[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
dam-l Water Minister Kasril's Speech at the SA Hearings/LS
Somehow, this did not get forwarded to the Listserv when I got it in late
November--sorry!
---------------------------------------------
Herewith a heartening speech from Minister Kasrils regarding large dams and
the attitude of his department. He clearly highlights the role of water
conservation and demand side management, as well as the many social and
environmental consequences of large dams.
Liane Greeff
Keynote Address: Mr Ronnie Kasrils,
Minister of Water Affairs and Forestry, South Africa
I come to you here, really not in fear as some individual whose totally
intent now to build major engineering feats and dams in this country. I
certainly do have and have had, perhaps not to many people’s surprise,
another side. Once upon a time, there were the so-called marvels of
engineering and these were presented as a kind of conquest of nature. I saw
this not only in the western world, but I travelled very much through the
whole socialist block, in the Soviet Union and so on, and I know how they
were presented, as conquests of nature. They were typically described or
photographed from a great height looking down as though it was God's eye
viewing these marvels. And the implications were very clear: that the man
made constructs were almost (and they were virtually made by men, so it is
politically correct to say man made constructs), more powerful than nature,
and certainly more significant than mere human beings.
It was out of this culture that we get our giant looping motorways slicing
through arable land and changing forever the character of towns and villages
and the countryside. It was this tradition that gave us massive concrete
buildings, dwarfing us mere mortals in the streets below and offering spaces
that often proved hostile to the human beings that inhabited them. And most
pertinent to your discussion over these two days is that out of this culture
came, and I've only learnt this very recently, the 40 000 large dams built
around the world. Massive constructs built on a really grand scale, they
were symbols of progress - of the conquest of nature, and the power of human
ingenuity.
I am not a Luddite, and I know how much progress has been made by engineers
and industrial development, but it has become abundantly clear to all of us
that the costs of ill considered developments have been extremely high. That
what has sometimes been a sledgehammer approach may result in tremendous
damage to the environment and to human beings. Dams have resulted in loss of
land, forests and resources. Fresh water fish have become endangered
species, and even extinct. The impact downstream has been devastating, and
it has been estimated that 60 million people worldwide have been flooded off
their lands and out of their homes by the construction of dams.
We are fortunate that we live in a more questioning age now, the more so in
South Africa, since our transition to democracy. All over the world, human
beings have begun to count the cost of development that has not been
properly thought through. I am not against the development and it is needed
and we need to conquer poverty, we need to improve people’s lives, but it
needs to be properly thought through. Development that has not considered
the full consequences of what are often extremely far-reaching, and then we
find irreversible situations.
Today, our view is not from above, but from closer to earth and very
necessarily, enthused from the grassroots. The scale of development is
judged from the ground. If it does not measure up on the human scale, it
does not deliver to those immediately affected. It must be judged then to
have failed. If it causes problems of its own, if it has implications and
consequences downstream of that development, then it must be judged to have
been a poor or wrong decision.
These Hearings symbolise this change of scale or perspective. You meet here
to consider the impacts of dams in our Southern African region and I'm very
pleased to hear you say that you have so many people here from the countries
that gave us refuge and assistance in the struggle against apartheid,
countries where I was very fortunate to have refuge, sanctuary, support and
to have lived for over something like 20-25 years of my life. So you meet
here to consider the impact of dams on our region and on the people of our
region. In doing so, the region has the unique opportunity to make a
significant contribution to a crucial assessment by the WCD of which my
colleague, Prof. Kader Asmal, as we know, is chair. It has an opportunity to
provide a platform for the voices of our communities to be heard.
I was particularly pleased to be able to be here today because this is a
debate that is central to my work and the work that I'm striving to get to
grips with now, being in charge of Water Affairs and Forestry. Governments
have the power to make far-reaching decisions and it is critically important
that we have all the facts at our disposal before we do so. It's not so easy
to say that. To get the necessary fact from all sides. These are political
decisions and they need to be informed by the facts. We all need to
understand the implications and then the trade-offs that can be foreseen
when a developmental proposal for a large dam is placed before us.
