“Swakopmund Myths” – Lobby groups continue to sabotage economic development in Erongo Region

In response to a factually supported statement by Namibian Marine Phosphate (Pty) Ltd (NMP) on “The Case for Co-Existence of the Fishing and Marine Phosphate Industries”, the lobby group Swakopmund Matters (SM) have responded with emotive and bigoted statements in support of their attempt to sabotage new mining and other industrial development initiatives in the Erongo Region. The propagation of miss-information persists. In their most recent statements SM has publically made unsubstantiated insinuations in regards to the ethics and professionalism of the independent consultants that were contracted to complete the comprehensive environmental studies for the Sandpiper Marine Phosphate Project (The Project). These consultants were appointed to provide the highest levels of environmental expertise in the Benguela Current Large Marine Ecosystem and to ensure full compliance with the requirements of the Environmental Management Act 2007. Thus, in light of these comments by SM, NMP is now compelled to provide a further factual response, setting out the inaccuracies in the SM statements and addressing the unwarranted vilification of consultants associated with this project.

Opaque Profile SM is a community group that represent themselves as a self-appointed voice of authority on the protection of the broader Namibian marine and coastal environmental issues and the related Namibian government regulations, as evidenced in their various public statements. Apart from a Facebook page, the group has no formal representative, no fixed or formal address and is not a registered entity (legal or otherwise). The public record reflects that SM has been represented on occasion by Ms Marcia Stanton (nee. Fargnoli) (American) also the director of Earth Organisation Namibia (EON) and Mr Riaan Eksteen (South African).

In response to the question as to why SM do not reveal a spokesperson or contact details, the group has said “it is all about content – not who runs SM”. There is no information on SM’s funding or their individual credentials or qualifications in relation to their experience and expertise in marine and terrestrial environmental management and the related Namibian legislation. The group operates opaquely as a faceless organisation, using Facebook, email and the media to issue public statements without professional accountability for source, or factual correctness.

Credentials and Ethics Yet SM considers itself sufficiently qualified to question the credibility of the Project EIA study and the expert opinions/conclusions of the specialist Consultants

with the following unfounded statement: “Who expressed this? Probably the ones hand-picked by NMP to read their documentation and who excel in desktop studies.”

Most disturbingly, without any substance or credentials, SM see it fit for them to make insinuations against the professionalism and ethics of these internationally respected and accredited Consultants that have been engaged to review of the project EIA, EMP, Verification Study and Peer Review conclusions.

In contrast to SM which operates opaquely, professional consultants are required to put their name to their work. All of the consulting companies engaged by NMP or the Government have provided full details of the various internationally published independent environmental experts were engaged to complete specific environmental impact studies and to provide peer review assessment or Independent External Reviews of the Project EIA and Verification Study findings. The Verification Study was based on current in-situ scientific data sourced through the implementation of sound scientific practices to ensure the findings as outlined in the EIA, were correctly assessed.

In response to the statement by SM it is noted that:

 The full EIA is available on the company website.  The full Verification Report and Peer Review report are available at the

offices of the Environmental Commissioner of the Offices of Ministry of

Fisheries and Marine Resources, as advised by the Environmental

Commissioner  The names, qualifications, affiliations, company details and contact details

of all of the experts engaged for various studies in the EIA and Verification

study are presented in the reports.  The process for completion of an EIA and application for an

environmental clearance certificate is fully documented in the

Environmental Management Act 2007 and Regulations, including the

appointment of an Environmental Assessment Practitioner (EAP) and

Independent External Reviewer (IER).  Once engaged, the EAP manages the process of Environmental Impact

Assessment process including the appointment of specialists to complete

various studies in accordance with the Scoping document that is finalised

after a process of public participation and which has been submitted

to the Ministry of Environment and Tourism.  SM have assumed that all reviews conducted were done by Consultants

appointed by NMP this is incorrect. Two Independent External Reviews have

been commissioned by the Environmental Commissioner in accordance

with the provisions of the Environmental Management Act 2007 (EMA 2007)

SM has clearly not made the effort to acquaint themselves with this information before making their statement.

