Transcript
MB: We have many concerns, one of which is the expedited procedure for expropriation. We have seen the same procedure when the previous Tahoeraa government passed the law for what they called a priority economic zones which were meant to facilitate this humongous and totally delirious Mahana Beach project. We have seen there the same expedited expropriation process and they have just cut and pasted what they have put into that law for a priority development zone into the mining code. So I'm really wary for Makatea because we have a lot of landowners and inhabitants who are against the intended project that they are going to use that expedited process. About the project itself - there are still many, many pending questions. It's not because you add the word rehabilitation to what is basically a mining facility that it somehow becomes a green one. That is greenwashing. And from the information we've got from Colin Randall, the promoter of that project, this is not going to be some rehabilitation project. It's just going to be a classic mining project that is pretending to rehabilitate.
WZ: What's the likelihood of this proposal to go through the commission and then the assembly for approval?
MB: The probability is 100 percent. We have the same situation in Tahiti that we have at the National Assembly in France with a large majority on the government side. So even if the opposition holds their breath, that law is going to pass. The real question is what happened when it passes. So far I would say that the government has never failed to hint its support for the project. They only see things in the perspective of promised jobs, promised income and of course approaching elections in the communes are an incentive for the government. That's how they function. They need white elephants, big announcements to make prior to the election.
WZ: Even if the law is passed a concession is not immediately granted, I imagine, because there is a process of consultation. How much faith do you have that a consultation of landowners and so on will be honoured or part of any decision-making process to grant a permit?
MB: There is a general urbanism plan called the SAGE [Schéma d'Aménagement et de Gestion des Eaux] that has been into study for a few years I would say now and we are currently seeing the consultation process that is being put into place. I would say it's a joke. You can only give your advice on the internet. It's a very complicated process. The people who don't have good internet won't be able to give their thoughts, and the time window is very tiny. I think they will use the same process here to pretend that they have consulted. Even if that joke of a consultation came out with a 'no' as the answer, then they would go to phase two and use this expedited expropriation process that is part of the law. No, they are really willing to go forward. During my last question at the local assembly I asked whether they are supporting or not this project. They were just mute. They didn't want, I would say, spoil the surprise. I have no doubt that they are fully supporting that because, again, that is the only way they know how to do politics - to announce white elephants.
WZ: There has been public opposition with an online petition that has garnered almost a quarter of a million people saying they are against the resumption of mining. Does any poll like this have any weight politically in French Polynesia or can it just be swatted aside?
MB: Oh no, it has no value whatsoever, unfortunately. We've seen that already. There was a petition around nuclear testing that was launched by Association 193 and it gathered many, many thousand people only in French Polynesia and the government answer was that it wasn't done according to the legal criteria that are embedded in our local statute and therefore it has no value and cannot be received as a proper expression of people's opinion. They will again just hide behind it.
