The anti-mining lobby clouds local – and often resolvable – issues with its own agenda, even as it wilfully ignores mining’s contribution to the world

Of all the major economic sectors in SA, only mining has a specialist “anti” movement, with the single-minded purpose of halting the development of new mines and the expansion of existing ones.

Yet the derided mining sector contributes handsomely to the economy. It employs nearly half a million tax-paying people. In 2018 and 2019 it paid R62bn to the national fiscus in royalties and taxes.

Mining companies are involved in a number of corporate social investment projects including the provision of bursaries and basic services in a number of communities. They provide entrepreneurial opportunities for small businesses. The mining sector is also a top foreign exchange earner, having brought in R361.7bn in exports income in 2019.

But it seems financial and intellectual resources locally and abroad are being used to cultivate a very powerful anti-mining movement – and it is causing deadly divisions in mining communities.

The growth of the anti-mining movement is not without irony. Those very anti-mining activists could not lead a modern life without using a variety of minerals, including those mined in SA.

To build a decent house you need cement and concrete, the input of which includes ash from coal. Various fittings need minerals such as manganese, iron ore, chrome, aluminium and copper.

The cellphones used to campaign against mines on social media and other platforms need no less than 20 minerals sourced from different parts of the world.

An anti-mining activist in Xolobeni, in the Eastern Cape, who accidentally breaks a bone might need a titanium-based bone replacement. He brushes his teeth every day thanks to titanium. The Xolobeni anti-mining activist insists on keeping his environment clear of titanium mining, but the mineral is being mined somewhere else for his convenience.

Some anti-mining activists might argue that their aim is to support renewable energy sources. But solar panels and wind turbines are built with minerals that have to be mined. Solar panels need, among other minerals, arsenic, gallium, germanium, indium and tellurium. Wind turbines need rare earths and aluminium. Minerals required in batteries include manganese, lithium, cobalt, vanadium and nickel.

None of the minerals required to convert solar and wind to electricity are renewable.

Why do we have people who describe themselves as anti-mining activists when most of what makes for their modern standard of living requires mining? The answer partly lies in the cognitive dissonance of the promoters of anti-mining activism.

There are those who sit in very well-developed places around the world, enjoying the comfort of modern life built out of the minerals extracted from poor countries. Instead of demanding the use of minerals to create jobs, improve the lives of the poor and reduce inequalities, they say mining must come to a halt.

They are indirectly saying that now that they have reached the highest standard of development, people from developing countries must remain at the bottom. They are not interested in the socioeconomic nuclear bomb made up of extreme poverty, income inequalities and drying up of life opportunities.

With more than 40% of South Africans unemployed, it is very irresponsible of anyone to directly or indirectly instigate a fight among community members by giving some of them counterproductive titles such as anti-mining activists.

This binary of anti- or pro-mining is nonsensical because the facts speak for themselves: directly or indirectly and whether we like say it or not, everyone is consuming a variety of mineral-based products. If it’s not mined in your community, it is certainly being mined somewhere else for your convenience.

This is not to say communities have no role to play in holding mining companies to account for environmental harm. Companies can be held to account in line with their stated licence conditions.

In fact, current legislation makes it obligatory for companies to engage communities before breaking ground and during the life of a mine. They are compelled to mitigate environmental harm caused by mining and rehabilitate when mining activities end.

In addition to the royalties and taxes mining companies pay to the state, the law requires them to spend money on social projects under regulated social labour plans. The department of mineral resources & energy monitors the implementation of these.

Mining companies have to work with a range of stakeholders, including communities and a number of regulatory authorities. But it’s often difficult for mining companies to reach consensus with communities on the way forward. This is partly because current mining policy does not sufficiently delineate the boundaries of engagement between mining companies and communities. There is no policy that provides for adequate dispute resolution between mining companies and communities on one hand, and among divided communities on the other.

The result is often that community concerns that could be addressed easily by mining companies or regulatory authorities are construed as being part of a plan to fundamentally oppose mining.

A false dichotomy is created: if you accept mining you automatically don’t care about environmental harm; and if you oppose mining you support environmental sustainability. These divisions are sharpened by funded lobbyists. Sadly, poor communities are used as proxies to fight battles they often know little about.

Whatever form of activism we engage in, in the exercise of our constitutional rights, we should do so with responsibility and care. We need responsible forms of lobbying that are sensitive to the most pressing community needs to prevent community divisions and to preserve lives and livelihoods.

The dastardly killing and threatening of those described as anti-mining activists need not only thorough criminal investigation and successful prosecution, but also a proper policy response.

Finding the killers and jailing them would be great, but not enough. We have to address the underlying causes of tension in communities already burdened by deep socioeconomic distress.

This opinion piece was published in Sunday Times: https://www.timeslive.co.za/sunday-times/opinion-and-analysis/opinion/2021-12-24-sa-can-forget-about-job-creation-if-it-cant-provide-reliable-power/