GROUNDWORK's QUARTERLY
NEWSLETTER
Volume 5, No 3
September 2003
IN THIS ISSUE:
Lead
Story - Times they are a changing!
groundWork merges with US organisation and opens a US office
Pipelines - Commission of Inquiry:
parliamentarians visit Tongaat gas rupture site
Air Quality Project
– Industrial Pollution in the Vaal Triangle
- National Report on Community Air Pollution Monitoring
in South Africa
Waste Projects
- African Solutions to African Problems: Developing countries
doing it for themselves
Cynics Corner
Community News -
Bisasar Road, Durban
focus on.. Ferrial Adam
In Brief …
Resources
Publications
Dear Friends
The last two months have seen some important changes in groundWork.
In August groundWork merged with a sister NGO in the US, the
South African Exchange Programme on Environmental Justice
(SAEPEJ). SAEPEJ has now become groundWork USA and will provide
a significant boost to our international work and to bringing
international awareness of and world pressure on environmentally
abusive companies and practices in SA. We warmly welcome Heeten
Kalan and Ravi Dixit, both formally of SAEPEJ, into the groundWork
team. You can read all about the merger on pages 4 and 5.
Also, we welcome Ferrial Adam as a new, permanent member
of the groundWork SA team. Ferrial will be managing the corporate
accountability project and will also assist with media work
and research support to the other projects. She is a seasoned
activist who also brings scientific skills and knowledge into
the office. Meet her on page 17.
I am sure that groundWork is now even stronger than ever and that as
a bigger, more diversified team we will be able to make an even bigger
contribution to improving the lives of the disadvantaged in South Africa.
Regards, Linda
by groundWork Director, Bobby Peek
Firstly, on behalf of all groundWorkers, I want to say a big thank you
to Linda Ambler for giving part of her life to groundWork for the last
four years. Linda was one of the original founding members of groundWork,
and has helped it grow to the organisation it is today. Although Linda
will no longer be in the office she will remain on as the editor of groundWork’s
publications.
In the last “From the smokestack” I spoke about a flurry of new environmental
legislation. This time I want to focus on another piece of legislation
- the National Environmental Management Second Amendment Bill. The stated
aim of this Bill is to bring coherency within the regulations that govern
environmental impact assessments, yet it fails miserably to do just this.
It simply weakens civil society’s power to hold industry and government
accountable for improper development.
It is argued by the Legal Resources Centre, on behalf of groundWork and
various other civil society organisations that, if the amendments are
passed, “it will no longer be a requirement that all activities that ‘require
authorisation or permission by law and which may significantly affect
the environment’ must undergo an impact assessment”. According to the
Bill, only “listed activities” must undertake an EIA. This means that
non-listed activities would be permitted to commence and may cause irreparable
damage before an assessment of their impact needs occur.
Furthermore, activities that are listed under Departments other than
the Department of Environmental Affairs, that need impact assessments
in terms of other pieces of legislation, will not have to comply with
the requirements and standards for impact assessments. This means that
sectors such as mining will be able to develop without impact assessments.
Also in terms of the proposed Bill, new industries would be permitted
to develop in, for example, the already pollution saturated zones of the
Vaal Triangle and south Durban, without needing to consider the cumulative
impacts of pollution from all sources in the area. Furthermore, socio-economic
issues will not be investigated during environmental impact assessments.
These are just some of the hard fought gains achieved since 1994 that
are being watered down - no doubt because of the influence of big business
and industry. Government’s inability to manage the enormous number of
impact assessments, which is a key problem, is not being addressed. Instead
of increasing staff and capacity to respond to EIA’s, government is seeking
loopholes to get away with not doing its job.
And finally, I have to end up with an age-old gripe. There is a flurry
of policy, legislation and regulations being undertaken by government
right now. However, there is no structured manner in which civil society
can make input, because there is no system that communicates these proposed
changes of law clearly to civil society. It is only industry - which can
afford people to delve into the corridors of bureaucracy - that is able
to ensure that it can impact upon all of these processes. Maybe, when
we eventually have the statutory, multi-stakeholder National Environmental
Advisory Forum it will be better … just maybe!
Times they are a changing!
groundWork merges with US organisation and opens
a US office
by Bobby Peek
On Friday, August 8, 2003 at our fourth Annual General Meeting, groundWork
signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the South African Exchange Programme
on Environmental Justice (SAEPEJ) of Boston, USA, whereby SAEPEJ became
groundWork USA.
The two previously separate organisations have united to form the new
groundWork. With this new development, groundWork will have a USA presence
to strengthen the local South African work and to help voice our concerns
in the international arena.
As groundWork, our mission is to seek to improve the quality of life
of vulnerable people in South Africa and increasingly Southern Africa
through assisting civil society to have a greater impact on environmental
governance. We place particular emphasis on assisting previously disadvantaged
people who are most affected by environmental injustices.
Founded in 1993, SAEPEJ focused on the effects of the deteriorating environment
and industrial pollutants on the health and daily lives of communities
in South Africa, and sought to build bridges between US and SA communities
around environmental justice issues. It provided resources to South African
community, developmental, labour and environmental groups in order to
address the neglected environments in which South Africans live, and to
assist in the building of a strong environmental justice movement, networking
closely with US and other international movements.
SAEPEJ’s founder and long serving director, Heeten Kalan, is a South
African, originally from Louis Trichart, who has been in the USA for fifteen
years. Heeten will now be titled Director of groundWork USA. Ravi Dixit
has run the SAEPEJ office as its Coordinator for the past three years
and will remain on as Coordinator of groundWork USA.
Heeten Kalan(left), Director of groundWork USA and Ravi Dixit, Co-ordinator
of groundWork USA
The basis for this association is that groundWork and SAEPEJ shared common
values, vision and a history of close cooperation. Both organisations
worked closely together in the past on the World Summit on Sustainable
Development, Project X-Change - which facilitated the visit of five young
South Africans of colour to environmental justice organisations in the
USA in May 2002 - the International Environmental Justice Forum and Toxic
Tour, both held in August 2001, and the Bucket Brigade in May 2000, to
name but a few joint projects.
