GROUNDWORK's QUARTERLY
NEWSLETTER
Volume 6, No 1
March 2004
Bhopal - Is South Africa next?
IN THIS ISSUE:
Air Quality Project
– Industry calls it incidents, we call it murder!
Waste Projects - Bubble,
bubble, cement kilns bring trouble: Fires burn and communities crumble
Corporate accountability – The World Social
Forum - a jamboree for the left?
Just past midnight on the 3rd December 1984 the world bore witness to
one of the most gruesome realities of corporate abuse when more than 3,000
people were painfully killed and thousands more injured as a result of
leaking methyl isocyanate (MIC) from the Union Carbide plant, in Bhopal
India.
The leak was a result of cost cutting measures by senior management that
resulted in various incidents during the years in the run-up to this disaster.
The story received coverage globally but for the majority of the world’s
population this event just slipped past as one of those inevitable incidents
that is the price of development. Back in 1984 I no doubt responded the
same way to this ghastly and inhumane incident.
It was not until a decade later that I heard the name of Bhopal mentioned
again, and this was in the context of the Engen (Petronas) oil refinery
in south Durban, which was attempting to “greenwash” my community into
believing its “promises” about how safe the refinery was and how it would
seek to improve its operations.
Engen used a system called Responsible Care, which was introduced into
South Africa by the Chemical and Allied Industries Association (CAIA),
in its public attempts to placate the surrounding community. This system
is modelled on a programme developed by Canadian chemical companies in
response to mounting international perception – in the aftermath of the
Bhopal incident - that the chemical industry was intrinsically dangerous
and manifestly irresponsible.
Within this context I was fortunate enough to briefly visit Bhopal in
January this year and work with community people and NGO’s from around
the world that are seeking justice for the very many thousands of people
who died or are still suffering from the effects of being gassed twenty
years ago.
For three days we spoke and worked on strategies to hold Dow Chemicals
accountable for the deaths and pollution at Bhopal. Dow bought Union Carbide
in 2001, despite warnings from the people of Bhopal that Dow would have
to assume the responsibility for Union Carbide’s ecological debt.
On the last day of our gathering we were all allowed access to the Dow
facility – and this is where one comes face to face with the horror of
that fateful evening 20 years ago.
Time has stood still in the plant.
The plant is as it was the day it was hurriedly vacated immediately after
the incident. In the storage warehouses bags of chemicals and pesticides
are still lying exposed to the environment, and all your senses experience
the agony of Bhopal, be it the smell, taste, feel, sight or the silence
of death.
The reactor tanks of the plant have rotted with age and collapsed onto
the ground where they continuously expose their deadly contents to the
environment. Adjacent to the open storage area, where toxic chemicals
were dumped 20 years ago in drums, is an open field where children play
and inquisitively climb up the wall and peer at us as we investigate these
leaking, rusted drums of toxic waste. Our guides during this “tour through
hell” are the local police who are mandated by the Indian government to
look after the plant. They cautiously and somewhat nervously point out
all of this history to us that for them is an everyday reality. Some of
the warehouses were so contaminated with pollutants that the thickness
of the air was too much for me to handle and I refused to enter.
In the control room it is clearly evident that a hasty exit was made
from the plant following the explosion. The entire model of the lant to
scale is still present and various documents, including the plans of the
plant, have been found lying around. Even the old emergency safety notices
are still there, and are held up by the police for us to take photos.
Inside it is clear that time has stood still, but outside local residents,
thousands of whom were orphaned by the disaster, all continue to fight
and challenge Dow for just compensation, clean up, clean water and for
the extradition of Warren Anderson, the then CEO of Union Carbide to stand
trial in Bhopal.
Seeing first hand how industry has failed to take any steps to protect
the Bhopal community since that fateful night in 1984, I ask if this is
the so-called “responsible care” that industries are offering to communities?
The only action industries took after Bhopal was to secure their image
via a public programme of “responsible care”, but they did not seek to
do the humane thing and clean up and correct the mistakes at Bhopal.
Bhopal is a grim reminder that communities cannot trust corporates and
their greenwash with their health. Bhopal is also a place that every environmental
justice activist should visit to witness the realities of corporate crimes
and actions that will never change. Like religious pilgrims have places
such as Mecca or Jerusalem or the Ganges, communities challenging corporate
power have Bhopal.
back to top
Lead Story
Community stops “polluter-friendly” Bill
Politicians agree to hold back air quality bill to allow for amendments
by Bobby Peek
The long awaited National Environmental Management: Air Quality Bill
finally came to parliament for public hearings in early February. The
National Portfolio Committee on Environment invited community people,
industry and NGO’s on the 3rd and 4th of February to give their comments
on the Bill. The fact that a Bill has been published is a victory for
communities who have been pushing for improved air pollution laws. However,
communities do have serious concerns with the content of this Bill and
the unsatisfactory manner in which public participation to inform the
Bill occurred.
