Conflict of interest concerns in proposed bauxite project, says NGO

 

Sahabat Alam Malaysia (SAM) president Meenakshi Raman is the latest to sound the alarm over the proposed bauxite mining site in Pahang that would cover 3,642.176ha or the equivalent of 6,806 football fields.

She told Malaysiakini there are grave concerns that conflict of interest would arise if the Pahang State Development Corporation (PKNP) is both the mining operator and the enforcer of environmental regulations.

This comes after an EIA report, prepared by KenEp Consultancy And Services, highlighted three major concerns, namely the pollution of rivers, the loss of fauna and their habitats and the pollution of local living conditions.

Should the project proceed, it is estimated that 170,000 tonnes of bauxite would be mined each month. It would take three years and eight months for the site to be fully mined.

Yesterday, environmental NGO Peka called for the moratorium on bauxite mining in Pahang to be extended, noting how such activities in the past resulted in a “Martian environment”, a concern previously expressed by Kuantan MP Fuziah Salleh.

In an interview, Meenakshi said these concerns needed to be taken seriously.

Question: In this new proposed project, the PKNP, a state body, is directly involved in the bauxite mining project. Should the public be concerned there is a “conflict of interest” as the state government is both enforcement and mining operator?

Meenakshi: Yes. There are grave concerns about mining projects like this being promoted by state bodies. The conflict of interest is real, in terms of monitoring and enforcement by government agencies over government-related projects.

The likelihood of compromises and less stringency are real and will be against the public interest.

Question: The proposed mitigation measures to avoid loss of wildlife - do you think they will be effective?

Meenakshi: Such measures are not going to be effective. The more important question to pose is - why allow mining to happen in environmentally sensitive areas? We see this trend happening particularly in Pahang.

Bauxite mining is environmentally damaging, as we have seen from previous experiences in the Bukit Goh area, which resulted in public complaints and a moratorium on bauxite mining there for some time.

Despite these impacts, why does the state government continue, not only to allow but also to be actively engaging in promoting this activity, especially when there is loss of habitat with potential illegal encroachment, logging and road-kills of endangered wildlife species?

The approach should be not mining in environmentally sensitive areas which should be clearly no-go zones. The approach of having mitigation measures as proposed are not foolproof and will cause irreparable and significant damage.

Instead of ‘building back better’ which is the mantra of the pandemic recovery the world over, we are building back worse! Such short-sightedness must not be allowed. We should not risk endangering environmentally sensitive areas and habitats that must be protected - not destroyed or compromised.

Sahabat Alam Malaysia president Meenakshi Raman

Question: The EIA report said a “closed-circuit water recirculation” concept was adopted and no effluents will be discharged to downstream rivers directly. The report, however, admitted that bauxite residue might overspill during the days of heavy rains.

The report also estimated that aluminium and other heavy metals will “increase slightly” in Sungai Riau but be “back to normal” when the river flows into Sungai Kuantan.

As there are at least four water treatment plants and one dam in downstream rivers, can you share with us the concern of and potential impacts on Kuantan residents?

Meenakshi: The likelihood and potential of aluminium and heavy metal contamination of Sungai Riau, which leads to four water treatment plants and one dam downstream, is indeed a massive cause for concern as the treatment plants are vital water supply sources for Kuantan residents.

Claims of ‘increase slightly’ which will be ‘back to normal’ cannot simply be accepted as these are speculative claims based usually on water modelling analysis.

The approach ought to be in not allowing at all any activity that can pose risks to the drinking water of residents, especially when it involves aluminium and heavy metals, which are hazardous to human health, even in small quantities.

We should not be taking such risks with our water supply systems, as all you need is one incident or accident involving the residues and tailings over spilling and we will have an environmental and health disaster.

Prevention is better than cure and hence, a cautious approach in not allowing any likelihood of such contamination from happening is not allowing activities like this.

In view of the serious dangers involved in relation to the bauxite mining proposed, SAM has written to the Department of Environment (DOE) for an extension of time in displaying the EIA so that the people will be able to view it and provide their feedback.

Given the current Covid-19 pandemic and the difficulties posed in having public consultations, more time is needed to ensure the public is not caught unaware, especially Kuantan residents whose water supply is in imminent danger from projects like this.

We hope the DOE will grant the extension of time and we wish to encourage more communities and residents to view the EIA and make their concerns heard to the DOE. - Mkini

✍ Credit given to the original owner of this post : ☕ Malaysians Must Know the TRUTH

🌐 Hit This Link To Find Out More On Their Articles...🏄🏻‍♀️ Enjoy Surfing!