Subject: report back -alternative alignments workshop..doc
From: "Guy Payn" <[email-masked]>
To: <Undisclosed-Recipient:;>
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2006 10:01:03 +0200

Dear All

NEWSLETTER - July 7 2006

REPORT BACK -N2 ALTERNATIVE ROUTES WORKSHOP
Initial encouragement at the news that various IAP's and NGO's had been invited by EIA consultants Nomi Mathialu and Assocs. to a workshop to submit proposals for alternative routes for the N2 toll road turned to incredulity when it became apparent that invited IAP's would have to pay for their own transport and accommodation arrangement to Pretoria, and then disillusion when it became clear at the workshop that SANRAL's stance on their preferred route through the 'Greenfields' section was stubborn.

Five IAP's who had submitted alternative routes for the N2 were invited to the workshop, namely, Dr Keith Cooper(representing WESSA) , Ms Pippa la Cock, Mr Mark Gallagher, ( both private individuals) Mrs Val Payn (SWC) and Bishop Geoff Davies (SAFCEI). Representatives from DEAT, SANparks, Eastern Cape DEAET and Eastern Cape Parks Board were also invited as well as Dr Nick King, CEO of the Endangered Wild life Trust( EWT) and Dr Bruce McKenzie from the Botanical Society of South Africa.

Although reservations were expressed at the short notice of the meeting (5 working days) it was hoped by participating IAPs that the workshop would be a real attempt to find a compromise to the N2 dilemma.
A week of haggling followed the news that all parties would have to fund their own way to the workshop, despite the fact that the majority of IAPs invited to give submissions reside in KZN and are ordinary members of the public.
In a letter of objection Mr Mark Gallagher wrote 'I find it quite unacceptable that the consultants invited interested parties that have taken the trouble -and time - to make practical and constructive suggestions to a workshop in Pretoria ... at only 10 days notice. Travel and accommodation are to be arranged by the delegates themselves.. despite the altruistic nature of the constructive suggestions'.   
Apparently SANRAL found it too costly to foot the transport bill for the 3 invited IAP's from KZN. They indicated that they would arrange a subsequent meeting in KZN  for those IAP's not able to finance their own way to Pretoria. (We fail to see how this would be cheaper, but we wait with baited breathe!)

In the event, due to the short notice of the workshop and the fact that invited IAP's had to fund their own way, of the 5 IAP's invited to present alternative alignments, only two, Dr Keith Cooper and Bishop Davies ( at great personal cost) were able to attend. Dr Nick King represented EWT and Mr John Clarke kindly agreed to attend as an observer for SWC.

At the meeting Mr Ron Harmse, the project leader, stated that it was against the law to pay for people to attend a public meeting. IAPs present pointed out that it was not a public meeting, that all those present had been invited to participate, and that by refusing to pay transport costs SANRAL had excluded the participation of civil society. 

The workshop itself, initially advertised for 2 days, was shortened to one day at less than one working day's notice, further exacerbating logistics for IAPs. Those who attended found the unyielding attitude of SANRAL towards alternative alignments thoroughly disheartening. 'A Charade' was one description. Although it was clear that several proposed alignments that avoided the Pondoland Centre of Endemism were viable and met the requirements of EIA legislation to find a balance between economic, environmental and social needs far better than SANRAL's preferred route, SANRAL did not seem willing to give any indication of compromise or serious investigation into these. 

Of the alternatives presented, Dr Keith Cooper's proposal offered a realistic win/ win situation. Bishop Davies proposal, utilizing existing roads, strongly supported the upliftment of local communities and would do away with the need to toll. There was strong opposition to tolling, to which SANRAL offered no response. IAPs made it clear that social and environmental factors must be taken into consideration when deciding on a route, not only costing.

The facilitator was at pains to point out that the meeting was not a decision making forum, and that the alternatives were only being presented 'for consideration' as to whether they would be taken forward in any way.

SANRAL was not forthcoming as to what the intended objective of the road was, despite IAPs repeatedly posing the question 'What is the purpose of the road?' Namely, was it intended primarily as a vehicle for poverty relief, or was its main objective a quicker inter -city route between Durban and East London. No clear answer was received.

It seems the only positive outcome of the exercise was that even closer working alliances were forged between all those parties who have expressed reservations about SANRAL's preferred route.

Ends/
Compiled on behalf of SWC and Associated organisations by
Val Payn 
SWC communications
[email-masked]
cell 083 -4416961