This Bill is an attempt by government to address the ills of toxic air
pollution. However, community organisations from polluted areas, such
as Sasolburg, South Durban, Richards Bay, Secunda, Boipatong and Cape
Town, asked the Portfolio Committee on Environment to hold the Bill back
for the next parliamentary session in order that it could be amended.
In the communities’ opinion, the Bill contains serious flaws that need
to be corrected before it is passed. If it were passed in its present
form, South Africa would be saddled with another piece of poor legislation
that would probably take decades to be rectified.
It is not only the community groups and NGO’s that are raising concerns
about this Bill. The Associated Law Societies of South Africa’s Standing
Committee on Environmental Affairs has also requested the Portfolio Committee
to hold the Bill back for reworking, rather than pass poor legislation.
Ironically, it was only the big polluters, such as Eskom and the petro-chemical
industries who supported the Bill in their final comments in Parliament
last week.
During the two days of hearings it became increasingly clear to members
of the public that neither the politicians nor the departmental officials
were willing to allow changes to be made to the Bill, because any changes
would delay the enactment of the Bill until the next parliamentary sitting,
which would be after the elections.
Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Valli Moosa, attended part
of the Portfolio Committee hearings and appealed to those present to accept
the Bill in its current form. Dr Chippy Olver, Director General of DEAT,
also pressurised community people late into the evening on the eve of
the hearings and during the day of the hearings to accept the Bill, in
its current flawed state.
Chairperson of the Committee, Gwen Mahlangu, was scathing of the Department
of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) for placing such a critical
Bill in front of parliament at this very late stage, and thereby placing
the Portfolio Committee in a precarious position of possibly having to
push the Bill through the current parliamentary session without prior
good consultation. This is despite the fact that, since 1996, the political
leadership and the Portfolio Committee have been calling upon the Department
to improve upon the outdated Air Pollution Prevention Act of 1965.
On the day prior to the parliamentary hearings on the proposed Air
Quality Bill, community represenatives staged a protest outside the Caltex
refinery in Cape Town. In the background, black smoke pours out of one
of the refinery's stacks.
However, in the end, the Portfolio Committee withstood
the pressure from both the Minister and the Department and called for
the Bill to be held back until the next parliamentary sitting.
It is critical that the Bill’s fundamental flaws be reworked if it is
going to deliver on Section 24 of the Bill of Rights, which guarantees
us an environment that is not harmful to our health and well-being.
The central defect of the Bill is that it focuses on regulating ambient
air (air generally), rather than on reducing air pollution at source,
i.e. at every chimneystack at every industry. The focus on regulating
ambient air requires setting ambient air standards for all of the hundreds
of industrial chemicals that we find in our air. This is a daunting task
that will take decades. Internationally, ambient air standards do not
exist for all of the hazardous chemicals emitted by industry. Another
concern is that the Bill does not give any timeframes for when these ambient
standards must be promulgated in South Africa.
Even when ambient standards are promulgated, how does one measure non-compliance
with standards for a large number of chemicals? Only 46% of municipalities
around South Africa do some sort of air pollution monitoring. Their air
monitoring stations are equipped to measure only five – if that – of the
most common pollutants. The more chemicals that need to be measured for,
the more costly it becomes.
Yet another problem of focussing on ambient air pollution is the difficulty
of identifying the culprit when there are exceedances of particular pollutants.
One needs accurate information to ensure that polluters are held accountable.
There have been various scandals with regard to misinformation by industries
on their pollution and the Shell and BP oil refinery in south Durban has
been one of the main culprits in this case. Monitoring ambient air pollution
does not provide us with incontestable information to hold specific industries
accountable for their pollution. What we need is emission monitoring in
order that it can be known exactly what is coming out of every stack and
to ensure that what is coming out is reduced accurately and not merely
“managed”.
In summary, the Bill fails in its approach by concentrating on monitoring
and “managing” ambient air pollution instead of actively seeking to reduce
emissions of toxic chemicals. See the adjacent box for a breakdown of
the main flaws of the Bill.
It is common knowledge that most pollution reduction achieved in South
Africa to date has been brought about by community action and information,
as opposed to government pushing multinational polluters to reduce their
pollution. So when community groupings say that the Bill is flawed and
needs to be corrected, they speak from a wealth of experience and scientific
knowledge and have earned the right to be heard.
We have waited since 1965 for this new legislation. We can surely wait
a few more months in order to ensure that a more stable and useful law
is passed. As the Bill stands now, it is a polluter-friendly Bill and
not a Bill that will reduce air pollution and protect community health.
Colonialism, coupled with Apartheid, created a fertile breeding ground
for environmental injustice in South Africa, which has manifested itself
in various ways, including the pollution of black neighbourhoods by large,
energy-intensive, polluting industries, and the development of new legislation
must not allow this to continue.
Following are ten major shortcomings in the Bill that need to be addressed
urgently:
- The Bill fails to focus on the improvement of health.
