|
|
|
起初有人发现环评部门与业主有利益关系引发质疑，后来环保部的头发现环评做的太烂，很多影响没有提到或被低估，就换了一家公司重新做，这样一晃就是几年。
现在正在环评公示期，环境主义者们正在热烈反对中。。
CONTROVERSY over plans to build a tolled highway through the Wild Coast has boiled over again during public presentations of an environmental impact assessment (EIA) report.
The greens think that the road will end up destroying the priceless environmental treasures of the Wild Coast by opening its unspoilt parts to property development, illegal logging and dune strip-mining.
The good people of KwaZulu-Natal, who will be made to fork over appreciably higher fees to go about their normal business on a coastal highway where one already exists, don’t see why they should subsidise their poorer neighbours in Eastern Cape.
After years of mudslinging between these lobbies and the South African National Roads Agency, the first proposal was canned in 2004 by Environment Minister Marthinus van Schalkwyk because of a serious conflict of interest. It turned out the consultancy that conducted the EIA, Bohlweki Environmental, owned a stake in Stewart Scott Investments, a member of the consortium that put the proposal together.
But Van Schalkwyk’s review also slammed the EIA for inadequate specialist studies and failing to apply the cautionary principle by downplaying potential environmental damage. He also questioned why the report failed to mention the road would make mining the dunes of Xolobeni more viable, thereby sidestepping another environmental minefield.
The new EIA, by CCA Environmental, has taken a serious stab at addressing all these concerns.
It redid specialist studies deemed to lack independence, considered social and environmental impacts of a 2km corridor, not just the 80m road reserve, and concluded the road would make it cheaper to strip-mine the Wild Coast and expand commercial logging and farming.
THIS clearly wasn’t good enough for the road’s opponents, who this month called on the government to reject the new plan out of hand. Their arguments have a point. There’s no way the Wild Coast will ever look the same once a high-speed highway slices it in half. And south coast residents will pay the lion’s share of the project budget, spent mostly in the former Transkei.
But I think many miss the bigger picture. In an ideal world our taxes and fuel levy should pay for the magnificent highways that link Johannesburg with Maputo in the east, Beit Bridge in the north and Gaborone in the west.
In reality they would probably never have been built if they weren’t tolled. The same argument applies to upgrading the road between Durban and East London.
The south coast residents must also realise that, by national standards, they pay a pittance to use their highway. Moreover, the disparities in wealth, income and infrastructure between their province and the Transkei could scarcely be greater.
The greens are fighting a noble battle to save what must be one of the most beautiful, pristine and biologically diverse places on the planet. But they often misrepresent local sentiment to further their cause. This perpetuates the stereotype of wealthy urban whites, more interested in animals than people, using impoverished black villagers as pawns to block development. I’ve visited many villages and attended several community meetings along the proposed route and found overwhelming support for the road.
Admittedly, the strongest support comes from local business leaders and subcontractors, many of whom are milking their political contacts to be first in line for concessions that will make them rich. But peasant farmers and small entrepreneurs locked in an almost medieval economy are desperate for any improvement to their lives.
In the end, a good road is far better than no road. Its opponents should start focusing on ensuring the best social, economic and environmental outcome of an inevitable project rather than trying to derail it. |
评分
-
查看全部评分
|
[复制链接]
/1 
狗仔卡
发表于 2008-11-26 16:48
提升卡
置顶卡
沉默卡
喧嚣卡
变色卡
抢沙发
千斤顶
显身卡
发表于 2009-1-4 10:26
发表于 2009-1-4 10:52
楼主