Appeal Against Record of Decision A24/16/3/246 (3 December 2003) N2 Wild Coast Toll Road between Gonubie Interchange near East London (Eastern Cape) and the Isipingo Interchange south of Durban (KwaZulu-Natal)

1. The South African Council of Churches appeals to the Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism to set aside the Record of Decision of 3 December 2003 concerning the construction of a Toll Road between Gonubie Interchange and the Isipingo Interchange, respectively located between the Eastern Cape and KwaZulu-Natal provinces.



2. Over the years, the SACC has adopted poverty eradication and the building of democratic institutions as key focus areas of our vision and mission, to mention a few. We have been integral to and instrumental in promoting key national discussions on poverty eradication, civil empowerment and sustainable development. Our biblical and historical mandate to be good stewards of God's resources, human, social and ecological, challenges us, therefore, to respond with deep concern to the suggestions in the said Record of Decision. In summary, the said RoD implies that the construction of a Toll Road between the Eastern Cape and KwaZulu-Natal will address adequately our concerns for poverty eradication, sustainable ecological development as well as due civil empowerment. At best, though, the RoD shows no real alternatives to limiting the worst case scenarios of environmental damage. The proposal to set up a biodiversity trust fund as "an offset against inevitable and unmitigated or residual impacts" (RoD, S 7.7) acknowledges the possibility of ecological damage yet nowhere indicates the necessity to explore preventative alternatives. In this sense the arguments in the RoD appear illogical.



3. A further concern is the precipitated or protracted nature of the public participatory process. Issues of the future sustainability of communities with regard to their ecological and socio-economic viability are too close to our Constitutional rights of South African citizens to be left to future negotiation with a privatised developer and/or contractor (RoD, S 8.7). With regard to this process we must ask too, why the Record of Decision was taken during December, a time of festivity and religious significance for the majority of South Africans. With most of our time spent on preparation for celebrations (and with major decision makers in DEAT simultaneously on leave!!) it needs to be questioned whether the timing of such a decision is responsible, wise and in the interest of our affected communities. The SA Council of Churches is therefore constrained to urge the Minister to withhold approval for the construction of the proposed N2 Wild Coast Toll Road and to extend the time for appeal so that our Provincial Councils may have adequate time to discuss the proposal with the affected communities.



4. The SACC believes "holistic development" to mean that sustainable socio-economic development is inextricably linked to ecological and environmental protection. A short term capital intensive project with a promise of short term rewards may be attractive yet it may force future generations to pay for any ecological degradation and degeneration it may cause. John Yeld, writing on sustainable development in South Africa, warns about the costs of development that fail adequately to take into account its ecological impact. He says with courageous foresight that: "We must not burden later generations with an ecological debt that will condemn most of them to an even more precarious poverty stricken existence than that endured by millions of people today." [John Yeld, Caring for the earth - South Africa. A guide to sustainable living (Stellenbosch: WWF, 1997), 41.]



5. It is therefore with deep concern for the stewardship of present and future resources that we have requested an extension of time as well as a setting aside of RoD. By its own admission the RoD draws on the EIAR's conclusion that " ... both benefits and negative impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. The benefits associated with the proposed project predominantly pertain to the social environment. However, the direct ecological impacts of the alignment presented in the EIAR, although significant in identified sensitive areas, are considered to be acceptable from a holistic environmental perspective and should not prevent the further planning, design and construction of the proposed project."



6. In the light of these contradictions, the SACC reiterates its commitment to cooperate with government in spheres of poverty eradication and development in a spirit related to broad objectives of sustainability as agreed at the World Summit on Sustainable Development 2002. Finally, while we also hold that sustainable, social and economic development is inextricably bound to care for the environment, we would wish to engage DEAT in further deliberation on this matter after due consultation with our representatives in the affected communities. We therefore request an extension of time for the appeal process to 31st January 2004.

Sincerely
Dr. Molefe Tsele
General Secretary
South African Council of Churches