- No timeframes are stipulated for the setting of ambient air pollution
standards or for the development of a national framework for air quality
management.
- Emission standards, which minimise pollution that comes out of the
chimneys and pipes of industry, are not guaranteed.
- Local municipalities bear the brunt of monitoring air pollution and
holding large multinational industries accountable for their air pollution.
- If, by chance, the Minister does recognise that an area needs special
attention because of air pollution (i.e. is declared a priority area),
it will take more than two years before action is proposed to reduce
the pollution, and even then the proposed action may be contested by
industry.
- In these priority areas it is not guaranteed that industry will have
to comply with emission standards.
- The licence to operate a facility does not require that the authorities
regulate against the very many industrial incidents that result in abnormal
pollution being dumped on the community.
- There is no specific information system developed to collect information
to understand and monitor industrial pollution.
- The Bill allows polluting industries that currently have temporary,
conditional licences, to convert these into final licences without changing
their polluting technology.
- The Minister may allow exemptions to some industries to allow them
to pollute.
News
Ours is not perception - environmental injustice and racism are reality
Community Environmental Health
By Bobby Peek
This was the rallying cry that was the outcome of the recent “Community
Environmental Health” gathering in Durban, which was jointly hosted by
groundWork and the South Durban Community Environmental Alliance (SDCEA).
This gathering aimed to increase awareness of South African communities’
health concerns on the eve of the 8th World Congress on Environmental
Health, which took place in Durban in February.
The Congress is an “old boys” club of researchers and government practitioners
that get together to discuss environmental health issues. A few progressive
academics and practioners were part of the 8th Congress.
Community people from Durban (Chatsworth, Sydenham, Wentworth, Isipingo,
Bluff, Merebank, Clare Estate), Richards Bay, Pietermaritzburg, Potchefstroom,
Table View (Cape Town), Sasolburg, Boipatong and Secunda gathered to ensure
that the Congress also heard from the people that are often studied and
researched - and polluted - by industry. The gathering was held over two
days, and community people from all the above areas delivered testimonies
on industrial pollution and its environmental health impacts. Most moving
were the testimonies of the various children that have to endure industrial
pollution in the south Durban area.
Environmental health experts delivered papers and proposals on environmental
health strategies. These experts came from the University of Cape Town,
Universities of Illinois and Michigan (USA), Nelson R. Mandela School
of Medicine, the Durban Institute of Technology, the Danish Nature Foundation
and the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR).
The papers that were delivered by the environmental health practitioners
verified community concerns. Marrying the community concerns and the research
was therefore easy and it gave the community people some real energy to
understand that there are people out there that believe in our cause.
On the second day of the gathering Peter Orris, from the University of
Illinois, a physician and advisor to both the World Health Organisation
(WHO) and Health Care Without Harm, worked with the community to explain
epidemiological research and suggested how community people could use
the very few resources available to them to understand and present their
environmental problems to community and other audiences. Sasolburg was
the case study the workshop used to work on a methodology to start understanding
the health challenges and the pollution in the area.
Ministers Manto Tshabalala-Msimang and Valli Moosa
receiving a community memorandum outside the 8th World Congress on Environemntal
Health - Durban, February, 2004
Out of this two-day gathering a memorandum was developed
entitled: “Ours is not perception, environmental injustice and racism
is a reality”. This memorandum was handed over to Ministers Valli Moosa
(environment) and Manto Tshabalala-Msimang (health) and the Congress Chairs
at the end of a protest by residents of Durban. The Congress was urged
to:
• Ensure that the outcomes of the Congress respond to the environmental
justice calls of the communities who live in situations where their health
and well-being are compromised as a result of poor industrial practices
and weak environmental governance;
• Urge participants to ensure that conclusions on research should be practical
and implementable and show the causal nexus, and that the research is
reported back to the people;
• Develop mechanisms to give meaning to the resolutions taken at this
Congress, in order that it does not become another talk-shop;
• Start undertaking research to highlight the impact upon vulnerable sectors
of our communities - especially those with HIV/AIDS and the young - who
cannot afford to be exposed to pollution that erodes their health;
• Create tools in order that community people as well as government can
hold polluters accountable for the destruction of healthy environments,
thereby dismantling the “cosy” relationship between government and polluters
that results in the creation of a sick population; and
• Create a space in the 9th Congress on Environmental Health where communities
can share their realities with those that choose to research, govern and
pollute us.
groundWork and SDCEA subsequently delivered formal papers at the 8th World
Congress on Environmental Health.
Minister Moosa’s parting words were that we the “community must take
control of our lives.” Does this mean that we have to start to take more
hardcore action against polluters? Does this mean that Moosa has finally
given up on his department and government, on the eve of his departure?
It is clear that our perceptions are real and therefore if no action is
taken we are going to have to take action ourselves.
Air Quality Project
Industry calls it accidents, incidents, acts of God, human error – we
call it MURDER!
