Up until relatively recently media reporting on the gold mining sector had been constrained mostly by the fact that media houses were less than well-informed about the sector. Part of this was due to the traditional coastal bias of media coverage so that the bauxite industry, for example, carried much greater reporting weight than gold-mining. The other reason, of course, had to do with what, again up until recently, was the dominant position that bauxite held as a major money-earner.
Gold has now supplanted bauxite as the country’s most important money-earning mineral. Significantly increased gold prices have raised the economic profile of the precious metal and won it a greater measure of both national importance and media attention.
Even now, however, that attention remains largely limited to what one might term ‘news,’ centred on things like gold production and prices, issues that help the media in their assessment of the broader picture.
Other factors have contributed to the gradual increase in media reporting on gold-mining. These include the role of the sector as a major employer and a contributor to family incomes, the linkage between gold mining and another issue of national importance, the environment; the implications of the proliferation of gold mining for changing patterns of social and cultural behaviour on life in some mining communities; the advent of major foreign investments in the sector and the risks to life and limb associated with gold mining activity.
All of these considerations have raised the profile of the sector and won it a greater measure of media attention. Public interest in gold mining has also given rise to the raising of the profile of media reporting on gold mining-related issues like whether or not existing state-run administrative and oversight infrastructure for the sector are anywhere near adequate enough to be effective; whether, on the whole, the miners are sufficiently mindful of the environmental obligations associated with mining; whether sufficient amounts of the earnings from gold are ploughed back into developing the gold-bearing areas of the country; whether considerations of safety are afforded sufficient weight in the sector’s operating decisions and whether, on the whole, there exists a law and order regime in mining communities that is sufficiently adequate to effectively maintain social order in what are, frequently, volatile socio-economic conditions.
All of these issues have been raised and discussed in the media to varying degrees, from time to time. One of the views that has arisen out of these has been that there is a lack of effectiveness in the regulatory mechanisms for the sector. The general view, is that, by and large, the effectiveness of those mechanisms has not kept pace with the expansion of the sector and with gold’s current importance as a major money-earner.
What does not appear to be in doubt, for example, is that the GGMC, is unable to effectively control the illegal raiding of gold-bearing state lands by rogue miners and to properly monitor, far less control, the frequency of other unlawful practices in the sector including unlicensed dredges and mining operations that function without official permits; so that the unearthing of those types of transgressors is largely a ‘hit or miss.’ Perhaps more importantly, there appears to be no consistent pattern of strict and consistent application of penalties for transgressions.
Whether or not enough is being done – officially, that is – to redress the balance between what is often described as the ‘wild west’ environment that prevails in some of the country’s gold mining regions and the desirability of implementing and effectively enforcing laws that bring a greater sense of order to the sector, is difficult to say. What can be said, however, is that the available evidence located in the prevalence of practices that include significant levels of gold smuggling, environmental and safety transgressions, the raiding of state lands, the blatant lack of regard for the various licence and permit-related regulations associated with mining operations and persistent reports of corrupt practices reportedly involving miners and state officials underscore the tenuous hold that the state has on the sector. Even officials of the Commission readily concede the need to create a more efficient infrastructure for on-the-ground monitoring and enforcement of rules and regulations. Nor can there be any denying the fact that the proliferation of violent crimes and other forms of lawlessness in gold-mining communities demand a greater, more effective police presence in those communities. Frankly, it would be interesting to hear the state’s justification for the lack of effort in the direction of improving the law and order infrastructure in these communities when plain common sense ought to take us in that direction.
It is the frequency of mining-related deaths which, in very recent years, has taken centre stage in media reporting on the sector. In fact, the climate of opinion on mining deaths points to the view that levels of official concern are low even though the relatively recent advent of Commissions of Inquiry into such deaths and the outcomes of those Inquiries may change that view. That some mining operations are indifferent to safety regulations and protocols and are prepared to take unacceptable risks has been borne out in the findings of some of the Commissions of Inquiry. Meanwhile, it is widely believed that ineffective state-controlled monitoring and oversight and enforcement mechanisms contribute significantly to risk-taking by some mining operations. On the whole, it does not appear to be the general view that the level of safety-related sensitization on the parts of either the GGMC or the owners and operators in the sector is anywhere near where it ought to be. There is a widespread feeling too (and if this is true it is the greatest tragedy of all) that the lives lost are expendable and that financial gestures to bereaved families are adequate compensation for those losses. It bespeaks a sort of life-has-to-go-on posture that simply must change. Safety in the mining sector must reflect a far greater mindfulness of the importance of the fullest application of all of the rules of regulations that have to do with protecting the lives of those who take the greatest risks in the gold recovery process.
Arguably, one of the positive things about Commissions of Inquiry is that their outcomes provide an increasingly greater body of information on the mining sector and how it works. This can help build the knowledge base of the media. It is the effectiveness of the assessments of these Commissions of Inquiry, the appropriateness of their recommendations and the preparedness of government to rigidly enforce those recommendations, that matter most. The importance of the gold mining industry to the economy and to the livelihoods of many thousands of Guyanese imposes on both the government and the mining sector the imperative of setting aside the time-worn reasons/excuses for neglecting to pay remedial attention to some of the serious issues facing the mining sector.