SAEPEJ has also worked on organising various individual and group exchanges
between peoples of the USA and South Africa, and on the Thor Chemicals
case, critiqued and developed documents in response to industrial EIA’s
and provided essential information to inform the Asbestos Summit held
in South Africa in 1998.
groundWork USA comes with a strong pedigree of working on issues that
are relevant to South Africa. This union will strengthen our ability to
work on joint strategies to give meaning to our mission statement and
project objectives. Furthermore the focus of supporting community struggles
remains unchanged and is strengthened by the groundWork USA branch. The
USA office will enhance our ability to monitor South African companies
that operate abroad and to challenge multinational corporate abuse in
South and Southern Africa. Furthermore, the presence of a voice for South
African communities in the USA will strengthen the solidarity between
the environmental justice movements in South Africa and the USA.
With the growing demand for independent environmental technical expertise
in local campaigns, the link with the USA will further facilitate access
to international expertise essential to supporting successful local campaigns
against corporate abuse.
With the globalisation of environmental justice issues, community campaigning
recognises the need to challenge corporate abuse at corporate head quarters
and financial hubs of the world where some South African companies have
situated themselves. We recognize the importance of linking community
campaigns across international boundaries and feel that this international
presence will strengthen groundWork in this regard.
The decision to form the association was taken after deliberations that
lasted more than 8 months, and after a joint strategic planning that groundWork
and SAEPEJ held in the first week of August 2003. At the strategic planning
we jointly worked on systems to understand how the association would operate.
This was groundWork’s fourth strategic planning, and our biggest yet.
Besides the two SAEPEJ staff, Ferrial Adam, a new groundWorker, was also
present at the Strategic Planning. Ferrial has joined us as the Project
Support Coordinator and will work on research for the projects and media.
Commission of Inquiry: parliamentarians visit Tongaat gas rupture site
By Bobby Peek
“[It] would be in the overwhelming public interest to warrant the involvement
of an organizations such as groundWork in the hearing of the Commission.”
Advocate Vinay Gajoo, Commissioner of the Commission of Inquiry into the
rupture of the Petronet Tongaat fuel pipeline.
Monday, August 4, 2003 saw the reconvening of the Commission of Inquiry
into the rupture of the Petronet fuel pipeline, carrying Sasol gas, at
Belvedere, Tongaat, on December 24, 2001. Fortunately no people were injured
during the explosion but there was some damage to property and the explosion
occurred right next to a school which caused considerable, justifiable
concern from the community.
On the same morning that the Commission reconvened, members of the national
parliament’s Portfolio Committee on Mineral and Energy Affairs visited
the site of the pipeline rupture. This visit was in response to the Tongaat
Civil Association (TCA), groundWork and the South Durban Community Environmental
Alliance (SDCEA) attending the Petroleum Pipelines Bill Hearings in Cape
Town earlier this year where we made representations on civil societies’
concerns about fuel pipelines.
Petroleum Pipeline Bill Hearings
At the Petroleum Pipeline Bill Hearings at Parliament in June 2003,
the TCA presented their concerns about the ruptured gas pipeline, which
damaged houses more than 100 meters away from the rupture. Their concerns
included the lack of community knowledge about the existence and route
of a pipeline carrying gas through their neighbourhood, and the fact that
there was no emergency evacuation system in place at the time.
Also at these hearings groundWork presented our concerns with the Bill,
especially in relation to environmental impacts, the expropriation of
land to make way for pipeline construction, and the switching between
different fuel products in one pipeline which can be potentially hazardous.
Fuel pipeline establishment and environmental governance still occurs
in an institutional vacuum, where no one department has a specific mandate
or legislation to enforce with regards to construction and maintenance
of these pipelines. All these concerns were already expressed to government
in groundWork’s comments on the first draft of the Bill released in 2001.
P rotest
by School Children
During their visit last month to Tongaat, the Parliamentarians visited
the Trubel Primary School, and were greeted by several hundreds of pupils
who called for the relocation of the pipeline away from their area.
The Parliamentarians met with school representatives, the eThekwini Deputy
Mayor, representatives of the TCA and groundWork. The eThekwini Mayor
called on the parliamentarians to develop protocols for pipeline operations.
groundWork supported this call by indicating that the necessary legislation
needs to be developed to protect people from such incidents as the rupture
in future.
After the school visit the Parliamentarians visited the community to
see where the Petronet pipeline runs under people’s properties. After
this they visited and met with the Commissioners presiding of the Commission
of Inquiry, namely Advocate Gajoo and Professor Masu.
Petronet challenges groundWork representation at the hearings
On the second day of the reconvening of the Commission of Inquiry, Petronet’s
legal team challenged groundWork’s presence at the Commission, and sought
to have us excluded from leading evidence or cross examining witnesses.
After much debate the Commission adjourned to consider the request. When
the Commissioners returned they stated that, “it would be in the overwhelming
public interest to warrant the involvement of organisations such as groundWork
in the hearing of the Commission.” Furthermore, it was confirmed that
“decisions regarding environmental issues would be necessary in fulfilling
the terms of reference” of the Commission, and therefore they welcomed
environmental expertise.
The Commission closed proceedings after 8 days and will reconvene in
January 2004.
Industrial Pollution in the Vaal Triangle
By Ardiel Soeker
Townships like Boipatong, Sharpville, Zamdela, Boipelong and Sebokeng,
form part of what is commonly known as the Vaal Triangle. The region straddles
two provinces - Gauteng and the Free State - and its main towns are Vereeniging,
Vanderbijlpark, Meyerton and Sasolburg.
Townships in the Vaal Triangle have a rich and turbulent history.
On the 21st March 1960, the South African Apartheid police murdered 69
people in Sharpville. This event changed the strategy of resistance to
Apartheid from passive, non-military resistance to a radical armed struggle.
