| Business |
||||
|
Protect
rights of migrant workers But is enough
being done to protect the rights of the female migrant worker who
often is subject to abuse, long working hours and sometimes delays
in the payment of salaries? Governments
claim to set up all kinds of schemes for the benefit of migrants
like non-taxed remittances, welfare for children of migrant workers
and now an exclusive lounge for them at the Colombo airport. These
are all fine but that doesn't still get rid of one nagging problem
- protecting their rights at the workplace. The tragic
case of 41-year old Somalatha Satharasinghe who went to Kuwait as
a domestic helper in May but returned in a coffin with parts of
her brain missing along with other organs like the bladder, corneas
and kidneys shocked many Sri Lankans (see extensive story in the
Plus section of this newspaper) and illustrated how the authorities
have failed miserably in caring for our people. Government
officials say labour receiving countries are not ready to enter
into bilateral agreements with the Sri Lankan government despite
intensive lobbying by Colombo. "We can't push those governments
to enter into such agreements because it is Sri Lankans who are
benefiting from these jobs," one official explained. This gives
it every reason why - if the government keeps promoting labour migration
to earn foreign exchange - different ways of ensuring the rights
of our workers must be studied and recommended by a tripartite committee
representing the Sri Lankan government, migrant workers and employment
agents. A high-level
committee with such representation should be appointed immediately
to undertake this task. While this is a right for our valuable human
resource, it is unfair for governments, present and past, to reap
the monetary benefits without taking care of migrant workers at
that end. The government must stop passing the buck. Some officials
for instance referred to the recent demonstration by migrants over
Satharasinghe's case as an "emotional outburst." Remittances
from migrant workers may have ousted garments exports and tea from
their pedestal but these sectors get much more benefits from the
government and banks. It is only now that the Central Bank is allowing
commercial banks to provide dollar-denominated housing loans to
migrant workers while the latest proposal is to set up a specialized
bank for migrants. Everyone is aware of the facilities and concessions
that industries like garments and tea get but what of migrant workers?
Is it because they are not tagged as an industry and used by governments
as an easy source of foreign exchange and conveniently forgotten
since they come from not-so-important backgrounds? Reports that
Bangladesh would lift the ban on its women going abroad to work
as domestics in the Middle East is also creating a lot of concern
among employment agents here but appears to have not upset government
authorities. The repercussions are enormous as our story on the previous page shows. Job losses, falling foreign exchange revenues and so on. Migrant workers need some protection in their workplaces and the government needs to act now. Upper
Kotmale Project : Objections raised by environmental groups valid,
but huge discount factor may affect the sustainability of development
While researching
for my doctoral thesis on "Effect of Discounting on Environmentally
Sensitive Major Projects in Developing Countries" I had the
privilege of researching the Samanalawewa Dam Project and the proposed
Upper Kotmale Dam Project. My thesis explored the practicability
of applying social discounting and economic parameters in cost-benefit
analysis for sustainable projects in developing countries where
the environment is a sensitive issue. I
am not writing this article to support the Ceylon Electricity Board
(CEB) or to denounce the Central Engineering Consultancy Bureau
(CECB), but to prove that the CECB has failed in their endeavours
to support their proposal, the Yoxford and Lindula Scheme. I believe
that the Upper Kotmale Dam Project should be allowed to go ahead
irrespective of environmental and other concerns for the economic
good of the country. It is on record
that some senior engineers and the CECB were responsible for raising
the initial objections to the CEB Upper Kotmale dam proposal by
submitting a counter proposal. But the objections raised by environmental
groups over the use of the "10 percent discounting factor"
(by the funding authorities) was the key issue, according to Treasury
officials, for President Chandrika Kumaratunga to suspend the project,
pending a complete report on the environmental issues raised by
the environmental groups. The objections raised by the environmental
groups were very valid, and a huge discount factor may affect the
sustainability of any development. Golden opportunity In reality
cost-benefit analysis never considers the catastrophic environmental
consequences of the future, when the future is discounted by using
an average 10 percent discount rate. If we discount a project by
10 percent then "we ignore our grandchildren or at least we
ignore them by 10 percent per annum". That is common
occurrence in Sri Lanka and many other Third World countries, as
investments are forced down our throats, in the name of economy
and political survival. Former Chairman
of the CEB Mr. Arjun Deraniyagala sought my help to analyse the
environmental damage from the proposed Upper Kotmale Dam Project,
and to propose a reasonable discount factor to be discussed with
the project lenders. But the director in charge of the project,
Mr. Fernando, had other ideas and was not so keen for me to analyse
the environmental damage due to this discounting factor. So the CEB
lost a golden opportunity to argue their case with some expert opinion.
