iSimangaliso river mouth closure & UPL warehouse fire: stakeholder input; with Ministry

Meeting report

Chairperson’s opening remarks

The Chairperson welcomed all the Members of the Portfolio Committee, representatives from the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and Environment (DFFE), as well as the stakeholders of the iSimangaliso river mouth. She said that the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and Environment had stated that she would be in the meeting when the Portfolio Committee was discussing the opening of the iSimangaliso river mouth, but due to unforeseen circumstances, she would be able to join the meeting again at 14:00 until 16:00, which was the reason the Committee had had to make changes to the meeting programme. She added that if some of the stakeholders of iSimangaliso wished to exit the meeting until such time that the Minister was present; they were allowed to do so and return at 14:00.

Mr Ravi Pillay, KZN MEC: Economic Development, Tourism and Environmental Affairs, asked to be excused from the meeting at 15:55, as he needed to attend a sub-committee meeting.

The Chairperson agreed to excuse the MEC, and invited Mr Sibusiso Bukhosini, Chief Executive Officer (CEO), iSimangaliso Wetland Park Authority (ISWPA), to introduce the delegation from the entity.

Shooting incident in iSimangaliso Wetland Park

MEC Pillay said that the substantive content on the shooting incident was in the presentation that would be made by Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife. The incident had happened at iSimangaliso Wetland Park, which was a world heritage site managed by the national entity. Ezemvelo, which was a KZN entity, provided biodiversity functions within the jurisdiction, and it was in that context that the Ezemvelo Rangers were performing duty when the incident occurred. When the incident was reported to the KZN Department of Economic Development, Tourism and Environmental Affairs, it had conducted some interrogations and had monitored the matter closely, and Ezemvelo would provide the context in detail. Regarding the person who was injured and had not yet recovered, the matter had been handed over to the South African Police Service (SAPS) for investigation. Allegations and suspicions had been raised, but the Department could rely only on the investigations by the SAPS to deal with the matter. He said that the Portfolio Committee was correct to require a briefing and interrogate the incident, but it had also raised issues relating to wildlife poaching and the Department’s capacity to be effective against it.

Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife

Mr Ntsikelelo Dlulane, CEO; Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife, introduced his delegation and handed over to the Head of Operations to proceed with the presentation.

Mr Joe Phadima, Executive Head: Conservation Services, Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife, presented on the Nibela shooting incident where four suspected poachers allegedly fired a shot at Ezemvelo field rangers after being ordered to surrender, after which one alleged poacher went missing and could not be found. He said that a case had since been opened with SAPS by Ezemvelo Park. He then described the incident, as well as the progress in the search for the missing alleged poacher, the possible scenarios and actions that may have happened after the scene, and what had been done by Ezemvelo since the incident.

iSimangaliso Wetland Park

Mr Bukhosini provided a report from iSimangaliso Wetland Park on the Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife shooting incident. He specifically highlighted the socio-economic conditions of the Nibela community, as well as the interventions made by the iSimangaliso Wetland Park since the incident. He said that the uMkhanyakude District Municipality was one of the poorest districts in the country, hence it was earmarked as a presidential node.

The KwaNibela community was part of this district, and levels of unemployment, poverty and inequality were high. Although illegal activities, especially poaching and illegitimate fishing activities such as gillnetting could not be condoned, it was likely that poverty was one of the key attributes of the situation that prevailed in the area. It was on this basis that the iSWPA had decided, after numerous engagements with the traditional leadership of KwaNibela, to intensify the creation of economic and employment opportunities through the Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP) of Working for Water, implementation of the Youth Employment Service's (YES) programme, and Groen Sebenza, targeting unemployed graduates in the area.

Discussion

Ms C Phillips (DA) said the Committee had been told there would be a spreadsheet of historical events that had been reported that would be attached to the presentation, but there were no attachments. She asked that the spreadsheets be provided to the Committee. She got concerned when poaching was blamed on the desperation of people because of poverty, unemployment, etc. because she had seen it with her own eyes, and added that this needed to be addressed urgently. There have been allegations that prawn fisheries had to close in the area, and wanted to know if this was true, as well as the number of people who had lost their jobs when the prawn fisheries were closed. Regarding the job creation in the area, she wanted to know whether these were permanent jobs or short contract jobs. In terms of Working for Water, she wanted to know if the trees that were being chopped down and the alien plants would be used to create income for people.

Mr N Paulsen (EFF) wanted to know how often incidents such as the shooting in iSimangaliso happened and added that the best way to secure the protected areas and parks was to involve the community. He also wanted to know the number of people from the surrounding communities who were employed in the parks. 

Mr N Singh (IFP) said that it was unfortunate that the one individual who was involved in the incident was still missing, and he hoped that the individual would be found alive and well. The interventions by both iSimangaliso and the Department were well-meant, but they could do much more by utilising the services offered by other departments, such as the Department of Agriculture. He said that poverty should not be a problem that led people into poaching and that there needed to be accelerated development programmes going forward to ensure that there was no conflict between the community and the authorities that were there.

Mr D Bryant (DA) said that it was a very tragic incident when anybody was killed, especially when it was someone from an impoverished community, where people were desperate for employment and had been let down over many years by the government. It hurt even more when such incidents happened in communities where there were potential opportunities to benefit from eco-tourism. He said about R11 million had been generated in revenue by iSimangaliso last year, and he wanted to know how much of the revenue had been invested in the communities through development programmes. He also asked for more information on the proposed community park in terms of who the envisaged funder of the park was, as well as who would run the park and who would be responsible for its security. He asked if it would not make more sense to involve the surrounding communities in the existing park infrastructure as opposed to creating a new park, which would more than likely bring additional costs.

Mr P Modise (ANC) said that the presentation from Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife had stated that the rangers had been approached by the suspects and a shot was fired, and the rangers had retaliated, which had led to three suspects running off and one going missing. The rangers and SAPS had then allowed two community members to be observers during the rescue mission, and the report stated that they were not able to suspect foul play. He thought that this was a contradiction, and asked if Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife did not think the community members who were observers might have been involved in the incident somehow. He also wanted to know how far the independent investigation of the shooting incident had gone, and when a report could be provided to the Committee.

The Chairperson said that during the holidays, she had visited the Nibela community and spoken to the traditional leaders in the community. The previous Portfolio Committee on Environment, Forestry and Fisheries of the Fifth Parliament had conducted public hearings on the Marine Spatial Planning Bill in the KZN province, during which the local communities were seriously concerned about the increasing incidents of shooting in iSimangaliso by the Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife. Subsequently, the iSimangaliso Wetland Park authorities had stated that they were working on improving the relationship with local communities and that things were improving, and then surprisingly, a fisherman had been shot dead by law enforcement officers from Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife in September 2020.

She said that in September 2020, there was also an allegation of opening fire by officers, and now there was the community member that had been missing since November 2021, but what was heart-breaking this time around was that the body had not been found. She did not understand how these incidents were going to be probed by the police, especially because there were rangers who were alleged to have tampered with the evidence. She asked whether the shooting incident had happened during the day or at night and if it had happened during the day, she wanted to know how the person had disappeared. She also wanted to know if the potential fish poachers who entered iSimangaliso were armed, for them to receive a militaristic response. She wanted to know the number of alleged poachers who had been shot dead in the past five years in the park, as well as the number of those who were wounded and arrested. She asked how the poaching numbers from iSimangaliso Wetland Park compared to those at Hluhluwe iMfolozi Park. She asked the CEO of iSimangaliso if the time had not yet come for them to review the impact of the militaristic style of law enforcement on people and park relationships.

The Chairperson said that according to Masifundise, the deceased was a legal small-scale fisher who was part of the Registered Small-Scale Fisher Cooperative. Celimpilo Mdluli and two other fishermen from the Nibela cooperative had been shot by rangers at the Saint Lucia Lake while fishing, and it seemed the rangers had shot them before asking questions. Judging from all the previous shooting incidents, there was no evidence of a gun or bullet rounds recovered from the alleged poachers. She wanted to know why there was no evidence and asked Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife if they had ever had a poaching case that was concluded with sufficient evidence. Was there clear communication between the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and Environment (DFFE) and iSimangaliso Wetland Park, Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife and the small-scale fishers regarding access of small-scale fishers to protected areas, to prevent such deadly consequences in the future?

Response by MEC

MEC Pillay said that the only evidence that was available from the shooting incident was the four affidavits from those who were involved. The destruction of the boat and other items had happened after the police had arrived. It was under the supervision of the police, which was their standard operating procedure. In terms of the issue of suspension, he said that the Department had no direct line of authority over it, but in interrogating it, the rangers would possibly have a legal case to have their suspensions lifted because the suspensions were based on suspicion and not evidence. The removal of the rangers had also been met with some resistance because it undermined the basis of the anti-poaching effort, but the Department had managed to persuade them that it would be the right thing to do, considering the sensitivity of the community’s feelings on the matter.

He said that the militaristic response to poachers would be a matter of debate, as the statistics could support this approach in some cases. He gave an example of himself having dealt with a case of a ranger who was shot in the mouth by poachers in another area. He said that there had been no independent investigation by the Department, but the community did not want the local police to investigate the matter, and the national Minister of the DFFE had approached the national Minister of Police to request that to happen. The DFFE had considered instituting an investigation on its own, but it would have still crossed boundaries with the police investigation, which would not have been appropriate at the time. An independent investigation remained an option for the Department, depending on the progress of the police investigation.

Response by Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife

Mr Phadima said that they did involve communities in anti-poaching efforts, and there was a three-legged national anti-poaching strategy that included law enforcement, community engagement, and the scientific approach. Concerning law enforcement, they existed as a microcosm of a bigger anti-poaching plan of the country, and that was run not only by Ezemvelo. There was a national integrated strategy to combat wildlife trafficking that was led by SAPS in partnership with the DFFE, state security agencies, and other law enforcement entities such as the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA). All the efforts that they put in place, including the standard operating procedures in dealing with crime, were encapsulated in the standard operating procedures that had been passed at the national level.

