Environment under probe

McDonald

The National Environment Planning Agency (NEPA) came into being on April 1, inheriting a number of unresolved environmental issues from the Natural Resources Conservation Authority (NRCA), the Town Planning Department and the Land Development and Utilisation Commission which merged to form NEPA.

Franklyn McDonald, former executive director of the NRCA, is the chief executive officer of the NEPA. He discussed some of the issues facing the new agency with Sunday Gleaner Staff Reporter Klao Bell.

Question: The NEPA concept has been called absurd, as there is a school of thought that cannot perceive environment and development going hand in hand?

A: Yes, environment and development have been seen as conflicting poles in the past but we have to look further ahead. In thinking about sustainable development, we now need to bring about the economic and ecological issues and look at them with a view to planning at for a minimum of 20 years.

Q: What would a successful relationship between environment preservation and development look like for our country at this time?

A: In terms of whether we can have totally green areas, areas of mixed use, areas specified for development, I think the reality is if you look around Jamaica that is where we will have to go...I think we have a lot to learn because the discussion about urbanisation and urban development in Jamaica tend to be carried out as if the two are in absolute conflict. It is indeed possible to accommodate development that is not damaging. We are a small island and small islands have their own peculiar set of development and environmental challenges and we certainly need to look very carefully at how we proceed with that.

Q: We revisit the NRCA and some of the issues left on the table. People who live in bauxite mining towns are still having problems with dust pollution why is this still happening?

A: We have worked very closely with the Jamaican Bauxite Institute to seek to ensure that new approaches were taken by them and other sectors of the country where there was industrial pollution. We introduced what was called a voluntary compliance scheme where we required reports on the impacts of the various industrial activities on the environment and what was being done to address them.

Environment

Jamaica's bauxite industry is to some extent peculiar where the mining of bauxite in Jamaica takes place in very close proximity to established communities. I would say the complaints arise from a historical situation where back in the 50s and 60s when the plants were established, not a lot of attention was paid to the environment at that time.

Impacts related to the plants have been problematic, many of those plants are older plants and efforts have been made by the Jamaica Bureau of Standards to set up schemes where the emissions from the plants are measured and in some places where there is an impact on communities, there is some kind of compensation. I have seen a significant improvement over the last five years.

Q: What percentage reduction have you seen?

A: I don't know if I'd want to say a percentage but I'll certainly say that the complaints are down. We have had some persistent problems in some areas, which are being investigated very closely. We continue to have complaints related to health, some of the citizens have gone to court.

Q: Are you satisfied?

A: I am happy there has been progress, but it is not up to this agency to say we are satisfied until there is full awareness from all sectors about the environmental impacts.

Q: Why has the NRCA not insisted on the legally required environment impact assessment (EIA) and public hearings for the change of use of the Long Mountain Open Space and Protected Area?

A: Let me clear up the matter of public hearings, public hearings are not an automatic part of the EIA process. There was in fact a scientific report prepared by the developer which satisfied the requirements. There has been some amount of public discussion and one of the main persons who drew attention to the ecological value of Long Mountain actually wrote a letter of support for the development as it was designed.

The developer in discussion with some environmental groups had set aside most of the undisturbed forest on the land and the sites on which there were relics. Areas which were still in pristine conditions were set aside by the developer because a significant part of the place had been disturbed. Approval was given for a development which had a lot of conservation conditions and which we expect to be managed in such a way that will lead to use of indigenous species and artefacts.

Q: Are you satisfied that the conditions under which the development was approved will be honoured?

A: One of the things that we have done in the last 10 years is put in a stronger system of post development monitoring. The developer consulted with the conservation agency. He set aside a third of the land for conservation purposes including a bird sanctuary, these are the conditions under which it was approved, and we expect them to be honoured ­ but we will also be monitoring the sites as is our custom.

Q: Is this a step away from the initial targeting of Long Mountain as an area in need of protection as stated in the NRCA/Government Green Paper on Protected Areas and Parks?

A: The entire acreage of Long Mountain is pretty large and the area involved in this development site is quite small. We have evidence that it was already disturbed, there were charcoal burnings on the site. There is a proposal to review the open space and protected areas of Kingston.

One of the targets that NEPA has is to proceed to have a new development plan of Kingston prepared very soon. We are, as usual, awaiting support for this...but adequate attention will be given to spaces of recreation and areas for conservation. The present plan was done in 1966.

Q: What guarantees the safety of Operation Pride houses when by law the Minister can by-pass both the NRCA and the Town Planning Department, simply inviting comment but not subject to approval of either. I have information that only six Pride sites have ever been approved by NRCA.

A: Operation Pride projects do need the approval of the NRCA. Let me be very clear that the NRCA ACT states that any development undertaken by the Crown must be approved by the NRCA.

Q: But there are some sites which have not been approved.

A: Well we are now looking at that matter very closely and let me be very clear. The NRCA Act was framed by the Prime Minister, who was then the Minister of Planning and Development, it has had excellent co-operation from Government in implementing it.

There are Operation Pride projects that deal with rationalising existing communities, we have had to go in and take an approach that facilitates development. The Housing Act gives the Ministry of Housing very far reaching powers and provides an alternative to the approvals required through the planning department but as we understand it, I don't think anyone in Jamaica can create any development without the approval of this body.

Q: I don't know that this is the case now.

A: We have set up an arrangement where there is an officer here who works with Operation Pride and economic advice for these projects are recorded on a priority basis. That facility still exists and it has been used. I think there was a break but those meetings are being resumed.

At present, we are restoring arrangement for existing settlements to be upgraded ­ which is a big problem because we have many informal settlements in Jamaica that are in need of upgrading.

Q: It has been said that you are a coward, because you do not stand up to the Govern-ment or to the big names.

A: I am not aware of any case where we have not stood up for what the law requires re: environmental factors. I have been involved in some very controversial issues, I've had strong support from Cabinet and the Prime Minister. I can't think of any case where we have departed from what our legal responsibilities are.

Conservation

There was the famous issue with the hotel in Negril ­ I think it was called the Real Negril (of 1995). There are some environmentalists who would want us to block development in various ways, but let me say that we have always understood conservation to be wise use not just preservation. It is possible to mediate a middle-position because you can get win-win situations.

To be very honest, I think there are a set of wider and complex issues involved in some of the decisions that are taken about responses to some environmental issues. I wouldn't agree that we have been afraid to apply the law, it's just that people were expecting more dramatic approaches.

Q: There doesn't seem to be much happening with the grand plans for the Blue and John Crow Mountain National Park.

A: There are real problems with the Blue and John Crow Mountain National Park because the protected area system plan we had worked on was based on certain ideas about funding to be raised from the private sector and from user fees et cetera.

I think we may have been a little optimistic about the funding ideas and we are now discussing a major review of the financial sustainability issues underlying the success of the park. The assumption was made back in the early 1990s that the financial sector, which was very vibrant at that time, would have continued making contributions, but that was pre-FINSAC days.

Also the Government has been unable to maintain the level of commitment. We have negotiated with the EFJ (Environmental Foundation of Jamaica) which has pledged $50 million dollars a year. We are now hoping to take a new approach to the National Park system.

Q: Has there been mismanagement of funds?

A: I don't know of that.

Back to Lead Stories