in their support for mining also bear a direct responsibility for the consequences of activities undertaken by their mining companies - activities, many of which are illegal in their own countries. The international investment community which funds these operations should also be cognizant of the implications of their investments in unscrupulous companies.
The Philippines government is actively promoting mining as a means to address poverty in the country. The negative social, environmental and cultural impact of the mining operations is clearly evidenced by increased militarization, pollution and the destruction of indigenous communities. On the other hand the proposed economic gains are far from evident. At the macro level generous concessions granted to companies to encourage foreign direct investment include tax holidays and full reparation of profits. The life span of these operations ranges from 5 to 20 years. With large government investments in infrastructure required in order to facilitate mining the short term net benefits to the country are questionable. The Philippines is one of the richest counties in biodiversity in the world. The destruction of this immensely valuable asset does not feature in the government’s macro economic arguments with regard to mining. Serious long term impact on agriculture, fishing and tourism, all of which have been identified as major potential growth areas for the Philippines, will be unavoidable. The team requested a cost benefit analysis of the mining

activities to the Philippine economy from the World Bank and government officials. Surprisingly no such analysis was forth coming.
At the micro level local communities are consistently worse off as a result of mining. Livelihoods are destroyed, communities divided, the number of human rights violations escalate, indigenous peoples are uprooted from their lands, their cultures wiped out and irreparable damage is done to the environment. Ms Short met with one indigenous leader who was awarded title to his ancestral domain by no less than the president herself but who subsequently has been banned from entering his land by the Canadian mining company. She also met a family who had just been evicted from their home. At another location farmers talked of animals becoming sterile and falling rice yields up to 30 km from the mining site as a result of pollution of water ways. They showed skin rashes on their legs caused by contact with water used to irrigate their crops. Fisher men described how their livelihoods were destroyed as no one would purchase fish from waters close to the mines. Locals pointed out the destruction wreaked on mangroves and coral that are vital for the sustainability of the land and marine ecosystems.

Mining operations promoted by the national government, despite the opposition of local people, are viewed as a form of development aggression. The resistance to this type of aggression has been strong in the past and despite efforts to wear people down it will continue in the future. The