Looks like the stubborn SESB has decided to force the dirty and toxic coal power plant down the throats of Sabahans, even though the use of coal has been criticized by our Prime Minister and has been widely condemned as well as unanimously rejected by the Sabah State Cabinet in April 2008 on health and environmental grounds.
SESB will submit the “Detailed Environment Impact Assessment (DEIA)” report for the proposed coal power plant which has now been suggested in Felda Sahabat, near Lahad Datu. This is one of the steps under the “EIA” process required by the Environmental Quality Act 1974. If this DEIA report is accepted/approved by the Federal Department of Environment, then the construction of the coal power plant could begin.
It is already very clear that this coal power plant will bring very bad and dangerous effects not only to the environment but also to the humans. Our question here is:
Let’s say the DEIA report is accepted/approved by the Department of Environment, can the people of Sabah depend on this so-called EIA process, and the government staff of the Department of Environment (who carries out the enforcements), to protect our health and fate??
Simply put, under this EIA process, the party wishing to build the coal power plant shall:
(1) identify the possible adverse effects to the environment which would result if the project is allowed;
(2) suggest/promise to take the steps which could mitigate/reduce [but NOT eliminate completely] these adverse effects; (the Department of Environment could also add their own conditions as they deem fit);
(3) promise to comply/take the suggested steps throughout the duration of the project [i.e. throughout the operational life of this coal power plant].
However, what is the consequence if the management of this coal power plant is found to have polluted the environment/breached the conditions of the project [meaning, if they were investigated/arrested by the relevant government servants -- if all the relevant government servants really work hard and seriously, 24 hours a day, honest and trustworthy -- and if the plant's management are charged in court --- and if the offence is successfully proved in court and is punished by the court]?
The answer is:
“If any developer is found to have failed to comply with Section 34A of the Environmental Quality Act 1974, then the developer would have committed an offence whereby he could be fined not more than Ringgit Malaysia One Hundred Thousand (RM100,000) or imprisoned not more than 5 years or both together and the additional fine of one thousand ringgit every day on any offence which is continued after the Director General of the Department of Environment has given notice to the developer to comply with Section 34A of the 1974 Act.“
Which is: They would be asked to pay only RM100,000 the most – NOT as compensation/damages to the suffering victims of the pollution by coal, mind you, but as fine to the government.
Do you know that in the space of 3 months only, from December 2009 to February 2010, the net profit of Tenaga Nasional Berhad (SESB’s parent company) was more than RM855.7 million?! (Or RM9.507 million per day) This means, by using only its ONE DAY’s profit, TNB is already able to pay 95 times the maximum fine under this section of the Act!!
Our question is – is this system/process of EIA really “effective”?? Are these so-called maximum fines/laws “meaningful” at all?? Isn’t this sort of LOW fines only end up providing a “license/permit to pollute”?? (Those who can afford, can pollute!!)
(We are not accusing TNB/SESB to have the intention to purposely pollute the environment of Sabah; but when being forced to defend their profits, to what extent will they be keen on putting our environment and health as the priority?? After all, the purpose of TNB/SESB in forcing the people of Sabah to accept the coal power plant is DEFINITELY NOT to “enhance” the level of health and environmental protection of Sabah… Why would they persist in being so stubborn, if this coal power plant is not going to profit/enrich them??)
Therefore, it is not surprising that the experts from Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia said this (when discussing the example of a housing developer) about this so-called EIA process:
“Further in discussing the EIA and the laws of Malaysia, I am of the view that the fine imposed on the developer who fails to comply with Section 34A of the Environmental Quality Act 1974 is low. This is because a developer who carries out the listed development activities are developers who possess very strong financial resources. Without very strong financial resources it would not be possible for a developer to develop a housing project with an area more than 50 hectares, to construct hill station or hotel which has an area exceeding 50 hectares and so on. These developers would think that if they fail to comply with Section 34A of the Environmental Quality Act 1974 it would not bring adverse effect to them because the value of the fine is low, i.e. not more than RM100,000.”
[Source/original article in Bahasa Malaysia -- see here.]
Although we do not deny that the EIA process could bring various benefits (such as to bring information about the proposed project), but if we were to hope that it would act as some sort of effective “protection” for our environment and health, then it would be really unsatisfactory.
Should the people of Sabah place the fate of our health, environment and future in the hands of this weak and ineffective so-called EIA process, the government servants from the Department of Environment (who will carry out the enforcements) and this super-rich company (TNB) who aims to maximize its profits??
To TNB/SESB – stop this “EIA” show!!
************************************************
The above quoted passages are translated and extracted from:
[“Proceedings of the Regional Symposium on Environment and Natural Resources” 10-11th April 2002, Hotel Renaissance Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Vol 1: 603-611, Omar, R., Ali Rahman, Z., Latif, M.T., Lihan, T. and Adam J.H. (Eds.)]
http://pkukmweb.ukm.my/~rsenr3/rsenr1/P603-611.pdf
Muhammad Rizal R. dan Kadir A.
Program Pengurusan Persekitaran, Pusat Pengajian Siswazah, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
Popularity: 3% [?]
No related posts.
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
.gif)
Leave a Reply