Wild Coast sand-dune mining decision halted again

February 09, 2010 Edition 1

Tony Carnie

THE decision on whether to allow sand-dune mining near Xolobeni on the Wild Coast has been put on hold again.

The Minerals and Mining Board was due to hear evidence for and against the mining application in Durban yesterday, but the meeting was postponed to a date still to be finalised.

The Congress of Traditional Leaders of SA president and MP, Nkosi Phathekile Holomisa, who was to chair the hearing and hear legal argument, said committee members had not had sufficient opportunity to study the substantial volume of documentation on the matter and a decision was taken to reconvene at a later date.

Journalists were refused entry to the meeting room yesterday and told the hearing was an internal meeting.

They were later advised that the meeting had been postponed.

The application to mine in the environmentally sensitive Xolobeni area, south of the Wild Coast Casino, had been made by the Australian-based company Transworld Energy, a local subsidiary company Mineral Resources (SA) and the shareholder group Xolobeni Empowerment Company.

The application was approved by the Minerals Department in 2008 but was put on hold shortly afterwards following appeals by a number of groups, including the Amadiba Crisis Committee.

The committee has complained that residents of the area were not consulted properly.


The LRC to make oral submissions on behalf of the Amadiba Crisis Committee at Xolobeni

Dear SWC supporters.
 
Please find attached information about a legal hearing that DME is holding in Durban to hear community appeals against the Xolobeni/ Wild Coast mining proposal . Needless to say, SWC will be watching these hearings with great interest. Read full story
 
If you have access to YouTube you might also be interested in downloading the following film clips that have been made about the amaPondo people’s battle against the mining proposal.
 
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XriivLxBoZ4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXQmpSNqH40

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClDk33tAVpk
 
regards
 
Val Payn
Sustaining the Wild Coast (SWC)
cell – 083 4416961
swcoastval@gmail.com


Mining ministry fox still guards EIA hens

MINERALS Minister Susan Shabangu has been asked to explain why she is “dragging her feet” in transferring her powers of environmental authorisation for mining to Environment Minister Buyelwa Sonjica.

This follows a bitter wrangle in Parliament last year, when the head of the minerals department refused to relinquish control of environmental impact assessments (EIAs) to the environment department.

Critics have argued that allowing the mining department to give environmental authorisation to mining ventures is tantamount to allowing the proverbial fox to look after the hen house.

For many years, the mining department has retained this power, whereas all other significant development projects – from nuclear power stations to cellphone masts – have to be authorised by the national or provincial environment departments.

Late last year, however, a landmark amendment to national environmental laws paved the way for mining EIAs to be transferred to the environmental ministry in a phased process lasting 36 months.

Now DA environmental affairs shadow minister Gareth Morgan is asking Shabangu for an explanation for the delay in transferring this power. He said although mining EIAs had always been treated differently, his party had helped introduce amendments to introduce a uniform process.

In terms of the amendments last year, the handover of responsibility would begin with the official commencement of the Minerals and Petroleum Resource Development Amendment Act.

Morgan said that although the act was promulgated in April, it had not been brought into effect yet. There has been no explanation from Shabangu for why the transfer had not been set in motion more than six months later.

By holding back on commencement of the act, Shabangu was effectively preventing the transfer of the mining EIA function to Sonjica’s ministry, said Morgan.


LRC submits expert evidence against mining in Xolobeni

On 28 September 2009 the Grahamstown office of the Legal Resources Centre (LRC) submitted two expert reports to the Minister of Minerals and Energy on behalf of the amaDiba Crisis Committee (ACC). The reports were in support of the ACC’s appeal to the Minister to set aside the mining right granted to Transworld Energy Minerals (TEM) at Xolobeni in the Eastern Cape. Click here to read more


Flood of Objections to Wild Coast Toll Road

January 29 wild- for immediate release

Flood of Objections to Wild Coast Toll Road

An unprecedented flood of thousands of objections has poured in to the consultants tasked with writing the final Report on the Wild Coast Toll Road EIA, despite holiday season timing for public comment.
The submissions have come from individuals, communities, businesses,
environmental organisations and civil society groups, while in Durban, where road users are protesting extra toll booths, local government have joined the chorus.
Many of the comments have described the EIAR as ‘fatally flawed” in many ways, but particularly in its lack of compliance with required legal standards and adherence to public participation norms.
It also
* misleadingly characterises the project as a regional social development initiative
* misleadingly assesses the benefits of secondary development
* fails to assess socio-economic impacts
* fails to assess the cumulative effects of mining and the toll road\
* demonstrates inadequate consultation with IAPs.
Specialist studies into relocation, land claims and sacred sites also fall short.
salaamu
Lylie Musgrave
Kibao Communications
On behalf of Sustaining the Wild Coast
tel: 27 31 2613406
fax 27 31 2616232
mobile: 072 2970974
email: kibao@iafrica.com
Full transcripts of comments are available on www.swc.org.za


