Chatham Rock Phosphate’s Namibian Scheme

In a media release on 5 March 2015 Chatham Rock Phosphate gave “further guidance on its future strategy” following the refusal of its marine consent application by New Zealand’s EPA Decision Making Committee on 11 February 2015.

Two aspects of the announcement by Chris Castle, CEO of CRP, need attention:

1. Its New Zealand focus.

According to the release CRP is looking to raise a further $1.25 million as its key staff takes pay cuts and the company pursues both law changes and a new mining consent under the law governing economic activity in New Zealand's offshore Exclusive Economic Zone.

Reacting to CRP pursuing law changes the Chairman of New Zealand’s Environmental Defence Society, Gary Taylor, said this in a statement:

“The idea that government would jump when CRP stamped its feet in annoyance at a rejection of its consent application is fanciful: New Zealand is not a banana republic."

And

“Improving New Zealand’s environmental laws should be principled and not rushed. A knee-jerk reaction to clear the pathway for individual applicants is not the way forward”.

https://www.eds.org.nz/shop/subscription.cfm?content_id=123989

BRAVO, Gary!!

2. Its Namibian focus.

According to Castle considerable work is going into reducing overheads in CRP, working through cash requirements for the next 12 months and settling final costs associated with the marine consent process. The purpose of this work has been to develop a 12 month budget for keeping the project moving forward (including provision for a small amount of scientific and technical work), continuing work towards a re-submission of the marine consent application and “increasing CRP’s focus on its Namibian permit applications”. (Emphasis added).

Continuing to describe CRP’s business strategy Castle had this to add about Namibia:

“One option is for CRP to increase its focus on its Namibia permit applications in the short term to help diversify CRP’s riskfrom primarily focusing on a single project”. (Emphasis added)

In our circular e-mail 3 of 11 February 2015 we had this unambiguous message for Castle:

“… its reputation and what it stands for are in tatters. With the baggage CRP now carries all in Namibia will be even more apprehensive about its involvement in Namibia and its intentions. CRP must thus rest assured that there will be no scope for it in Namibia to try and recover lost ground”.

He still labours under the illusion that CRP is the best thing since sliced bread. He continues to believe that Namibia will be a pushover in his attempts to fulfill his “dream”. Pity he can’t catch up with reality.

As with so many of his recent arrogant pronouncements this latest one about CRP focusing on Namibia “to help diversify CRP’s risk” must be seen for what it really is: an insult of the highest order to all Namibians. To even think that he could use such a tenuous scheme is beyond belief. It demonstrates the bankruptcy of his action. It deserves only contempt. Namibia will not bail him or his company out – not now and never in the future!

His countryman Gary Taylor used two phrases that are equally apt to describe this audacity in respect of Namibia:

• His Namibian dream is just as “fanciful”. Nobody in Namibia will jump to satisfy his appetite to mine Namibia’s marine resources or to use it for his selfish purposes. Namibia most certainly does not care about what individual companies desire or aim for. Least of all one that has failed in its own country because of a misguided approach. Moreover, in Namibia there is no running to law makers to beg changes to legal prescriptions so that egotistical desires can be accommodated. Lowering of environmental standards is not an alternative that Namibia will even remotely consider.

• By now he must know that Namibia “is not a banana republic”. The sooner he accepts this fact the less disappointed he will be. His Namibian “dream” will be shattered, if it has not already become a nightmare with this latest affront. Namibia has not been impressed with CRP’s studies. They backfired in New Zealand. There they were exposed for their ineptness. His grandstanding is a futile exercise.

A dedicated and well-structured process is underway in Namibia. It will lead to a final decision on what is in the best interest of the country and its people. Consequently, CRP and its failures have no place in Namibia’s progress to defining its marine well-being. And most definitely is Namibia not available to anyone who wants to misuse it in a dubious manner to bail out a foreign company struggling because of an ill-conceived project elsewhere.

ends

© Scoop Media