By Ardiel Soeker
The National Environmental Management Act defines an industrial incident
as: “an unexpected sudden incidence, including a major emission, fire
or explosion leading to serious danger to the public or possible serious
pollution of, or harm to the environment, whether immediate or delayed”.
Incidents within the chemical industry are considered by civil society
to be gross environmental injustices. In developing countries, like South
Africa, the impact of abuse and injustice is compounded where poor communities
and workers face a never-ending battle against poverty, malnutrition,
poor and deteriorating health, and the many other manifestations of our
profit-driven society.
In December 1984, the Union Carbide Corporation in Bhopal, India, leaked
methyl isocynate gas into the atmosphere. The disaster caused the death
of more than 3,000 people and more than 100,000 injuries. The Bhopal disaster
became known as the Hiroshima of the chemical industry.
Bhopal was not an isolated incident.
The history of the South African chemical industry is littered with similar
incidents, although, fortunately, none of them has been of the magnitude
of the Bhopal tragedy. Some recent examples serve to illustrate this.
• The Thor Chemicals situation is tantamount to one continuous incident.
Situated in Cato Ridge, KwaZulu-Natal, Thor Chemicals processed mercury
waste from 1986 to 1995. Since then it has continued to store unprocessed
mercury waste in thousands of leaking containers and ponds, thereby continuously
leaking mercury into the environment. In July 1993 Peter Cele, a Thor
Chemicals worker, died a painful death due to mercury poisoning. Engelbrecht
Ngcobo died shortly thereafter, also due to mercury poisoning. Many more
former Thor Chemicals workers continue to suffer from the impacts of mercury
poisoning. As with Bhopal, the surrounding community has also been affected,
with mercury detected in nearby streams and grazing land.
• The explosion at AECI’s plant in Macassar, Cape Town, in 1995, exposed
residents to toxic sulphur dioxide fumes. Two asthma sufferers died as
a result of the incident and hundreds of people were hospitalised.
• Sapref, the Shell and BP refinery in south Durban, is probably the most
accident-prone facility in South Africa. Among the most notable incidents
that have occurred at this plant are:
o On 19th May 1998 Sapref’s alkalation unit malfunctioned, resulting in
the release of 5 tons of hydrofluoric acid into the atmosphere.
o On 22nd March 2001 a tetra ethyl lead (TEL) tank failure resulted in
25 tons of TEL leaking out of the tank over a period of 4 days.
o On 7th July 2001 an underground petrol pipeline leak resulted in the
release of more than 1 million litres of petrol into the soil under residents’
houses. The leak was discovered and reported by residents.
• During 2001 there were fires at both the Caltex Refinery in Cape Town
and Natref (the Sasol and Total co-owned refinery) in Sasolburg. The Natref
fire, which lasted 8 hours, resulted in two deaths.
• Also in 2001, at the Engen refinery, south Durban, a contract worker
lost his life while carrying out maintenance work during the shutdown
period.
• In Tongaat, KwaZulu-Natal, on the 24th December 2001, a Petronet pipeline
carrying SASOL gas ruptured. The resulting explosion flung debris for
100’s of meters over the residential area, including two nearby schools.
Fortunately, no injuries were reported, probably due to the fact that
the incident occurred during school holidays.
• In June 2002 the Foskor plant in Richards Bay was the site of an incident
where 200 people had to be treated for gas inhalation after an excessive
release of sulphuric acid from the plant engulfed nearby commuters. One
woman later died as a result of exposure to the fumes. A similar incident
occurred again in January 2004 when a cloud of sulphur dioxide was released
into the atmosphere. Forty-five people were gassed as a result of the
incident. Like the then Union Carbide in Bhopal, Foskor is presently busy
with cost-cutting measures.
It is clear that the Russian roulette operations run by the chemical industry
cannot guarantee our health and safety. The so-called progress and development
that has characterised the chemical age - pesticides, plastics, fertilisers,
solvents, fuel products and other chemical advances - should be seen within
the context of the hazards associated with its manufacturing and production,
transportation and storage and disposal of waste products.
The need to hold corporations accountable for their day-to-day activities
has become a matter of life or death for residents and workers. There
are great expectations that the new Air Quality Bill could address this
need for accountability and strict regulation of industry’s operations.
However, it needs to be improved drastically before this is a reality.
Black smoke belches from two flaring stacks at the Shell and BP refinery
(Sapref) in South Durban.
back to top
Waste Projects
Bubble, bubble, cement kilns bring trouble: Fires burn and communities
crumble
By Llewellyn Leonard
"We have one set of standards for hazardous waste incinerators.
We have another, weaker set of standards for cement kilns." Carol
Browner, EPA Administrator, July 28, 1995
The disposal of obsolete pesticides under the Africa Stockpiles Project
(ASP) still remains a contentious issue, due to the fact that government
is still open to combustion technologies (including cement kilns) as an
acceptable option for the final disposal of obsolete stockpiles. Public
interest groups have voiced their objection to the burning of hazardous
wastes (including obsolete pesticides) in incinerators, since incinerators
contribute substantially to global pollution and disease by producing
deadly poisons such as dioxins and furans.
