Network
of Earthkeeping Christian Communities in South Africa
NECCSA Update: January 2004
A
monthly newsletter on Church and Environment in South Africa
Churches Object to N2 Wild Coast Toll Road.
On
3 December the Record of Decision was signed concerning the construction of a
Toll Road through the Wild Coast. This
has drawn strong responses from the public, including from church leaders.
The following are two such church responses:
LETTER OF APPEAL: N2
WILD COAST TOLL ROAD
Appeal Against Record of
Decision A24/16/3/246 (3 December 2003) N2 Wild Coast Toll Road between Gonubie
Interchange near East London (Eastern Cape) and the Isipingo Interchange south
of Durban (KwaZulu-Natal)
1.
The South African Council of Churches appeals to the Minister of
Environmental Affairs and Tourism to set aside the Record of Decision of 3
December 2003 concerning the construction of a Toll Road between Gonubie
Interchange and the Isipingo Interchange, respectively located between the
Eastern Cape and KwaZulu-Natal provinces.
2.
Over the years, the SACC has adopted poverty eradication and the building
of democratic institutions as key focus areas of our vision and mission, to
mention a few. We have been integral to and instrumental in promoting key
national discussions on poverty eradication, civil empowerment and sustainable
development. Our biblical and historical mandate to be good stewards of God's
resources, human, social and ecological, challenges us, therefore, to respond
with deep concern to the suggestions in the said Record of Decision. In
summary, the said RoD implies that the construction of a Toll Road between the
Eastern Cape and KwaZulu-Natal will address adequately our concerns for poverty
eradication, sustainable ecological development as well as due civil
empowerment. At best, though, the RoD shows no real alternatives to limiting the
worst case scenarios of environmental damage. The proposal to set up a
biodiversity trust fund as "an offset against inevitable and unmitigated or
residual impacts" (RoD, S 7.7) acknowledges the possibility of ecological
damage yet nowhere indicates the necessity to explore preventative alternatives.
In this sense the arguments in the RoD appear illogical.
3.
A further concern is the precipitated or protracted nature of the public
participatory process. Issues of the future sustainability of communities
with regard to their ecological and socio-economic viability are too close to
our Constitutional rights of South African citizens to be left to future
negotiation with a privatised developer and/or contractor (RoD, S 8.7). With
regard to this process we must ask too, why the Record of Decision was taken
during December, a time of festivity and religious significance for the majority
of South Africans. With most of our time spent on preparation for celebrations
(and with major decision makers in DEAT simultaneously on leave!!) it needs to
be questioned whether the timing of such a decision is responsible, wise and in
the interest of our affected communities. The SA Council of Churches is
therefore constrained to urge the Minister to withhold approval for the
construction of the proposed N2 Wild Coast Toll Road and to extend the time for
appeal so that our Provincial Councils may have adequate time to discuss the
proposal with the affected communities.
4.
The SACC believes "holistic development" to mean that
sustainable socio-economic development is inextricably linked to ecological and
environmental protection. A short term capital intensive project with a promise
of short term rewards may be attractive yet it may force future generations to
pay for any ecological degradation and degeneration it may cause. John Yeld,
writing on sustainable development in South Africa, warns about the costs of
development that fail adequately to take into account its ecological impact. He
says with courageous foresight that: "We must not burden later
generations with an ecological debt that will condemn most of them to an even
more precarious poverty stricken existence than that endured by millions of
people today." [John Yeld, Caring for the earth - South Africa. A
guide to sustainable living (Stellenbosch: WWF, 1997), 41.]
5.
It is therefore with deep concern for the stewardship of present and
future resources that we have requested an extension of time as well as a
setting aside of RoD. By its own admission the RoD draws on the EIAR's
conclusion that " ... both benefits and negative impacts are anticipated as
a result of the project. The benefits associated with the proposed project
predominantly pertain to the social environment. However, the direct ecological
impacts of the alignment presented in the EIAR, although significant in
identified sensitive areas, are considered to be acceptable from a holistic
environmental perspective and should not prevent the further planning, design
and construction of the proposed project."
6.
In the light of these contradictions, the SACC reiterates its commitment
to cooperate with government in spheres of poverty eradication and
development in a spirit related to broad objectives of sustainability as
agreed at the World Summit on Sustainable Development 2002. Finally, while we
also hold that sustainable, social and economic development is inextricably
bound to care for the environment, we would wish to engage DEAT in further
deliberation on this matter after due consultation with our representatives in
the affected communities. We therefore request an extension of time for the
appeal process to 31st January 2004.
Sincerely
Dr. Molefe Tsele
General Secretary
South African Council of Churches
17 December 2003
--------------------------------------------------
STATEMENT BY ANGLICAN ARCHBISHOP
NJONGONKULU NDUNGANE ON THE
PROPOSED WILD COAST N2 TOLL ROAD
We
know government is committed to creating employment and sustainable development
for the people of South Africa. We
wholeheartedly support it in these endeavours.
However,
we agree with the Endangered Wildlife Trust that the proposal for the Wild Coast
N2 toll road are flawed in a number of substantive
areas and unacceptable in its current form.
As
stated in the Record of Decision: “This proposed project aims to provide a
limited access, high speed national route.”
While this might benefit through traffic and the trucking industry, we
are convinced that it will be to the detriment of the impoverished people of
Pondoland.
It
is clear that the Wild Coast Engineering Consortium’s proposal
is largely profit-motivated with little consideration for
people of Pondoland and their need for infrastructure that will aid their
development, such as tarred roads to hospitals.
In
its present form the N2 toll road proposal is not a solution for the people of
Pondoland and their invaluable environmental resources.
We
also cannot follow the logic that by building this road, the open cast sand dune
mining proposals at Xolobeni will be turned down.
The mining requires a road to truck the ore to the smelter.
The proposed N2 toll road will run within a few kilometres of the mine
and will provide the road that is needed.
We
do not believe that from a social or economic aspect the routing of this
proposed road is right. We are also
highly alarmed from an environmental point of view. Economic development in this region is dependent on
improved agricultural infrastructure and eco-tourism development.
The Wild Coast is one of the most magnificent and unspoilt coastlines in
the world.
It
also harbours a botanical centre of endemism.
Even if this road is to skirt the edge of the centre, the inevitable
influx of people, deforestation, alien plant invasion, overgrazing and erosion
are the natural consequences of building a road. It is also clear that the road will hinder rather than aid
eco-tourism as its route impinges on ecotourist centres and would prevent the
expansion of the presently miniscule Mkambati nature reserve into a major nature
reserve and tourist attraction.
We therefore appeal to government to rethink this
scheme and come forward with a proposal that respects the integrity of the
people of the region and their natural resources. It therefore seems that the appointment of a commission to
conduct wide- ranging hearings on development possibilities would be the best
way forward.
We
certainly do not believe that we should go ahead with the Record of Decision as
signed by the Director General of the Department of Environmental Affairs and
Tourism and are shocked that he has done so at the
start of the festive season. This
has effectively undermined due democratic process and is preventing a wide ranging response.
19 December 2003
-----------------------------------------------------
Objections may be lodged by the end of January.
Visit the WESSA website for details: www.wessa.org.za
------------------------------------------------------
NECCSA
website: www.neccsa.org.za
where membership details can also be found. You are welcome to distribute this
NECCSA Update electronically to any other interested person. You are also
welcome to send news to be included in the next NECCSA Update to emcemp@iafrica.com
by 19 February 2004. You may send such contributions in the language of
your choice.
Distributed
by A.E. Warmback 28/01/2004.