Referring to the alleged burning of the boat, he said that the boat had been burnt after the investigations and after the police had been in consultation with the investigators. The reason for burning the boat was to prevent poachers from using the same boat to commit more crime. The officials were not suspended immediately because Ezemvelo normally held their own investigations as informed by the regulations applied for the use and handling of firearms. He said that they had an office that was independent of other operational staff and ensured that after every incident of a firearm that had been discharged, there was an investigation by an official who looked at the handling, the use, and the circumstances around the discharge of the firearm. If there were any foul activities found, disciplinary processes were followed. In this instance, after the incident, the investigation was undertaken as part of compliance with regulations on the use and handling of, and there was no evidence of the unwarranted use of the firearm.

Mr Phadima said that the prawn fishing that was happening in the area was illegal, and the closure of the estuary made the propagation of the prawns impossible. It was something that had happened about 20 years ago, and it was illegal and was no longer happening. Regarding the contradiction pointed out by Mr Modise, he said that they allowed the community members to be observers to express sensitivity to the situation, as they had been asked to do so by the community leaders, who had wanted to see for themselves that there were indeed investigations and that there was a search for the missing individual.

The point of the proposed opening of a new park was to transform the industry to ensure that there were more previously excluded participants in game farming, hunting and the many other value chain activities that happen around the biodiversity economy. This had been done deliberately to ensure that the people, most of whom had access to fecund land that could be transformed into biodiversity areas, could benefit from the use of their land. Some initiatives were funded through international funders through the national Department to ensure that there was investment, either through the building of lodges on community-owned land whereby communities could be owners or shareholders in the infrastructure that was built on those parcels of land, and jobs were created.

Regarding the comment from Masifundise about the missing person being part of the Registered Small-scale Fishers Cooperative, Mr Phadima said that he could confirm that the missing person was not part of the Cooperative, as he was not on the list.

The Chairperson asked for the name of the missing person.

Mr Phadima said that the missing person was from the Mdluli household.

The Chairperson said that she had stated the name of the missing person, and the person was registered in the Small-scale Fishers Cooperative. She urged Mr Phadima to dispute the claim with the authorities if he was sure so that it could be put on record.

Mr Phadima said that he was sure that the person was from the Mdluli family.

Mr Dlulane said that the spreadsheet of historical events was attached to the presentations, according to his understanding. However if the Committee had not received it, they did have the information and could provide it to the Committee. They could also provide a comparison between iSimangaliso and Hluhluwe iMfolozi Park.

Regarding collaboration with other departments, he said that they had been trying to do a fisheries programme, but had ended up not being able to do so because most of the communities adjacent to iSimangaliso had been using fishing as part of their livelihoods. At some point, they had received communication that funding was going to be made available, but unfortunately, they could not implement the fisheries programme. They had been in consultation with other programmes and inviting other colleagues and departments to the programmes that they had that were aimed at assisting young people to develop businesses. They also had the Operation Vula Fund, which was funding made available to assist business people to buy some of the important equipment or products that they needed for their initiatives.

Regarding the trees that were being chopped down and the alien plants, he said that there was not much that they were doing presently, as they did not get any products from the alien plants. He added that there was one that they used to create furniture and coffins, but it was not used across the province and perhaps in the future they could look into spreading it into different areas and districts.

Follow-up questions

Mr Bryant said that his questions about the proposed community park had not been answered effectively, and some questions remained, particularly around the funding model. Although he supported the initiative of trying to empower people who come from previously excluded backgrounds in terms of revenue generation and ownership, he still needed an explanation of the ownership structure and proposed ownership model for this community park. He wanted to know if it would still fall under Ezemvelo or iSimangaliso or the provincial authority and who stood to benefit.

Mr Modise said that he had not heard the response about the independent investigation and how far it was. He also wanted to know about the relationship between Isimangaliso, Ezemvelo and the community.

The Chairperson said that she had found it disturbing when Mr Phadima said that they had followed operating procedures when they burnt the boat because the boat was part of the exhibit that would be required by the court. Ezemvelo would have had the right to destroy or burn the evidence if they were the law on their own. She still wanted to know whether the person was shot during the day or at night, and how the person disappeared if the person was shot during the day. It did not make sense that the person was shot near the rangers and then disappeared, and their firearm was not found because the person could have been injured or dead. Something was amiss, and the Committee was not being told everything. She asked if the rangers shoot at people without asking for permits. She also wanted to know the number of poachers who had been shot dead and the number of those who had been wounded and arrested at iSimangaliso Park in the past five years. She asked the CEO of iSimangaliso if the time had not yet come for them to review the impact of the militaristic style of law enforcement on people and the park's relationships.

The Chairperson also wanted to know whether or not the Department had increased the law enforcement capacity in KZN since the termination of the agreement with Ezemvelo. She also wanted to know whether the rotational law enforcement agreement was still in place, where fisheries control officers from the Eastern Cape and the Western Cape were temporarily deployed to KZN. She asked about the progress of the investigation and the search for the missing person and added that she was asking this because the family of the person needed closure, as this incident had happened in November 2021.

Response by MEC

MEC Pillay said there was no independent investigation presently, and that what had happened was that the community did not want the local police to investigate the matter, which had led the Minister to approach the national Minister of Police to ensure that investigators from the outside were brought in. The Department had considered instituting an investigation on its own, but it would have still crossed boundaries with the police investigation, which would not have been appropriate at the time. An independent investigation remained an option for the Department, depending on the progress of the police investigation.

Regarding the time of the shooting incident, he said that the report that was given to him indicated that the incident happened in the late afternoon in daylight, and the area where it happened had water, which was Saint Lucia in iSimangaliso Wetland Park, and that was why the divers were brought in. The destruction of the boat and other items happened after the police had arrived and it was under the supervision of the police, which was their standard operating procedure, according to the rangers. However, he had raised the issue with them that they needed to change their operating procedure, especially in cases of this magnitude.

MEC Pillay said that there had been 72 incidents in the past five years, and 35 of the incidents had involved firearms either in poaching or in other incidences of exchanging fire with rangers. In this incident, the pertinent question was whether a shot was fired against the rangers, leading to them shooting back at the missing person. The rangers’ version was that there was a shot fired against them. If the investigations showed that a shot was not fired against the rangers, the rangers' actions would have been unlawful, and they would face criminal prosecution and disciplinary action.

Response by Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife

Mr Phadima confirmed that the gunshot had happened around 3.30 in the afternoon according to the report that they were given, and the permutations that they had made about the reasons why the firearm was not found should not be relied on. They should rather rely on an investigation that was undertaken.

He said that the name of the person who was missing was Thulani Mdluli, and his name did not appear on the list of registered Small-scale Fishers Cooperation members, as stated by Masifundise. They preferred to avoid making comments about what may have happened with the missing firearm and bullet, as the matter was sub-judice and would be taken care of by law enforcement.

Mr Dlulane said that the answers they were giving to the Committee regarding the investigations were the answers they had received in the report that was given to them, and added that they would rather let the SAPS deal with the details.

Regarding the ownership of the proposed community parks, he said that there were community conservation areas in the KZN province, and they would push to get the land under the initiative of creating community conservation areas that were owned by the communities that were owners of the land adjacent to the protected area. They had a fully-fledged office that supported these initiatives to ensure that when they went through their establishment, they ensured that the initiatives were maintained, including training some of the community members to manage and run some of these areas. One example of these initiatives was the Somkhanda Game Reserve, which was owned by the community. They would assist communities and ensure that they managed the work that was done in consultation with the communities, and would train them and ensure that they could manage it on their own. Ownership it could be through any institutional arrangement, whether it was in the form of a trust or any other form, but the community would also be advised legally to ensure that everything was done above board. This could also open the possibility for other initiatives such as the establishment of lodges and, to an extent, designated hunting areas.

Response by iSimangaliso Wetland Park

Mr Bukhosini said that iSimangaliso had created a very good working relationship with the community and the family of the missing person, but the only issue was that of the foul play around the field rangers and the calibre of the firearms that they used. The only solution to the matter was for iSimangaliso and the community to distance themselves from the investigation and let law enforcement do its job.

He said that there was no prawn fishing in the area, but normal fishing in False Bay. Regarding the tree cutting and alien plant opportunities, he said that the opportunities were short-term with a long-term outlook -- there was an initial phase of cutting, but because the alien plants kept growing, there was a need for follow-up cutting. They were short-term in the sense that a contractor was appointed on a rotational basis, and they became long-term because the programme itself was long-term.

He said that in the budget that they get from the Department, about R241 million was allocated for small, medium and micro enterprises (SMMEs) in the form of EPWP projects, and there were employment opportunities in all the other infrastructure programmes. They did insist that contractors must ensure that Grade 1, 2 and 3 contractors were sub-contracted, and several SMMEs had benefited.

Mr Bukhosini said that the issue of Nibela should not be confined to a conservation facility, but a collaborative government approach where different government structures and entities assist and come up with programmes and projects that respond and address issues of poverty and unemployment. In terms of the income that would be generated, as well as the programmes, projects and how communities would benefit from their income, they had 12 traditional authorities in Isimangaliso, and most of them had land claims, and they had concluded management agreements in accordance with the Protected Areas Act. These traditional authorities were paid R1.8 million annually from revenue generated from the park because they were currently generating income revenue from gate entries, so as soon as the business model changed, some changes were also expected in the income.

The community park was an idea that had come from Mr Mdluli, who was the father of the missing person. This was welcomed by iSimangaliso, but a feasibility study still needed to be conducted to determine the answers to the questions of the funding model. The main aim was to inculcate a culture of conservation among the communities so that they could see the value of trading and owning game and wildlife, as the value was much higher than that of livestock farming. “We believe that if the same energy that was being exerted into poaching by that committee could be translated into assisting professional hunters, that could go a long way,” he said.

