In a television programme on NCN on February 1, Prime Minister Sam Hinds, who has responsibility for mining, launched a thoroughly misplaced attack on the Stabroek News in relation to its coverage of the dissent in the mining sector.
The Prime Minister argued that the newspaper had shifted from its strong stance against damage caused to the environment by mining. Ostensibly SN would have made this somersault to simply jump on the bandwagon of the miners who have been able to successfully mobilize against new mining regulations. The Prime Minister unfortunately did not disclose the method by which he arrived at that erroneous conclusion. Secondly, the Prime Minister inferred that the full coverage given by this newspaper to the miners’ protest equated to approval of their cause. The Prime Minister is completely wrong on both scores.
He was however right on the point that the Stabroek News has been unremittingly critical of the damage caused by mining and other activities to the environment. This newspaper has been in the vanguard of efforts to ensure that the government properly equips regulatory bodies for the multifarious tasks they must execute in defence of the environment.
Very early in the life of the 1992 PPP/C administration Stabroek News had begun to set out its position on environmental issues and particularly the havoc wrought by mining in the interior. Indeed, in an editorial on April 10, 1994 welcoming the government’s approach to the IDB and the World Bank for a US$3M environmental sector loan this newspaper said: “This dilemma is replicating itself in many ways throughout the country. Rivers ravaged by rapacious miners are yet another sign of this problem on an even larger scale. But nothing is being done.
“The government must come to realize that its environmental record can be a tremendous plus in an international milieu where increasing emphasis is being placed by international funding agencies on the preservation of our surroundings.
“But lip service will not do the trick. What is needed is a fully equipped, autonomous body with the necessary laws and authority to be a roving crusader for environmental preservation”.
This position remained unaltered and the continuing problem was recently illuminated by detailed investigative pieces last year that took an intrepid reporter twice to the isolated community of Arau where residents complained bitterly about mining depredations and the insouciance of the government and regulatory agencies.
And the editorial line on mining continued as recently as January 11, 2010 thusly “Ironically, had the government been progressively applying stringent clean mining measures from 1992 onwards it would have been in a much better position today to advance its low carbon initiative. For many years Stabroek News has been at the forefront of lamenting the serious environmental damage being caused to rivers and streams by both local miners and their counterparts from across the Takutu and by all scales of operations: small, medium and large scale. It should not be forgotten that the worst … damage caused to the environment was at the hands of Omai Gold Mines Limited which was shockingly let off by the government in relation to the penalties that should have been applied and its obligations to affected communities. Worse, of all mining companies, Omai should have been the one to put every last dollar of its commitment into a reclamation plan to restore the scarred landscape. Instead, the government allowed it to walk away on the flimsy grounds that there might be further prospects for mining in the area – a most injudicious decision. It was vital that Omai of all operators set the best example for reclaiming mined out areas. Further, the odds that there are other rich mineral deposits nearby must be low.
“It was this same laxity that led to the pollution of the Konawaruk River to such an extent that it could no longer sustain the diversity of life it was accustomed to. Last year residents of Arau near to the Venezuelan border complained bitterly about the atrocious environment violations by miners. Yet none of these major problems and the dangerous pollution by the wanton use of mercury galvanized the government – that is until recently.
“Now the government is trying to play catch up by introducing draconian measures and flooding the interior with mines officers when for many years the complaints by residents of transgressions went unheeded. The same attitude has been evident in the forestry sector. The government did not stringently enforce many of the rules governing forestry and ensure that companies like Barama Company Limited complied with their commitments to value added forestry instead of concentrating on log exports. It is only latterly that the government has cracked down on holders of TSAs and other forests and at a time when the industry was under serious threat.”
So it is clear that Stabroek News has not resiled from its longstanding position contrary to Mr Hinds’ contention. The PM also failed to distinguish between the newspaper’s editorial position on mining and its obligation to report in full on the miners’ efforts at mobilizing to, in their own words, ensure the “survival” of their industry. Whereas the newspaper might not agree with all the positions enunciated by the miners it is duty bound to report fully on their efforts particularly since civil society and the business community have been in a state of suspended animation and seemingly incapable of challenging the government on matters of vital interest to them.
Indeed, the struggle by the miners may be the first round in a necessary campaign to restore and strengthen the vibrancy of organizations like the Guyana Gold and Diamond Miners Association. For much too long, President Jagdeo’s government has managed to have its way with these organizations by inserting placemen and women to do its bidding and to provide it with up to the minute intelligence. This is well evident across the private sector and it is something that its constituents must have the courage to throw off if they are expected to be taken as credible and serious stakeholders.
Quite interestingly, the miners and the foresters, who in the theory of these new mining impositions are adversaries, have closed ranks to present a common position to the government. This bodes well for networking among private sector entities.
The present contretemps should also tame the government’s belief that the grass roots are incapable of peaceably and peacefully mobilizing to oppose draconian measures. Bartica majestically put an end to that myth on Monday. However it turns out, the miners’ campaign is a healthy sign for this burdened society and it behoves the government to sit down with the group and construct mature compromises.
Considering the radical proposals that the mining industry is now confronted with, the government must now present as quickly as possible to the public the final versions of the Low Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS) and the forest protection agreement hammered out with the Kingdom of Norway. Surely the much-vaunted and circus-like, myriad consultations on the LCDS should have broached specific proposals like the six-months mining notice? Who knows what other onerous impositions might be contained therein?