During this period the CECB was pressurising the Central Environmental
Agency to reconsider their proposal as an alternative to the CEB's
proposal and the CEB was getting ready for a lengthy battle. Is the CECB
really keen to preserve the environment by proposing this alternative
design or is their motive to get the hefty commission from the project?
The CECB ignored one crucial aspect of the funding arrangements
for this major project, (i.e. the 10 percent discount factor imposed
by the lenders) in pushing the government to accept their proposal.
Any professional should question the motives of the CECB. Did the
CECB act in good faith as true professionals and patriotic engineers
in submitting an underestimated, incomplete design as an alternative
design proposal or were they trying to stall the project? The Environmental
Impact Assessment Study of the Upper Kotmale Hydro Power Project
was subjected to a public hearing held in February 1995. After the public
hearing, the Technical Evaluation Committee of the Project Approving
Agency granted environmental approval of the project. However, the
Central Environmental Authority (CEA) refused to concur with this
decision due to pressure exerted on them by the CECB and other external
sources and a request was made for the project proponents to study
the alternatives. Because of
this appeal and the refusal by the Secretary of the Ministry of
Transport, Environment and Women's Affairs to approve the project
in its original format, the CEB was forced to examine alternative
proposals submitted by the CECB that included the Yoxford/Lindula
Scheme. As directed
by President Kumaratunga at a meeting held in the Presidential Secretariat
on March 1996, the proposal submitted by the CECB under the tutelage
of Dr. A.N. Kulasinghe, the then Chairman of the CECB, was subjected
to a very thorough study. The senior
engineers of the CEB expressed their concern about accepting this
proposal as they had very serious misgivings in dealing with the
CECB during the initial construction stages of the Samanalawewa
Project as sub-consultant (sub-contractors) to the consultants.
Samanalawewa
The recorded
(written) documents of the Samanalawewa Project gives ample evidence
to prove that the CECB as sub-consultants to the main consultants
erred in their professional judgement in providing the "Duty
of Care" to their employers, the CEB and the Government. The
CECB Chairman's letter in June 1992, to the then Minister, the late
Gamini Athukorala, states that: "It has been reported that
some detailed site investigations of the right abutment were proposed
to be carried out during 1986, but they were never carried out".
The CECB requested
this geological survey of the right abutments in 1986 of the new
site, where the Samanalawewa Dam is now constructed (as per CEB
documents). Why? The CECB as
sub-consultants did not pursue this site investigation as they were
bound to do so under their consultancy agreement without waiting
for six years to report it to the Minister. It is the duty of the
consultants and the sub- consultants to pursue and see that the
contractor successfully completed all their instructions. If the detail
site investigation was carried out in 1986, the root cause of all
present problems (of leakage of stored water) from the Samanalawewa
Dam Reservoir and reduced capacity to produce the planned power
output could have been avoided. Can this be a reason for the CEB
to move away from the CECB without burning their fingers again?
The scope of
the study of the CECB proposal included an extensive field survey
of the Yoxford/Lindula scheme to investigate the geological and
topographical conditions of the proposed site, the existing environment
and to identify the potential environmental impacts of this proposal.
The study was also subjected to verification of the design capabilities
(system design), hydrological analysis to ascertain the power generation
capabilities, analysis of cost estimates, construction plans, economic
viability and evaluation of technical, financial and environmental
impacts. Adverse geological
conditions, a limestone layer of two-metre thickness exposed at
the foundation levels of the proposed dam site, reservoir area and
the power house locations for the Yoxford Scheme make this scheme
unsuitable. (Samanalawewa Dam is now constructed on a similar limestone
bed having similar adverse geological conditions. This is the main
reason for the leak of water from the Samanalawewa Reservoir and
wet blanketing and other repairs becoming very difficult). This
scheme was rejected due to many geological defects. The Lindula
Scheme intake is also not suitable for a dam due to adverse geological
conditions. Construction
cost When a major
project like Kotmale Dam is analysed, distribution of the cost and
the benefits expected from the project is considered along with
the time horizon. But the discount factor or the discount rate is
a choice for the investor. The selection of the discount factor
has given rise to much controversy among developers, politicians
and the environmentalists on many occasions. Selection of different
rates can force the net present value to be larger, smaller or even
negative. To illustrate
this theory, consider the Samanalawewa Dam Project, which has involved
a very high initial cost at the construction stage as well as a
very high cost in running repairs to bring the dam up to a functional
position (Rs. 2 billion lost without any measurable results). However
the selection of a very high discount rate of 10 percent and a very
defective procurement system will drive the present value of distant
future benefits to near 'ZERO' thus making the project not feasible
from an economic standpoint for both the country and the investor.
