Sunday Times 2
International Financial City must be a win-win project
View(s):By Carmel L. Corea
At the 71st United Nations General Assembly sessions in New York President Maithripala Sirisena proudly announced that Sri Lanka is a free, independent and sovereign nation with territorial integrity, his speech also appeased the hearts of environmentalists when he stated his government’s commitment to environment sustainability. He further added, “My government’s intention is to make the people of Sri Lanka one of the happiest among the world communities”.
President Sirisena’s inspiring comments at the UN have impacted people’s debate on the construction of the Colombo Port City (CPC) renamed the International Financial City (IFC) – a project to be built reclaiming 269 hectares of land from the sea. However the extracting of sand from Sri Lanka’s coastal waters will decimate this island’s coastal fishing industry and in addition to causing visible beach erosion adversely effecting (the high foreign income earning) coastal tourist Industry.
Environmental cost
It is estimated that 60 million cubic metres (possibly much more) of sand will be excavated from Sri Lanka’s continental shelf, which this small island can ill afford due to environmental reasons. Engineer Channa Fernando states that this sand with an estimated value of US$ 1.7 billion is given free to the Chinese developer by the government of Sri Lanka. Hence Sri Lanka’s contribution is well in excess compared to the much publicised Chinese investment of US$ 1.43 billion for this unsolicited Chinese project.
This Chinese construction in addition to needing sand from our coast requires its inland granite as well. Large granite blocks equivalent to about two Giza pyramids (3.45 million cubic metres) will be quarried using explosives. To quarry this large volume of granite, in addition to the normal granite needs for urban housing and road construction, will adversely affect biodiversity and impact human existence. It is reported that due to rock blasting streams having run dry, their frequent loud noises have disturbed animal and bird breeding patterns (Ceylon Today newspaper). The increased quarrying activity necessitated by this project will exacerbate the dangers publicised for Sri Lanka.
How reliable was the EIA and SEIA?
The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Supplementary Environmental Impact Assessment (SEIA) reports have been criticised for not stating how biodiversity will be protected, how disposal of dredged spoil will take place and how construction of piers, break waters and other water side structures and erosion will lead to short and long term impact on the aquatic and shore line habitats. There is no mention also of the direct impact on removal of sea floor covering, change in water flow patterns and related sedimentation, change in water quality due to storm water and waste water as a result of this project.
There is no mention also about this project’s impact on reefs that protect this island from storms and sand erosion; reefs are important breeding grounds for economically important fish. There is no mention of the project’s effect on bird life, wetlands and other sensitive habitats. The EIA and SEIA reports make no mention of Sri Lanka’s high biodiversity value or the survival of critically endangered flora and fauna in the proposed construction area. Sri Lanka has the highest biodiversity per unit area in Asia, and is now considered a global biodiversity hot spot (endangered area). President Sirisena told the UN General Assembly that Sri Lanka is a Buddhist country where Theravada Buddhism is practised; hence Sri Lanka has a sacred duty to respect and protect all humans, animals and the environment for future generations.
Decimation of the fishing industry
Disheartened, helpless fisher-folk without any help to protect their centuries old coastal fishing industry have been questioning the government, for whose benefit their livelihood is being destroyed. For many centuries they have braved the seas to provide fish for the poor; the government has offered Rs.500 million to compensate their loss. The fisher-folk have openly rejected this offer requesting the government instead to protect their livelihood and fishing grounds from Chinese sand mining, reported Father Sarath Iddamalgoda. Fisher-folk further state that Sri Lanka’s northern fishing grounds will continue to be a region of conflict for them with India. This is mainly due to climate change: the warming of surface waters, resulting in a sharp thermocline which reduces nutrients in surface waters, this in turn reduces the size of fish and fish stocks. Hence poor fishermen in India and Sri Lanka are forced by poverty to hunt for dwindling fish stocks pursuing them in restricted waters, resulting in conflict. The southern waters of Sri Lanka have been conflict free areas, now unwisely the government permits the destruction of these well established, centuries old coastal fishing grounds, by permitting sand mining for the project. Fisher-folk strongly believe it is a violation of their human rights.
Newspapers regularly carry articles and images of eroded beaches, poor fishermens’ homes washed away and destroyed due to erosion. Having exhausted all known courses of action these helpless fisher-folk, victims of perceived future progress, marched to the Negombo courts complex yesterday with black flags and banners held high, highlighting the damage to their homes and livelihood. Will the government care to assist the poor fisher folk?