Response by DFFE Director-General

Ms Nomfundo Tshabalala, Director-General (DG), DFFE, said the contract between the Department and Ezemvelo had been terminated, and fisheries management transferred from the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) to the DFFE, which had a responsibility of law enforcement around the coastal area. Due to resource constraints, they had had to redistribute the capacity that they had across all the coastal areas. The question raised by the Chairperson was pertinent because the role of the Department needed to be defined, given that the incidents indicated the capacity constraints. The Department needed to sit down with both iSimangaliso and Ezemvelo and discuss and investigate how best to deal with these constraints.

Mr Phadima said that regarding other similar incidents that had happened in the area, the list that they had submitted to the Committee was about Tewate, and covered all the historical incidents that they had covered in that specific area.

Follow-up questions

Ms A Weber (DA) said that it was impressive that iSimangaliso involved EPWP workers in the contracts for cutting off alien plants, but wanted to know if they had been trained as there were different kinds of invasive/alien plants. She also wanted to know if they had tried biological agents, because they worked very well with EPWP workers, as they could not keep up with the growth of alien plants.

Mr Bryant said that the fact that the community park was intended for the family of the missing person was concerning for the ongoing investigation, especially if two members of the same family were allegedly involved in the poaching. He asked if iSimangaliso and Ezemvelo did not see a potential conflict of interest in handing over a section of land for hunting purposes to a family that had potentially been involved in poaching. He felt uneasy about that and suggested that the investigation run its course before such steps were taken.

Ms Phillips said that there was no sewage treatment plant in St Lucia -- there were settling ponds, and after that, the sewage was just allowed to run off into the sea, and there was also not enough water for the residents and businesses. She suggested that before they looked at developing any new lodges, they should rather look at improving the existing infrastructure, as that would also create jobs and benefit the local community.

The Chairperson said that while the Committee agreed that the investigation should be left to the law enforcement agency to conclude, the entities needed to provide the requisite leadership because currently, Ezemvelo had killed two people from the same family. Thulani Mdluli had been missing since November 2021, and Celimpilo Mdluli -- who Ezemvelo denies was a registered member of the Small-scale Fishers Cooperation -- was killed on 16 September. She asked Ezemvelo to provide the list of the registered members of the Small-scale Fishers Cooperation to the Portfolio Committee. She said that the Committee had been told that both the incidents of the Mdluli sons were in self-defence, and added that it was time for the Department to conduct an independent investigation into the matter.

She pleaded with the MEC to resolve the leadership issues at Ezemvelo. The Director-General had not fully answered her question, and she explained that she wanted to know whether the rotational law enforcement agreement was still in place, wherein control officers from the Eastern Cape or the Western Cape were temporarily deployed in KZN. She also wanted to know whether the Department had increased its law enforcement capacity in the KZN province since the termination of the agreement that the DG was referring to. The DG could submit the response in writing.

Response by Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife

Mr Dlulane assured the Committee that they would submit the statistics on the number of people who had been shot dead and those who were injured and arrested in Ezemvelo, alongside the comparison between Hluhluwe iMfolozi Park and iSimangaliso Wetland Park within seven days, as the information was readily available.

He said that they were not necessarily going to hand over the land to the Mdluli family, but the community park had been proposed in the engagements with the communities as one of the projects that could be done to ensure the alleviation of the problems they faced, such as poverty and unemployment. They were currently entertaining the idea and were going to conduct feasibility studies to see if the project would work or not, but the ownership of the parks would not go to the Mdluli family alone, as it was for the community. The ownership of the parks would be institutionalised in the form of a trust or any other form, but the same family was community leaders, as Mr Mdluli was a chief and another Mdluli was a king, and their proposals had been considered.

Response by iSimangaliso Wetland Park

Mr Bukhosini said that they did not use biological controls because EPWP workers tended to digress from what they were supposed to be doing, as they did not focus on alien plants but started looking at indigenous plants. Their conservation work was based on scientific research.

He noted Ms Phillips’s concern about infrastructure and said that there was an existing institutional arrangement between Ezemvelo and iSimangaliso wherein Ezemvelo was running the commercial facilities and was generating income from those facilities, but in terms of the agreement, the requirement was that Ezemvelo must maintain those facilities. Due to financial constraints and other reasons, Ezemvelo could not maintain those facilities, resulting in the unhygienic conditions in Saint Lucia. They were currently working on a programme of refurbishing several infrastructure facilities, but unfortunately, it had not been enough, as they had only R25 million in the budget. They did not want to invest too much in the refurbishment programmes, especially as they were approaching commercialisation, they wanted to shift the risk so that they could save public funds.

Response by KZN DFFE

MEC Pillay said that both iSimangaliso and Ezemvelo had a commercialisation process underway which was taking longer than expected, as it was also affected by the last two years of COVID-19. They were also looking at the national Department to assist with their best practices. It was not a full-scale process of commercialisation, but selected facilities were going through the process. Going forward, it could not be that community empowerment was limited only to EPWP and alien plant removal -- there had to be more substantive economic empowerment of the sector.

He said the individual accounting authority was also a concern for the Department because the board had been dissolved, and part of the reason for the current situation in Ezemvelo was the issues that had arisen in the board that had been dissolved. He assured the Committee that the issue was close to being resolved, as they had provided a shortlist to the provincial Portfolio Committee. The provincial Committee felt that having regard to the previous experience and the quality of skills that were in the previous board, the new board should reflect a better balance, and they felt that the shortlist that had been produced was not sufficiently reflective of that objective. The provincial Department had accepted that comment and readvertised, and the short-listing had been done and would be tabled in the next meeting with the provincial Portfolio Committee for a final consultation, and then the other processes through the Executive Council would take place. He expected that the new board would be in place by the end of March 2022.

He agreed with the Chairperson that an independent or external investigation was due into the case of the missing person, as the police investigation might take too long.

Presentations on UPL warehouse fire

Interim Multi-Stakeholder Forum (MSF)

Mr Rico Europedo, member of the Interim Multi-stakeholder Forum, was asked by the Chairperson why he had not submitted his presentation to the Committee in writing.

Mr Europedo said that he had wanted to provide a brief verbal input, and did not realise that he needed to submit it in writing. He agreed to do so shortly after the meeting.

The Chairperson said that she was confused, because the Committee had not received a list of the speakers, and allowed him to continue.

Mr Europedo referred to the public health impact of the chemical incident and said they knew that over 1 500 tons had been involved in the fire and released into the environment, and the public health consequences could be understood and fully measured only through a systematic and ongoing health surveillance system. According to their understanding, a robust public health surveillance system was needed to determine which members of the public were exposed in the acute phase and the post-acute phase, as well as the chronic phase, and who continued to be exposed. This continued to be their worry because unless there was a good public health system, they would never understand the true impact of the environmental incidents.

He alerted Members of the Portfolio Committee that the questions to ask the health authorities were about the ongoing public health surveillance to determine where the greatest impact was going to be. Each time it rained, the chemicals were getting flushed out into the environment, and there had not been signs of analytical work for the most persistent chemicals expected to be released into the environment and deposited into the smoke during and after the fire. The fire had remained for more than ten days, so it was expected that the chemicals were in the environment, even though there had been no reports yet, but it remained an ongoing worry.

Mr Jeremy Ridl, Convenor, Interim Multi-stakeholder Forum, described the role played by the forum that had been convened to participate in the environmental compliance procedures following the chemical spill resulting from the fire at the UPL warehouse in Cornubia. He said that the purpose of the MSF was:

·         To be a conduit for information to flow between the relevant authority and stakeholders;

·         To provide a mechanism and vehicle for consultation with stakeholders;

·         To monitor the performance of the various organs of state involved in the government’s response to the incident, and to recommend appropriate                 actions to the Minister and/or the MEC in respect of any failures they might identify;

·         To recommend to the Joint Operations Committee (JOC) appropriate action where it discovers non-compliance or deficiencies in the performance               by UPL of its obligations; and

·         To monitor the performance of the environmental consultants undertaking work on UPL’s behalf.

He said that some of the difficulties that they faced included:

• Finalising the terms of reference;
• It was limited to internal debates;
• There was no engagement with the UPL or the JOC;
• There was no formal structure;
• There were different expectations of members; and
• There was no clear mechanism to hold the government or stakeholders to account.

South Durban Community Environmental Alliance (SDCEA)

Mr Desmond D’Sa, Office Coordinator, SDCEA, said he fully agreed with Mr Europedo on the issue of the JOC, and added that they were only meeting and discussing issues amongst themselves as the community, and since the meeting that they had with the Portfolio Committee, they had not met with any officials from the government, health authorities or UPL. They were not privy to any information where they could ask questions directly to the people who had developed the documents, and in some cases, they had not received any documentation. They were also not privy to asking UPL any questions and were not privy to asking government about their decisions and what had led them to make those decisions. “This has been a problem because we are kept in the dark, yet we have been informed that we have to agree with the structures that have been put in place, but this is taking a long time before we can engage,” he said. They also had not been allowed an opportunity to engage the company in terms of the livelihoods of people, as the company had been closed for a while and the people were not receiving any form of compensation.

Mr D’Sa said that the community had a lot of questions regarding health. They had gone to the clinics with community representatives, and the clinics had said that they had signed a secrecy document and could not reveal information to the community. Those who were conducting the health assessments were not saying anything about what they wanted to investigate, so the community did not know the impact that the chemicals from the fire would have on their respiratory systems in the future. The communities that were tested were not getting any answers regarding what they were being tested for at the clinics that had been set up, and this showed that there was no openness and transparency in this process.

Regarding hazardous waste, he said that they had continued to ask government and had put forward to the last Portfolio Committee meeting that they were aware of the waste, and had been on site and had seen everything, but they did not know whether it had been tested before it was dumped. There had been another fire in South Durban just last week, and he was the one who had to go and inform the relevant departments of the fire because there was no means to communicate fires in South Durban. If things continued to go this way, the fires outbreaks would continue to happen and people’s health and safety with be at even more risk. He asked the Portfolio Committee to help them to hold the big corporations accountable and investigate the recurrence of the fires in the town because since the UPL fire there had been about five or six explosions and fires in South Durban, but everything had been handled secretly behind closed doors. There needed to be an independent investigation into why the fires were happening so that the communities could present before the Portfolio Committee, and they could be heard, and a solution could be found.