Last year, local company Natal Portland Cement (NPC) proposed to burn
hazardous waste in its cement kiln at its Port Shepstone plant. I was
flabbergasted to read in the Minutes of the pre-application meeting, held
between NPC and government, that the provincial Department of Agriculture
and Environmental Affairs (DAEA) had actually suggested that NPC consider
using its cement kilns to “dispose of” (i.e. burn) agricultural chemicals
(obsolete pesticides).
Some of the other proposals on the table for burning hazardous waste in
cement kilns include:
• Pretoria Portland Cement (PPC) propose to use tyres to replace some
of the coal feedstock in its cement kilns;
• Holcim (Pty) Ltd, formerly known as Alpha (Pty) Ltd, proposes to burn
“alternative fuels” in its cement kiln. Holcim, a Swiss company, has a
bad track record in the US. It is the number one emitter of VOC's (volatile
organic compounds) amongst the USA's cement plants and in 1999 was fined
$500,000 for 17 years of air emission violations.
So why is there this sudden surge of applications to burn hazardous waste
in cement kilns? Is it because we cannot properly manage our toxic waste?
The answer, I would say is, yes to a certain degree, but that we also
have a situation where industries are putting profit above people and
environmental integrity, a government that won't do anything about it
(weak policies) and waste management companies which are not competent
to deal with toxic waste. Thus the solution is not to try and find a technological
quick fix to our toxic waste predicament but to make more fundamental
changes to the way we do things, such as implementing waste prevention,
minimisation, reuse and recycling schemes. This is the alternative solution
to turning around the toxic waste crisis on a long-term basis.
It is imperative that lessons be learnt from other countries, such as
the UK, which, instead of incinerating, are reducing their waste by implementing
waste minimisation, reuse and recycling techniques. For example, instead
of incinerating tyres the rubber crumb is being used in products such
as rubber wheels, specialist running tracks, roads, carpet backings and
car mats.
It is a fact that all future proposals for burning waste in cement kiln
incinerators will be a battle between civil society on the one hand and
industry and government on the other. It is important that government
starts “walking the talk” and begins implementing its own integrated waste
management policies, which stress the need to look at front-end solutions
to dealing with toxic waste. Industries should be required to only select
clean production technologies (CPT’s), and implement waste management
schemes that lessen the adverse health impacts of waste. Clean production
technologies, as opposed to cement kilns, are more efficient in terms
of materials and energy usage and produce far less pollutants. This would
fulfill the needs of society and the environment in a more sustainable
manner.
CEMENT KILNS – FACT AND FICTION
THE WORLD SOCIAL FORUM – A jamboree for the left?
By Ferrial Adam
A ”caravan of dissent”, a “carnival for activists”, “just another talk-shop”,
“an open space”, “a forum for intellectuals” are just some of the expressions
used to describe the World Social Forum (WSF) that was held in Mumbai,
India in January this year. Over 50,000 people challenging globalisation
from across 130 countries attended the forum, only the fourth of such
an event. Even with the conflicting opinions about the WSF, the number
and diversity of participants is indicative of the need for such a forum
to exist.
The first WSF was held in Brazil in 2001 as an alternative to the World
Economic Forum (WEF) that is held annually in Davos, Switzerland. The
WSF began in reaction to economic globalisation and was an outcome of
the Seattle protests and the very many civil society actions in the 1990’s
that sought to tackle globalisation. It is suggested that the impact of
the Seattle protests convinced people to bring “like-minded leftist” forces
together under one tent. The purpose of the WSF was thus mainly to provide
a space for like-minded people from around the world to interact and network
with a focus on globalisation and war.
 It
has since changed from a “single-issue protest movement into a new political
creature” [1]. The India gathering brought many new issues to the WSF
“space”, including gender, caste, poverty, children’s rights, discrimination,
environmental justice, and so on, and thus has broadened its focus. This
of course has opened up a barrage of debate and criticisms from many sectors.
One of the main concerns is that, with a focus on so many issues, would
the WSF become over-stretched and ineffective?
It is true that there were so many issues being dealt with that it was
easy to get lost in it all. groundWork attended the WSF in India with
the aim of networking, sharing and organising, specifically around corporate
accountability. Transnational corporations (TNCs) have spread their influence
across the globe. The only way to successfully expose and challenge corporate
abuse is by linking local campaigns to campaigns being waged internationally.
The WSF provided the perfect platform to make this a reality.
groundWork worked with the International Campaign for Justice in Bhopal,
which is still trying to hold Dow Chemicals responsible for the Bhopal
disaster that occurred almost 20 years ago. We also participated on a
number of panel discussions on Environmental Justice, Nepad and Accountability,
and Corporate Accountability in South Africa. These panels allowed us
to share our experiences and network with a range of organisations around
the world.
