Transcript
WZ: The short answer is yes. However, there are many reservations riding on this. In essence, the Council does recognise the potential financial benefits but attaches its concerns to how this can be combined with sustainable development.
BRD: What are the main challenges identified by the Council?
WZ: The Council is mainly concerned at the environmental impact mining can cause. When Makatea was mined a century ago, there were no environmental issues impeding the project. However, it is acknowledged that there is a new awareness and also a constitutional restraint with the so-called Environmental Charter. This means that people are obliged to protect the environment and also that the polluter pays. The Council also says that the site also has other significance, such as in terms of tourism.
BRD: The project to mine is being resisted. Can it go ahead?
WZ: It's difficult to say. The Council says the views of the public need to be taken into account. It goes as far as saying that for the duration of the mining project there has to be information...and participation of the public. This is against the backdrop of two years ago when more than 230,000 people signed an online petition opposing renewed mining. Also, the Council says the impact of renewed mining is not known and needs to be looked at. Furthermore, the concept of rehabilitation is, in its view, not defined tightly enough. There are seemingly many variables left in this equation to win outright support.
BRD: On the financial side - how could French Polynesia benefit?
WZ: The proposal is to be generous with the landowners to win their consent, meaning that compensation would be well above the legal minimum. French Polynesia would grant tax breaks to the investors to restart the activities. However, the Council is not sure whether there should be fiscal concessions and suggests a taxation regime which would benefit the communes and the landowners. Avenir Makatea calculated that it could export a quarter of a million tons of phosphate a year at about 140 American dollars a ton, which would amount to about 34 billion dollars a year.
BRD: Finally, while we're talking about mining, sea bed mining is a hot topic in the Pacific. Where is the debate at in French Polynesia on sea bed mining?
WZ: For one it's considered to be still in an experimental phase, and it is also clouded in uncertainty. France retains the right to strategic resources but it is being noted that rare earths are not listed. A suggested clarification is that strategic resources should be restricted to the ones which have a military application.
