There has been a longstanding debate within the fraternity of Economists, whereby political regimes in varying countries, have been routinely accused of trading off long term development for short term growth. This particular debate seems to have developed renewed impetus in Jamaica in recent times, as the country is confronted with a political regime anxious to effect a fundamental transformation of the economy, but equally so convinced of the suitability of its approach that it is seemingly tending towards a strategy that will eschew any real degree of public consultation. This as Prime Minister Bruce Golding has opined, that Jamaica cannot remain underdeveloped solely to preserve the environment.
This cast against the backdrop of PM Golding’s revelations, that for the period October 1 to November 23, 2007, the controversial National Environment and Planning Agency (NEPA), “completed the approvals for 78 percent of the applications received proving that efficiencies can be achieved”. Whereas this may seem to be congruent with the PM’s desire to limit the building approval process to a period not exceeding 90 days, it raises some troubling questions. Indeed, by Mr Golding’s own admission in Jamaica “very often there is no correlation between what is approved and what is built.”
In light of this and the Prime Minister’s strategy of developing a single piece of legislation that is applicable to all regulatory agencies in the process of development, is there any provision being made for the input of the citizen? Already Section 9(5) of the NRCA Act, says that the NRCA (a part of NEPA) “shall consult with any agency or department of Government exercising functions in connection with the environment” and “shall have regard to all material considerations including the nature of the enterprise, construction or development and the effect which it will or is likely to have on the environment generally, and in particular on any natural resource in the area concerned.” Where the NRCA is of the opinion that the development involves activities that have or likely to have an adverse effect on the environment it may ask for an environmental impact assessment (“EIA”) containing such information as may be prescribed. This has already been the source of tremendous disquiet as NEPA has seemingly interpreted the word “shall” to mean may and not must and therefore has assumed tremendous discretionary powers. For the new legislation to be worthwhile, it should clarify the position on public consultation in an unequivocal manner and encompass provisions for compulsory consultations with the citizenry.
Similarly there are questions about the utility of Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA’s) in the new dispensation. EIA’s globally are usually completed in a 6 months to 2-years and hence a 90-day time interval would suggest that this necessary stage in the process of development is to be abandoned or severely compromised. Indeed this has legal ramifications as determined in the case of Belize Alliance of Conservation Non-Governmental Organization v The Department of the Environment and Belize Electricity Company Ltd (2004) where it was held that:
a. an EIA is part of the information taken into account by the decision maker when deciding whether to grant permission to conduct any activity that might adversely affect the environment;
b. the EIA is not expected to resolve every issue raised and indeed it could not since by its very nature it does not purport to explore every single possibility and advance solutions;
c. it is wrong to look at the EIA as the last opportunity to exercise any control over any project to which the EIA is relevant;
d. An EIA is satisfactory if it is comprehensive in its treatment of the subject matter, objective in its approach and alerts the decision maker and members of the public of the effects of the proposed activity.
Hence, whereas the Government of Jamaica is seeking to provide leadership to a much needed investment thrust, efforts must be made to ensure that such investments or development projects must be sustainable over the medium to long term. This cannot be achieved by seeking to circumvent, proven safeguard mechanisms in the interest of short term growth nor by continuing to seek to effect a process of development with no reference to the citizenry.
This cast against the backdrop of PM Golding’s revelations, that for the period October 1 to November 23, 2007, the controversial National Environment and Planning Agency (NEPA), “completed the approvals for 78 percent of the applications received proving that efficiencies can be achieved”. Whereas this may seem to be congruent with the PM’s desire to limit the building approval process to a period not exceeding 90 days, it raises some troubling questions. Indeed, by Mr Golding’s own admission in Jamaica “very often there is no correlation between what is approved and what is built.”
In light of this and the Prime Minister’s strategy of developing a single piece of legislation that is applicable to all regulatory agencies in the process of development, is there any provision being made for the input of the citizen? Already Section 9(5) of the NRCA Act, says that the NRCA (a part of NEPA) “shall consult with any agency or department of Government exercising functions in connection with the environment” and “shall have regard to all material considerations including the nature of the enterprise, construction or development and the effect which it will or is likely to have on the environment generally, and in particular on any natural resource in the area concerned.” Where the NRCA is of the opinion that the development involves activities that have or likely to have an adverse effect on the environment it may ask for an environmental impact assessment (“EIA”) containing such information as may be prescribed. This has already been the source of tremendous disquiet as NEPA has seemingly interpreted the word “shall” to mean may and not must and therefore has assumed tremendous discretionary powers. For the new legislation to be worthwhile, it should clarify the position on public consultation in an unequivocal manner and encompass provisions for compulsory consultations with the citizenry.
Similarly there are questions about the utility of Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA’s) in the new dispensation. EIA’s globally are usually completed in a 6 months to 2-years and hence a 90-day time interval would suggest that this necessary stage in the process of development is to be abandoned or severely compromised. Indeed this has legal ramifications as determined in the case of Belize Alliance of Conservation Non-Governmental Organization v The Department of the Environment and Belize Electricity Company Ltd (2004) where it was held that:
a. an EIA is part of the information taken into account by the decision maker when deciding whether to grant permission to conduct any activity that might adversely affect the environment;
b. the EIA is not expected to resolve every issue raised and indeed it could not since by its very nature it does not purport to explore every single possibility and advance solutions;
c. it is wrong to look at the EIA as the last opportunity to exercise any control over any project to which the EIA is relevant;
d. An EIA is satisfactory if it is comprehensive in its treatment of the subject matter, objective in its approach and alerts the decision maker and members of the public of the effects of the proposed activity.
Hence, whereas the Government of Jamaica is seeking to provide leadership to a much needed investment thrust, efforts must be made to ensure that such investments or development projects must be sustainable over the medium to long term. This cannot be achieved by seeking to circumvent, proven safeguard mechanisms in the interest of short term growth nor by continuing to seek to effect a process of development with no reference to the citizenry.
1 comment:
This blogger should contact NEPA for confirmation but it is my understanding that the ninety day processing rule does not apply if it has been determined that an EIA is required. It simply would not be possible to fulfill the procedural requirements for an EIA in such a time-frame.
Post a Comment