Environmental Justice Action in Southern Africa


GROUNDWORK's QUARTERLY NEWSLETTER
Volume 5, No 3
September 2003

IN THIS ISSUE:
From the Editor
From the Smokestack
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 ProjectIndustrial 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


From the Editor

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

back to top


From the Smokestack
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!

back to top


Lead Story

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.


Pipelines

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.

Protest 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.

back to top


Air Quality Project

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.

back to top


Waste Projects

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.

back to top


Cynics Corner

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


Community News

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


Focus on...

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.

back to top


In Brief  
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)

back to top


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.

back to top


Publications

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”.

back to top