Unbridled eploitation of natural resources that belong to the nation

By Ashley de Vos
(Continued from yesterday)

Sri Lanka has exposed itself to unnecessary problems in the recent past. It permitted a foreign company to pump millions of cubic feet, YES, millions (150 acres or more x 25 feet or more) cubes of sand from within the immediate economic zone of Sri Lanka, to create an artificial island in the sea off the City of Colombo.

How much are the millions of cubes of sand worth? Has the contractor paid the nation and its people for the exploitation of this resource? Countries like the Maldives and Singapore pay for the sand and the metal (granite stones) imported for the concrete works in their buildings from Indonesia. Even sand-rich Dubai imports construction sand all the way from Australia. If this was the case in Sri Lanka, how much would the contractor have to pay for the sand? Shouldn’t there be a charge for the sand? If it has been paid, who benefitted from it? More additional sand will be required for the construction of the buildings envisaged on this artificial island; where is the sand coming from – the sea or land – and who pays for the resource?

These are some of the questions that should have been asked and solutions sought before embarking on such projects. The negotiators should always be experienced people, certainly not inexperienced individuals with no love for the country. This is a lacuna that the decimation of three generations of youth in the past has brought upon this country

Sri Lanka is known to be a generous country and its past survival was based on correct decisions. However, there is a limit to generosity, especially when it affects a sovereign country and its citizens.

One shudders to think of the thousands of granite hillsides and huge boulders that have been and will be systematically destroyed to provide the rubble and metal for the concrete required for the construction of the mega structures in Colombo and on the new island. Granite is not an infinite resource in Sri Lanka. Instead, will the requirement of granite aggregate be imported from Indonesia like what other countries have done and continue to do? Are destroying one country to create another? We saw this effect in a different area when in the 1960s and 70s perfectly good old buildings were cannibalised for building parts to satisfy an unsustainable fashionable indulgence in the construction of more contemporary buildings.

As an artistic people, we have given every rock outcrop a name: Nandhagala, Ethagale, Gommatta gala, Bellumgala and so on. After these boulders and rock outcrops are all destroyed in our copy-cat concept of unsustainable development, disregarding whether it is suitable or not, would it be the time for Sigiriya? After all, in this greed-driven economy, it is money that matters. History and culture have no place.

Development is seen only in terms of short-term benefits; if you have a resource it must be exploited to collect its immediate monetary value. A very western thought concept as opposed to the lateral thinking of the past, regardless of other important cultural, historical, archaeological, environmental values that define the cultural matrix.

When the Yoda Ela was built, the kings responsible had a vision which allowed rain water falling on the Eppawela phosphate deposit to flow into the Ela. This minimal fertiliser addition was systematically transported in the water flowing along the canal to the fields in Anuradhapura. No unnecessary destruction of the resource, no transportation costs, only the celebration of a uniquely sustainable and viable vision. Are there such brains, today?

The fact that there was no holistic long-term vision available in any of the agencies responsible is seen in the very confused development concept for Colombo and the rest of the country. Here each agency works in a dictatorial fashion as though only it mattered. Shouldn’t there be a holistic vision, as each effects the other? This requires humility, not arrogance. If the agencies even at this late stage, refuse to come down from their high horses and work as a team, there will be no future worth talking of.

Tourism should not take precedence over health. The health of a nation could be more beneficial than the short-term benefits from tourism. Large scale agricultural development destroys the water shed urgently required by the surrounding village. The quarrying for granite destroys the water table in the immediate village. Most wells go dry.

The new artificial island off the Colombo City would have had some meaning and sense if it had been developed with all future development concentrated on it. At present there is no opportunity cost. All development that is out of human scale should have been moved to the artificial island and Colombo left in its pristine state. But then where is the clear holistic vision for development?

