|
March The
D.C. government task force members were behind closed doors last month discussing ways to manage the burgeoning lead contamination crisis when Jerry N. Johnson spoke up. What was on his mind, though, had little to do with public health, politics or policy. "A forward-thinking authority gets out and informs people that there's a real serious problem and solicits everyone's input," said Brent Blackwelder, president of Friends of the Earth, an environmental group. "Even if WASA came up with a miracle solution tomorrow, it would not redeem them for the fact that people were consuming high levels of lead in water without knowing about it at a time when the agency did know. That's major misconduct."
A top Interior Department official with ties to oil and gas companies has been cleared of several allegations of ethical violations, but federal investigators didn't rule definitively on questions about his involvement with coalbed methane development in Montana and Wyoming. Kristen Sykes, of Friends of the Earth, an environmental group that helped prompt the investigation, said the report details enough conflicts that Griles should be dismissed.
"The inspector general's report is damning," she said. "It uncovers regular and consistent breaches of Griles' ethics agreements and, more importantly, blatant violations of the public's trust." Land Letter Interior Deputy Secretary J. Steven Griles, whose history as an oil and gas lobbyist has garnered suspicion and contempt from environmentalists and Democrats, did not violate ethics laws or rules despite multiple appearances of conflicts of interest, the Office of Government Ethics ruled Tuesday.
Kristen Sykes, who monitors the Interior Department for Friends of the Earth, went further, calling on Norton to fire Griles. "The inspector general's report is damning. It uncovers regular and consistent breaches of Griles' ethics agreements and, more importantly, blatant violations of the public's trust," Sykes said. "If this White House is serious about ethics and accountability, Griles should be dismissed immediately." Associated Press The Office of Government Ethics said the Interior Department's No. 2 official, Steven Griles, did not appear to violate ethics rules by arranging meetings between Interior officials and his former lobbying clients and partners. Two matters - the coalbed methane analysis and the Interior Department dinner - were referred to Norton by the Office of Government Ethics for possible action. Norton said they had been adequately addressed. "This closes the issue," Norton said in a statement.
Kristen Sykes of Friends of the Earth disagreed and said Griles should be fired.
"It uncovers regular and consistent breaches of Griles' ethics agreements and, more importantly, blatant violations of the public's trust," she said. "If this White House is serious about ethics and accountability, Mr. Griles should be dismissed immediately." The
An 18-month investigation by the Interior Department's inspector general has found multiple instances in which Deputy Interior Secretary J. Steven Griles had dealings with energy and mining industry clients of his former lobbying firm even as he continued to receive payments from the firm. Griles released a brief written statement in which he said he was "gratified" by the report's conclusions, which he described as a final determination "that I have adhered to the ethics law and rules." Others read the report differently. "The inspector general's report is damning. It uncovers regular and consistent breaches of Griles's ethics agreements and, more importantly, blatant violations of the public's trust," said Kristen Sykes of Friends of the Earth, the environmental group that helped trigger the investigation after it obtained Griles's meeting calendar through the Freedom of Information Act. "If this White House is serious about ethics and accountability, Griles should be dismissed immediately." In an unusual arrangement, Griles is receiving payments of more than $1 million over four years from his former partner in the lobbying firm while serving as deputy secretary.
It's a scene that plays out more than once a day, on average, somewhere in the
Still, in some corners of post-Sept. 11
Fear of terrorist attacks Last month, the
"All we are trying to do is reroute the most dangerous targets," Millar said. "Only the top most dangerous shipments.
"It is very clear that there are no regulations of the routing of hazardous materials by rail, and there is no law or regulation of what the cities or states can do to protect themselves from terrorism."
Federal regulations bar trucks carrying any amount of materials that are highly explosive, poisonous when inhaled or radioactive in heavily populated areas, tunnels or narrow alleys "whenever practical," said David Longo of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.
