Environmentalist sceptical about establishment of new Mining and Geology ministry

By Nakinskie Robinson 

 

 

Environmentalist Peter Espeut is questioning the need for a stand-alone Ministry of Mining and Geology, arguing that it has been given no new responsibilities beyond those previously assigned when mining was combined with Agriculture and Fisheries. 

 

Mr. Espeut argues that the former mining ministry has already failed to adequately advance the sector, blaming government neglect rather than a lack of institutional separation. 

 

"It makes no sense to me to create a whole new ministry just to do what the other ministry was doing. The new mining that would fall under this ministry, I suppose, will be the oil that we are alleged to have found in commercial quantities. If there is a real reason for having a separate Ministry of Mining, then one could say that it is to ensure that the oil and the bauxite are properly extracted," he reasoned.

 

"Of course, we know that the bauxite was not properly extracted. The companies are in breach and the government is negligent in not enforcing the law beginning to be extracted in commercial quantities. They announced some years ago this plan to recover the rare earth elements from the red border, and years have gone and we haven't heard anything about that," Mr. Espeut complained.

 

He also questioned whether renewed attention to mineral extraction could reopen mining at the Dry Harbour Mountains in St. Ann.

 

In April, the Supreme Court struck down a 2020 environmental permit granted to Bengal Development Limited for bauxite mining and quarrying in the Dry Harbour Mountains.

 

The government subsequently announced plans to appeal the landmark ruling, while environmental groups and local residents continue to push for the permanent protection of the area's dry limestone forests.

 

Meanwhile, Mr. Espeut argued that the government should move to privatise Jamalco to eliminate conflicts of interest, rather than just to protect taxpayers from financial losses.

 

"The government is supposed to regulate the bauxite industry, but then it's a major owner of bauxite properties like Jamalco, or is part owner of Jamalco. How can you own a bauxite mine and at the same time, you are responsible to regulate mining? So it was a conflict of interest from morning."

 

"The reason they should be saying why they want to divest it, is to remove the conflict of interest. I don't know whether Jamalco is losing or not, but of course, you know, whenever the government says they're going to sell something, are we ever going to know who buys it? What we hear is that some company called Clarendon Mining Company is going to buy it and we'll never know who are the people who own it," contended the environmentalist.

 

He said the government's stated priority of environmental protection is also at odds with an industry whose activities can cause significant environmental damage. 

 

The move to establish a new ministry has also aroused Mr. Espeut's suspicion, who argued that the decision seemingly contradicts the government's recently announced belt-tightening measures. 

 

"It all looks very suspicious. In particular, since a new ministry does mean new permanent secretary, new offices, new staff, it does not sound like a cost-cutting exercise, when the government says that it realises that it needs to cut costs and no travel for people and so on," he pointed out. 

 

The government has not disclosed whether it will optimise existing staff or recruit new people.