The letter entitled “Frieda will not be an ecological disaster” penned by Greg Anderson of the PNG Chamber of Mines and Petroleum (The National 30/05/08) must not go unchallenged. This letter is written with a self-approving moral corrective that seeks to rectify what Mr Anderson perceives as the incorrect assumptions of the letter I wrote about the Frieda River Mine (The National 05/05/08). Anderson’s letter is swayed by an admirable intent to paint a positive image of the mining industry in PNG. It carries the message that mining and mineral wealth plays an important role in digging out PNG from its persistent confinement in the bottomless pit of economic miseries.
People in isolated locales in PNG need mines because mines provide necessary services and infrastructure development that the PNG Government is not able to provide. Thus geographic isolation and economic marginalism provide an attractive rationale for mines to be opened. It is a geographical fact that all the mining that has ever gone on in PNG takes place in very isolated environs in the country. However, in the same breath isolationism and marginalism have contributed towards isolating environmental issues from the extractive agenda of mining companies. The Fly River experience is more than a case in point. The government and company are interested mainly in the landowners around the mining area, but the majority of the people who shall bear the ultimate brunt of this mine are marginalised from the radar of environmental concerns.
The basis of Mr Anderson’s corrections rest on the view that the developers of the mine, Xstrata Frieda River Ltd, has resolved to not deposit tailings or waste rock in the Sepik River or any other rivers within the vicinity of the mine. If that is the resolution of the developing company, can we thus have a sound environmental plan laid out before us? Why are the government and the company silent over the environmental plans to do with this mine? Why are villages from Ambunti to Kopar not informed about these plans? Can the developer and the government sit down with the villagers of the Upper and Lower Sepik villages and discuss this very pressing issue? If there is a so-called “positive and proactive” approach to this particular mine, why leave environmental planning as an afterthought? It seems we are planning to talk about these only after problems have arisen.
Whilst I am fully cognisant of the legislative framework under which the environmental and social impact studies are commissioned in PNG, I am however convinced that it has not worked in all the places that we have had mines in the country. Our mechanisms for planning, evaluation and monitoring are extremely weak if not non-existent. Let us face the truth! The Environmental Planning Act is a convenient legal fiction that we invoke in order to convince ourselves that we possess an environmental conscience. Lessons from Bougainville, Strickland, Fly and Anga Banga rivers are too self-evident to rehearse them. There is no such thing as an “environmentally friendly mine”, such a thing exists only as an oxymoron. An oxymoron contains a contradiction of terms and, in this context, it must exist because there are people who make a living out of concealing contradictions with messages of “responsible approaches towards environmental management”.
The Sepik River is not another experimental site to test out the kinetics of sedimentation and mineralization. It is not a place where we can afford to repeat the failures we have encountered with mines elsewhere in the country. In fact, the language of wanting to avoid a repetition is ultimately an admission to the fact that all our mines thus far are ecological disasters. If all our mining and environmental efforts thus far narrate a common history of ecological failures, what is the guarantee that we cannot repeat these failures on this great river system?
The Sepik River is the spiritual abode of an ancient and youthful civilisation and the ecological home to a diversity of life forms. We need something more than telling us about the requirements of the Environmental Impact Assessment because the history of mining with its concomitant outcomes of ecological failures indicates that our requirements have not been satisfied. The Sepik River, its people and their culture cannot be given a third rate treatment in so far as matters of economic livelihood is concerned.
Whilst I am aware that anthropological studies on land ownership have been carried out in the mountain villages located adjacent to the proposed Frieda River Mine, no similar consideration or environmental sympathy has been committed to the people who inhabit the villages downstream. This is because the mining company has already delineated the land area with which it is primarily interested in and so it appears that those people who live downstream are not on its radar of immediate concerns. The lives of thousands of people on the Sepik River basin hang in the balance if this mine gets into operation in 4 years time. We need to know what are the government’s and the company’s plans for the impending environmental disaster that they will now introduce into the Sepik River?
This particular piece appears in the letters column of The National 01/07/08. At the same time another letter by S.K.Noku about the issue of the Frieda River Mine appears in The National of 01/07/08. The General Manager of Xstrata, the developer of the Frieda River Mine has just entered the public debate about the Frieda River Mine prospect. His recent letter indicates that the company is currently undertaking a diverse range of studies to help them establish whether a sustainable mine is feasible.
Extraction is a key word here.
A term which Papua New Guineans need to take time out to understand, the repercussions and consequences of extraction consequences are highly destructive and irreversible.
The so called bigmen are selling out their own country and their people in the name of development. The only ones that really benefit are the corporates, the chiefs and a hand full of corrupt land owners.
Papua New Guinea lacks a true visionary in government. Politicians all seem engrossed with the next 5 minutes. What’s happening in PNG will inevitably go down in history as the fastest annihilation ever of a culture and tradition.
There was a once time when the chiefs had the interests of their people at heart and could be trusted but that time has long gone.