Blackburn Village

Mr Kwanele Msizazwe, a representative from Blackburn Village, said that in a meeting with the community members, they had shared some views concerning the implementation of the clinic. They had said that the problem was that the clinic did not give the community members any information -- nothing for them to hold as evidence in case something could happen to them in the future. The community found this problematic because they would not be able to hold the company accountable should anything happen to them in the future. He said that the community believed that the delay at the clinic was caused by the fact that the company already knew that they were holding hazardous chemicals, and had they implemented the clinic sooner rather than later, several problems would have been discovered. He blamed the MEC for this, because the issue of testing the people of Blackburn Village had been raised shortly after the fire happened, and the MEC was also aware of the dangers of the chemicals, but he was too soft, and had allowed the company to erect the clinic far away from the village. He was certain that the warehouse was going to be rebuilt.

Phoenix Village

Mr Zameer Khan, a representative of the Subsistence Fishery Folks of Phoenix Village, said they had been denied access to fish at the Umhlanga estuary because of the UPL chemical spillage. It had now been seven months, and nothing had been done to address the matter, and people were unemployed and had no way of sustaining their livelihoods. The fishermen had not received any assistance from the government or UPL, and they were requesting compensation for income that they had lost from not being able to fish so they could sustain their families.

SAPS

Lt Gen Michael Motlhala. Divisional Commissioner: Visible Policing and Operations, SAPS, presented an update on the UPL Cornubia warehouse incident.

A summary of the presentation was that:

• The UPL Cornubia warehouse incident was part of the unrest that took place in KZN from 9 to 15 July 2021.
• Due to the vastness of the KwaZulu-Natal Province, the SAPS districts were grouped together into three smaller, manageable zones, and the SAPS in Cornubia were deployed at the N2 Freeway, the Gateway Mall and the Cornubia Mall.
•  A complaint of a fire at the UPL Cornubia warehouse was received at the Verulam Police Station at around 23:30 on 12 July. The eThekwini Metro Fire Department was activated and SAPS members were dispatched immediately. Upon arrival, the fire department identified that there were hazardous chemicals, which were causing the fire to be excessive and dangerous to the emergency response team.
• A case of arson and burglary at business premises was opened at the Verulam Police Station and registered as CAS 231/07/2021. Statements were obtained as part of the preliminary investigation. The investigation was still underway.
• Another case (CAS 06/09/2021) for contravening charges under the NEMA for damages caused to the environment by a chemical spill as a result of the fire had been opened against the UPL company at SAPS Verulam. No arrests had been made, and the investigation was still underway.

Discussion

Mr Singh said that he could not talk generally about the matter raised by SAPS, because they were all still under investigation. Had they questioned everybody from the surrounding communities regarding the possible cause of the arson? Was anybody from the UPL company questioned for bypassing the environmental management regulations that were in place?

Mr Paulsen asked who had been paid off in the municipality, and at the provincial and national level, in order for the UPL facility to be set up in proximity to a highly densely populated area. Unless they got to the bottom of the matter, they would witness other disasters from chemical companies across KZN, such as Engen. There was always a disaster waiting to happen in KZN.

Mr Bryant asked if the cameras had been destroyed at UPL. Was this one of the reasons that SAPS was struggling to find relevant evidence? Had they explored whether or not the attack at the facility was a planned or coordinated attack?

Mr Modise said his understanding of burglary was a forceful and illegal entrance of a building with an intention to commit crime. Was anything stolen for SAPS to investigate burglary? Were the cameras functional before they were destroyed? How long did a case of this nature and magnitude take to be investigated? He did not want the Portfolio Committee to sit for two years and leave the Parliament while the issues were not resolved.

Ms N Gantsho (ANC) asked if there were any security personnel on-site on the day the warehouse caught fire, or if they relied only on CCTV cameras.

The Chairperson said that she was happy that a case had been opened against the UPL company with charges under the NEMA. She asked the SAPS if they had the capacity to prosecute environmental law cases because no arrests had been made due to the ongoing investigation.

Response from SAPS

Maj Gen Alfred Khana, Component Head: Serious Commercial Crimes, Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (DPCI), said that the section at Marine Protected Resources was investigating all the matters relating to the contravention of any environmental laws under NEMA, and prosecution would occur after the investigations.

Maj Gen Mary Motsepe, Acting Divisional Commissioner: Detective and Forensic Services, said her duty was to ensure that pending investigations were conducted and concluded. She was liaising with the Provincial Commissioners who submitted progress reports fortnightly to the Ministry of Police offices.

Adv Kalaivani Govender, Deputy Director, National Prosecuting Authority component in Durban, said that the UPL fire had been referred to their office, therefore the investigations were guided by the NPA. She said there had been a lot of progress, with a few outstanding statements. The next meeting was on 25 February to determine the progress of the outstanding investigations.

Follow-up discussion

The Chairperson asked the NPA, Hawks and the SAPS to advise who had actually opened the case regarding the UPL fire incident. She also asked the SAPS how far they were regarding the cases about the missing person, Mr Thulani Mdluli, and the Mtutatuba and Nibela community.

Mr Bryant said there were conflicting reports about the actual day of the fire -- 12 July 2021 -- as to when the fire was reported. A number of references were made in the high-level report that was released by the President in terms of the breakdowns in intelligence. Would the Deputy Minister of Police agree that there had been a severe breakdown in intelligence? Did this impact the UPL fire and the disaster that followed?

Adv Govender said that the DFFE were the complainants on the UPL fire. With regard to the capacity to prosecute the matter, she said that there were senior state advocates who were guiding the investigations, and were well acquainted with the environmental laws. Therefore, the senior state advocates were capable of researching and prosecuting the matter.

Lt Gen Fannie Masemola , Deputy National Commissioner: Policing, agreed with Mr Modise on the definition of burglary, which involved forced entry. He said that the SAPS had the capacity to prosecute and they were mandated to jointly investigate the crime with the DFFE. In terms of intelligence, he said it was not only the UPL at Cornubia that had called and got a delayed response -- a lot of clients had called, but the SAPS was not able to respond quickly because they were all over KZN, to the extent that the provincial SAPS had asked for national backup.

Lt Gen Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi, KZN Provincial Commissioner, said that the provincial SAPS could not comment whether there was a camera or not. They had been told that it was too risky to investigate, and had had to evacuate and leave the place until the whole UPL factory burnt down. Therefore, investigations had to occur afterward. He added that UPL was situated in an informal settlement, therefore the risks and challenges for police were high, and they were not able to intervene easily.

Mr Bryant asked if the nature of the attack at UPL was planned or spontaneous.

Lt Gen Mkhwanazi said it was difficult to determine the timelines because there were different departments involved in the fire incident. Regarding the case opened by the DFFE on the storage of chemicals found in the warehouse, he said the SAPS was guided by the NPA. He added that the investigations would also determine the nature of the attacks. It would be so difficult to conclude if it was organised crime or not. They only knew that there were people who intended to go to UPL to break in and burn. Also, UPL was next to Makro, and the SAPS had been trying to protect its goods, so maybe the presence of the police had frustrated the rioters and they had diverted their anger to UPL, or they had broken in thinking they would get something.

He asked to respond to the remaining questions in writing.

Department of Health

Dr Sibongiseni Dhlomo, Deputy Minister of Health, introduced his team, which included Mr Ramphelane Morewane, Acting DDG: Primary Health Care, and Ms Aneliswa Cele, Chief Director: Environmental Health and Port Health Services,

The presentation of the Department of Health (DoH) was delivered by Mr Morewane.  He said the Health Services and Pollution Control Units from eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality had responded to the fire incident on 13 July to perform their functions under the Hazardous Substances Act of 1973 and Regulations R452 and R453 of 1977. The Act provides for the control of substances which may cause injury or ill-health or death of human beings by means of their toxic, corrosive, irritant, strongly sensitising or flammable nature, or the generation of pressure thereby in certain circumstances, and for the control of certain electronic products.

The national DOH had appointed experts to visit the site to assess the impact of the incident on human health and environment in terms of ecology, occupation, toxicology, geology, air quality and hydrology.

(For more information, please consult the presentation.)

Discussion

Ms Weber said she was concerned that UPL would be up and running again very soon. They all knew that UPL was in the wrong area. It should not be close to the water and a residential area. It should not be there even if it got a permit. It should be moved. 

Mr Singh referred to intergovernmental relations and asked where the role of all the spheres of government started and ended. Was the DOH just the custodians of the legislation, or did it also implement? Were the letters of authority given to the provincial health practitioners or to the eThekwini municipality? He asked if exemptions of companies operating within free and special zones were provided for in the legislation or regulations, notwithstanding the fact that these companies had hazardous substances.

Mr Bryant stressed that there should be regular, rather than random, checks at some of the chemical storage facilities within the country to ensure that the hazardous substances and materials were kept in check.

Mr Modise asked if the substances stocked at UPL and anywhere in the country were regulated by the Hazardous Substances Act or the National Health Regulatory Act. Was it known if UPL had a letter of authority to possess the chemical substances guided by the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAPRA)? The DG had said that this fire necessitated the strengthening of the coordination amongst various government departments -- was this an acknowledgement to confirm that indeed there was no cooperation within the departments? Or was it a recommendation that the co-operation within the departments needed to be further enhanced?

Ms Gantsho asked if it was allowed for community members not to receive the results or a diagnosis when they went to clinics after not feeling well.

Responses from DoH

Mr Morewane said that the role of national DoH was as a regulator, therefore they set the norms and standards. It was very clear that the matter of hazardous substances was regulated at the director general’s level. In terms of intergovernmental relations, the national DoH rendered services in collaboration with the colleagues that were on the ground. They did not fall on top of each other -- they knew very well where their roles start and end.

The message the DoH was trying to send on the ‘random vs regular check’ issue was that they did check the entities. Because they were spread across the country, they randomly identify areas where there were suspicious activities. If a clear risk was identified in an area, then they focus on that area. One of the principles of the district systems, where environmental health was based on service delivery, encouraged the DoH to engage in intersectoral collaboration. Therefore, intersectional collaboration was not optional, but mandatory.