The event led to a whole generation of youth becoming politically conscious
and many becoming active combatants under Umkhonto we Sizwe. Today, the
Sharpville massacre is commemorated as a public holiday known as Human
Rights Day.
To suppress resistance to Apartheid, the old Government employed the
tactic of divide and rule. This tactic manifested itself in events like
the Boipatong massacres of the 1980’s where hostel dwellers living next
to Iscor attacked Boipatong residents, killing or injuring many people.
Today, the Vaal Triangle is South Africa’s biggest industrial region.
Smoke stacks bellowing out clouds of pollution over residents is a common
feature of the landscape.
Over the past 18 months the Zamdela and Sasolburg communities have been
groundWork’s main community partners in the region. Together with the
Sasolburg Air Quality Monitoring Committee we have been able to increase
awareness of industrial pollution. Community monitoring of industry (pollution
emissions, industrial accidents, EIA’s, etc) has increased. This process
has resulted in some positive developments within industry. Other communities
in the region have now also expressed an interest to challenge industrial
pollution in their areas.
Participants engage one another at the Community Conference
on Air Pollution for the Vaal Triangle held in August 2003.
On the 23rd August 2003, after intensive networking with communities
of the Vaal Triangle, groundWork, together with the Boipatong Environmental
Working Group and the Sasolburg Air Quality Monitoring Committee, held
a conference on industrial pollution for communities of the Vaal. The
purpose of the conference was to share the outcomes of community air monitoring
research and actions with other communities, industry and Government.
The South Durban Community Environmental Alliance (SDCEA) presented its
research findings to the conference participants. SDCEA has researched
the impact of Sapref and Engen refineries on communities of South Durban
by comparing them with similar refineries - Statoil and Shell - in Denmark.
SDCEA and a sister NGO in Denmark together produced a report: A 2002 snapshot:
Comparative study of refineries in Denmark and South Durban. One of the
significant findings of this study is that refineries operating in the
northern hemisphere adhere to far higher, more stringent environmental
standards than similar refineries operating in Southern countries.
SDCEA also presented its community GIS pollution-mapping programme. The
programme translates the data from community air monitoring, including
complaints from residents and bucket sample data, into pollution maps
indicating pollution hot spots, main pollution sources, major pollution
incidents and fence line communities. Data is also obtained from industry
and government and fed into the system.
The Sasolburg Air Quality Monitoring Committee presented a case study
at the conference, based on its community air monitoring campaign. The
presentation highlighted community concerns as a result of the revelations
from bucket samples that high levels of dangerous chemicals, like benzene,
are present in the air that people from Sasolburg breathe. groundWork
presented on the National Report on Community Air Pollution Monitoring.
This report encapsulates the data collected by communities through community
air monitoring campaigns in Sasolburg, Secunda, Cape Town and South Durban
(see more on this report below).
Denny Larson, the director of Global Community Monitor, a US based NGO
that supports the introduction of the bucket brigade community air monitoring
system into communities, presented to participants lessons from community
monitoring around the world. The bucket monitoring system is being introduced
- and in certain cases is up and running - in over 24 communities in the
US as well as in the Philippines, Thailand, India, Scotland, England,
Swaziland, Mozambique and South Africa.
Industry, representatives who attended the conference welcomed closer
cooperation with community groups.
Community participants called for closer networking and linkages between
communities of the Vaal. They emphasised that all communities suffer from
the activities of a few major polluters, like Sasol and Iscor in the Vaal.
Only through joint community action and mobilisation will government and
industry be forced to actively tackle industrial pollution.
Industrial pollution is a slow and sometimes painful massacre of communities
in the Vaal Triangle. It is a violation of our human rights. What is happening
in the Vaal today is, in many ways, similar to the 1960 Sharpville Massacre
and the 1980 Boipatong massacres. Today in 2003, the demands are the same
– respect for human rights and social justice. The difference today is
that it is our government that must take responsibility for protecting
our health and well being against the ammunition of industrial pollution
and greed for profit.
National Report on Community Air Pollution Monitoring in
South Africa
In August 2003 groundWork released its first national report capturing
the findings of communities around the country on industrial pollution.
This report focuses on the impact of the petrochemical industry on the
communities of Sasolburg, Secunda, Cape Town and South Durban.
The report provides a profile of these communities and the key polluting
industries. It focuses on community air monitoring and analyses the results
of bucket air samples taken in these communities. Industrial accidents
and incidents are also documented.
The report also reviews national and international environmental policy
and legislation specific to pollution, including the newly released Air
Quality Bill.
The Civil Society Strategy on Industrial Pollution, a five-pillar strategy
developed by communities in 2002 to challenge the threat of industrial
pollution, was based on the preliminary findings of the report.
The report calls on government to support a global convention establishing
corporate accountability and liability. It also calls on government to
support community monitoring. It envisions a national network of community
monitors.
One of the findings of this report is that accidents and incidents are
a major concern to communities and that repeated incidents are a sign
of poor and negligent environmental management. It recommends that heavy
penalties or even imprisonment be handed out to repeat offenders.
The report welcomes the new draft air pollution legislation. It however
cautions that a number of key concerns particularly around enforceable
ambient and emission standards, technology standards, quality control
measures, community “right to know” and access to information measures
should be addressed for the legislation to be effective.
Whilst the report is a first attempt at capturing community research,
it has also become a lobbying tool that communities can use in the discussions
with government and industry.