On the issue of ethics, it is both unfortunate and disappointing that there is a

recurring insinuation from SM as well as others that “he who pays the piper calls the tune” and therefore the opinion of an environmental consultant appointed or whose services are ultimately paid for by a proponent of a mining project cannot be accepted as credible

Those perpetuating this jaundiced view are clearly unaware that worldwide, reputable consultants are required to comply with strict codes of practice and ethics which underlie their professional status and reputation.

Furthermore, in Namibia the law requires that the proponent is responsible to pay all costs related to the EIA process, including the EAP, any Consultants appointed by the EAP as well as the costs of any External Independent Reviews commissioned by the EC. (Regulation 45 and 46, Environmental Management Act 2007)

Principles and Integrity SM has stated previously that “. Swakopmund Matters wants to distribute credible views….” and that, “Recipients of our emails judge Swakopmund Matters on the substance of its communications”.

Certain media outlets, reporters and commentators have taken up SM’s recent statements in response to the “Case for Co-Existence” article and specifically their reference to an article written by Dr. Sylvia A. Earle entitled “Deep Sea Mining: An Invisible Land Grab” which describes “a campaign of wholesale destruction” gave rise to the Namibian media reports headlined “Phosphate mining a weapon of mass destruction” (New Era), “Phosphate mining dubbed as wholesale destruction” (The Economist). These are potentially misleading statements.

According to a famous quote by Mark Twain “If you don’t read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed.”

What SM elected not to disclose is that Dr Earle is also on record as being strongly opposed to “bottom trawling which has been compared” by Dr Earle herself and other prominent scientists such as Dr Lisa Levine to “the destructive practices of clear-cutting of natural forest”. Or in the case of Dr Earle who states that “She no longer eats any seafood, her small personal protest against the damage she has observed from fishing practices that have worn down populations of some species by 90 per cent.”

Despite the undeniable and scientifically documented parallels between trawling and dredging, SM, either blindly or ignorantly remains fixed to the view that “…….their activities – call it by whatever name NMP wants – will not only have a direct influence on fishing, but will harm the marine environment in its totality”.

This raises a question mark over the principles which SM stands for in regard

to their stated positon on protection of the broader issues of protection of the Namibian marine and coastal environment and underlying motives for opposing one activity (Phosphate Mining) while supporting another (Fishing/bottom trawling) when both have impacts to the marine environment.

It would be interesting to know:

 where SM stands on the issue of bottom trawling and the environment.  Or if SM will support the newly proposed amendments to the

Environmental Management Act 2007 which include Commercial Fishing as

a listed activity requiring full EIA process for all operators and quota holders?

Furthermore given the opaqueness of SM as a Group what gives them the right to:

a. question the credibility and professionalism of the consultants engaged

for the Project environmental studies b. Comment on EMA 2007 guidelines and requirements? c. Approved EAP’s and IER’s under EMA 2007? d. The appointment and qualifications of EAP’s or IER’s? e. Or for that matter the scientifically based environmental impacts and

regulations as a whole?

Conclusion

It is time for SM to step out from behind their jaundiced premises and put their credentials forward to support their unfounded statements and miss-representation of the true facts.

While diverse discussion and views that based on facts and sound logic are to be respected, hollow, unsubstantiated claims and destructive opinions put forward by some groups does little to promote the image of Namibia and unfairly undermines credibility of the Government agencies responsible for applying the relevant legislation. Similarly there is nothing to gain from undermining the significant value and role of the accredited specialists and consultants that contribute their expertise towards environmental studies in Namibia.

Expert opinions expressed by an Independent Peer Review panel as well and the appointed Independent External Reviewer concluded that there are no substantive reasons why marine phosphate mining and fishing industries should not be able to co-exist and be equitably managed under the provisions of the Environmental Management Act of 2007.

Knowledge Katti Director NMP