A patient visiting a clinic was entitled to getting results. He stressed that the difference between the public and private sectors was that some of the records belonged to the state. If they could establish which clinic was involved, they would follow up.

Ms Cele said that the DoH had learnt through the UPL fire incident. It had actually assisted it to strengthen its systems. They had evaluated the licensing system and found some weaknesses, and had highlighted in their presentation that they needed to work in a coordinated manner. The licensing resides with the national DoH through the DG, but it was implemented by ground personnel after inspections. There was a special agreement with the provincial DoH, where environmental health practitioners were the eyes of the state. The environmental health practitioners were authorised through a programme to be offered a letter of authority.

She confirmed that with the licences that had come through, they had not received any applications that referred to UPL not being run again. They were watching the space and had made certain provisions in terms of strengthening the licences by listing all the substances that were in that particular factory. She read the special condition on the licence, which read that "the branding of the licence does not exempt the authorised person from the requirement of any other law." This was to avoid a situation where a company would claim that they had been licensed by the DoH while they have issues related to the provisions of other departmental acts.

Mr Murdock Ramathuba, National Director: Environmental Health, emphasised that in terms of intergovernmental relations, collaboration cuts across intersectoral spheres and departments. The local government and municipalities were allowed to conduct premise surveillance and regular inspections on the ground through the provisions of the National Health Act. He added that the licensing had been improved to ensure that the DoH was aware of any chemicals that were in any licensed chemical plant.

The Chairperson said that the presentations had stated that the names of the hazardous substances (Category A and B) and their quantities must be included on the licences issued by the legislated local authority or the DoH, but this was never done. Did the UPL have a case to answer in this regard, in terms of applicable health legislation? She had heard from the SAPS presentation that only the DFFE had opened a case. Had the DoH opened a case against UPL as per the legislation?

Ms Cele said that the DoH had not opened any case because they had been working with the DFFE on the ground, and had been able to supply whatever information the DFFE needed from the DoH.

The Chairperson asked if there was any reason the DoH had not opened a case.

Ms Cele said that the DoH had looked at the provisions of the act, and were still trying to analyse from their side. Because this had been an incident, they had not picked up anything in terms of the Hazardous Substances Act that there was a clear contravention. She added that through investigating, the DOH had found that there were some chemical elements in the warehouse that had not been disclosed during the inspections.

The Chairperson said that she did not want to create a dialogue, and asked Ms Cele to present the answer in a written format. She asked if the DoH had "dropped a bomb," because they had not been given a sufficient answer.

eThekwini Municipality

Dr Musa Gumede, Deputy City Manager, eThekwini Municipality, said the eThekwini team had been advised, after reporting at UPL, that the warehouse stored numerous types of pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, pigments and packaging used in the agricultural environment. Through preliminary investigations, it had been found that UPL did not hold the necessary permits as per the municipal health bylaw. The Air Quality Officer and meteorologist could not access the site due to the fire.

UPL had been instructed by an Authorities Directive to provide a fully resourced mobile clinic in the impacted area to assess the health of the community members after the fire incident. The UPL business closed after the fire and the demolition application had been approved, with a condition that the ambient air quality was monitored and reported on.

Media updates via loud hailing, pamphlets and door-to-door campaigns had been disseminated to the community with regard to the fire and possible impacts.

Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife

Dr Andy Blackmore, environmental law and conservation scientist, Scientific Services Division, Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife, said the rangers at Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife had discovered the spill (blue water) after the fire. There were toxic chemicals in the water that affected both plant and animal life, especially the massive fish die-off. The extent of the contamination and the impact of the spillage were still to be determined.

Ezemvelo recommended that there should be:

• restoration of damaged biodiversity, recreational and other values;
• restorative justice in the form of compensation, offsetting and criminal liability; and
• cost recovery.

KZN EDTEA

Mr Sabelo Ngcobo, District Manager, Department of Economic Development and Environmental Affairs (EDTEA), KZN, said that on 12 July 2021, a fire incident was reported to the fire department, but they could not respond due to the sheer scale of the unrest in the province, which had resulted in approximately 200 buildings being damaged. The eThekwini Fire Department had attended the incident on 13 July, accompanied by the SAPS. The municipal main water supply had been damaged during the unrest, thus preventing fire hydrants from working properly. There was also an exacerbated influx of toxic chemicals into the watercourse and the estuary.

The emergency measures taken had included:

• A spill response team was activated and immediate control measures were put in place by UPL - SpillTech and Drizit - with no runoff from the site on 19 July.
• Emergency control measures were implemented at the discharge outlet and berms placed in the river.
• Closure of beaches from Salt Rock to uMgeni River (40 km) on 16 July. Swimming and fishing were prohibited until all seawater and sediment samples from the affected side were analysed. UK-based Professor Jason Weeks recommended the opening of beaches, with an exclusion zone. Beaches that were closed were to open with effect from 2 November 2021 (96% reopening of previously closed beaches).
• Continuous public updates by eThekwini Fire Services in relation to progress made with extinguishing the fire.
• After consultation with Dolphin Coast Landfill Management (DCLM) and EnviroServ, the DFFE had issued the exemptions for waste management on 28 July.

DFFE

Ms Frances Craigie, Chief Directorate: Sector Enforcement, and Mr Grant Walters, Director: Enforcement, Environmental Impact & Pollution, made the presentation of the DFFE on the UPL incident.

They said that the solid waste that was removed from the environment amounted to 18 232 626 kg sent to DCLM. The liquid waste had amounted to 58 658 420 litres, the majority of which was sent to Holfontein to be landfilled.  More recently, some small volumes were sent to DCLM for landfill and treatment in their Vibratory Shear Enhanced Processing (VSEP) plant, facilitated by means of upliftment of conditions contained in Waste Management Licences (WMLs) by the DFFE. Dead fish weighing a total of 3 900kg was sent to the DCLM.

Regarding progress before and after the fire:

• A case (Verulam CAS 06/09/2021) was opened in September 2021. The Green Scorpions/ Environmental Management Inspectorate (EMIs) would continue to lead this process.
• The baseline compliance profile agrochemical manufacturing sector would commence in early 2022 to evaluate the efficacy of the regulatory loop/connections and make recommendations
•  MINTECH Working Group 4 would review guidelines on the administration of NEMA section 30 incidents (2019) and legislation to determine the need to make revisions in relation to the mandated authority to coordinate an intergovernmental response to high-risk emergency incidents.
• The Environmental Assessment Practitioners Association of South Africa would be engaged to investigate the creation of a mechanism whereby specialists were selected and appointed by the government, but for which the polluter pays.

(For more updates on the stream rehabilitation, and freshwater and health updates, please consult the presentation.)

Questions for eThekwini Municipality, Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife, DFFE and EDTEA

Mr Singh said he had not seen any representation of local non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in the presentations - could that be considered moving forward?

The Chairperson said that the oversight visit to KZN must prioritise engagements with the local NGOs.

Mr Singh said that the common thread in the NGOs presentations many moons ago was the lack of communication. It seemed like the various role players were talking past instead of to each other. The multi-stakeholder forum set was supposed to deal with these issues, and it was regrettable that up to now they did not have TORs. He asked if it was possible for an independent facilitator, rather than government, to spearhead enhanced communication among all the stakeholders. He recalled that in 2002, a gas pipeline had leaked on Christmas Eve in a school area, and fortunately the children were not at school. He had been a MEC at that time, and there had been a commission of inquiry headed by senior counsel, who had produced a very comprehensive report with remedial solutions after engaging with the community. Maybe, that was what they now needed to consider. How justified were the complaints from the local communities and NGOs? How did one communicate with the public?

Mr Singh asked the eThekwini municipality if they had opened criminal charges against UPL for not complying with the bylaws. Was the government satisfied that the disposal of waste had been done in an environmentally acceptable manner? Did these people have the necessary authority to dispose of waste? In the Ezemvelo presentation, it had been mentioned that the Umhlanga lagoon/ estuary could be compared to St Lucia. Was the mouth of Umhlanga lagoon open all the time? Was it closed like St Lucia? He was not satisfied with the initial report from the DFFE, because they put a lot of blame on UPL for what had happened -- why was the local or provincial division of DFFE not blamed for any contraventions of their own law and regulations, like authorising the company to operate? Did UPL have sufficient liability cover if they were found to be responsible to pay by a court of law? When would the operations of the lagoon return to normalcy?

Ms T Mchunu (ANC) agreed with Mr Singh that an impartial body was required to deal with all of the issues raised. She asked EDTEA and DFFE why they had not presented on the sections of the environmental laws that permitted UPL to operate. Was an environmental impact assessment (EIA) conducted? If so, what were the roles of the Green Scorpions’ in the investigations? What was the role of the Environmental Health Practitioners from eThekwini? She asked about the ambient air quality report - had the monitor not been able to pick up any emissions since April when the UPL Cornurbia had started to operate? What had been the consequence management at EDTEA and the eThekwini municipality following the UPL incident? Why were they not included in their reports? The officials, as well as UPL, needed to account for the incident.

Ms Weber asked what the effect of the toxic chemicals from UPL was on humans, crops and animals. Were the respiratory and eye issues the only symptoms that came from the water? What were the short and long-term effects on the human body? Did one know the migration of the emissions - where they were now in the air, and in which area they were mostly concentrated? She did not trust the means of communication between the communities and the authorities, and doubted that the communities would even be given the reports. As it had been reported that the fish were no longer dying, why did they still have excluded zones where fishing was not permitted? What would be the specific reason for the closures, because fishing was the bread and butter of these local communities? What was being done in those excluded zones to ensure that people were earning money?

Ms Gantsho said she concurred with the proposal of prioritising the stakeholders, saying it was unfortunate that they had left the meeting, and advised the government to close the gap between themselves and the stakeholders.  She asked who had given the UPL permission to erect the building again, with the pending investigations.  Would the eThekwini municipality make provisions for anyone who could not walk the 5km distance from the Blackburn community to the clinic, especially the elderly people? How were they tested?