As the South African chapter of Friends of the Earth, groundWork assisted
in organising a Friends of the Earth International workshop aimed at developing
a toolkit to challenge TNCs. This workshop was a good example of the level
of networking and sharing of ideas that can take place at the WSF. There
isn’t one recipe to tackle big corporations and it was, therefore, interesting
to view the different types of activities that are being organised around
the world. These ranged from shareholder activism in the United Kingdom,
to legal action in Indonesia, to media advocacy in Nigeria. It is hoped
that the toolkit will be a working document that would be able to be used
by people challenging corporations around the world.
What does the future hold?
Many concerns and questions have been raised as to the future of the
Forum. However, even with these criticisms, there seems to be some consensus
for the need of a “space” to allow people to voice their struggles. The
Mumbai Resistance 2004, a parallel movement, which found the WSF “too
tame” in opposing capitalist-led globalisation, has raised some of these
concerns. They have highlighted questions about the direction the Forum
should take next, and what these mammoth meetings that have been going
on for four years can achieve.
There is a feeling that the frequency of having it annually could lead
to the focus on practical work being ignored. Perhaps once every two to
five years would be more manageable, and more fruitful. This would allow
civil society the time needed to organise at a local level and to consolidate
the outcomes from each WSF.
The suggestion that the 2006 Forum should be held in Africa is a good
one. The Forum in India managed to highlight a number of problems being
faced on the Asian continent and could do the same when held in Africa.
A challenge would be for the Africa Social Forum to be inclusive, democratic
and transparent. It would be quite disappointing if the Forum were not
held in Africa due to a lack of consensus amongst social forums in Africa.
It is true that the Forum could become just another talk shop if it does
not adapt to what is needed. Arundhati Roy’s comments on the WSF sum up
the way it should be viewed:
“[T]hese conversations refine our vision of the kind of world we’re fighting
for. It is a vital process that must not be undermined. However, if all
our energies are diverted into this process at the cost of real political
action, then the WSF, which has played such a crucial role in the movement
for Global Justice, runs the risk of becoming an asset to our enemies.”
These comments are important given that the WSF is only in its fourth
year of existence and thus faces a number of growing pains. It is only
through constructive criticisms that this forum can mould itself into
a force to tackle globalisation.
NOTES:
1. IPS journalist Marwaan Macan-Makar.
back to top
Community News
Fighting for better air and transportation in Boston, USA
By Ravi Dixit
The public transit system in Boston, Massachusetts, is a vital service
for urban communities, connecting residents to friends and family, goods
and services, and economic opportunities. However, the Massachusetts Bay
authorities continue to invest far more in commuter rail for whiter and
wealthier commuters than in buses for black and low-income commuters,
even though there are four times as many bus commuters than rail commuters.
Buses are often late and too overcrowded to even board. Buses also spew
toxic diesel smoke that triggers asthma and poses significant cancer risks.
Khalida Smalls, a community organiser from Boston,
USA who will be part of a delegation of American environmental justice
activists visiting South Sfrica in March, 2004.
Consequently, local bus commuters have united to form the T Riders Union
(TRU), a grassroots membership organisation, which campaigns for better
and equitable transportation service. TRU’s victories include free bus-to-bus
transfers, a reduced cost weekly combo pass, and commitments from the
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority to replace more than half of
its dirty diesel fleet with clean-fuel alternatives by December 2004,
to save bus riders’ health.
In 2000, Khalida Smalls became the Coordinator of the TRU. Khalida is
a single mother living in the predominately black community of Roxbury.
She explains, “We have come together to demand our fair share of service
because the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) has failed
to meet the needs of riders in low income neighbourhoods and neighbourhoods
of colour and continues to pollute the air we breathe with dirty diesel
exhaust. The TRU demands from the MBTA respect and equity, accountability,
first class service, clean air and better health, and accessibility and
comfort.”
Khalida will be part of a delegation of US activists visiting South Africa
in March 2004 to share their experience and learn from local communities
fighting for cleaner air. As a dedicated community organiser, who has
been fighting for environmental justice and clean air in Boston, Khalida
is a great part of the US delegation. Khalida also works as the Community
Organiser for another Boston-based NGO: Alternatives for Community &
Environment (ACE). ACE builds the power of communities of colour and lower
income communities in New England to eradicate environmental racism and
classism and achieve environmental justice. She not only has many experiences
and skills to share, but Khalida is also eager to learn as much as she
can about environmental justice in South Africa.
“I am excited about the opportunity to visit South Africa both personally
and professionally. I am curious as to how the environmental justice movement
looks and operates in South Africa. I also hope to learn some of the strategies
and tactics used to confront decision-makers and change the power dynamic
in South Africa. I hope I can also share my seven years of experience
here at ACE and help folks better understand what we are doing here. Ideally
we can all learn from each other.”
back to top
Greenfly warns Minister: “Green lobbyists are in your own backyard too!”
