Alfredo Reginfo, Mayor of Tambogrande, Peru, on Mining
"Producing minerals looks nice on paper, but people are hungry and you can’t see the light at the end of the tunnel. Mines don't respect the constitutions, and people realize that, ultimately, we are alone."
The following comments were made by Alfrego Reginfo, Mayor of Tambogrande, to an Oxfam delegation in June 2001.
 |
| Alfredo Reginfo, Mayor of Tambogrande By: Ernesto Caballos |
“This is an agricultural area, and after 40 years of development efforts funded by the World Bank and others the infrastructure leaves much to be desired; partly due to the political instability and economic situation in Peru. Still, there is potential. We have now maybe $US 250 million in potential but with more help in technology we could get $2-3 billion in exports. The entire zone in this area of Piura has potential and it is envied throughout the country. We have good air, water, we’re close to the coast and the highway to Ecuador, there’s ranching, and good access to markets. Tambogrande is in the center of this area.
“We live on top of a mineral deposit and there is good richness here. This was discussed 100 years ago (an iron mine), and since then 25 years ago with the BGRM firm [from France], and then we found these minerals. Now Minero Perú signed an exploration contract with Manhattan Minerals to do a study and exploration and they now see even more potential, and they have even better technology to do this.
“The population here is mostly agricultural. They have never seen any mining so naturally they are uncertain, and they have fears, for good reason. The state is not providing information and lacks transparency. It seems that government has an intention to exploit the minerals without concern for the social costs. If we decide our wealth will be exploited in exchange for some jobs, maybe 500 directly at the mine and another 2000 jobs indirectly dependant on the mine, my fear is that it won’t benefit the town and there will be environmental contamination and an increase in social pressures on the area. People will move here seeking jobs, and we are a poor municipality that would have to deal with increased demands related to water and sewage, electricity, schools… We don’t have all this. Manhattan Minerals doesn’t talk about this and the government doesn’t say anything.
“Even with as much technology as they have, there will still be contamination. So what will be the impact? How will a poor community pay for this? It looks like a bleak future – our wealth is taken, and where are we? As the mayor I can see that logically we need to oppose the mine. We will not see the benefits, only high costs. The people have decided to live freely and transparently, and say if we want the mine or not. We have gathered 75 percent of the population’s signatures showing they do not want the mine.
“The government says that one day we will exploit these minerals, but we see that this effort needs to reflect the social aspects. We won’t permit the government or any private enterprise to do something the people don’t want, and we have to defend this right peacefully and fairly, without letting the government make laws behind the backs of the people.
“Producing minerals looks nice on paper but people are hungry and you can’t see the light at the end of the tunnel. Mines don’t respect the constitutions and people realize that ultimately we are alone. When the central government talks about mining in Tambogrande, they are on the side of the firms. They need the money for their balance of payments and income. They don’t have a policy that benefits the population. Any policy should be to help people and families. If wealth does not serve to help people, then you are just exporting it and you have a lot of problems for the next 100 years trying to reclaim the environment.
“So why exploit minerals? The people here have already defined how they want to work and live, and it is in agriculture. No mining district is a good example of ecology and development.
“For this reason, we are considering establishing an intangible zone; we are waiting for an opportunity to explain this to the new [Toledo] administration. The town needs legal advice to do this.
“At this point we are considering our next steps. The population remains firm and we will defend our views; we do want dialogue. But before a firm is invited by the central government, there should be a conversation between the local population and the government so we can explain our positions. You can’t have a conversation between three parties at first. The government should understand the positions of the people. You can’t have a dialogue between three parties about whether there should be a mine if they are already going to mine.
“We gathered signatures to demonstrate opposition to the mine, and we have to consider the signatures a resounding NO to mining, since the population acted with transparency and freedom. We asked “yes or no” and there was no pressure to sign. If there is ever a referendum the people will freely register their opinion. Ninety-nine percent of the people don’t want a mine, I can put my hand in the fire and assure you.
“Our people here are agrarian people. Since Manhattan Minerals started working here they have learned about other mines and gained knowledge about mining and now they are concerned about the environment, inflation in the local economy, loss of land, changes in nature. Since 90 percent of the people are agricultural workers, they don’t want to displace this. They have certain culture and values and they don’t want them challenged.
“Social programs should not be done by a firm when they have commercial interests. The population becomes dependent on the private enterprise – we want to be free and independent, and we will fight for our own development, without tying them to a private enterprise. That’s paternalism. We can’t agree to projects that take freedom from people, it makes them into machines.
“It’s a struggle because the laws are in favor of the mining activity. The problem in Tambogrande is a series of laws and decrees that gave firms the option of exploration and possibly exploitation. This favors the firms. How can you make a law without talking to a population? Who is first, the government or the nation? The nation must prevail and the laws should follow. The state cannot be omnipotent.
“We want you to take this to the public. We feel alone, and this is the intent of the firm, which is understandable.”