The Chairperson asked what proportion of the state's remedial cost could it claim from the polluter. She asked Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife if they knew how long the chemical would remain in the ecosystem before the natural system fully recovered. Have a cost recovery initiative been envisaged should the UPL company decide to file for bankruptcy, considering all the costs it had incurred? Who did they think should be compensated, and why? What would be considered a proper offset in the case of UPL's damage to the broader environment?

The Chairperson asked everyone to respond to the following questions according to their line function: Why was this hazardous liquid transported all the way, considering the risks involved? She said that the DFFE, in terms of the multi-stakeholder forum, had stated that a draft TOR had been circulated to the stakeholders on 4 October. Could the DFFE clarify who the 73 groupings/individuals and 40 members were who had attended the conference? Which was which? Did all the stakeholders have access to the drafted TORs? One had to be sensitive to community participation in this kind of setting.

Responses

eThekwini Municipality

Dr Gumede said the land in question had belonged to Tongaat Hulett and had been sold to a company called Fortress. Fortress had met all the conditions required to build warehouses on the land, and two-thirds of the land was leased to UPL. Therefore, UPL had not directly come to the eThekwini municipality for permission to store hazardous substances at their warehouse. The eThekwini Municipality had not laid any charges against UPL. It had an intergovernmental process that it was dealing with. Its legal team had advised it to support a process by depositing its own statements in support of the case that had already been opened by the DFFE.

He said that the symptoms the eThekwini municipality was looking at were any change in respiratory, skin and eye issues. The obstetrician clinics were also monitoring if there were any malformations that were noted during pregnancy checkups. He added that UPL was providing transport for communities to go to clinics that had been made available. The stillbirth statistics of vervet monkeys would also be monitored by the municipality to check if they were linked to the UPL fire incident.

There was a new decision matrix that would clarify the role of the municipality in such incidents to prevent overlaps with other spheres of government.

The Chairperson said that she would allow the eThekwini municipality to defend their line of function properly in a written format because she had not received a satisfactory answer.

Mr Enock Mchunu, Head of Fire and Emergency Services, eThekwini Municipality, said that UPL had been approved for fire safety and protection systems -- for example, fire hydrants, sprinkler systems and one million litre water tanks. The non-compliance had occurred when the UPL submitted an application to subdivide the warehouse so that they could deal with flammable liquids on one part of it. The UPL did not submit its plans for approval of chemical storage in the subdivided part of the warehouse. He said that in terms of major hazard installation regulations, the regulations in occupational health and safety required a company to notify the authority and the chief director at the provincial level to store chemicals. UPL had to get services from an approved inspection authority to draw up a risk assessment report to be submitted to the fire emergency service at a local municipality. The fire had started without most of them knowing that they were already storing chemicals there.

Mr Melusi Molefe, Air Pollution Management, eThekwini Municipality, said that emissions from UPL had occurred only when there was a fire incident, therefore the stations would have not picked up any emission before the fire. Most of the pollutants had moved to the upper atmosphere during the first six hours of the fire, therefore not impacting nearby communities. In terms of air quality, they were concerned with ground-level pollution, where humans breathed the air. What happened with the lingering pollutants was that the industries had tall stacks that allowed pollutants to disperse way up in the atmosphere. The pollutants got diluted when they were up in the air so that humans would breathe less concentrated air should it come back to ground level. He said that when there was a fire in the city, residents were alerted through the media. During this incident, there had been pamphlets, and notices were disseminated to the community.

Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife

Mr Dlulane said that there was no indication when the particular work on UPL would be completed, especially concerning the estuary. He stressed that the estuary would take a long time to recover, so should there be a need along the line to require additional resources, they would need a cost recovery. They were of the view that the polluter pay principle must apply because they were uncertain when the work would be finalised.

Dr Blackmore said that they expected the full recovery of the estuary to be in 20 years' time, based on the half-life of the chemicals in the systems. The system had a high rainfall, therefore the recovery might take about eight years to move from a degraded to a pre-or climax state. If UPL went bankrupt, the taxpayers have to, unfortunately, cover all the environmental costs. Compensation would be in the form of a high-functioning ecosystem which would be a key breeding ground for major fish species with fewer particles going to the marine environment. He stressed that it did not necessarily have to be recovered financially, but through physical offsets for rehabilitation.

KZN EDTEA

Mr Nhlakanipho Nkontwana, Head of Department, EDTEA, said that the lack of communication was also fuelled by the social unrest in Durban. He agreed that this was an area where they had to improve communication platforms with stakeholders through websites, although there was no budget for it. EDTEA was working with companies that had been affected by the social unrest and had asked them to provide the names of the people who were affected. These would be submitted to the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition (DTIC) to establish government support programmes. The national government had asked them to identify the beneficiaries, and they would process payments. On consequence management, Mr Nkontwana said that they had lodged a complaint with SAPS to exercise the powers they had as provincial representatives.

Mr Ngcobo indicated that UPL was not authorised to operate at Cornubia. The EDTEA had learnt that cooperation and proper enforcement within government departments were crucial when dealing with incidents of this nature. Some of the lessons would be learnt when the court process was finalised and the EDTEA would be happy to report on that. He added that an independent investigation had also been initiated by the MEC, so the attorneys would be able to allude to some of the improvements that the EDTEA had to include going forward.

DFFE

Ms Tshabalala (DG) said one of the lessons that the DFFE had learnt from this incident was the communication gap between various departments. Although they had intergovernmental structures that existed, they needed to ensure that these structures were indeed cooperative, functional, sustainable and effective across all spheres of the government. The affected stakeholders and the DFFE were not finding each other, which called for synthesised reporting. She added that the lessons learnt from this incident would be explained in full detail, as per Chairperson’s request.

Ms Craigie said that there were very few hazardous waste landfill sites in the country, one being in Gauteng. The DFFE needed to assess which authorised landfill sites (Gauteng versus KZN) could be accommodated with the volume of the solid and liquid waste. The waste disposal process was monitored very carefully and conditions were lifted to allow liquid waste to be accepted at the authorised sites. The Department was also consulting specialists to check if there was an alternative way to deal with liquid waste. The process of certification to lift the conditions would be due by April 2022. It was not ideal to dump treated liquid waste at a landfill site.

She added that it was important to note that the DFFE compliance report had specific terms of reference which required the conducting of a preliminary investigation, particularly to identify what permits within affected departments were required to deal with the fire incident. The preliminary investigation had helped the DFFE to realise that UPL had committed offences which led to the opening of a proper criminal investigation. To avoid player and referee issues, the investigators from the DFFE had to allow the criminal investigations from SAPS to take over the matter. The SAPS investigation would be able to identify if there was negligence from any government departments and units, especially the DFFE.

Ms Craigie said that UPL had a liability cover that had been sent to the DFFE, but the report was not clear on the amount of the cover. They needed to first understand the rehabilitation cost, and then they would have to re-engage with UPL again. The drawing out of the insurance cover would depend on the criminal investigation.

She highlighted that they had found that smaller reaction teams of the different governmental departments needed to improve their response when dealing with cases of this nature. The Department was looking at getting a panel of laboratories to enable quick sampling and analysis during incidents of this nature. She added that the incident also highlighted the commitment of the government officials to their roles. Many officials had worked harder and dedicated their time to attend to this issue in a professional manner”

Mr Walters said that the multi-stakeholder forum had played a significant role in terms of quantifying the losses during the period. The quantitative analysis would aid the KZN government to compensate affected beneficiaries in terms of assets.

DoH

Mr Morewane said the incidents highlighted the need for government departments to collaborate. The intergovernmental relations (IGR), integrated development plan (IDP) and One District One Plan approach were some of the governmental instruments that would strengthen the collaboration within the departments at a local level. They needed to go back and leverage these initiatives, using the UPL incident as a case study, particularly on matters of a legislative nature. He said that all the gaps that had been identified would be responded to comprehensively in a written format.

He said the national DoH remained responsible for legislative norms and standards, including monitoring and evaluations, which connected them to local municipalities in terms of interventions. They regretted areas where they had failed, but would definitely take the necessary steps to restore their competence.

Multi-stakeholder Forum

Mr Ridl clarified that the draft TORs had been sent to a wide body of stakeholders for comments. After reviews, the semi-finalised TORs had presented to stakeholders at a public meeting. An interim committee had been appointed at the same meeting, and their mandate was to raise any concerns and make amendments to the TORs. The complaints that had been heard today were very much the same complaints that the MEC had heard during the first and subsequent meetings after the fire. The TORs were good in his opinion, and the Portfolio Committee needed to engage with it because many issues raised today had been anticipated in the TORs. He added that the TORs were backed by the letter of appointments given to each one of the committee members.

He said that it was not true that the multi-stakeholder forum had not been given information. He had received bi-weekly reports, and the committee was supposed to disseminate the information to their own constituencies that they represented. The bi-weekly reports were available on public platforms.

They were still working out how stakeholders would physically work with the government through various forums. The TORs also dealt with the identification of people that needed to be compensated. It was up to the stakeholders to go and find these people, which was easier said than done. How did one get volunteers to go to communities to conduct social science research with very few resources and little expertise?

He said that the multi-stakeholder forum had been invited to comment on the application of the UPL to discharge waste into the sea with eThekwini officials. Also, on Christmas Eve, it had been given an opportunity to engage on a proposal on the heavy rains that were diverting some of the stormwater to the river. They had managed to submit written input on that proposal.

The Chairperson said that the question had been very clear, and the point remained that the TORs were not yet finalised. There had to be some intervention to bring everyone on the same page. One could not come to the meeting to criticise other stakeholders in their absence. The Committee knew Mr Ridl had been appointed by the MEC to lead the forum, so could he clarify whether they were talking about 73 groupings or 73 individuals? How was the draft TORs circulated to all these stakeholders?

Mr Ridl said he was not criticising the committee members of the multi-stakeholder forum, but the expectations of the committee. He thought there might be a greater expectation than they were able to deliver. In that process as a convener, he had to take responsibility if the committee had not delivered.