If a relatively low discount rate was chosen the project should
be feasible because the future benefits remain relatively unaffected.
To sustain
our cultural heritage and secure the benefits of (present) developments
for our future generations, all new development projects should
be discounted using relatively low or affordable discount rates.
But, for a poor country like Sri Lanka, negotiating a low discount
rate is impossible as we are forced to depend on external investors
for our social, economic and political survival. In a situation
like this, where our survival is dependent on external borrowings,
we should not be very complacent about the environmental damages
due to the use of very high discount rates. It is my professional
view that Upper Kotmale Dam Project, if handled correctly, can be
successfully completed as a sustainable project irrespective of
the discounting factor. Economists and the economy play a bigger
role in sustaining our environment than the environmentalists. Thondaman's
objections Such relocation
of people for national economic prosperity and development of infrastructure
happens all over world. It benefits the entire population. Is Thondaman
genuine in comparing the plight of 768 families against the welfare
of 18 million people who will benefit from this project? What about
the economic gains this project will bring to the people of up-country
electorates during the construction? At the time
the Upper Kotmale Dam project was planned many years ago the cost
of the project was less than $150 million. In 1993/4 the cost increased
to $260 million and by the end of 1995 it increased to $293 million.
Today the cost is $380 million (Rs. 35 billion). The local investment
on the project will be $83 million. The Japanese soft loan of 33
billion yen will accumulate interest due to the strong yen and the
unequal parity in the exchange rates. Use of defective
and contract documentation to procure this contract may increase
the construction cost by 350 to 400 percent at the conclusion of
the contract (based on the Samanalawewa contract). This cost increase
may be due to design variations, construction variations, and uncontrollable
risks emanating from the condition of contract, mismanagement, unprofessional
contract administration and corruption. In addition to these costs
the contractor is eligible to claim delay cost due to the suspension
of this project. This claim may include loss of profit, delay cost
and other costs due to non-performance of the contract. All these
additional costs will raise the completion cost to over one billion
dollars. The Samanalawewa
Hydro Power Project never proved to be a sustainable development.
It savaged the environment so much the entire district felt its
adverse effects for many years during construction. It is still
not producing the expected benefits. Mahaweli
a disaster If the project
is required on a given date and will accumulate large economic benefits,
then fast-tracking is profitable. The economic benefits we gained
from the accelerated Mahaweli Project are not quantified against
the vast cost of completing the project. If acceleration of the
project has not yielded any real benefits as expected then it is
a waste of taxpayers' money. Some parts of the accelerated scheme
are still to be completed. Fast tracking
originated in the USA for NASA to meet the accelerated completion
time of the first 'moon' rocket. But due to corruption and bad administration
of the project, the US Congress was forced to abandon this fast
track system, and resort to normal 'optimum' construction methods.
Now, it is
mandatory to get the approval of the Congress for any fast track
projects. Nevertheless, by fast tracking the Mahaweli Scheme, Sri
Lanka spent billions of rupees for a very limited economic gain.
The extra cost incurred for this project should have helped the
authorities to construct another Mahaweli Scheme and many more hospitals
to treat people. To accelerate
or to fast track a project is like opening the floodgates of corruption.
The time gained by accelerating a project is not economical if the
final completion cost is not compatible with the time gained. After researching
for many years on environmentally sensitive projects, it is my professional
opinion that, if we go to preserve the environment (I am an environmentalist)
the poor people in Sri Lanka will die of hunger as our economy is
fast deteriorating. Sri Lanka should
mitigate environmental damages in development projects like the
Kotmale Dam Project to achieve environmentally sustainable development.
Our bargaining power with the Western moneylenders is very minimal to be able to borrow on our terms. But close co-operation with all 'stake holders' can overcome these environmental problems to a very satisfactory end. Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe should give the green light to commence this project before the delay cost exceeds the estimated cost of this project. |
||||
Copyright © 2001 Wijeya Newspapers
Ltd. All rights reserved. |