At present, I'm in that very situation. I'm having to look at proposals -
very far down the road in relation to dams close to this very city,
Skuifraam and of course, the possibility of another phase of the Lesotho
Highlands Project, Phase 2. And I want to assure you that I'm not simply
sitting there and allowing bureaucracy and the civil service and previous
decisions to force me to sign documents virtually as though there's a hidden
hand forcing one to do so.
It is very, very difficult. And this is why I so readily responded to the
letter that I received from the Environmental Monitoring Group when I saw
this was taking place. I wanted to at least come and meet you and to assure
that although I can't be here at all except for the twenty minutes or so,
that I am going to very seriously deliberate on your deliberations and your
conclusions and recommendations. In fact, I want you to know (and Guy
Preston's going to be present in my department), that in relation to
Skuifraam, in relation to the Highlands Project, Phase 2, I've said to the
Department that before we proceed another inch, I want to have all the
role-players from the department (this is not going out at such a stage), to
argue the pros and the cons in front of me, and I'm sure that
recommendations here, through somebody like Guy Preston, will be expressed
at the meeting. It's within a week, I think.
We need to know who will benefit, who will be disadvantaged, what the
project will cost and who will pay. We simply need to have these facts at
our fingertips so that we are in a better position to make a decision. So
I'm not giving you any guarantees about those two projects or about the way
I will view dam-building projects in terms of my tenure, but I am
guaranteeing to you that I'm not going to automatically ascribe to the
mechanical and the construction marvels of the engineers. I will look at the
other options and I'm deeply indebted to a number of people in my department
for sensitising me to all the things like the catchment management approach
and so on. I do, at the same time, understand the need and the reality for
dams to catch water, to store our water, etc. So it's a balanced approach.
Obviously, as I've said, there will never be one perfect answer.
Any proposal will have its positive and negative aspects. Communities will
be affected, for better or worse, there may be conservation aspects, or loss
of biological diversity. Economies may be stimulated or depressed. Without
this foreknowledge, however, we cannot hope to make a proper decision at
all. And we must be aware of the options. I am committed to ensuring that we
are in a position to understand the conservation alternatives. And I know
that conservation alternatives such as demand management and catchment
management have not been adequately explored in our country. This has meant
that the supply side approach has tended to carry far more weight when
decisions have been made.
>From now on, anybody that proposes a large dam will have to present evidence
of adequate trials from a potential of conservation alternatives before a
decision can be made.
You need to remember that there are never easy answers to the questions
posed, but with proposals for large dams, there can only ever be trade-offs
with both positive and negative consequences. This is why the broadest
possible participation is essential when engaging in the decision-making
process. The supply and use of water must be based on the principles of
equity, efficiency and sustainability. This is the bottom line, the
foundation on which all our decisions must be based.
Water management is not an end in itself. It is a means toward an end, its
purpose is to contribute to a just society. A society in which all people
can live in dignity, in which all are provided with the building blocks for
a decent life. For this society to exist, two things are necessary. There
must be sufficient water, of adequate quality to allow for equitable
economic development and we must protect the environment on which we depend
and to which we belong and for which we must ensure our children's children
and their children can thrive. Many of the opinions we seek and value will
come from members of NGOs (many of whom are clearly represented here).
Democracy requires that I do my job as Minister of Water Affairs and
Forestry and that I recommend decisions to Cabinet. But it also requires
that you play your part in making sure that government is suitably and
adequately informed about the consequences of any decision that government
takes. We need you, the NGO community, to tell us with as much honesty as
you can bring to bare, in all honesty, in other words, the full implication
of each option. We need you to have your ear to the ground, to inform us
about the possible consequences of decisions for the ordinary people you
have the privilege of being in daily touch with. Your sepcialised knowledge
and your willingness to share it with us will help us as governments come to
the right decisions.
We all share one overriding interest, the greatest common good for the
majority of people throughout our region and on our continent. Together, in
partnership, we can find a way to meet our goals. Many years ago, Maria
Montessori, that great educationist, reported to a class of young children
living in war time Italy bout the suffering around them. She was momentarily
confused when a small girl said, “I wish I was not so small”. What the child
meant, it turned out, was that she felt powerless to do anything about the
world. For many years, many individuals and communities have felt themselves
to be too small and powerless to impact on events around them. In South
Africa, and indeed, Southern Africa as a whole, people and communities have
been buffeted by events, by decisions that have been taken above and beyond
their control.
