Porgera Alliance

Category: Canadian Parliament

  • Background – Issues Related to Barrick Gold”™s Porgera Joint Venture Mine in Papua New Guinea May 2011

    Violence Perpetrated by the Security Forces of the Porgera Joint Venture Mine

    Allegations of rapes, beatings and killings of community members by Porgera Joint Venture (PJV) security forces have been prevalent for at least a decade. In a news article in 2005 then-mine operator Canada”™s Placer Dome admitted to eight killings of community members by PJV security guards. 1 Early in 2006 Barrick Gold took over the mine when it acquired Placer Dome. There have been further allegations of killings and rapes by PJV security forces since 2006. Most of these cases have never been investigated. (more…)

  • In response to paid Press Statement done by Honorable Philip Kikala, Member for Lagaip

    Response to paid Press Statement done by Honorable Philip Kikala, Member for Lagaip ““ Porgera on the Post Courier dated 8th December 2010.

    Surprise but not surprisingly, Mr. Kikala seems to have gone off the track in his attempt to answer numbers of sensitive issues connected with the operation of the Porgera Gold.


    The decision to sale 5% shares in Mineral Resources Enga was decided on pure commercial reasoning by the MRE board. We understand that the Porgera mine is lucrative but we have not seen any dividend benefits over the last 7 years from the shares. Year in-year out”™ cash calls from the major shareholder and the joint venture partnered of the mine has become common practice and, we the Porgera Landowners Association representing about 10 000 people of the Special Mining Lease Area wish not to be seen stuck with 2.5% shares whilst no benefits. Window dressing and waste of time in holding unto the 2.5% equity.

    I understand the nature of the Ok Tedi deal; BHP excited from the Ok Tedi mine free off loading some 63.4% ownership right to settle out of court after class action by the people of the Fly River delta. The PNG government reached a deal with BHP guided by an Act of Parliarament known as the Ok Tedi Act and PNG Sustainable Development Trust set up.

    Apparently, Mr. Kikala was given the mandate in 2007 and whilst being fresh and in form with the ruling NA government, the opportunity was there for him to hold grips on the issues affecting the Porgera mine and the people of Lagaip-Porgera if he was that genuine. The landowners have been struggling with the mining impacts for some time and we cannot continue to hold on to shares that are of no value. I recall that at a public rally in Laiagam in September 2008, Mr. Kikala cited that, Barrick (PNG) Limited was big brother to him and he was smaller brother to Barrick.“ So by way of selling the 5% share to Barrick could mean we are trying to make his big brother even bigger.

    Moving on to the points of MOU Review and Resettlement, I appreciate the call by the local MP but than, his statement gives rise to a very serious question how genuine is he? What really prompted him to make a call at this juncture when the Mining Minister, Honorable John Pundari is providing the leadership and the MOU Review is expected to commence mid January 2011.

    Despite Mr. Kikala is correct in pointing out that landowners are living inside the SML, the issues are not new and his statement was not a surprise call. In numerous petitions to the government, Porgera Landowners Association has repeatedly demanded for the MOU review and a comprehensive resettlement package from the National Government and Barrick PNG Ltd.

    Politicians like Mr. Kikala should not size the opportunity for political convenience. Before he became an MP, Mr. Kikala was Porgera Project Coordinator, Deputy Secretary in Enga, National Planning Secretary and member of the Porgera Investigation Committee in 2006. Mr. Kikala was well acquainted with the issues affecting the landowners and yet he pretended to know nothing. I begin to wonder at one stage Mr. Kikala made a statement in Parliament in May 2010 that, “four Porgera landowner leaders have visited Canada”™s House of Commons and trying to sell fabricated stories.” He even went on the extreme of asking the Foreign Affairs Minister to prosecute the four leaders.

    I was amongst one of the four Porgera leaders who visited Canada between April-May 2010 and raised the issue of MOU Review and Resettlement with Barrick Senior Executives at Headquarters in Toronto and with like-minded Politicians and senior civil servants in Ottawa. Now I find Mr. Kikala”™s statement contradicts him. The four Porgera leaders where not in Canada at that time trying to sell fabricated stories but raise serious issues that are affecting the SML landowners.

    Hence, the issues of MOU Review, Resettlement, and the failed FIFO program at Paiam are all part and puzzle of the Porgera Landowners Association Position paper before the Mining Minister for renegotiation purpose start mid January 2011. For benefit of Mr. Kikala, I suggest he visit this web site; www.porgeraalliance.net.

    Otherwise I appreciate the leadership that has been provided so far by Honorable John Pundari, Minister for Mining within his brief period at the ministry and the initiatives taken to move forward to address issues affecting the SML landowners in Porgera.

    Finally, I ask Mr. Kikala to allocate some funds from the Lagaip-Porgera JDBP to assist the PLOA Land Negotating Committees for the MOU Review. The outcome of the MOU is off course, Rural Development.

    Authorized for Release,

    Mr. Mark Tony Ekepa

    Chairman

    Porgera Landowners Association

  • Presentation by Mark Ekepa at the Canadian Parliament Press Gallary 12th May 2008

    My name is Mark Ekepa. I have come from Papua New Guinea to speak to the Canadian people and the Canadian government about the problems the indigenous people in my community are facing because of the reckless mining operations of Barrick Gold”™s Porgera Joint Venture mine.

    I am the Chairman of the Porgera Landowners Association. I represent the traditional landowners in Porgera where the Porgera Joint Venture mine has operated since 1990.

    I am here to tell you why we cannot be safe and healthy in our ancestral land anymore.

    Barrick”™s Porgera mine is disposing of millions of tons of toxic tailings (mine waste) and mountains of waste rock directly into our nearby 800 km-long river system. Barrick calls this “riverine tailings disposal.” We call it the permanent contamination of our river system. We know that this practice is illegal in Canada so we want to know why Barrick is allowed to do this to our river and nearby communities in Papua New Guinea. We used to use the river for drinking water, for food, for transportation. Now it is very dangerous. There have been consultants”™ reports since 1996 that have warned of heavy metal contamination, in particular arsenic, lead, silver, and cadmium. Our river has become a health hazard.

    Also, the mine is expanding in the middle of our community and in a mountainous area. It is continuously encroaching on our homes. There is little to keep people out of the mine, or away from the dangers of its mountainous rock waste dumps, and rivers of mine tailings. We have documented many cases of people, including children, falling into the open pit, being buried by rock slides on the waste dumps and drowning during flooding in rivers of tailings. Although Barrick has recently installed a fence around the open pit itself, the pit, the waste dumps and the rivers of tailings remain accessible to the people.

    Also, as the open pit has expanded and its massive waste rock dumps have grown, we have lost most of our spaces for “gardens.” This is where we grow our subsistence foods. But we have had to relocate to steeper areas where we cannot farm for our daily food.

    Given all of these issues ““ as well as other human rights concerns that Jethro Tulin will tell you about –  is no longer safe for us to remain on our ancestral land.

    Many of the 10,000 indigenous peoples living within the mine lease area now want to be relocated. But Barrick seems to be reluctant to undertake this task. We know that Barrick has hired consultants to review the relocation possibilities but little information about the findings of these consultants is being shared by Barrick. At Barrick”™s Annual Genial Meeting on May 6th in Toronto we were told by Patrick Garver that only a few families would be moved.

    This is unacceptable. Barrick has destroyed our land, our water, our safety and our ability to feed ourselves. We know that we can no longer live on our ancestral land. We know that we must leave our place so that our children can have a future. We call on Barrick and on the Canadian government to please help make the relocation of our people possible.

    Thank You