African
solutions to African problems: Developing countries doing
it for themselves
By Llewellyn Leonard
"I don't believe that the solutions in society will come from
the left or the right or the north or the south. They will come from islands
within those organisations, islands of people with integrity who want
to do something." Karl-Hendrik Robert - Founder of The Natural Step
In May I had the opportunity to travel to Mozambique to conduct an initial
health care waste skills share in two hospitals in Maputo. This visit
was the start of long-term assistance to Livaningo - an environmental
justice NGO – which requested groundWork to visit hospitals in Mozambique
and share our expertise on issues concerning health care waste.
groundWork has - for almost three years now - been committed to the process
of reducing the real and potentially harmful impacts of health care waste
and incineration. groundWork’s Waste Project has been working with two
South African hospitals (Edendale in Pietermaritzburg and Ngwelezane in
Empangeni) to turn them into model “green” institutions for others to
follow. It was due to our intervention at these government hospitals,
and the substantial improvements in health care waste management which
they have achieved thus far, that we were called in to assist in Mozambique.
From all my visits to health care institutions since the start of my
work with hospitals at groundWork, I found the situation with regard to
health care waste in Mozambique to be more critical than any other I have
seen. Mozambique did not have a waste management system in place during
my visit. I was shocked to hear that only in June this year, for the first
time ever, were regulations for health care waste management passed. Upon
examination of these regulations, however, I found them to be weak and
inadequate in addressing the problems of waste management. According to
these regulations, nothing is done to consider other waste solutions,
such as the 3 R's (reduce, reuse and recycle). Still, I do see the regulations
as a step in the right direction.
Maputo Central Hospital
I first visited Maputo Central hospital. Katya Hassen, Livaningo’s health
care waste project coordinator, and Mauricio Sulila, also of Livaningo,
accompanied me. Upon our arrival, excited staff members, who were eager
to start addressing waste issues within the institution, warmly greeted
us. We conducted an assessment of the hospital over a period of two days.
We also had an initial meeting with the hospital management and, overall,
I found the management were positive about our visit and genuinely showed
a willingness to better manage and reduce waste.
During our walk through the facility, staff members in the various departments
eagerly answered the questions I put to them. This was so that I could
better understand the hospital’s waste management system. The staff also
expressed their concerns and issues. I could see that they were feeling
hopeful that some of the pressing issues they were experiencing regarding
health care waste would be addressed and resolved. One of the most common
concerns expressed was the fact that all staff members need to be educated
on waste handling and disposal and that all staff would need to be unified
to work together.
Mavelane Hospital
After visiting Maputo Central hospital, I had the privilege of visiting
Mavelane hospital. Dr Zulmira Silva of Mavelane accompanied us during
our visit to the institution. The staff also eagerly welcomed us in the
hope that a proper waste management plan would be formulated. Mavelane
hospital also did not have any waste management policies in place and
therefore no segregation of waste was being conducted. Like Maputo Central
Hospital, only black bags were used for all types of waste. The hospital
had an on-site incinerator for disposal of their health care waste. It
was unfortunate to see that staff were unaware of the health impacts that
incineration poses to their quality of life as well as that of the surrounding
community and environment, since pollutants from incinerators are known
for disrupting the bodies hormonal, immune and reproductive systems and
can cause cancers. My overall impression of staff attitude to waste management
was that much work needed to be done in terms of training since staff
did not exhibit a clear understanding of the difference between infectious
and non-infectious waste. This is likely to lead to more injuries and
exposures, as well as spills and other sanitation issues. In fact, I was
not shocked to find that there were many needle stick injuries reported
every month amongst the various departments. It is hoped that, through
the initiation of education and training of hospital staff on waste management,
the situation at Mavelane hospital will improve. This must be seen as
a starting point if any sustainable solution is to be achieved.
Findings
Some of our findings during the audit of the hospitals’ waste streams
were: no waste management systems and policies where in place at the institutions;
no colour-coded bagging system is being used; only black bags are used
for all the waste streams, from domestic right through to infectious waste
and aborted fetuses; and no separation of the waste streams occurs, except
for body parts which were sent either for burial or incineration.
I was disappointed to find that no health care waste contractors exist
in Mozambique. Health care waste was mixed with the municipal waste stream.
Although a municipal service existed, I was flabbergasted to see that
the hospitals needed to find their own means of transporting their waste
to the only dumpsite in Maputo (there are no landfills in Mozambique).
At the dumpsite I was shocked to see that waste pickers were manually
sorting through the hospital waste, thus exposing themselves to the infectious
wastes. According to some of the rag pickers, there have been numerous
instances where rag pickers have been pricked by contaminated needles.
I was sad to see that civil society is not yet mobilised on these issues
and not aware of the dangers of being exposed to such health care waste.
This was due to the immense poverty being experienced in Mozambique, which
causes people to scavenge on the dump for daily subsistence.
The intense poverty in Mozambique causes many people,
including young children, to scavenge on the Maputo dumpsite for daily
subsistence.
I also met with the Mozambique Ministry of Health. I was surprised to
hear that incineration was the preferred option for the final disposal
of health care waste, since the Mozambican government is well aware of
the health effects that incineration poses to human health and the environment.
A government official told me that they needed a solution immediately
to the waste problems and that incineration was seen as an immediate solution.
The Mozambican government has recently purchased two used incinerators
costing millions, and has not been instrumental in combating the problems
arising from health care waste.
It is important for all to realise that there is a way to deal with waste,
which can create jobs whilst also solving a waste problem and this is
to engage in projects that reduce, separate, reuse and recycle waste.
Money spent like this stays in the community instead of being spent on
capital expenditure to incinerator vendors from overseas. The two hospitals
in Mozambique acknowledged that they needed to immediately tackle the
problem of health care waste at their institutions and will be working
in the future with Livaningo to improve their current situation. Livaningo’s
Katya Hassen will work with these facilities to establish environmental
management plans at the hospitals. It is hoped that these hospitals can
in the future be used as models for other hospitals in Mozambique to follow.
This would ensure that future threats to communities in Mozambique could
be reduced.
Looking ahead
This visit was a precursor to a longer visit, which will
take place in November when an expert from India will be visiting
hospitals in South Africa and Mozambique to share her knowledge
of health care waste management. Srishti, an NGO in New Delhi,
has already done great work in transforming some of their
worst hospitals into model hospitals for others to follow.
