dumpsites, but to materials recovery facilities (MRFs), as mandated by RA 9003. And it doesn’t stop there. Mayors should ideally push for segregation at the household level, which would ease the burden on MRFs. But even if they don’t, the waste can still be sorted at the MRFs. In theory, recyclables from MRFs are no longer “waste” because they have resale value. Organic kitchen waste should ideally be shredded and composted, but even without machines, it can still be composted—albeit more slowly. There’s already a legal basis for LGUs to support local cooperatives by donating funds and equipment as part of their livelihood programs. That means LGUs can legally donate land, buildings, and equipment for MRFs and authorize cooperatives to manage them. This just needs a municipal ordinance to be passed.

Now imagine this: waste management programs that also serve as livelihood generation programs. Even better, they could double as public health programs, reducing not only poverty but pollution as well. This is not a joke. Methane gas escaping from unmanaged landfills is not only a serious pollutant—it also causes dangerous fires. Implementing proper waste management isn’t just a legal issue; it’s a matter of public safety. Surely, there are still enough upright mayors out there willing to act. But we need responsible citizens to lead the way—people who will speak up, bring these ideas forward, and demand action. Because in the end, implementing our waste recycling laws is not just about the environment. It’s about cleaner communities, livelihood opportunities, public health, and fighting corruption—all at the same time. Let’s stop wasting the laws we already have. Let’s start implementing them.