R
Tip/Request: A RSS Feed on the blog would be really handy.
I wrote a letter to the letters section of The National newspaper in response to Mr. Anderson’s letter, however it looked like the newspaper categorically singled me out and did not publish my letter. The RH-owned newspaper has a development agenda but sometimes try to paint the picture that it has a neutral stance on issues of national interest. Firstly, it is a slap in the face for the ordinary villagers in rural PNG to continue to be used as scapegoats in the language of mine development in PNG. Mining benefits mostly acrue to the corporations, govt, rent-seeking politicians and bureaucrats and the local elites while the ordinary commoners get very little (if they are lucky) but most often bear the full brunt of the social and environmental costs of the mining project even long after the life of the project.
The veto of power over whether a mine should be given the green light or not rests with people and stakeholders from within the immediate vicinity of the deposit itself. A big question is what rights or how much say do people down-river from the mine have in terms of the decision-making process?
An ‘environmentally friendly mine’ on or near a river; that’s a laugh! Do what you can to stop this. I lived on the Sepik for many years and I would hate to see it ruined by rapacious mining and self-seeking politicians. If mining goes ahead, in any large way, it will not only pollute the down-river villages on the banks of the main river but think what contamination would do to the Grass Country Villages and environment near Angoram. We all know what mining did to the Fly River. Andrew, if I can help in any way let me know. Regards, David
David,
Thank you for your posting. The foreseeable consequences of this mine is tremendous and could be completely devastating. Anyone like you who has spent time on the Sepik River would appreciate how much the economic livelihood of this people depend on the river system. I shall be in touch with you in due course.
Regards,
Andrew
Members of the Manamb communites of Malu, Avatip and Yambon village of the Sepik river Ambunti District – have recently met in Port Moresby to discuss the impending mining activity at Frieda River. We are united in our efforts to have a voice at the table – not only for our communities but also to honor the thousands of people who depend on the Sepik River for their existence. Those who are interested should advocate along with us for an open and transparent process with one goal in common – to preserve our lifeline of the Sepik River. We plan to meet regularly for further discussions
Damien Gamiandu
Damien,
Thank you for bringing to the awareness of this forum the meeting that your Manambut people have had in relation to the Frieda River Mine. The initiative of the Manambu is examplary. It is of utmost importantance that local people in the area have their say in this mine issue. I hope we can mobilise all educated Sepik River people living in and around our Moresby and other urban centres in PNG to talk about this. I will be in Moresby by next week and look forward to meeting with people like you and other like minded Sepiks and Papua New Guineans to talk about this.
Ngepma nien!
LAND / DEEP-SEA MINING NOT THE WAY FORWARD FOR PNG:
Just a quick question for all your readers out there – what is Sir Michael Somare’s position with regards to the proposed Frieda River Mine?
It is my personal view that as the Paramount Chief of the Sepiks and founding father of the nation, PM Somare has a moral responsibility to the nation and peoples of the mighty Sepik River to preserve its existence. Of all people the PM should know better that the Sepik River is not just any other river – it is a force of life! The river is vital for the very existence of the Sepik people – it directly/indirectly links with their Sepik way of life, culture and tradition.
I beg all you Sepiks out there and the entire nation to prevent any level of mining activity in Frieda (and also to block any daft proposal to carry out deep-sea mining within our Seas in NGI).
In the long term the cost to the environment will be immense and irreversible (let us not forget the damage caused by OTML to the Fly River system).
Does PNG need any more mines? The answer is “NO”.
AGRICULTURE INDUSTRY:
I am an advocate of the Agriculture Industry. The PNG Government should look at redeveloping our nation’s ‘lost’ primary source of national income – the government should re-establish a more robust and progressing Agriculture Sector in PNG. A strong and efficient agricultural sector would enable a country to feed its growing population, generate employment, earn foreign exchange and provide raw materials for industries. The agricultural sector has a multiplier effect on any nation’s socio-economic and industrial fabric because of the multifunctional nature of agriculture. It puzzles me why the PNG Government and its so called well learned policy advisors are not looking into this as an alternative, if not the main source of income for the nation.
As the world population continues to grow geometrically, great pressure is being placed on arable land, water, and adequate supply of FOOD while maintaining the integrity of our ecosystem. At present there is insufficient food and inadequate distribution of food. A recent study by the UN has stated that in China alone about 80 million people are malnourished and hungry – right there, is the opportunity for Papua New Guinea.
Politicians & their advisors within the corridors of Waigani need to start “thinking big”. Who says it is impossible for PNG to feed 80 million Chinese? What we do need in Waigani is people who are upwardly mobile, intelligent and articulate – people who can say NO to the status quo! And people who are willing to look at other more environmentally safer means of creating wealth for our nation.
PNG does not need mines to be a prosperous nation. There are so many examples of developed/semi developed nations whose economy was and is still driven by a strong agriculture industry.
Rob
York, England.