Such expertise from folk in India is essential for South Africa
and Mozambique and will be of tremendous benefit since the
situation in India has been much shoddier that than of Africa’s.
The November skills share will be an exciting opportunity
since it will see collaboration between NGOs from South Africa,
Mozambique, Swaziland and India. I look forward to welcoming
the assistance from India since this developing country will
be sharing their expertise with other developing countries,
shifting the reliance away from being dominated by experts
from the north. It will also be essential in terms of finding
developing country solutions for a developing country.
The collapse of WTO talks at Cancun: South Africa’s noble stand?
By Greenfly
As Greenfly writes this, newspapers are awash with dramatic headlines
about developing nations who ‘held firm’ and resisted the bullying tactics
of the European Union and United States; civil society protestors have
hailed the fact that poorer governments finally put their collective feet
down: ‘no deal is better than a bad deal’. Since our government is clearly
identified as part of the group of developing nations that walked out
of the talks, are we to conclude that the government and our comrades
in progressive civil society organisations are on the same side, fighting
a common battle for global economic justice? It would be surprising if
it were so. We need to look deeper to unravel what actually went down
and what’s at stake.
Before the Cancun meeting, South African activists expressed their doubts
about the likely conduct of their government delegation. The Cape Times
reported that South African ‘anti-globalisation’ [sic] protesters going
to Cancun had effectively branded the government as a ‘sell-out’, willing
to abandon the rest of Africa and the developing world to further local
business interests. One of them was quoted saying: “The track record has
shown ... South Africa will decide which way it will go according to the
balance of power and will probably sway to the powerful and look to where
business can benefit from the WTO”.
Dot Keet provides a thorough account of that recent track record in South
Africa’s official position and role in promoting the World Trade Organisation
(2002), which takes the story through to the WTO Ministerial meeting (in
Doha) that preceded Cancun. She shows clearly that the SA government’s
role has been to energetically defend the WTO and to support a new and
expanded round of negotiations. Both aspects are at odds with the interests
and positions of the majority poorer nations, globally and particularly
in the rest of Africa. They experience global trade as exploitative and
unfair, and they recognise that WTO ‘rule-making’ has been dominated by
those who benefit from global trade. Even researchers at the neoliberal
South African Institute of International Affairs concede that that African
governments view Minister Alec Erwin “with some degree of suspicion” because
he “does not have their best interests at heart”. In the context of tensions
and talks within the WTO, South Africa sees itself as a bridge between
developed and developing countries and has used its dominant position
on the continent to secure African subservience to the dictates of a broader
neoliberal agenda on behalf of those who, in turn, hold a dominant position
in world trade.
But did events at Cancun change all this? Has our government changed
and become a reliable ally for poorer nations or progressive activists?
Probably not.
For a start, remember the particular sets of issues that triggered the
crisis and collapse at Cancun. One important issue, frequently highlighted
by the mainstream media (as well as developing country leaders and big
development NGOs like Oxfam [1]), relates to agricultural subsidies in
developed countries. For developing country producers, these subsidies
are hugely unfair – they block their access to export markets (because
they keep domestic produce in the developed countries artificially cheap)
and they destroy livelihoods in developing countries where producers cannot
compete with floods of cheap imports. The demand from developing countries
to reduce agricultural subsidies in the developed world (especially the
European Union where subsidy levels are notoriously high) is seen as making
world trade freer and fairer and as contributing to poverty alleviation
in poorer countries. It has become a prominent and burning issue on the
WTO agenda. Promises to address the issue have not translated into effective
action by the developed nations, and their continued intransigence at
the Cancun WTO meeting helped galvanise developing countries to take a
stand.
But in fact it was not agricultural subsidies in themselves that precipitated
the collapse of talks – it was the ‘Singapore issues’ or the ‘new issues’.
These have been aggressively pushed by the EU and US especially, whose
mega-powerful corporate stakeholders would benefit from WTO agreements
to secure global rights and market-access for investment capital. The
push for these new issues onto the WTO agenda has been widely rejected
and resisted by developing countries who rightly fear that what vestiges
of control they exercise over their own development destiny, over labour
and environmental policy, and over global capital would be removed.
What happened at Cancun was that developed countries refused to budge
on subsidies if developing countries wouldn’t give in on the new issues
and allow them onto the WTO agenda. As the British Guardian put it: “the
EU had refused to back down on its insistence that poor countries should
pay for a better deal on agriculture by agreeing to new global deal on
foreign investment”. Developing countries, cynical of un-kept and meaningless
promises on the subsidies issues, refused.
The final walkout centred around the actions of a new alliance of some
developing countries, that included South Africa, variously called the
Group of 21 (G-21) or the Group of 20 plus. What held them together was
a common interest in pushing the agricultural subsidy reform issue. The
African Peoples Caucus pointed out during the Cancun meetings that this
grouping “essentially reflects the interests of big agricultural exporters
and does not support the needs of small producers. … Most problematically,
the G-21 has adopted the overall position that, if there is ‘movement’
(a rather ill-defined notion) on agriculture by the majors, they will
then consider negotiating their other demands. This flies in the face
of the position of the African and other developing countries in Asia
and Latin America (numbering more than 70 in total) that the controversial
new issues must not be linked to any possible agriculture ‘concessions’.
In fact, these new issues, above all towards the global liberalisation
of international investment and capital flows, must NOT become negotiating
subjects in the WTO.”
Some countries within the G21, including South Africa, were part of a
small grouping that held extensive private negotiations with the US and
EU during the Cancun process trying to rescue some sort of deal linking
the two sets of issues together. Newspapers reported that “A small group
of countries - the EU, US, China, South Africa, Brazil, India, Malaysia
and Kenya - … hoped that a deal which they agreed to could be rubber-stamped
by other members. Countries from Africa and the Caribbean were infuriated
by this tactic….”. Observers close to the action specifically state that
“India, Malaysia and Kenya left the meeting for a caucus while the others
stayed inside. They were joined a little later by South Africa and the
caucus continued. Together they decided that they will not move on the
Singapore issues unless there was first a major shift on Agriculture by
both the US and the EC. … The problem with this is that the imperial countries
(EC and US) have managed to link the new issues with the negotiations
on agriculture”. This was precisely what poorer nations had feared and
resisted all along and which the South African had repeatedly fudged –
even prior to the previous WTO ministerial meeting in Doha.