What we need to try to do in this new era of freedom and democracy, is to
create an environment in our country and in our region where nobody feels
too small to express their concerns, where those who have lost their land
and their homes are able to speak up and say so. Where those who have an
opinion are able to find a platform where they can express that opinion. And
most important, we need to maintain an environment in which we, who make the
big decisions that affect peoples lives, we in government, stop and listen
to the voices of those who speak, particularly to the voices of those who
feel small and powerless.
I wish you all the best in your deliberation and this very exciting
conference over these two days. And as I said at the outset, I'd be very
interested to see the result of your deliberations.
Asantisana. Thank you. Siyabonga.
The Minister was asked questions concerning:
? Large dams vs communally owned smaller projects;
? The involvement of NGOs in the review of the LHWP and the decision
regarding implementation of Phase 2;
? Changing dam names in South Africa;
? What standard needs to be passed to convince the Minister that a dam is
needed,
The Minister answered:
I am still involved in something of a learning curve in relation to my job,
so I can't pretend that I am going to be able to deal with some of the
questions at present in the deepest possible way. But just going through
them in sequence, the first question was about where my preference would
lie, what would I support, the big mega project or the smaller project. I
think that's entirely a question of evaluation of a situation, of what the
needs are and what the river catchment's like. There would have to be (and I
must say there is), a tremendous amount of study, impact assessments and so
on, a screed of reports and documentations over many years before a decision
is taken about whether a dam is required, the size of the dam, type of
construction, where it should be located. What I'm fortunate enough to have
at this stage in South Africa, is a new generation of experts such as Guy
Preston, so that unlike in the past where, within a department such as mine,
it would be totally dominated and run by engineers whose single thought was
that you had to put up a dam and there was no alternative.
So, one certainly looks for all that fieldwork and research and debate and
discussion and that's got to be presented. Of course, given that we now do
know the amount of harm that going big can create and that it's not the
panacea, then it makes one interrogate the situation very carefully. SO,
happily, we have alternatives now and that’s why I’d indicated in my
presentation that in relation to the two projects that I mentioned, there
are people in my department who can come to the fore and have spoken to me
already about other options. I am of the view that we do have very many dams
in our country and that's my feeling and the way I've been reading the
situation. We've just gone through a period of the development of the
Lesotho Highlands Water Project and that massive dam there, there are a
number of other dams just being built - in Mpumalanga for instance; a small
dam up in Ceres which is very very beneficial to the farmers in that area.
Then there's this notorious issue of Skuifraam for an area of Cape Town
where there are so many dams. And the way I'm looking at Skuifraam is: what
is driving up the need for water? I've very quickly come to realise that
it's not particularly the fact that we’re running out of water, but it's the
impact of the use of water in the most profuse and profligate way by the
wealthy, by those living in the suburbs such as Constantia, and so on, where
I've come to learn that the households per capita consume over 1000 litres
of water per day. And the average for the poor is supposed to be 24 litres
according to our RDP. But in fact where we've started to develop water
projects and where there's got to be certain money and cost recovery and
therefore charge, and unfortunately it can’t be given free, that people who
are able to receive 25 litres, suddenly cut their requirement down to
something like 7 or 8. So, we look at Cape Town and we realise that we're
going to require, say, 800 million to a billion if we build Skuifraam. And,
in fact, we're going to have to do that now and not in 20 years or 30 years
time because we've got good citizens of Cape Town watering their gardens and
washing their cars and taken innumerable baths and showers a day and
therefore consuming per capita 1000 litres per day and therefore there's now
this demand, this requirement, for another dam.
