Michelle Pressend
Crossfire
It’s a shame that 90% of the Draft Minerals Development Bill debate is on mineral rights and the discretionary powers of the minister to grant those rights, when mining by its nature has caused huge environmental damage and has severely affected the health of workers and surrounding communities.
One would think that journalists writing about the Bill would do more homework to find out about its effect on workers and communities affected by mines.
The Bill does not adequately address compensation for workers and communities, improved working conditions in mines, stringent environmental management, rehabilitation, health and safety, etcetera. Instead, most of the coverage on the Bill is on the mining conglomerates’ unhappiness about how their mineral rights will unfairly be “taken away” and the negative impact on foreign investment.
The state must get its due for creating an enabling environment for equitable distribution and access to mineral resources to all South Africans and yes, there need to be checks and balances. But the state must further ensure that management of mineral extraction complies with acceptable health and safety standards and effective environmental regulation.
One of the major gaps in the Bill is the implementation of the National Environmental Management Act (Nema). The Bill merely paraphrases the principles of Nema and does not elaborate on its implementation with respect to mining.
For example, the Bill is not explicit on pro-active public participation, preventative measures and the “polluter pays principle”. The Bill is very limited in stating the process or making direct reference to present legislation regarding integrated environment management, the monitoring of socio-economic conditions and the importance of cultural heritage sites and areas rich in biodiversity as “no go options”.
The discretionary powers of the director of mineral development, the director general and the minister to grant permits are one part of the concern. Another concern is the dual role of the Department of Mineral and Energy Affairs as both regulator and the promoter of mining particularly problematic with respect to the department’s ability to implement and monitor environmental regulation.
The Bill encourages equity in the mining industry, but it does not discuss the department’s role in building the capacity and resource for environmental management and safe labour practice, especially in small-scale mining.
Public participation in decision-making in industrial development projects is one of the prerequisites of sustainable development. Yet the Bill makes very little reference to the role and responsibilities of interested and affected parties. Public participation is especially important in mining, where previous planning laws and government policies have located numerous poor communities in the vicinity of mining concessions.
With this in mind, the draft Bill is rather vague on any socio-economic legal provisions on how rural communities and other stakeholders will participate and benefit from minerals development.
If prospecting rights are favoured for “previously disadvantaged groups” without looking holistically at the provision of resources and capacity to reduce the negative effects of mining on communities and the physical environment and to improve labour conditions, then the paradigm shift in the Bill may defeat its purpose.
Michelle Pressend is coordinator of the environmental policy initiative of the Group for Environmental Monitoring