The consequences for developing countries that did not give in to US
and EU demands may well be severe and punitive. According to the Congressional
Quarterly Today, Republican Congressman for Iowa, US, Charles E. Grassley,
said, on the day after the talks collapsed: “I'll use my position as chairman
of the Senate Finance Committee, which has jurisdiction over international
trade policy in the U.S. Senate, to carefully scrutinize the positions
taken by many WTO members during this ministerial. …The United States
evaluates potential partners for free trade agreements on an ongoing basis.
I'll take note of those nations that played a constructive role in Cancun,
and those nations that didn't”. And Franz Fischler, Europe's agriculture
commissioner, has threatened: “"The G21 has shown no ambition at
all. We have shown flexibility, we are showing flexibility and we will
show flexibility but there are limits.”
Ultimately South Africa and the others did reject the terms offered by
the EU and US. But it should be clear now just how close South Africa
came to finding these terms palatable. Indeed, it is very evident from
the press coverage after the talks had collapsed that Minister Erwin was
not exactly ecstatic – he seems mostly to have been disappointed that
a deal was not struck, especially since he felt such headway had been
made on the farm subsidies issue. But the demand to reduce farm subsidies
that ‘distort’ global markets is essentially a free trade argument and
it’s entirely consistent with a neoliberal capitalist outlook on world
trade. We would do well to remember that there is good reason why Noami
Klein’s slogan: “Free trade is war” rings true for many global justice
activists.
Greenfly does not want to spoil the party of those comrades celebrating
the crisis in the WTO. As George Monbiot argues (Guardian): “The developing
countries, for the first time in some 20 years, are beginning to unite
and to move as a body. … At Cancun the weak nations stood up to the most
powerful negotiators on earth and were not broken. The lesson they will
bring home is that, if this is possible, almost anything is. Suddenly
the proposals for global justice that relied on solidarity for their implementation
can spring into life”. The collapse is indeed an important moment and
may signal new opportunities – just let’s not be naïve about where
the SA government sits as we map out the way forward.
ENDNOTES
[1] Oxfam’s 2002 report: Rigged rules and double standards, is an excellent
source.
back to top
Bisasar Road, Durban
By Sajida Khan
It all started when I attended groundWork’s
“Corporate Accountability Week” in Johannesburg in August 2002. Bobby
Peek invited me and I am glad that I attended. During that week I met
Christina Hotz (Carbon Trade Watch) and Ell Southern (cheeckystreak productions).
I had a letter in my possession written by Ken Newcombe (Fund Manager,
PCF) of the World Bank in which he described the Bisasar Road landfill
site (Durban) as being “operated and maintained on a World Class Level”
and as a noteworthy example of environmentally friendly facilities. What
a joke!! Unlike me, he does not live across the road from Bisasar where
approximately 3000 – 5000 tons of rubbish is dumped every day. The World
Bank was interested in converting the landfill gas from the Bisasar Road
site into electricity using Emission Reduction Credits (ERC).
Christina conducted an interview with me one evening and Ell took the
video footage. A few days later more interviews were conducted in Durban.
The video footage was sent over to Oxford in the U.K. where the Transnational
Institute worked extremely hard to produce the documentary GREEN GOLD.
The screening of Green Gold in London was very successful.
Carbon Trade Watch, which is part of Transnational Institute, successfully
conducted its first emissions trading strategy seminar in Oxford in July
2003. From South Africa Dudu Mphenyeke of Soweto, Patrick Bond from Johannesburg,
and I (from Durban) attended the seminar. As a new comer to emissions
trading I learnt a lot from the fundis. I found that Marcelo Calazans
of Brazil, Ricardo Carrere of Uruguay, Ponglet Pongwanan (Jaad) of Thailand
and I had a lot in common. The knowledge that I gained by interacting
with the seminar members could not be extracted from any textbook. I felt
like a student again, learning about emissions trading during the seminar,
while having fun punting or picnicking. I now understand why Durban is
conducting a feasibility study to privatise the Bisasar landfill site.
Firstly, the World Bank moves in, secondly it privatises the project and
the rich Northern Companies gain control by purchasing the projects. As
a result the energy source (including oil) remains in the hands of a few
rich Northern Companies or countries. Privatisation is usually followed
by maximisation of profits and job losses as well.
After the strategy seminar Dudu, Marcelo and I presented our cases in
Oxford. This public event also proved to be successful and a number of
links were forged. We then traveled to Scotland to meet the Scottish Parliament.
Dudu and I gave small presentations but the discussion that followed was
very stimulating. Green MSP’s (Members of the Scottish Parliament), Friends
of the Earth, the World Development Movement and researchers attended
the meeting. Everybody was very supportive. They could not believe that
government officials did not follow the minimum requirements or enforce
the law. They wanted to know if I was taking any legal action. They had
encountered a similar matter on a much smaller scale and they took the
matter to court but ended up settling favorably out of court.
Case Number 2222/02 has been registered in the Durban High Court. We
expect to hear of the trial date shortly.
I would like to thank Transnational Institute for sponsoring my trip
and my stay in the UK. Special thanks go to Carbon Trade Watch members,
Heidi, Tami, Christina and Jessica for organizing the seminar and taking
such good care of us. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank
the following people and organizations for supporting me in objecting
the World Bank Gas to Electricity Project:
Carbon Trade Watch, CDM Watch, groundWork, Earthlife Africa, Johannesburg,
Patrick Bond, Wits University, Urgewald, Germany, Institute for Policy
Studies, USA, Anti-Privatization Forum (JHB), Samata / Mines, Mineral
& People, India, Dr David A. Mc Donald, Queens University, Kingstone,
Canada, The South South Project, SA, European Youth for Action, The Netherlands.
back to top
Ferrial Adam
 Ferrial
joined groundWork in August 2003 as Project Support Coordinator. She will
be taking over the press work, assisting Bobby with the Corporate Accountability
Project and providing research assistance to the other projects.