So one looks at that then in terms of the options and what can we achieve by
greater cost management, by having a tariff such as that they had in
Hermanus. Or in Durban (Umlazi Water) where the first six kilolitres are
free, but the moment you start going up the tariff steps and you get to your
consumption of 2 and 300 per day and 1000 a day, then you are really paying
and then it's up to you. If you want it and you fill your swimming pool,
then you pay big big money. If you don’t and you're prepared to save the
money which then reduces our need for another dam, blah, blah, blah, the
economic factor.
So, let me say I've dealt sufficiently with question one and I think a
little bit with the last question - if you'll forgive me - given you some
insight into my mind and the process because I'm now getting into danger
time. We have very close connections with the Lesotho government and with
your Minister, my counterpart. Of course the Lesotho government would really
like to see South Africa go in for further building and extension in
relation to the Highlands Scheme because it's a very poor country and if
South Africa buys more water from Lesotho, it's greater revenue. The
question is, do we need that much more water. and, who pays in the end? The
water from there goes to the Rand (Gauteng) and who then in the end would
pay for the additional project and the monies. It's like my example about
Cape Town and Skuifraam. But I think your bias there was more towards how do
we involve ourselves with the NGOs. Well, maybe not that satisfactory at the
moment. The NGOs in our country, and internationally, I think all have gone
through quite difficult times. During apartheid they certainly did here and
when you have freedom and democracy, whether it's in Mozambique or Lesotho
or Zimbabwe or wherever, then the NGOs, if you're unpopular, or you say
something unpopular, you're viewed in a way that doesn't necessarily favour
you.
I think that there's a great need for the NGOs to find the right way and the
right voice and the right way of presenting information to government and
being very careful not be seen to be having another or a specific agenda.
This is why I said place facts as honestly as you can. But you need to be
careful of whether you have the agenda of another government behind you. I'm
not saying you have, but wherever I've lived, whether it was Mozambique, or
Zimbabwe and in South Africa, these are some of the questions that arise on
government's side.
I'm saying that governments have a tremendous amount to learn from NGOs.
It's a wonderful relationship. In defense, I have a yearly meeting, you
would probably all feel it's not enough, but I actually instituted an annual
meeting with the Cease-fire group in the ministry of defense in Pretoria.
And we differed (I was going for the Corvette as you all undoubtedly know).
We differed but we could respect each other and they realised that I was
always willing to listen and to hear their views. I can't honestly say to
you, Thabang, that in the water sector I've met very many people from the
NGO sector. I've been to a number of conferences on the environment and
spoken at those conferences as I've been pleased to come here. But the
question from both sides, developing mutual trust and respect, and
discussion and where we differ, not assuming that we're enemies, and this is
why I would say to you, present your facts as honestly as you can.
Changing the names of dams is a very easy question because I'd love to
change the Loskop and many other dams. I'm one of these people that would
like to give them a real link with the liberation struggle. But we have had
a good process that Kader Asmal has begun. Changing names of dams, and I
think it's not a good thing to have dams named after people. We all know
what happens - you're a hero one day and the next century you're regarded as
the biggest villain. But I'm certainly very ready. I am in fact looking at
changing the names, starting with my department and I've told my Director
General that I want to change the names of the four buildings that we have
in Pretoria which are called Residensie, Paterson and names of that kind.
And the kind of names I wanted are Emanzini and Pula and so on. But I'm up
against regulations. These are buildings that we rent and they're named by
the landlord so we're having to try and deal with that. I'm very much
inclined that way. I think that actually covers them all, maybe not to
everyone's satisfaction, so let me just finally say thanks again for
Tugela - no, that's not your name, you talked about the Tugela catchment,
it's a wonderful province as are all the provinces of the country and the
region. And we want to try and keep them that way and improve them. At the
same time, we've got to manage water for our whole region for the benefit of
our people and that's where we come to the whole question of development and
how we manage development so that it doesn’t contradict the need for the
healthy environment. I think on that basis I beg you to let me run for a
plane. Other wise I'll have to use one of those dreadful blue lights and
screaming sirens and an environmentalist will attack me in the press
tomorrow.
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Liane Greeff
Environmental Monitoring Group,
PO Box 18977 Wynberg, South Africa, 7824
E: liane@kingsley.co.za Tel: +27 +21 7610549/788 2473 Fax: 762 2238
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*