'Extractive industries' (like mining for oil, coal and gas extraction)
are notorious in the South because they basically leave southern countries
resource poorer and environmentally compromised whilst lining the northern
pockets of big, resource-based transnational corporations and servicing
the needs of over-consuming, energy-dependant northern elites. As such,
they're pretty representative of the way global capitalism works.
A couple of years back, the World Bank initiated an “Extractive Industries
Review” (EIR) because there was so much popular resentment about its involvement
in oil, mining and gas extraction. Amongst the recommendations recently
emanating from that review are that the Bank should stop funding coal
projects now, and should phase out support for oil projects by 2008. The
World Bank has still to decide how it is going to deal with the recommendations
of the EIR.
The Bank will certainly block the EIR’s most progressive recommendations
if South Africa's Minister of Minerals and Energy, Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka,
has anything to do with it. She claims her government is already implementing
sustainable development, that our environmental safeguards are sufficient,
and that her new African Mining Partnership would help alleviate poverty.
After a meeting of 19 African mining ministers, she's told senior World
Bank officials not to buckle under pressure from ‘green lobbyists’.
Who are these 'green lobbyists' that the Minister refuses to buckle under
to? The snide implication of her comment is that pressure for dramatic
changes in the 'extractive industries' comes from northern tree huggers
and bunny huggers who don't care about the poor people of Africa. Greenfly
suggests that the poor people of Africa beg to differ!
During January 2003, African civil society organisations comprising NGOs,
labour and local communities met in Mozambique to develop a response to
the EIR process. They issued a statement of their position after the meeting.
It begins with an unambiguous call for “the World Bank Group to stop financing
and support for mining, oil and gas until adequate and transparent mechanisms
are established for lending as well as damages to national economies,
local communities and environment by current World Bank Group financing
are addressed”.
The African civil society position went on to point out that:
“ Our long experience has shown that the interventions by the World Bank
Group in the extractive sector on the continent are not only shrouded
with secrecy but also have not resulted in poverty reduction which is
the Bank's primary objective. The interventions have rather accounted
for increased poverty, environmental destruction and human rights abuses,
especially among rural communities living within the precincts of such
interventions. The World Bank Group's involvement in mining, oil and gas
in Africa has contributed to intensifying colonial patterns of exploitation
and the plunder of natural resources and peoples, leading to impoverishment,
environmental degradation, human rights abuses, unsustainable debts and
a relationship of domination and dependence.
“During the past two decades, the World Bank Group and the International
Monetary Fund (IMF) have promoted the liberalisation of the extractive
sector through reforms that compel mineral-rich African countries to relinquish
ownership and control of extractive industries to foreign mining and petroleum
companies while the Bank and its affiliates (the International Finance
Corporation-IFC and Multinational Investment Guarantee Agency-MIGA) provide
financing and support to foreign investors. The increased involvement
of the World Bank Group is not accompanied by a corresponding increase
in decent conditions of life for the people of Africa. It has rather led
to a significant inflow of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), which promotes
corporate interest and corruption.
“Despite the large increase in Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in extractive
activities in Africa, the peoples of the continent are poorer and the
economies of African countries are weaker. The Bank's role in the extractive
industries has only succeeded in generating excessive profit for foreign
investors with mining codes that ensure minimal taxes for foreign mining
companies, increasing the debt burden of African countries and reducing
the quality of life for peoples living in resource-rich communities and
states. While nations derive little or no benefit from the extractive
industries the people living in the communities affected by mining and
other extractive activities have had to cope with impoverishment resulting
from diseases, environmental degradation, air and water pollution, human
rights abuses and social dislocation”.
Well, if that's how African people experience the 'extractive industries',
then Greenfly would like to know just whose interests is the minister
promoting? The 'extractive industries' have such an appalling history
(and perhaps even more so here in South Africa, where they were a central
pillar of the apartheid economy) and they are so deeply embedded in the
unjust and unsustainable patterns of global capitalism that even reforms
of the sort offered by the EIR are woefully inadequate. But it's really
embarrassing and sickening to have the South African government leading
the fight against limited reforms that might throw a lifeline to embattled
communities in the South!
back to top
In Brief
Court battle around Ixopo incinerator continues
groundWork brought an application to interdict the waste incinerator
at Ixopo, KwaZulu-Natal, in May 2002. The application is based on the
fact that the incinerator is operating without a permit in terms of the
Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Act and on groundWork's claim that the
incinerator has a detrimental effect on the environment and the health
of communities living in the area. The incinerator, operating as it does
without any pollution control equipment, is likely to emit high levels
of the toxic chemicals dioxin and furan. In addition, it is also likely
to emit high levels of mercury.