Ferrial has come to groundWork fresh from completing an MPhil in Environmental
Management at the University of Cape Town. Prior to that she worked for
the Department of Foreign Affairs for almost six years, of which 2 ½
years were spent in Mexico.
Gutsy, determined, outgoing, vivacious and warm are a few words that
come to mind when thinking of Ferrial. A committed activist from an early
age she is a “go-getter” who is focused on making a difference in the
lives of those less fortunate than her.
Ferrial was born in Lenasia, outside Johannesburg, in 1972, the youngest
of five siblings. It was here where she spent all her childhood and where
her activism was birthed. At the tender age of 13, Ferrial was the only
female and the youngest member of the Lenasia Students Congress, which
successfully campaigned for the replacement of the prefect system with
Student Representative Councils in all the schools in the area. Two years
later she was elected president of her school’s Student Representative
Council – a position which she held for three years.
Ferrial recalls that, as a young teenager during South Africa’s turbulent
1980s, politics was the only thing that was important to her. She joined
the ANC’s Youth League at a young age and soon took up executive positions
there. When she left school and studied at Wits University she became
actively involved in student politics while also serving on the Lenasia
Community Development Forum. It thus comes as no surprise that, in 1995,
while only 23 years old, Ferrial received Lenasia’s Outstanding Woman’s
Award.
On completion of her BSc in Geology, Ferrial worked in a couple of contract
positions before joining the Department of Foreign Affairs. But after
almost six years in government, and having recently just completed her
Masters, she was more than ready to be an activist again and has made
her new activist home at groundWork. Ferrial believes that in groundWork
she will be able to combine her creative, activist and academic skills
and put them to good use to make a difference in the lives of others.
When not working, Ferrial enjoys traveling, city-life, dancing (flamenco
and salsa) and is a closet fan of Hindi movies!
We hope that she enjoys her move to Pietermaritzburg and all the challenges
and opportunities to be found at groundWork.
City of Cape Town also moves to appeal nukes decision
Following hot on the trail of Earthlife Africa, the City of Cape Town
has lodged an appeal against the decision by the Department of Environmental
Affairs and Tourism to approve Eskom’s proposed Pebble Bed Modular Reactor
(PBMR) at Koeberg. Some of the reason’s highlighted in the City’s appeal
were the environmental costs of nuclear waste storage at Koeberg, the
costs to the city of current and future emergency planning and related
infrastructure, and potential plume dispersal. The City also requested
more information on the health risk assessment conducted on behalf of
Eskom as well as on what monitoring would be done of ambient radiation
and health in the surrounding communities. (See www.capetown.gov.za.)
South Africa signs Cartagena Protocol
In September South Africa acceded to the Cartagena Protocol, an international
treaty aimed at protecting biodiversity from any risks posed by genetically
modified organisms. The protocol allows countries the right to refuse
to import genetically modified products on scientific grounds. A spokesperson
for the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism said that South
Africa would need to redraft the Genetically Modified Organisms Act to
bring it in line with the protocol.
DDT linked to infant mortality
Infant mortality arising from exposure to DDT may be as high as the
number of lives saved by using DDT to control malaria in Africa, claim
two scientists from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
(USA).
This claim was made at around the same time that the Kenyan government
announced that it is opposed to the reintroduction of DDT as a malaria
control drug in Kenya on the grounds that it constitutes an environmental
threat. The Chief Public Health Officer for the Kenyan Ministry of Health
stated that DDT has been found to cause cancer, and that it was no longer
as effective as it was 40 – 60 years ago as mosquitoes were now becoming
resistant to DDT. (Sources: PSR – Kenya, and www.OurStolenFuture.org)
Gauteng provincial vehicles run on LPG
In June 2003 the Gauteng provincial government unveiled a fleet of 210
official vehicles that have been converted to run on liquid petroleum
gas (LPG). The provincial government is planning to convert its entire
fleet to run on LPG. This gas is far more environmentally friendly than
petrol and diesel as it produces fewer noxious gases. It is also much
cheaper. Five LPG filling stations have been set up in Gauteng for the
government vehicles. This follows an example set by a couple of private
companies in South Africa who have already converted their fleets. (The
Star, 19 June 2003)
World Trade Organization policies trigger desertification
Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) this month issued an alert
on the potential impacts of the World Trade Organisation’s negotiations
on drylands. According to FoEI, desertification and land degradation are
global environmental problems that devastate the livelihoods of millions
of rural people, especially small-scale farmers. It is estimated by the
Secretariat of the Desertification Convention that the degradation of
land is costing the world community up to 40 billion USD per year.
Agricultural trade liberalization as currently proposed by the US and
European Union at the WTO will place an additional burden on dryland populations,
says FoEI. Most dryland communities consist of small farmers who are unable
to compete on a world market. The trade proposals by the EU and US would
force developing countries to open up their agricultural markets for these
subsidized products. The results would be devastating for dryland producers
and for the lands these communities manage.
FoEI also noted that water privatization, triggered by the General Agreement
in Trade in Services under the WTO, will ut an additional burden on dryland
populations. Few rural farming and pastoralist communities are able to
pay for privatised water services. Water privatisation schemes have already
lead to disastrous effects in countries like Niger and Northern Mali,
where rural people living in deserts and drylands have been faced with
water bills that are taking up between 12 and 70% of their income. (Source:
www.foei.org)
In the pipeline:
10 – 14 September: Fifth ministerial meeting of the World Trade Organisation
in Cancun, Mexico. For more information see: www.foei.org/cancun.
