Quick-fix unsustainable mining solutions are doomed to fail
PHAKISA, from the Sesotho word meaning “hurry up”, has been touted by government as the silver bullet that would “fast-track the implementation of solutions on critical development issues”.
In a meeting between the Department of Planning Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME), Mining Affected Communities United in Action (MACUA) and ActionAid SA (AASA) recently, to consider how communities could participate in the Phakisa project, the DPME reiterated that the process was aimed at bringing together an “alliance of the willing” to focus on the “implementation” of “confident projects” that were “constructive, pragmatic and viable”. To their credit, the Phakisa planning team admitted they were faced with a tough challenge in that besides the historical antagonisms between the key stakeholders, the process was also challenged by intractable policy differences.
They were, however, at pains to emphasise that the Phakisa process was not about policy but about processes and implementation. It was at this point that the MACUA leadership once again confirmed the absurdity of a sector of powerful players who ignore the insights and inputs of communities at the peril of inclusive, sustainable solutions.
Matthews Hlabane, an MACUA leader from Mpumalanga, said that despite the rhetorical claims that mining-affected communities are stakeholders, “they are victims”. And as Meshack Mbangula, national co-ordinator for MACUA pointed out, “communities are angry, are ready to explode and government ignores communities at the cost of greater social conflict”.
MACUA leaders questioned the intentions of Phakisa and pointed out that mining-affected communities had only experienced the worst effects of mining. They argued that, considering the bloody, destructive and contentious nature of mining in South Africa, it would be wise to instead engage in Operation Bhekisisa – “look closely”.
What the industry needed was a considered, mature and inclusive discussion on what the real issues are that face South Africa – and, through such deliberations, reach lasting and sustainable solutions.
The One Million Climate Jobs Campaign, which shows that it would be possible to create one million jobs while greening our environment and rehabilitating the worst excesses of mining environmental destruction, was highlighted as a case in point.
It was pointed out to the DPME that MACUA, as part of the One Million Climate Jobs Campaign, had delivered more than 100 000 signatures to the DPME calling on it to include the campaign in its planning. The campaign has yet to receive a response.
It is ironic then that the DPME, while acknowledging that the key stakeholders are not only antagonistic but deeply entrenched in their positions, itself seems unwilling to move beyond its scripted path to engage in real conversations about possible solutions.
But to be fair, the planning commission of Phakisa is merely trying to navigate a path that could bring together an “alliance of the willing” and “break the paralysis” facing the sector.
Given the nature of the engagements with Operation Phakisa to date, it would be fair to say that government’s (Department of Mineral Resources) own intransigence and its continued refusal to acknowledge – let alone meet miningaffected communities – remains the biggest obstacle to inclusive solutions.
The failure to build inclusive platforms and inclusive solutions is what allows business to hold the country to ransom and allows business leaders to issue demands that if they are “not satisfied with the way Phakisa goes then we will withdraw our delegation after four days”.
Thus signalling to the Phakisa team and society that you will do it our way or we take the highway.
Government and business have to understand that any quick-fix solutions are doomed to fail and that the only “viable” way forward is an inclusive one. Bring on Operation Bhekisisa.
Rutledge is the mining and extractives co-ordinator for ActionAid South Africa and the convenor of the Coalition on the MPRDA