News
New controversy over dredging of sand for Colombo Port City
View(s):The Coast Conservation Department (CCD) has called for a detailed report from the Ministry of Megapolis after a citizen’s movement warned that a dredger belonging to Colombo Port City builders China Harbour Engineering Corporation could be mining sand closer to shore than has been approved.
Screenshots from www.marinetraffic.com that reportedly showed the dredger within three kilometres of the shore–much nearer than the recently sanctioned five kilometres–were provided by the People’s Movement against Port City (PMAPC) to the CCD. The CCD then wrote to the Megapolis Ministry seeking a detailed report.
The Megapolis Ministry claimed the PMAPC had miscalculated the distance by confusing kilometres and nautical miles, the CCD said yesterday. However, a response has not yet been submitted in writing. “We will summon a meeting between representatives of the Megapolis Ministry and the People’s Movement to clarify doubts,” CCD Director General Prabath Chandrakeerthi said. A date for the discussion is yet to be confirmed. “We plan to go to out to sea with members of the Megapolis Ministry and the People’s Movement so that they (Ministry) can prove their point.”
Meanwhile, the Cabinet is evaluating a proposal by Megapolis Minister Patali Champika Ranawaka to change the location of the borrow pit from which sand is now being mined. A borrow pit, also known as a sand box, is an area where material is dug for use at another location. Minister Ranawaka submitted a Cabinet paper stating that the sand remaining in the pit reserved for reclamation activities of the Port City was insufficient. Around 40 million cubic metres of sand still need to be extracted out of a total requirement of 70 million. He proposed that this quantity be obtained from sea sand pit reserved for the purposes of the Sri Lanka Land Reclamation and Development Corporation (SLLRDC).
The SLLRDC usually supplies offshore sea sand from its designated pit to the construction industry at a price. This is due to restrictions over mining of river sand.
The Cabinet paper pointed out that under the tripartite agreement related to the project, the Government was committed to supply the required sand free of charge. It suggested that a lump sum of US$2 million be paid as administrative and other costs to SLLRDC by Colombo Port City Project Company.
The Cabinet office announces on its website that this proposal was approved by ministers on October 3. However, a request for the relevant paper filed by the PMAPC under the Right to Information Act was turned down under section 5 (1) (m)–on the basis that “the information is of a cabinet memorandum in relation to which a decision has not been taken.”
The PMAPC has a longstanding battle with the Government and the Port City over mass-scale sand mining, particularly its impact on fisher communities. In a media statement issued this week, it said the Central Environmental Authority (CEA) had assured them in writing the sand extraction zone would be six to seven kilometres from shore.
When fisher-folk staged a six-day demonstration in October 2016, Lasantha Alagiyawanna–who was then the Deputy Minister of Megapolis–promised them that dredging would take place at least 10km from shore. But subsequent monitoring by the PMAPC “revealed that on more than one occasion the dredgers appeared to moving closer to shore than authorised”.
When these breaches were reported to the CEA, a meeting was summoned with relevant parties including CHEC and ministry officials. Here, it was claimed that a decision had been taken–without consulting fisher communities–that the dredger could operate within eight kilometers of the shore. This indicated that, contrary to all assurances, it was nudging closer and closer to shore.
On September 20, the CCD informed the People’s Movement that permission had now been granted for dredging to be carried out five kilometres from shore. This was a realisation of previously expressed fears that “despite claiming no danger to fisher-folk activities as the sand mining was to be conducted at least six km from shore, the approval had been sought to mine from three km”.
Notwithstanding this assertion in the media release, there is no formal indication that permission has been sought for dredging to take place three kilometres from shore. It could also not be independently verified if the dredger has already ventured this close. It is clear, however, that the borrow pit has moved much nearer than previously anticipated.
The PMAPC states that the Chairman of the National Aquatic Resources Board has refused to share information of the CHEC dredger borrow areas citing “privileged client information”. “It is inherently wrong for public institutions to conduct research on matters of public importance denying this research to the public,” it says. “If not for public funds, those institutions would not exist. All equipment used to make scientific assessments is the property of the public. There can also be no legitimate reason for such limits.”
The movement also scoffed at claims that the Port City agreement was beneficial to Sri Lanka. The Government was providing sand and quarry material for free. At internal bulk supply rates, the sand represents a value of US$ 13bn. At SLLRDC rates, it’s still US$ 2.8bn. The quarry material is worth US$ 1.2 billion.
In addition to receiving all this without payment, for its input of a mere US$ 1.4bn (of which US$ 1bn is in loans), the project company will get 50 percent of saleable land amounting to US$ 3bn. But the Government invests around US$ 15 to four billion and receives US$ 3bn in saleable land.