Today, there is a bifurcated Colombo, requiring emergency surgery in infrastructure requirements with as usual, preference being given to areas with political clout. It is trying to imitate, copy and compete with what other cities with diverse and more efficient and vibrant economies are trying to achieve. What is the real need for this unsustainable development in Colombo: is it our inferiority complex getting the better of us?

If the new artificial island built with our sand is so important, there are many unanswered questions that need to be answered. There are many projects around Sri Lanka and in the Maldives, in isolated locations; they are totally self-contained where power, water, disposal of garbage and other services are concerned.

a. On this new artificial island, what happens to the garbage generated there? It cannot be brought back to land or disposed in the ocean. How will it be disposed of?

b. Where is the fresh water requirement coming from? It should be generated within the artificial island through an RO process.

c. How is power requirement being generated? Generators, solar and storage batteries? It should not come off the Sri Lankan national grid.

d. Where are construction material like sand and rubble coming from?

e. What is the pattern for a sustainable traffic movement in and out of the area? It should not interfere with normal traffic flow.

f. Wouldn’t there be any competition with existing traffic flow?

g. There should not be more flyovers destroying the old inner city and some of the important buildings within it. What is happening near the Kelaniya Bridge? It unbelievably ugly, and how sustainable is it? What is the lifespan of such a construction?

h. The draining of and the free flow of the excess rain water from the Beira has been disturbed. The lack of a proper drainage system to the ocean will increase the level of the existing water table of the surrounding ground leading to forced ingress of water into many of the basements of the present buildings.

i. There is one Beira outlet facing the south west monsoon, how viable is it? Sand accretion builds up and sea currents may obstruct free movement of water. This is a phenomenon observed in many of the river outlets along the west coast during the monsoon.

j. Is there a proposal for the sand bank that may collect to the south of the artificial island? Over time, there is a possibility of sand driven by natural forces collecting south of the island as another artificial piece of land. Is there a proposal? Who will own it?

k. Will there be any restitution of the coral reefs and nurseries for fish spawn destroyed during the pumping of sand that churned up millions of tons of mud and silt from the ocean floor? A destructive process. What are the institutions that documented or were engaged in the original research prior to the commencement of the pumping of sand?

l. Were there historical ships (now belonging to the Department of Archaeology) that were destroyed in the process of pumping sand; what method was adapted to document and or conserve them?

m. Has there been any study by way of a long-term investigation with focus on future development of new sea currents and their effect on the seascape and the beaches of the land mass to the north of the new island?

n. How will this artificial island, protruding a couple of miles or more into the sea, impact Muthurajawela and Negombo? What will support a landscape that is extremely fragile, with marshes and mangroves that could be easily destroyed if the sea decides to come in. We use the word ‘decides’, as no one can safely predict the mind and action of the ocean over time.

o. What is the possible damage to the traditional fisheries and the livelihoods of the fishermen on the North-Western coast?

p. Were the citizens of the country ever consulted on the building of this artificial sand island?

q. Is it possible to prevent smuggling and other unwanted activities taking place there?

There is an interesting aspect of the new island, which has been missed up to now. A small section of it has been designated as being developed by Sri Lanka. Where is this section located? The infrastructure requirements for this section of land would have to be provided by Sri Lanka. Once Sri Lanka is involved in the project, there is no way out. This is a Chinese checkmate move to get Sri Lanka to provide all the requirements listed above for the project. This should be rejected at all costs, even if we have to forego the generous carrot offered by the Chinese in the form of a section of the artificial island as belonging to Sri Lanka. But do our ‘expert’ negotiators see the writing on the wall?

All infrastructure on the artificial island should be self-contained and pollution free and should not affect or be a burden on Sri Lanka and the citizens of Sri Lanka. All regulations and other statutory enactments being proposed and even legislated should be very clear on this.

The old city of Colombo, in spite of being a British creation, has greater significance for Sri Lanka especially on the intimate human scale, than the new island city outside, which is not visually subservient to the old city. But then we don’t have a holistic vision, do we? (Concluded)