Millar said regulation is "virtually never enforced." Environmental Finance Magazine Concerns about the environmental and social sustainability of large-scale extractive industry and infrastructure projects are not new. Neither are the efforts of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in challenging such projects, and seeking to improve them where possible, or halt them where not. But whereas NGOs have typically focused their attentions on public finance institutions - such as the multilateral development banks, or export credit agencies (ECAs) - their campaign focus is beginning to shift towards private sector banks. The rationale behind this move is two-fold. First, civil society groups are increasingly aware that, in many cases, success in preventing public financing dollars from underwriting unsustainable projects will not necessarily stop a given project. Instead, such 'success' can often simply bring in a set of financial players less influenced by, and less open to leverage from, public concerns. This fact of life does not excuse the use of public money for unsustainable initiatives, but it does require a broader view and strategy by local communities and their non-governmental partners. Secondly, this shift in focus is occurring out of necessity. Many harmful projects are going forward from their inception without any public financing whatsoever. Private sector bank-focused campaigns have therefore sprouted up, and are putting intense pressure on the likes of Citigroup and ABN Amro. The most dramatic response from private sector financial institutions to the increased heat of NGO campaigns has been the June 2003 announcement of the Equator Principles. Essentially, the Equator Principles, which apply to all project finance deals of more than $50 million, commit signatory banks to follow the environmental and social guidelines set out by the International Finance Corporation (IFC) of the World Bank Group (see pages 18-19). According to the Equator Principles website, the first 18 banks-not counting the latest signatories CIBC and KBC- which have now adopted the Principles arranged at least $43 billion of project loans in 2002, or 74% of the market volume. To the end of last October, the 18 banks accounted for 78% of the project loan market in 2003. On the public side of the market, things are moving in a similar direction. At the end of 2004, ECAs reached an Agreement on Common Approaches for the Environment, negotiated under the auspices of the OECD that aspires to, but does not require, application of IFC standards when ECAs assess the projects they guarantee or underwrite. At the same time, the IFC is itself in the planning stages of a full review and update of its standards and safeguard policies in 2004. Lastly, the World Bank's Extractive Industries Review, initiated by Bank president James Wolfensohn was completed in December 2003. It recommends a number of sweeping reforms, including a call for IFC policy to halt investments in the oil sector by 2008 (see pages see pages 14-15). Collectively, from the viewpoint of NGOs these actions signal significant movement towards the harmonization of international environmental and social standards in project finance. NGOs recognize, however, that intense monitoring will be required, at both the project and policy level, to ensure progress is made in the coming years. Many in the activist community believe that private sector banks need to be aware that the Equator Principles should be seen as the beginning of necessary reform - and not an end. Michelle Chan-Fischel at Friends of the Earth International in
Working towards that agenda, a new network called BankTrack has been set up to monitor the implementation of the Equator Principles and to co-ordinate with public bank campaigners. In 2003, BankTrack launched the Collevechio Declaration, a counter to the Equator Principles which calls on private sector banks to commit to sustainability, the avoidance of harm, financial responsibility for project impacts, accountability, transparency and to increased investment in sustainable markets and governance as guiding principles of all project finance. The networks plans to engage with private sector banks on all levels, and to attend international forums such as the recent World Economic Forum annual meeting in Davos. Critiques of the Equator Principles by NGOs are fast emerging on both a project and policy level. On the project level, they point to two cases that directly involve Equator signatories where there are assertions of non-compliance with IFC standards: the Oleoducto de Crudos Pesados (OCP) Pipeline in
Financed by a $900 million loan from Westdeutsche Landesbank (WestLB), the OCP pipeline will transport heavy crude oil from the
According to California-based Amazon Watch, the damaging impacts of the new pipeline will be felt far beyond its immediate route. To make the OCP economically viable, Ecuador must double current oil production by embarking on an unprecedented wave of new oil exploitation in vast areas of Amazon frontier forest. Plans are already underway for dozens of new oil wells, roads, flow lines, and associated processing plants that will despoil some of the country's last remaining old growth rainforests and territories of isolated indigenous peoples. Complaints of non-compliance with World Bank standards are legion. In an attempt to address these, the banks and companies involved paid for consultants to assess their impacts, and came to the conclusion that Bank standards are being met. However, an independent analysis has been subsequently carried out by Robert Goodland, the original author of many of the World Bank policies. Goodland countered the consultant reports, finding violations of World Bank policies, including unsatisfactory environmental assessments (World Bank OP 4.01), a failure to protect natural habitats (OP 4.04), and involuntary resettlements of impacted communities (OP 4.12). Bruce Rich, director of the International Program at Environmental Defense in
Rich, a long-time advocate of major environmental and social reforms at the World Bank, stresses that implementation may be an issue that needs more work by all stakeholders. "The Equator Principles are a starting point, but experience at the World Bank demonstrates that implementation and compliance is key for credibility, and civil society must play a role in that process," says Rich. The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC or Baku-Ceyhan ) oil pipeline will cover 1,056 miles between the
A number of concerns have been raised by NGOs, covering both the environmental and human rights implications of the project. UK NGO, The Cornerhouse, and a coalition of other groups, claim that the project violates six key World Bank policies, which are violated on more than 80 counts. One particular environmental issue that has raised the hackles of conservation group WWF, among other NGOs, is the routing of the pipeline through the
Other concerns with respect to the Equator Principles relate to global sustainability issues such as climate change and biodiversity. More specifically, while the IFC standards are considered a positive step forward in terms of mitigation or negative impact avoidance, the Equator Principles do not play a positive role in the fundamental investment shifts that many NGOs see as necessary for a safe and clean global environment. "We'd like to see the Equator Principles lead towards continued strengthening of standards and alternative investments that benefit the environment and local communities. IFC standards are a floor and need to be upgraded," notes Ilyse Hogue, global finance campaign director at Rainforest Action Network in
It is clear that the Principles are being taken seriously by those that counsel the Equator Principle banks and by companies seeking their financing. Prominent law firms are acknowledging the Equator Principles and IFC standards as a necessary area for increased attention going forward. Ken Rivlin, the New York-based head of the environmental law group at Allen & Overy, a leading corporate law firm, says: "The Equator Principles will soon be the prevailing standard for addressing social and environmental issues in project finance transactions. All Banks should be assessing their internal project screening procedures to assure that they take the Principles into account (or will be able to do so) and that their transaction documentation addresses related implementation and noncompliance risks." Sullivan & Cromwell, another leading law firm, released a similar advisory memo recently. Stakeholders on all sides of the issue anticipate that negotiations and transparency of environmental and social loan covenants related to these principles will be a thorny issue attracting considerable attention. Whether the Equator Principles go far enough or not, it is clear that NGO campaigning around private sector banks is on the rise. It remains to be seen if Equator signatory banks recognize the full implications of what they have signed up for, whether implementation will be successful, and whether these Principles actually make a positive difference to local communities impacted by such projects, or the global environment as a whole. Jon Sohn is a Senior Policy Analyst at Friends of the Earth in
|
|