The Chairperson said the Portfolio Committee had listened to the NGOs and civil society. The DG had already mentioned that there was a need to improve on how matters were conducted. They would have another meeting that focused only on the multi-stakeholder forum. The TORs from the multi-stakeholder forum still needed to be finalised, and there must be an intervention to bring every affected stakeholder on point. If there was any matter that Mr Ridl wanted to raise, he could do so in a written format.

Closing of St Lucia estuary

St Lucia business, tourism, and community stakeholders

Mr Sibusiso Mthembu presented on the social and economic impact of the closure of the St Lucia estuary, as well as the impact on small-scale farmers. He said there were about 550 severely affected small farmers from the Sokhulu community and about 350 from the Dukuduku community. Each farmer supported an average of about four to five dependents. Farming was a cornerstone economic activity for these two respective communities. The absence of farming meant that reliance on government grants was growing and crime was inevitable. Farming had been happening for over a century in the region and had graduated from subsistence to a recognisable industry.

The farmers were self-sufficient, able to send their own children to school and afford their basic needs, but the economic impact of constant flooding had pushed all these people out of work and had taken away about 1 000 job opportunities each year. Fresh farm produce was sold in Mtubatuba, Richards Bay, Empangeni and other towns across Zululand, creating further small jobs which were much needed. He said that wholesaling to vans and trucks was now history, and farmers had lost over four years’ worth of production, which had had a devastating effect on the household economy. “Poverty is knocking on many doors, and we all have to postpone our dreams and attend to the current reality caused by the closing of St Lucia Estuary,” he said.

As a solution, they proposed cleaning of Msunduze channel, opening the St Lucia Estuary mouth, and maintenance of the estuary. This meant implementing the 1.6m above mean sea level for natural breach going forward  -- or buy them a farm to share and then keep your swamp!

Large-scale commercial farmers

Ms Amanda Maphumulo said that since the initial inundation of water in September 2016, the large-scale farmers’ situation had become dire every year. Up to 440 hectares of the 497 hectares of land that they had was underwater and they could not access it, farm it, or get any income from it. They had lost income and the employees whose livelihoods had depended on these farms. The few remaining employees had to work under harsh conditions, as at times they had to work underwater and were exposed to dangerous animals such as hippos, crocodiles, and insects such as mosquitoes. Because of these job losses and uncertainty, there had been a rise in criminal offences and violence, as the people were desperate to find other ways to support their families. As this situation progressed, more farmlands on the flood plain were being affected, and this had put the viability of the uMfolozi sugar mill on the line.

Ms Maphumulo said that they had raised their concerns and views at the symposium that was held by iSimangaliso in October 2020, where the general consensus was that the estuary was in a state of emergency and disarray, following the implementation of the project management plan, which had not brought the desired effects to the estuary system. The assisted opening of the mouth in January 2021 had had no positive impact on the farmlands. The estuary and the stakeholders at large had seen no benefits, and instead, the system continued to regress, as did the communities around it who had lived off the system for centuries.

She said that they were now going into a second year with no communication from iSimangaliso regarding the short-term, medium-term and long-term resolutions that were put forward by the task team of March 2021. They were still sitting with the damage that had been caused and yet again they were pleading for a way forward, as they had been in limbo for too long. “If by any chance, iSimangaliso would give us an upfront solution -- be it compensation for the loss of our land, or expropriation -- it would give us closure and peace of mind, rather than living with the fear of the unknown,” she added.

She said that some of the neighbouring farmers had started abandoning their farmlands as they could not afford to continue farming. She had been tasked to bring forward some questions from fellow farmers to the panel, and they were as follows:

• Had global warming and climate change been considered in the current management plan of St Lucia? If so, was the management plan not supposed to be flexible to mitigate some of the unforeseen consequences of climate change?
• uMfolozi was known for having high loads of silt in the past. Had this been measured and considered in the management plan, and had there been subsequent management of the silt after the project?
• The communication between the stakeholders and the previous and current iSimangaliso team had been questionable, so we request that the board includes observers on the various stakeholder meetings for transparency.  

On behalf of the farmers, she requested that Minister Cressy should visit St Lucia to examine the situation on her own to see what had become of the farmlands that once thrived. “St Lucia is home to most of us, and we fear that future generations will not be able to see the beautiful and functional St Lucia estuary that supported the communities and the diversity around it," she concluded.

Umfolozi Sugar Planters Ltd

Mr Lawrence McGrath, General Manager, Umfolozi Sugar Planters, provided a visual representation of the impact of the flooding on the Umfolozi farmland.

Small-scale fishers

Mr Lindani Ngubane, representing the small-scale fishers, expressed gratitude to the CEO of iSimangaliso for inviting them to the symposium where a discussion on the opening of the river mouth had taken place and added that they have seen some results, as some species from the ocean had come to the lake. There had been a reduction in the hunger and stress for the fishers in small-scale and surrounding communities.

He said that although they were sympathetic to the situation that was faced by the farmers, they could not deny that they had benefited from the opening of the river mouth. The small-scale farmers did not support the closing of the mouth, as it had been there for over 20 years and had never caused problems and disturbances, and there was a healthy movement of species from the ocean to the lake, and vice versa. The mouth contributed to them feeding their families, and its closure would leave them in poverty and would kill the fish, which was also not good for nature. The mouth should remain open, but an amicable solution where both fishers and farmers could benefit from it needed to be found.

He said that water species also benefited from the opening of the mouth, as they ate other water species, and if it was closed, species such as crocodiles and hippos could be a danger to human beings.

Tourism business owners

Mr Glen Valentine, KZN tourist guide, said that the lodges and the accommodation people in St Lucia were currently battling as they were not getting the tourism that they used to get before the COVID-19 pandemic, and now that the lake had been closed, the people would rather go on holiday up-country than visit St Lucia. When the lake was open, they used to host fishing competitions in St Lucia and people would come in their numbers, and now that the lake was closed, such competitions did not happen anymore and the accommodation places could not support themselves and the people from surrounding areas through employment.

Ratepayers' association

Ms Stacy van Wyk said that there had been a unanimous feeling amongst everyone during the iSimangaliso symposium that there was finally a semblance of unity and working together towards a common goal. During the early inception of the iSimangaliso Authority, communities had become very divided and engagement between stakeholders was rare, which caused animosity and anger within the communities. When the symposium started almost three years ago, they felt like it was finally rectifying the problems of the past. She said that their faith in iSimangaliso had now once again crumbled because they had not held up their end of the symposium with the recommendations and the democratically proposed solutions. Symposium members had not just come out of the blue and decided to open their mouth, as there had been serious discussions and scientific inputs by dedicated teams, and solutions were proposed and bold moves had been implemented. She said that for anyone to say that opening the mouth was not a success had not stood on the beach for five months and seen the positive impact that it had.

The Minister, as well as the other community members, had seen this positive impact with her own eyes, and it was amazing to witness the rebirth of the St Lucia estuary. However, this was the beginning of their loss of faith with Isimangaliso, as communication with the media and government had not been transparent from the beginning, and it seemed that at this stage, iSimangaliso had taken a step back. She said that iSimangaliso had a clear mandate, and the stakeholders were concerned by the lack of effort and the fact that the country’s heritage site was in jeopardy, and no one seemed to be concerned about this.

Ms Van Wyk said that with the enormous input from the scientists, symposium members knew that the problem of the farmers would not necessarily be resolved by just opening the mouth, but it was a step in the right direction to rectify years of interference. The symposium members had come up with solutions, the costing, and short-term as well as long-term goals to continue the important process of opening the mouth. However, the iSimangaliso authorities had told them that there was no longer a need for a symposium or for their input, which was the end of any form of communication about the mouth and maintaining what they had started. The ratepayers wanted to understand why the recommendations of the scientists that were part of the symposium were being ignored. Their frustrations were understandable because the scientists had years of experience working at St Lucia. She asked the Minister why the scientists who were part of the symposium had not been added as part of the panel of experts, and only scientists who were opposed to the manual breaching of the mouth were part of the panel. She wanted to know if the papers for the scientists who were part of the symposium had been used, or if they had just been ignored. She asked how Isimangaliso, community members and the government had been able to sit idly by and allow the egos of scientists and the media to dictate their environment, livelihood and heritage.

She said that in conservation there was a strong belief that humans should not intervene unless the situation was man-made and needed human intervention to rectify the problem. When a rhino was shot by poachers, and its horn and face were hacked off, did they as humans not jump to their aid and save the animal by all means possible?  With surgery, medication, park security, wildlife funds, poaching units, helicopters and guns, they had literally thrown everything they could to stop the killing of rhinos because they were a critically endangered, highly vulnerable protected species, yet a complete blind eye had been turned to what was happening to St Lucia. She said that humans had created this problem and destroyed the system, and it was a human responsibility to fix it.

She appealed to the panel to go to St Lucia and see for themselves and added that they were tired of all the lies and pretences. iSimangaliso’s website had wonderful images of estuaries and landscapes and they were selling the area to international investors, which was not a problem, but many of the pictures were of Kosi Bay and not St Lucia, and many of the images were dated almost 20 years ago. “Come down for yourself and stand on the ground and see what humans have done to this area and understand first-hand why we are fighting so hard to protect this place. This is bordering on a humanitarian crisis, and due to the lake dying, we are killing people directly and indirectly”, she said.

Marine scientist's input

Mr Robbie Hanson, a marine scientist, said that he had attended a lot of scientific meetings regarding the impact of closing the St Lucia estuarine system, and stressed that the scientists were mostly concerned about the hydrological side, such as water movement. The marine scientists were attacked when they mentioned the impact the closing of the estuarine had on the fish. They were always told that they "just want to murder fish.”

Mr Hanson said that he had consulted Dr AK Whitfield, who had encouraged him to draw some important recommendations regarding a special fish called flathead mullet from his paper entitled, "When flathead mullet left St Lucia.”