13 – 15 September: Oilwatch International meeting in Cartegena, Columbia.
For more information see www.oilwatch.org.
16 –18 September: The International Conference on Environmental Rights
and Human Rights, Cartegena, Columbia. This conference is being organised
by Friends of the Earth International, TNI, Oilwatch, and FoE Columbia.
For more information see www.censat.org.
18-20 September: The SIGN (Safe Injection Global Network) meeting in
Nairobi, Kenya. For more information www.injectionsafety.org.
2 –3 October: Minerals and Energy Education and Training Institute is
hosting a workshop in Randburg, SA, on Mining Legislation: The mine Health
and Safety Act. For more information email info@meeti.org.za.
6-9 October: The World Health Organisation and the United Nations Environmental
Programme (UNEP) are hosting a workshop in Tunisia on pesticide alternatives.
12 – 15 November: The second European Social Forum (ESF) is being held
in Paris. This is going to be one of the major events to fight globalisation
in Europe, and link up with a very large public (30.000 people) and many
organisations.
20 – 21 November 2003: An international conference on Sustaining Environmental
Journalism will be held in Cape Town. This two day conference will bring
environmental journalists together to share issues, challenges and successes.
High-profile speakers, panel discussions and outreach tours will combine
in a conference designed to make a difference – to journalists and the
planet.For more information contact Alison Barnard, African Kaleidoscope,
on Tel: 021-670 1485 or email: alison@africankaleidoscope.co.za.
16 - 21 January 2004: World Social Forum, Mumbai, India. For more information
see: www.forumsocialmundial.org.br.
Useful web sites:
Below are some useful websites for information on environmental justice
and social justice issues.
www.foei.org
This is the website of Friends of the Earth International (FoEI), the
largest worldwide federation of national environmental organisations.
This website contains press releases, electronic versions of most of FoEI’s
publications, information on all of FoEI’s projects and campaigns, and
links to FoE members worldwide.
www.ProtectingOurHealth.org
This website provides information on the health effects of various chemical
pollutants. The site is managed by the Collaborative on Health and the
Environment.
www.gcmonitor.org
This is the website of the US based NGO the Global Community Monitor (GCM).
This website contains much information on the bucket brigade system of
air pollution monitoring. It also includes information on the bucket brigade
in South Africa.
www.EnvironmentalHealthNews.org
This website provides links to useful environmental health articles in
the press and science digests. It is also possible to subscribe to the
EHN listserve which sends through regular emails and links on new studies
and research findings.
www.healthcarewaste.org
This is the World Health Organisation’s (WHO’s) website on the management
of health care waste.
www.OurStolenFuture.org
This site is the official website for Our Stolen Future, the book that
brought world-wide attention to scientific discoveries revealing that
common contaminants can interfere with the natural signals controlling
the development of the foetus. This website keeps track of the emerging
science of toxicology and debates about new advances in toxicology that
challenge basic assumptions about which chemicals are safe and what exposures
are tolerable. The site provides links to: the latest scientific results
and what they mean; policy news; and related press articles.
www.afhh.org
The Alliance for Healthy Homes (AFHH) maintains a website with information
on how to prevent health hazards in the home. This site contains a lot
of useful information on lead poisoning.
www.rachel.org
Rachel’s Environmental and Health News is a website and a weekly listserve
which is produced by the Environmental Research Foundation. Rachel’s provides
news and resources for environmental justice, largely focusing on providing
understandable scientific information about human health, toxicology and
the environment.
www.realworldradio.fm
“real world radio” is an initiative that mixes radio and new Internet
tools to 'break' through the information ‘wall’ set up by the mainstream
media reporting on the WTO. “real world radio” is a joint initiative of
Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) and Asociación Mundial
de Radios Comunitarias (AMARC). The objective is to show the impacts of
trade liberalisation, and, at the same time, to show there are many ways
in which communities can resist transnational corporations.
The groundWork Report 2003: Forging the Future - Industrial
strategy and the making of environmental injustice in South
Africa, written by Dave Hallowes and Mark Butler, published
by groundWork, South Africa, August 2003
This is the second in groundWork’s series of annual reports - entitled
The groundWork Report – which seeks to investigate the state of environmental
justice in South Africa.
This year’s report - Forging the Future - Industrial strategy and the
making of environmental injustice in South Africa - argues that government’s
current industrial strategy [1] has some very serious flaws. These include:
1. a continued reliance on providing cheap, coal-derived energy to industries.
The IMS fails to see how this strategy fuels pollution and global warming
and, consequently, poverty, and is, therefore, unsustainable.
2. an over-reliance on export led industrialisation which seeks to meet
the needs of the global market rather than domestic needs. In this model,
value is appropriated by those who command the global production networks,
and thus the IMS can only offer the false promise of trickle-down benefits
in the future.
3. a failure to promote labour-intensive industries. There is a tendency
for export-led growth to drive investment in capital intensity and to
drive out labour, to casualise and to out-source labour.
4. a lack of recognition of our need for a healthy and sustained environment.
The strategy does not address environmental degradation caused by industry.
For workers and the poor, as well as for the environments we all share,
this signals that health and quality-of-life remain subordinate to the
profit making of a small and wealthy elite. The basic recipe inherently
reproduces environmental injustice.
The report thus argues that, unless South Africa changes its development
strategy, environmental injustice will be further entrenched, the poor
will get poorer, and there will be little improvement in the quality of
life for the majority.
This report proposes an alternative approach to sustaining the economy
and livelihoods of South Africans by developing a more nationalist orientation
that seeks to develop domestic production for internal markets. A shift
away from the export-led growth model would also help achieve another
required shift away from capital-intensive towards labour-intensive production.
Notes:
[1] The government’s current industrial strategy is laid out in the dti’s
April 2002 strategy document entitled “Accelerating growth and development:
The contribution of an Integrated Manufacturing Strategy”.
|