NEW TOLL ROAD EIA ‘Rank with double standards’

PRESS RELEASE – January 14 2009

NEW TOLL ROAD EIA ‘Rank with double standards’

With the deadline for public comments for the Wild Coast Toll road looming on 22 January, Sustaining the Wild Coast (SWC), has condemned the new EIA as ‘still saddled with dealing with the problems of an extensive infrastructure proposal that was developed and promulgated in a manner that was anything but objective and independent’.

In its comment on the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), SWC argues that the foundations of the proposal are fundamentally flawed because the SANRAL preferred route was developed as an isolated and unsolicited bid by a consortium of private bidding companies whose primary motivation was profit, rather than arising out of an integrated and comprehensive regional development plan. As the basic premises of the proposal remain unchanged, many of the fundamental concerns that were raised by the public in 2003 have still not been addressed.

SWC lists numerous public and legal concerns that were raised in the 2004 Appeal Review which the new EIA has failed to address. These include unrealistic mitigation measures given the current capacity of local government structures in the Eastern Cape Province; that by excluding the tolling process from the EIA a bias is created in socio-economic impact assessments and that it is still not certain that tolls will be affordable for poor communities, that the need for a Toll road and for a route through the Pondoland Centre of Plant Endemism (an internationally recognized ‘hotspot’ of plant endemism) are still not adequately justified, that the precautionary principle has not been applied, and that public participation processes are still not in compliance of NEMA.
The Appeal Review was commissioned in 2004 by the new Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Minister van Schalkwyk, in response to the large number of public appeals petitioning against the Record of Decision (ROD) made in December 2003 which had approved the N2 Wild Coast Toll Road Environmental Impact Assessment of 2003.
The SWC EIA commentary states that the EIA is ‘rank with double standards’.


Wild Coast Toll Road Extention

December 15 2008

The cut-off date for public comment on the controversial Wild Coast Toll Road EIR has been extended to 22 January, 2009.

This follows concern expressed by numerous Interested and Affected Parties (I&APs) that the cut off date of 9th January was cutting into the holiday season. The same had been the case with the Record of Decision authorizing the N2 toll road over the summer holiday season of 2003/2004. Many organizations felt this was a ploy to cut out comment as most of South Africa is on holiday over the festive season.

“We are most grateful to the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) who had responded that the comment period must be extended until January 22″, said Bishop Geoff Davies, Chairman of Sustaining the Wild Coast (SWC). “SWC was among many who objected to the short comment period. We are told that all I&APs should now receive notification of the extension by post.

“However, we are surprised that our other concerns have not been addressed, as we cannot comment meaningfully until they have. These are that the public open days were held in KZN and Eastern Cape only, while there are many interested and affected parties who live in Gauteng or the Free State or Western Cape, and that the EIR presentations that were held were inaccessible to the local communities of Pondoland and the Eastern Cape. These are the
people who will be the most directly affected.

SWC wrote to NMA, who is responsible for the public participation process, that the format of the information displays and presentations at the public open days was neither culturally nor educationally suitable as a means of conveying adequate and understandable information to rural communities residing in Eastern Cape. “SWC considers the format used did not enable disempowered, often illiterate, orally based communities to gain an adequate understanding
of the full implications of the road.

“Since the last scheduled public open day was 11 December, we are dismayed that there has been no response to this point. The National Environment Management Act (NEMA) Section 4(2)(f) requires the state to ensure participation by vulnerable and disadvantaged persons in environmental governance. Section 2(4)(h) of NEMA prescribes the following additional measures to ensure the protection of the environment : `community well-being and empowerment must be promoted through environmental education, the raising of
environmental awareness, the sharing of knowledge and experience and other appropriate means´.

Consequently, SWC called for an extension of the Public Comment Period , an extension of workshops and public comment days to other Provinces, and a relook at the presentation format in rural communal areas which would allow for a `community education´ process that
would empower rural communities with the means to become informed decision makers with regard to the proposal.

“There is a great deal of public concern regarding the future well-being of the Wild Coast” commented Bishop Davies who is also director of the Southern African Faith Communities Environment Institute (SAFCEI), “so we look forward to hearing from NMA that they will pay heed to our call which, after all, simply follows the requirements of our National Environment act.”