Tongaat
Hulletts historical arrogance of ignoring their neighbours pollution complaints
comes back to bite.
A
public participation meeting held yesterday 22 May 2017, at the Maidstone
Country Club (Tongaat). Concerned community members filled the hall and raised
their disputes and worries with the proposed Effluent Treatment Plant (ETP).
Tongaat
Hullett formally known for its horrible odours and current mismanagement of its
site has over the years significantly impacted on the health of surrounding
communities. The health impacts such as asthma and sinusitis have been intensified.
The residents accused Tongaat Hullett senior mill manager of being inefficient
for having turned a deaf ear to the numerous complaints logged by the community.
Amongst the burning issues in question were, “what are the reasons behind this
development, why is this proposal to develop now public knowledge when the
management committed to close the mill in 2015, Why is this still functioning
when the commitment was made to close.
Why
expand to treat effluent and waste when the grand plan was to exit the site. It
is worrisome when a huge corporate chops and changes their plans for this shows
that the company is lacking in sound management. The only understanding the
community could come to is an ulterior motive of land been used as a brokering
tool, displacing communities and uprooting them for the sole purpose of
development and increasing their profit margin.
The
Maidstsone residents clearly indicated that the consultants had failed dismally
in its public participation process. There has been inadequate clarity
surrounding this proposed development. The experts who developed the reports
were not present thereby negating any prepared questions the communities had
come with to pose to these experts .Their reports were summarized by the
consultant who herself just noted down the volumes of questions that needed the
responses from the drafters of these reports .Communities stood resolutley that
there cannot be a rushed process when there is valued reasons why this EIA
process time frame must be extended by a further three months as the residents
were not happy to venture into the unknown by allowing this effluent treatment
plant to get the go ahead. Critical issues were raised and neither could the
consultant nor the Mill Manager answer the questions befittingly.
Communities
claimed that the process of this public meeting was flawed on the basis of the
consultants hosting a meeting in another area that would not be affected by
this development. The “independent
consultants – WSP Environmental” played both referee and player in the EIA
process. The residents alluded to the consultants providing insufficient consultation
with the affected communities. The meeting was advertised with a small poster
in an area far from the affected residents, as a result the meeting was poorly
advertised and not placed in local newspapers. Alarmed residents took the initiative
to invite the relevant affected parties to this meeting to ensure that those
affected could voice their opinions. Communities do not trust Tongaat Hullets
and their reasons to build this Effluent Treatment plant for the mere fact that
they cannot handle the current emissions being emitted from their site, the
dust that collects on people’s homes, cars, and the atrocious odours. Residents
reminded Tongaat Hullets Mill Manager Allan that, “Tongaat has a bad History
and putrid reputation and has failed the surrounding communities since its
construction”.
Communities
came to an agreement and demanded the following to be done:
1. The
Mill manager had agreed with communities on the basis that, a peer review needs
to be done and paid for by Tongaat Hullets. That the Mill manager will take
this up with his superiors and inform the community in two weeks.
2. The
community proposed a site visit to see the state of the art technology proposed
and where this technology is functioning as stated by the Mill Manager that
there is a plant in Prospection.
3. The
commenting period deadline stipulates that comments need to be made by the 31st
May 2017. Communities opposed this deadline and stated that, this is the first
time that they have come to understand this proposed project, and in order for
a peer review to be carried out time is needed and therefore we want an added
three months extension to accommodate this process. (Tongaat Hullett‘s together
with WSP Environmental will negotiate this with the department).
No comments:
Post a Comment