Compass Waste, the operator of the incinerator, responded to groundWork’s
interdict application by claiming that it had in fact applied for a new
permit. The said application could not be found by the Department of Environmental
Affairs and Tourism, but the department nevertheless accepted a copy of
the application which Compass claimed to have made. The department considered
but subsequently denied this application for a new permit. Compass Waste
then appealed the Department’s decision and brought an application to
stay the interdict proceedings until the appeal had been dealt with.
For months, no date for the hearing of Compass Waste’s appeal was forthcoming
from the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism. After many enquiries,
it appeared that the Air Pollution Appeal Board had lapsed, as has the
National Air Pollution Advisory Committee that is responsible for setting
up the Appeal Board. The department experienced endless delays in reconstituting
the two bodies and groundWork resorted to bringing an application to court
to force the Department to establish the Appeal Board and to set a date
for the appeal.
The department had now complied with the court order and the appeal will
be heard on 4th March 2004.
Tutu calls on World Bank to reform its support for oil and mining industries
In February this year Nobel Peace Prize winner Archbishop Desmond Tutu
together with four other Nobel winners and more than 300 organisations
jointly wrote to World Bank President James Wolfensohn asking him to radically
reform the way the World Bank supports oil and mining industries.
A recent review of World Bank funding for extractive industries, found
that funding extractive industry projects was not a suitable use of public
money and does not promote sustainable development. It recommended the
Bank reallocate funds towards renewable energy. Currently 94% of the World
Bank's energy portfolio supports fossil fuel projects with a measly 6%
going to renewables projects.
The Bank’s own data shows that countries which rely on oil as their primary
export are more than 40 times more likely than other nations to be involved
in civil war.
In the letter to Wolfensohn, Tutu and the other Nobel Laureates say:
“War, poverty, climate change, greed, corruption, and ongoing violations
of human rights – all of these scourges are all too often linked to the
oil and mining industries. Your efforts to create a world without poverty
need not exacerbate these problems.”
(Source: www.foei.org )
back to top
Applied Meteorology and Climatology in South Durban, published by Danmarks
Naturfredningsforening (DN) and the South Durban Community Environmental
Alliance (SDCEA), February 2004, A4, 43 pages
This innovative textbook is aimed at assisting both educators and learners
living in the heavily polluted south Durban basin to better understand
the dynamics behind the air pollution problems besetting the area. Published
by the South Durban Community Environmental Alliance (SDCEA) and a Danish
partner NGO, Danmarks Naturfredningsforening (DN), this book will be used
as a geography textbook by selected Grade 10 – 12 learners in Durban this
year.
 Njoya
Silas Ngetar, a PhD student in Environmental Management at the University
of Natal, who also works as a technical consultant for SDCEA, did the
research and writing for the textbook.
This book is part of a civil society campaign to increase south Durban
residents’ awareness of and involvement in processes aimed at resolving
the pollution problems in the area. This campaign is being spearheaded
by SDCEA, with assistance from the Denmark-based Danmarks Naturfredningsforening
(DN) and funding support from DANIDA and the Norwegian Ministry of Environment.
According to SDCEA, most children living in the heavily polluted south
Durban basin are unaware of the existence, let alone the causes, of toxic
chemicals in the air they are breathing.
The textbook is divided into seven chapters which run along themes such
as climatology and air pollution, topographical factors affecting air
pollution, and the health effects of exposure to toxic air pollutants.
The book is filled with maps, graphs and other illustrations and each
chapter has a series of exercises following it to test that learners have
understood the subject.
SDCEA and DN are to be congratulated for such an innovative product and
it is exciting to see how the Department of Education has embraced it.
Education Minister, Kader Asmal, has personally congratulated SDCEA for
their outstanding work. Let us hope that other environmental and social
justice organisations will follow in SDCEA’s footsteps and be able to
channel their research into our school curricula in such a direct and
concrete manner.
To obtain a copy of this textbook please contact SDCEA on 031-4611991.
IN THE PIPELINE
22 March – 2 April: groundWork will be hosting an exchange visit to
SA by a group of environmental justice activists from the US wishing to
learn more about the movement for environmental justice in South Africa,
as well as to share their learnings and victories with South African communities.
The exchange will have a particular focus on the effect of industrial
air pollution on poor communities around SA.
5 - 7 May: groundWork is hosting a multi-stakeholder national workshop
on health care waste management and incineration at the Edendale Hospital
in Pietermaritzburg. This workshop is open to all stakeholders. For more
information contact Llewellyn Leonard on 033-3425662.
7 May: groundWork will be officially launching our new manual Managing
hospital waste: A guide for Southern African health care institutions.
The media launch will take place in Pietermaritzburg. For more information,
or to book your seat, contact Bathoko Sibisi in the groundWork office.
17 – 28 May: groundWork will be sending a team of six South Africans
to the USA to learn from communities there who have been involved in campaigns
to limit the harmful effects of waste “dumping” and incineration.
13 May: A world wide day of action against Dow Chemicals will take place
to coincide with Dow’s AGM.
back to top
|
