Jabiluka: World heritage nightmare for government
By Jim Green
Once again, the federal government has been seriously embarrassed over the possible listing of Kakadu National Park as "world heritage in danger" because of the potential impact of the Jabiluka uranium mine.
Last year, the World Heritage Committee (WHC) was presented with a report from a United Nations fact-finding mission which concluded that the Jabiluka mine posed "severe ascertained and potential dangers to the cultural and natural values of Kakadu National Park". After a massive lobbying effort by the Australian government, the WHC decided to give the government until April 15 to submit a report explaining how the natural and cultural attributes of Kakadu can be protected if the mine proceeds.
Twenty of the 21 WHC members recommended that construction of the mine be stopped pending the preparation and review of the government's report; the only dissent was from the Australian delegate. The government ignored the recommendation, and construction of the mine is ongoing.
The latest fiasco involves the leaking of a document stamped "Highly Protected", which outlines the government's strategy to avoid a world heritage in danger listing. The document was prepared by the federal Environment Department following high-level consultations with the departments of the Attorney-General; Prime Minister and Cabinet; Industry, Science and Resources; and FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND TRADE.
The document states that the government's objective is "to avoid a listing of Kakadu as World Heritage in Danger, while securing arrangements for ... development of the Jabiluka mine". Noting the apparent disposition of WHC members to proceed with a world heritage in danger listing when a final decision is made, the document says: "Overcoming this disposition before the July meeting of the WHC will be a difficult task; requiring a coordinated, resource-intensive effort across a range of portfolios and both domestically and internationally".
According to the document, the Environment Department will implement an international lobbying strategy in as many key international contexts as necessary. Efforts will be made to go over the heads of WHC delegates because they are too concerned with "heritage or environmental agendas rather than a whole of government view".
The Department of Foreign Affairs is entrusted with "identifying decision-makers and pressure points" overseas, while the Environment Department is to explore and prepare a calendar of "ad hoc lobbying opportunities".
Already, the government has funded lobbying trips to Mexico, Nairobe, Zimbabwe, Washington, Ireland and London. Federal environment minister Robert Hill acknowledged that his department alone would spend $1 million on the lobbying campaign. There appears to be no intention to forward the bill for these trips to Jabiluka mine owner Energy Resources of Australia (ERA).
Another task for Foreign Affairs is "analysis of upcoming candidacies". This can have only one meaning: grubby deals in which the Australian government supports WHC member countries for international positions in return for their opposition to an "in danger" listing.
Democrat Senator Lyn Allison says the government has attempted to change the composition of the World Heritage Bureau. She says a leaked Foreign Affairs cable noted, "We had only a limited opportunity to influence the election [of the WHB]. We lobbied with success to have Korea preferred over Thailand."
Thailand's "sin" is its view that a world heritage site can be put on the "in danger" list without the consent of the affected national government. The Australian government is contesting this view.
According to Allison, Hill denied the veracity of the information and then, when confronted with the evidence, fudged the issue by attacking the Democrats.
'Empowerment'
The leaked document says, "The issue of traditional owner attitudes to the mine is the most difficult one to counter internationally with rational argument". It goes on to stress the importance of "arguing the strength of our ... policies to support the genuine empowerment of traditional owners". In fact, the government and ERA are pushing ahead with the mine despite the unanimous opposition of the Mirrar traditional owners.
Presumably, the "genuine empowerment" will come from mining royalties. However, the Gundjehmi Aboriginal Corporation, which represents the Mirrar, says: "Local Aboriginal people have been excluded from governance of their region, have had their language and culture ignored, suffered massive industrial development against their wishes and in the space of 20 years been completely overwhelmed by a rapidly established white township [Jabiru]. This has manifested in chronic alcohol abuse, community violence and a chronic sense of dis-empowerment and hopelessness."
Contrary to the Environment Department's glib assertions, the Jabiluka mine, like the nearby Ranger mine, will further dis-empower the Mirrar.
The Environment Department suggests a strategy of bribery and cooption: "If we could arrive at an attractive package involving land, social and economic benefits, we might be able to persuade the traditional owners to accept, albeit reluctantly, the fact that the mine is going ahead, and that they should accept a negotiated settlement.
"Any settlement will be difficult to achieve, given the extent of the international support gained by the Mirrar, but a settlement, or even a clearly fair Commonwealth offer, could neutralise the active opposition of many WHC members."
Another option floated by the Environment Department is blackmail. There are ongoing negotiations regarding the transfer to Aboriginal ownership of sections of land in the Kakadu region. The document suggests that early action to settle this matter would be unwise because it "may limit the options for negotiation in relation to the mines".
Manoeuvring
The leaked document has been sent to all members of the WHC. This will provoke even more scrutiny of the world heritage process.
Last year, a report from two advisory bodies to the WHC argued that a failure to implement the recommendations of the WHC's fact-finding mission — that the mine should be stopped and Kakadu listed as world heritage in danger — would diminish the credibility of the World Heritage Convention. "This is of particular concern at a time in the Convention's history when the pressures on World Heritage sites are growing, and mining in particular is bringing such serious impacts", the advisers said.
Hill has repeatedly attempted to discredit the WHC. Last year, Allison claimed that Hill's staff were assembling a "dirt file" to discredit scientists on the fact-finding mission to Australia. Hill refused to confirm or deny Allison's claim.
When the WHC reports on Kakadu were released publicly, Hill claimed they were biased and unbalanced.
Hill dredged up a 1997 report by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature to try to claim that Australia is being "singled out" over commercial operations in or near world heritage areas. He claimed the IUCN report "shows that many of the factors which UNESCO claims are putting Kakadu at risk are commonplace in world heritage areas around the world".
Hill's manoeuvre backfired. IUCN director-general David McDowell issued a media release which said Hill's claim that Australia is being singled out "amounts to a misrepresentation of the purpose and content of the 1997 report, which is an objective statistical record of human impacts on sites.
"Such a record of the situation does not imply acceptance of these impacts or endorsement of them. Each case is assessed individually, taking into account the particular circumstances of the site, its nominated values, and the specific nature and impact of the activity being proposed on that site.
"IUCN has frequently taken a stand in relation to mining proposals — as it has with other such development activities — where they are likely to result in a damaging impact on the values for which the site was inscribed."
McDowell cites the example of Yellowstone National Park in the United States. It was listed as world heritage in danger because of the potential impact of a planned gold mine adjacent to the park. The US government subsequently stopped the mine.
The government says it will allow the Jabiluka mine to proceed even if Kakadu is declared world heritage in danger. ERA has also attempted to downplay the significance of the world heritage fiasco. However, Hill said he was "disturbed and distressed" by the WHC's findings last year, and Phillip Shirvington, chief executive of ERA, said he felt "betrayed" by the committee.
On February 18, the Senate passed a parliamentary order for the production of all documents relating to the Jabiluka mine proposal since October. Allison says, "It is anticipated that the order will force the government to come clean on its heavy-handed international lobbying tactics".
It is likely that the Howard government will continue to have a miserable time of it this year as its intervention into the world heritage process lurches from one stuff-up to the next.