Suggestions to mitigate effects of climate change
Scientists have warned that as a result of climate change; its ravages of drought, floods and landslides on agricultural lands will result in their reduced food production. As sea level rises (due to melting glaciers), salt water will seep inland, adversely affecting coastal paddy cultivation, stated Prof. Jinadasa Katupotha, (Emeritus Professor), University of Sri Jayewardenepura. Evaluating these circumstances, it is prudent to invest and upgrade coastal fishing and develop coastal fish farming. The Fisheries Ministry should urgently provide better facilities for fisherman and educate them on best practices of sustainable c
oastal fishing. It is reported in the media that our poor children are increasingly suffering from malnutrition and the purchase of expensive deep water large fish is beyond the budget of the poor. By destroying the coastal fishing industry, the government is indirectly inducing the poor, to purchase frequently out dated cheap tin fish, dumped in this country from foreign lands. This is not a healthy option for the poor in a country surrounded by rich coastal fishing grounds.
Geopolitics, employment and health and safety
The geopolitics of Sri Lanka has to be seriously evaluated: Sri Lanka’s strategic position in the Indian Ocean between east and west shipping sea routes makes it a valuable partner for trading nations. About 70% of our transshipment income comes from India. Sri Lanka is also an important hub for China’s Silk Route economic expansion. Hence China has developed and is managing two terminals in the Port of Colombo. However, Sri Lanka will get no income from them for 25 years.
Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe has stated that the Chinese constructed International Financial City will provide employment to 83,000 people and would certainly be a boon for cash strapped Sri Lanka. It would no doubt provide jobs for people in all walks of society, and as a financial city it will no doubt attract the educated people of this country.
The burning question by environmentalist is how safe is this new International Financial City? Built by the Chinese developer its base sits on highly weathered Pre-Cambrian metamorphic rock, how long could this highly weathered metamorphic rock carry the massive weight of sand, granite and high rise buildings so attractively publicised by the developer?
On 14 April, 1615 the capital city of Colombo was devastated by an earthquake of magnitude 6.4(Mw). More than 2,000 people lost their lives and 200 houses were destroyed (Wimalaratne 1993). An earth tremor was reported in the southern city of Gall on September 27, 2016. Is the proposed massive International Financial City constructed on weathered Pre-Cambrian rock considered a safe habitat in case of an earthquake? Can it withstand the predicted increase in levels of sea water due to climate change?
The Port City/Financial City of Tianjin was in a similar location as the proposed International Financial City (IFC) situated next to the transshipment Port of Colombo. Chinese environmentalist’s warned their authorities on safety hazards of situating a densely populated city next to a transshipment port, but their warnings were not heeded. On the 12 August, 2015 the Port City of Tianjin exploded killing 173 people and wounding 797. Some 17,000 buildings were damaged, requiring a costly environmental clean-up operation.
The 2015 Tianjin explosion was a massive human disaster. Sri Lanka is now proposing to construct an IFC next to a transshipment port of Colombo. Is it fair to put the lives of innocent people at risk? Is Prime Minister Wickremesinghe justified in suggesting that 83,000 employees work in an IFC situated next to the expanding transshipment port, when it is an obvious health and safety risk. Can the government of Sri Lanka underwrite such a risk?
The Economist reports that China appears to have deep pockets with a GDP of US$ 9 trillion. However the capstone of the world’s financial pyramid in Basel, Switzerland — The Bank of International Settlement (BIS) which governs 58 global banks and guides and directs the centrally planned global financial system — has warned China in its Quarterly Report to wean its economy off debt-driven growth, before it is too late. The total value of China’s outstanding loans is US$ 28 trillion; its credit vulnerability is three times over the danger threshold. If China’s debt bubble bursts it will also affect Sri Lanka’s economy.
Possible win-win situation for all stakeholders
Instead of the costly environmentally destructive land reclamation of 269 hectares, as suggested by the Chinese developer, the IFC could be situated in a location within Sri Lanka’s mainland — if it complies with health and safety regulations — and then connect it by speed rail to Colombo. It will cost less than US$ 1.43 billion offered by China.
If that suggestion is unsuitable the developer could use its allocated 149 hectares in a location within the expanding Megapolis or other safe location on this island. The Government could also develop its 120 hectare allocation, in a safe location within the metropolis or another location of its choice or even develop existing rundown sites.
It is advantageous for Sri Lanka to invest and develop its well established essential Coastal Fishing Industry and its Coastal Tourist Industry to their full potential in parallel to the proposed International Financial Centre.The sand and granite construction mess adjacent to Galle Face could be carefully converted into park land, an air-lung for the city with attractive restaurants. This will increase the 5.7 hectares available at Galle Face Green for the enjoyment of residents and tourists as suggested by Mr. Ranil Senanayake, Megapolis Advisor.
In the current economically unstable world all stake holders involved in the IFC project would thus have an opportunity to develop their full work potential in a safe, healthy environment. Sri Lanka will then be on the path to achieve the President’s intention…“ to make the people of Sri Lanka one of the happiest among the world communities.”
The writer is an environmental researcher