They provide conditions for more than 5 thousand children, so that the absenteeism rate in schools has decreased from 70% to 0% once the program started
Carlos Salazar
During last week, a series of articles have been published, that stemmed from a forum about mining organized by a series of ecologists groups, organization that if carefully observed, reveals it is formed by the same faces of the movement that we could call “anti-everything”. We can’t expect objective conclusions of an event where clearly the objective was to emphasize the negative aspects of an industry such as mining, without giving a fair opportunity to those that would talk about the positive aspects.
However, the position of those that are in the mining industry like myself, has always been that the mining projects in progress and those to come (as well as those of any other nature), should continue to be carried out always considering the most advanced measures of environmental, social and clean technology management, and this includes periodic audits and ISO 14000 certifications.
This type of management is the one that all financial institutions impose on companies that develop these projects, as a condition to contribute with their money.
No one with a minimum of responsibility in this industry would want to close the financing sources on themselves. On the other hand, safeguarding the adequate implementing and follow-up of these measures, and helping to strengthen the institutionalism of the country for the Government to better comply with the regulating duty, is where we should direct the communities and the society’s effort, the laws are already there and the human resource in government institutions also.
How are we going to discuss about serious and non-political/ or dogmatic bases, a national territory ordering plan, if the resources in the subsoil are not explored and known?
Precisely, the only way to know it is through geological exploration of the country. To request moratoriums and/or discussions on the convenience of taking economic alternatives to whom today don’t have other alternatives, is simply participating of the game of those who want to extend the stay in the poverty circle of a vast majority of Panamanians indefinitely and increase their mistrust in the democratic institutions.
And it is also very clear that if we prolong starting projects or we close the door on geological exploration to establish where there is potential for others, we are going to lose the opportunities that state of the global economy currently offers. The latter is the objective sketched in the background of the “anti-everything” that has an ample media range in the country, since conflict sells.
Is it that we don’t realize that those that lead the cause against the Panamanian mining industry, are the same ones that are against the Canal’s extension, the dolphinariums and resorts that generate many jobs, the new cement installations that help the cost of social interest housing to decrease, the hydroelectric stations that would decrease the cost of energy (cost that coincidentally badly strikes the most poor)?
Let us not allow those that are trying to put us against the alternatives of improving the quality of life of the poorer ones through half truths or biased arguments, make us venture into writing about the spillage of sulphuric acid in the mines in Santa Rosa of Cañazas or in Remance Mine when actually the substance was never used in those lixiviation tubs.
The “damage” was such caused by these industries in these areas, that while they were in operation the population experienced better economic conditions (historically the best contributions to the Social Security), lots of employment, health centers conveniently equipped, construction of water-treatment plant in Cañazas, infrastructure maintenance, and what is even worse, if we go to Cañas today and talk to the residents (not those that are trained and that are brought from the “anti-everything” groups to the biased forums), we will find out that these do not expect to have this opportunity again.
Why don’t we show the fact that Petaquilla area receives conditions for more than 5 thousand children has decreased the absenteeism in schools from 70% to 0% once the program started? Is it that we want moratoriums for this type of “damage” to be replicated in other parts of the country?
The biggest risk to the environment is poverty, since this condition only makes human beings take what nature provides in the field.
The high rates of deforestation in the country are not a result of an industry, even less result of the mining industry; it is caused because of the need of residents of rural areas to get a space to survive when they have no other alternative than this or to migrate to other cities. It is good for us to analyze what we are going to propose before the whole country, because if we only look at one side and we don’t go deeper into the surface (generally done by politicians) we will be supporting the fact that these people will not be able to get out of the extreme poverty circle.
Likewise, it is not possible to assure that certain industrial activities cannot be compatible with others, when if handled in a responsible and convenient way, they can coexist one next to the other. Examples of mining being a catalyst vehicle for the development of agricultural activities coexisting with these exist in many parts of the world, including our country.
In front of the Boca Chica beach in the Dominican Republic there is a huge and recently built container dock less than two kilometers away. The hotels and a great resort on that beach maintain their occupation above 90% annually. This happens in a country where the GDP comes from tourism, GDP with much higher figures than our neighbors in Costa Rica and with a diversity of products.
It is good for us to see once and for all that most Panamanians are not proposing to paralyze the country; we only want everyone to watch over everything for them to be done well from an environmental and social point of view. But for them to be done.
Not allowing or prolonging the access of the population in rural areas to new alternatives and opportunities, is not the best way to combat poverty, undoubtedly.
Related posts:
Responses to “AT THE PETAQUILLA PROJECT AREA HEADED BY RICHARD FIFER CARLES”