The summary of the paper was as follows:

• The annual spawning migration of the flathead mullet (Mugil cephalus) down the estuarine system in the first half of the year was a major ecological feature of the declared World Heritage Site of St Lucia.
• The closing of the St Lucia estuary mouth during the first decade of the 21st century caused disconnectivity between the Umfolozi River and St Lucia Estuarine system, leading to prolonged drought and ceased spawning migration.
• The flathead mullet disappeared during the second decade due to a continued disconnectivity between the estuarine and marine systems. The loss of connectivity was longer than the lifespan of flathead mullet species.
• The artificial breaching of the berm at the mouth of the estuary in January 2021 had led to an outflow and restored the estuarine-marine connectivity.
• It was not yet clear whether the flat mullet population would recover to pre-2000 levels over a short (year) or longer (decade) term.

Mr Hanson blamed the police, scientists, environmental monitors and the contractors from iSimangaliso Wetland Park for the local extinction of the flathead mullet. He claimed that they were always using quotes such as, “we are waiting for nature to respond, or "we are waiting for 'one in ten' storms.” It did not work, he responded.

He added that the possibility of reestablishing the flathead mullet once the mouth opened was too slim because the sand that the fish feed on was not there anymore.

He agreed with the Whitfield (2021) paper when it concluded that the St Lucia system required a sustainable adaptive management system strategy, rather than a fixed management approach. He highlighted that an estuarine system was very dynamic, so using a ten-year strategy for such a system was irresponsible.

He said the residents of St Lucia got bad quality water due to human-induced climate change. They did not need hydrologists but people who could inform the affected communities about the opening of the mouth. The mouth needed to be managed on a daily basis. When one opened an estuary on annual time scales, one should at least invite the affected stakeholders to be there. The estuary was suffering, and so were the people who depended on it.

Minister's comments on closure

Minister Creecy said that in August 2019 she had spent a considerable amount of time visiting the communities and management team around the iSimangaliso Wetland Park. Concerns about the closure of the estuarine mouth had been raised, and the CEO had mentioned then that the park management wanted to convene a symposium to discuss the issues that were raised today. The symposium had been delayed to later in the year due to COVID-19 restrictions. The decision to open the mouth of the estuarine was subsequently decided on during the early months of 2021.

She had received huge complaints from scientists and environmental organisations and had also received a report on the symposium. She had been faced with contrasting opinions on what the correct management procedure for the estuary should be. The National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) highlighted the importance of sustainable development. The four aspects of sustainable developments were:

• the protection of the environmental systems for future generations;
• the exploitation of natural resources in a prudent manner;
• equitable use of natural resources; and
• incorporation of environmental services into economic and development plans.

The Minister said that today’s meeting highlighted that tensions existed between four different principles that underpinned the concept of sustainable development. She had not been able to consider all the different aspects of this matter and had made a decision to appoint a panel of experts to review the scientific basis regarding the breach of the mouth of the estuary.

She said she understood the frustrations expressed by the different stakeholders in today’s meeting and was glad that she had been given an opportunity to share the terms of references (TOR) of the appointed panel.

Panel's terms of reference

Minister Creecy said the Panel was appointed for a period of six months from 1 October 2021 to 31 March 2022, under Section 3A of the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) of 1998.

The TORs were to advise the Minister on:

• The significance and impact of the opening of the estuary mouth and how this related to the implementation of the Global Environment Fund's (GEF's) five project interventions and the St. Lucia Estuary management plan;
• The exceptional circumstances, as defined in the estuarine management plan, that had led to the decision to open the mouth, including those of an environmental, social and economic nature;
• The impact of the mouth opening on 6 January 2021 on the functioning of the estuary system and the wetland system, as well as the associated environmental, social and economic implications; and
• Developing guidelines for the immediate and ongoing management of the system.

The Minister promised to send an updated version of this presentation to the Portfolio Committee.

(For more details of the TORs, please consult the presentation.)

The Chairperson asked the Minister when she was going to conduct an oversight meeting at iSimangaliso and meet the affected stakeholders.

The Minister replied that she had already done that. She had been there in August 2019 but had not met the stakeholders. Hence, she had agreed to hold a symposium with the CEO of iSimangaliso Wetland Park and structured the Panel in the way that she had. She was fully aware of the competing interests that existed in this matter. She stressed that she would wait for guidelines from the Panel before she took any further action.

Discussion

Mr Singh complimented the Minister for putting the Panel together but indicated that waiting for the panel of experts to report and to consider public opinion was like waiting for death at one's door. "It may be too little too late -- time and tide wait for no man," he said. They were in favour of the protection of the environment, but not at the cost of the vulnerable communities. There was a need to strike a balance. He asked if the Minister could consider speaking to the Panel to come up with something immediate and short-term that would ameliorate the plight of these vulnerable communities whilst carrying on with the bigger report. They should not be forced to act by international organisations for problems that were man-made. At the end of the day, it was the people on the ground that should benefit from all those scientific reports.

Mr Bryant agreed with Mr Singh, adding that the affected communities' economic situation needed urgent attention because it had affected their employment status and their agricultural produce.

Mr Paulsen also agreed that the livelihoods of people had been affected, and one could not allow people to be hungry. He said the people who were affected by the UPL fire required medical assistance and had lost their jobs, and asked if there could be an urgent response to these needs.

Ms Phillips said that they had visited St Lucia and the iSimangaliso Wetland Park in January 2021, and the difference between what they saw then had been astronomical compared to today. She urged the Minister to take her time and visit the communities to see the situations they were faced with, compared to 2019.

Minister's response

The Minister said that the view of fast tracking the work of the Panel was well taken. Everyone agreed that there was extreme difficulty regarding the situations faced by these communities. She would definitely interface with the chairperson of the Panel to look at the extent to which they could speed up the process.

She stressed that it was important for the Portfolio Committee to understand that they were faced with complexity. The first complexity was the court order in 2016, which prevented the artificial breaching of the channel that caused the flooding of the area. The second complexity was that the estuarine system was a World Heritage Site that attracted tourists. Therefore, international protocols could not be ignored. She repeated that when one dealt with these matters, there were always two competing views. If they were to manage the situation in a way that prioritised the needs of sustainable development, they were going to have to find a complex solution that would allow them to meet all the competing needs in this situation. The Minister requested the Committee to allow the Panel process to be concluded. There was a need to solve this problem once and for all. It could not go forward and backward. She hoped that as a result of this process, they could forge a fine and agreeable line to honour all the competing needs

The Minister said that she had spoken with the MEC of KZN in regard to the compensation of small-scale fishers. There was a fund to which the small-scale fishers could apply, and she hoped the officials would provide further details on this matter when the issues raised today would be considered.

Isimangaliso Wetland Park Authority on the estuary closure

Mr Bukhosini made the presentation to the Committee, and the summary was as follows:

• St Lucia Estuary was the largest estuarine lake in Southern Africa, covering an area of approximately 350 square kilometres 
• In 1999, iSimangalisowas inscribed on the World Heritage List.
• In 1950, the government dredged the mouth of the estuary to channel the movement of the water from the uMfolozi River to the sea, to mitigate flooding along uMfolozi River. Operations were undertaken by the Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife which resulted in disconnectivity between the sea and Umfolozi river and disruption of the natural systems that were operating.
• The reduced injection of freshwater into the uMfolozi river resulted in high salinity levels in the estuary. The high salinity led to the extirpation of specific estuary biota.
• Global Environment Facility (GEF) Grant No.TF096152 (GEF5) had three components which were to evaluate the hydrology and ecosystem functioning of the iSimangaliso Wetland Park and institutionalise capacity-building for biodiversity conservation that was compatible with local economic and cultural development.
• The GEF project had managed to redirect the uMfolozi river to the estuary and remove dredge spoil separating the river from the St Lucia Lake so that freshwater would charge the estuary and at a certain stage of time the mouth would open into the sea naturally.

(For more information on the effect of the GEF project on various stakeholders and details about the symposium, please consult the attached presentation.)

Discussion

Mr Singh asked the Minister to set a proposed deadline for the submission of the Panel report. After listening to the CEO of iSimangaliso Wetland Park, he was convinced that the park could make decisions. In terms of the TORs for the matter highlighting the exceptional circumstances, he said he did not believe that one should be looking at red tape. There was a need to act swiftly, and they should be given seven days to come up with a response and tell us why there were no ramifications to the problems regarding the opening of the estuarine mouth. If the management of iSimangaliso failed to submit a report in seven days, they had to offer valid reasons. The court case had taken place many years ago, and it was relevant to a certain extent.

Ms Phillips said that the "go-to" position when everybody was talking about the flooding must stop was that the farmers had built in a flood plain. Everyone understood and accepted that, but the reality was that farmers were affected by the flooding. Would the flood plains be flooded to such an extent if the uMfolozi was not backed up due to the reeds and silt? The accumulated silt was caused by human intervention up to 100 km upstream. Would they sacrifice farmers and choose United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) regulations? Would UNESCO and iSimangaliso then offer to buy the farmers out so that they could carry on with their lives, rather than being held on a string?

Mr Modise highlighted that the Portfolio Committee took a keen interest in biological diversity. Therefore, none should be compromised. The opening of the mouth was very close for them, but it could not be delayed by timeframes. He added that he agreed with Mr Singh that timeframes needed to be adhered to by the DFFE and the iSimangaliso Wetland Park.

Mr McGrath said that he was encouraged by the responses from the Portfolio Committee, the DFFE and iSimangaliso Wetland Park. They looked forward to the timelines and would be keen to be involved in any activities that offered solutions to all the affected parties.

iSimangaliso Wetland Park's response

Mr Bukhosini agreed with the Minister and said that a long-lasting solution was required. The removal of sediment would offer only a temporary solution. One would need to go to the uMfolozi River to remove the sand so that one did not remove the sand today and three days later the sediment returned. One would not have fixed the actual problem but dealt with the symptoms of the problem.

The Chairperson said the Portfolio Committee agreed that an interim intervention or a possible solution was necessary to prevent a further loss of jobs, lives and assets amongst the affected stakeholders whilst waiting for the Panel recommendation.

The meeting was adjourned.