A TEST OF DEMOCRACY AT CHATHAM

One way of describing Government’s attitude might be arrogance, but its handling of the matter also suggests that democracy in our nation is not being served as well as it might. Democracy, if it is true, shows itself in the way people do things.

American pragmatist John Dewey, writing in the 1930s, pointed out democracy is not simply about going to the polls on election days. Dewey spoke of the need to recreate “by deliberate and determined behaviour” a richer democracy. Democracy involves respectful listening.

How Government treats the Chatham and Cedros groups and the issue of the smelter is as much a test of democracy as it is of its willingness to listen to the voice of the average citizen.

QUESTIONS LEFT UNANSWERED

Alcoa boasts of being “the world’s leading producer and manager of primary aluminium, fabricated aluminium and alumina facilities, and is active in all major aspects of the industry.” In 2005, its revenue stood at US$26.2 billion and profits grossed close to US$5 billion. Its size and power suggest it is not a company to be trifled with. It is to be noted as well that the Trinidad and Tobago smelter and another in Iceland are the only new smelters that Alcoa is to build in 20 years.

At this stage, many questions have been left unanswered. What exactly is “a state-of-the-art,” low emission, environmentally friendly aluminium smelter?” Why has the original plan for Alcoa to have a 60 percent stake in the smelter, with Government having a right to the remaining 40 percent, been shelved for an arrangement whereby Alcoa is to have 100 percent ownership of the plant? And what about the seeming misinformation? The organisations in the south-west peninsula are convinced from their research that the plant will now occupy over 3,000 acres and swallow up eight places of worship, a school and two recreation grounds, among other institutions. Alcoa, for its part, maintains that the smelter will be built on 500 acres of land that will be surrounded by a 1,000 acre park.

Plans have now reached the stage where the Environmental Management Authority will determine the terms of reference for the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the proposed facility. One hopeful stage of the process is that the terms of reference or instructions for conducting the EIA must be open for public review before they are finalised.

Non-governmental organisations and members of the public will need to be vigilant. Democracy demands it. They will be able to judge whether the terms of reference cover all the areas that must be considered in any proper assessment of the effects that the project might have on the community and the environment. The future of this project is, we hope, still in the people’s hands.