Environmental Justice Action in Southern Africa

PRESS RELEASE
23 February 2004

We the residents representing civic organisations of south Durban (Wentworth, Isipingo, Bluff, Merebank), Clare Estate, Richards Bay, Pietermaritzburg, Chatsworth, Sydenham, Potchefstroom, Table View (Cape Town), Sasolburg, Boipatong and Secunda gathered, at John Dunn Hall, to share our experiences and suffering as a result of industrial pollution in south Durban over the week-end of February 21-22, prior to the 8th World Congress on Environmental Health.

We have also heard from researchers who, through their research, have shared and confirmed our concerns.

We take note of the reality that:

Multi-national industrial corporations (MNC's) in South Africa, many of whom have exhibitions at the Congress, are:-
* Dumping hazardous chemicals and pollution in our neighbourhoods that lead to death and injury of workers and residents, and
the retardation of our population [1];
* Driven by greed to maximise profits at the cost to community health;
* Not taking responsibility for their pollution and use public platforms to shift the environmental health debates to vehicle pollution and domestic pollution;
* Undermining the community environmental health concerns by using employment as a bargaining tool for their unsustainable and polluting developments, and compromising community struggles by pushing industrial led social development projects [2]; and
* Transferring dirty technology, such as incinerators to South Africa and increasing the pollution burden on poor and vulnerable
communities

The national, provincial and local government is:-
* Failing the people by refusing to challenge MNC's for their polluting practices [3];
* Allowing an industrial sector to develop that is holding our democracy at ransom by its continued pollution and injury to free South Africans;
* Not giving meaning to its commitments of Section 24 of the Bill of Rights in our Constitution which guarantees us an environment that is not harmful to our health and well-being;
* Allowing the development of a sick and malformed society because children are exposed to pollution daily in their learning as well as their living environments [4];
* In collusion with industry to promote unsafe expansion of industrial development;
* Marginalizing communities due to improper consultation processes; and
* Not honouring the commitments of its international conventions such as the Stockholm Convention by allowing the development of
incinerators which are a source of dioxin production.

Noting the above, we hereby call upon the conscience of more than 600 environmental health academics, researchers, practitioners and government representatives, and of those industrial people attending the Congress to:- * Ensure that the outcomes of the Congress respond to the environmental justice calls of the communities who live in situations where their health and well-being are compromised as a result of poor industrial practices and environmental governance;
* Urge participants to ensure that conclusions on research should be practical and implementable and show the causal nexus, and that the research is reported back to the people;
* Develop mechanisms to give meaning to the resolutions taken at this Congress, in order that it does not become another talk-shop;
* Start undertaking research to highlight the impact upon vulnerable sectors of our communities especially those with HIV and Aids and the young, who cannot afford to be exposed to pollution that erodes our health;
* Create tools in order that community people as well as government can hold polluters accountable for the destruction of healthy
environments, which will start dismantling the "cosy" relationship between government and the polluter that results in the creation of a sick population; and
* Create a space in the 9th Congress on Environmental Health where communities can share their realities with those that choose to
research, govern and pollute us.

We call on the SA government:

• Stop polluting industrial practices;
• To ensure that community concerns raised in Parliament on
  3-4 February 2004, is addressed in the reworking of the National
  Environmental Management: Air Quality Bill [5].

Finally, we call on government and industry to pay reparations to those affected and are suffering from the polluting practices of MNC's.

For more information:

S. (Bobby) Peek - 082 464 1 383, groundWork,
Desmond D,Sa - 083 982 6939, SDCEA

End notes:

[1] Sasol releases more than 400 000 tons of volatile organic compounds into the environment annually at their plants in Secunda; Shell/BP have leaked more than 1 million litres of petrol under community houses and more than 26 tons of tetra ethyl lead next to community houses (for more information visit www.groundwork.org.za/airquality/airmonitoringreport2003.pdf
<http://www.groundwork.org.za/airquality/airmonitoringreport2003.pdf>)
[2] Instead of Shell/BP replacing their leaking pipelines in south Durban, they are spending millions of rands on social assessment, to find ways of spending their "social investment" in the south Durban community.
[3] An example: the eThekwini (Durban) City Council unwillingness to hold Shell/BP accountable for their continual violations of the communities' environments. The eThekwini (Durban) Mayor is central to this in calling for the reconsideration of the legal action by his health department against Shell/BP.
[4] White et al, 2003 (University of Cape Town) and Robins et al 2002 (Michigan University - USA), have done studies in areas around the Caltex Refinery in Cape Town Refinery, and the Engen and Shell/BP refineries in south Durban respectively and have linked the pollution from these industries with impacts on learners in local schools.
[5] Following are ten major shortcomings in the Bill that need to be addressed urgently:
1. The Bill fails to focus on the improvement of health.
2. No timeframes are stipulated for the setting of ambient air pollution standards or for the development of a national framework for air quality management.
3. Emission standards, which minimise pollution that comes out of the chimneys and pipes of industry, are not guaranteed.
4. Local municipalities bear the brunt of monitoring air pollution and holding large multinational industries accountable for their
air pollution.
5. If, by chance, the Minister does recognise that an area needs special attention because of air pollution (i.e. is declared a
priority area), it will take more than two years before action is proposed to reduce the pollution, and even then the proposed action may be contested by industry.
6. In these priority areas it is not guaranteed that industry will have to comply with emission standards.
7. The licence to operate a facility does not require that the authorities regulate against the very many industrial incidents that result in abnormal pollution being dumped on the community.
8. There is no specific information system developed to collect information to understand and monitor industrial pollution.
9. The Bill allows polluting industries that currently have temporary, conditional licences, to convert these into final licences
without changing their polluting technology.
10. The Minister may allow exemptions to some industries to allow them to pollute.