South
African President to Open National Climate
Change Summit on 03 March 2009
26 February 2009 - Media
Statement - Department of Environmental
Affairs and Tourism - THURSDAY, 26 FEBRUARY
2009: The President of South Africa, Kgalema
Motlanthe will officially open the National
Climate Change Summit on Tuesday, 03 March
2009 at the Gallagher Convention Centre,
Midrand, Gauteng.
Media is invited to
the opening session on Tuesday, 03 March
2009 at 14:00.
Hosted by the Departments
of Environmental Affairs and Tourism as
well as Science and Technology, the Summit
will formally launch the policy process
that will translate Cabinet’s climate change
policy decisions and directives into fiscal,
regulatory and legislative packages as well
as sectoral implementation plans.
The Summit will provide
all key climate change response stakeholders
with an update on the most recent climate
change research and other current South
African initiatives and interventions. The
Summit will also provide a platform for
all key climate change response stakeholders
to discuss and agree on the framework for
a National Climate Change Response Policy.
Marthinus van Schalkwyk,
Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism,
will deliver a keynote address during the
opening session on Cabinet’s climate change
response directives and the international
negotiations context.
The National Climate
Change Summit will see over 600 participants
from government, organised labour, business
and industry associations, public interest
groups and academia converge under the theme,
“Climate Action Now!”
The opening day (03
March 2009) will also see the broadcast
of a key video presentation on the global
climate change challenge by Climate Change
Nobel Prize winner, Professor Rajendra Pachauri.
An address on the expectations for the Copenhagen
COP in December 2009 will also be delivered
through a video insert by Danish Minister
of Climate and Energy, Connie Hedegaard.
Minister of Transport,
Jeff Radebe and Minister of Minerals and
Energy Buyelwa Sonjica will present government’s
vision on climate change with a transport
and energy focus respectively.
Councillor Amos Masondo,
Chairperson of SALGA will speak to local
government’s vision for a South African
climate change response while industry’s
vision will be presented by Jerry Vilakazi,
CEO of Business Unity of South Africa (BUSA).
The vision shared by
labour for a South African climate change
response will be conveyed by COSATU Deputy
General Secretary, Bheki Ntshalintshali
and Richard Worthington will present civil
society’s vision as coordinator of the Climate
Action Network South Africa.
Delegate registration
for the Summit is closed but there will
be live audio and audiovisual streaming
of the Climate Change Summit. A blog facility
will be available on the website as part
of the live streaming display. Public comments
and a selection of relevant questions raised
during Q & A sessions will be streamed
into the plenary session.
The Summit will continue
until Friday, 06 March 2009. The conference
programme is comprehensive and categorised
into thematic areas. Several pertinent side
events are also scheduled during the Summit.
To view the comprehensive
programme and for further information on
the live streaming visit www.ccsummit2009.co.za
Roopa Singh
WORKSHOP ON THE EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION
OF THE ROTTERDAM CONVENTION ON PRIOR INFORMED
CONSENT (PIC) PROCEDURE FOR BANNED AND RESTRICTED
CHEMICALS AND PESTICIDES IN SOUTH AFRICA,
23 –27 FEBRUARY 2009 IN DURBAN, SOUTH AFRICA
DEPUTY MINISTER’S OPENING
ADDRESS
It is the greatest pleasure
and privilege to be here and be part of
this memorable event today. I wish to take
this opportunity to welcome our distinguished
guests and delegates from Geneva and Rome
respectively, national and local.
This week’s workshop
marks the sixth year after South Africa
acceded to the Rotterdam Convention of which,
the Department of Environmental Affairs
and Tourism is the focal point and the Designated
National Authority, responsible for the
coordination of the implementation of the
Rotterdam Convention for Prior Informed
Consent (PIC) Procedure for Banned and Restricted
Chemicals and Pesticides.
As we are gathered here
today we have the same goal of protecting
human health and the environment from harmful
effects of hazardous chemicals and pesticides
through the proper control and management
of trade of restricted and hazardous chemicals.
As such, this week‘s workshop serves as
a reminder of our responsibilities to the
community, including ourselves, and assist
us to understand our roles with respect
to the implementation of this Convention.
It is therefore, of
utmost importance to note that effective
implementation of this Convention lies amongst
various organisations and is not a sole
responsibility for DEAT. We are, therefore,
here to forge and strengthen engagement
and relations with various parties and thus
ensure that desired objectives of the Convention
are achieved.
I wish to give a special
thanks to the Secretariat of the Convention
for the profound and immeasurable support
it has given to South Africa in the past
years and in years to come. This hasn’t
been a smooth journey since South Africa
is a developing country and thus still struggling
with technical expertise and financial resources.
In recent years there
have been Conventions and International
frameworks that seek to control hazardous
chemicals and pesticides which led to some
being restricted, controlled and banned,
hence, the establishment of the Rotterdam
Convention. However, implementation of the
Convention needs to be monitored closely
to ensure effective implementation.
The Constitution of
South Africa grants everyone the right to
a healthy environment, and imposes a constitutional
duty on the state to protect the environment
through reasonable legislative and other
measures of which the Rotterdam Convention
on Prior Informed Consent forms part. It
is therefore very crucial to have deliberations
of this nature wherein the effectiveness
of legislative frameworks and policies is
assessed with the purpose of strengthening
them.
Department of Environmental
Affairs and Tourism is the focal point for
most
multi-lateral environmental agreements,
but the Department of Health administers
the Hazardous Substances Act, Department
of Agriculture administers registrations
and de-registrations of hazardous pesticides
and Department of Trade and Industry is
mandated with the function of controlling
the import and export of hazardous chemicals
or pesticides in South Africa.
Significant interdepartmental
coordination is therefore required to ensure
effective, efficient implementation and
compliance with provisions of the multi-lateral
environmental agreement that South Africa
is a signatory. This workshop is seen as
an opportunity to enhance coordination and
understanding on implementation of the convention.
Over the past six years of South Africa
acceding to the Rotterdam Convention, there
has been notable positive changes and improvements
in the control and management of controlled,
restricted and banned industrial chemicals
and pesticides which are proudly attributed
to efforts of the international community
through establishment of the Rotterdam Convention
on the Prior Informed Consent.
Nationally, the establishment
of the National Committee on Chemicals Management
by DTI and DEAT in consultation with other
relevant National Departments, industry
and NGOs marks a step forward in sharing
information and proper understanding of
the Convention providing a platform for
information sharing and coordination.
The Department of Environmental
Affairs and Tourism has also established
a database of chemicals listed in the Convention
that are exported or imported. More information
will be deliberated later. The recent initiation
of a project to determine the Final Regulatory
Actions is also set to improve the current
situation with respect to chemicals management
and improve DEAT’s compliance with the requirements
of Convention.
Since implementation
of the provisions of this Convention requires
extensive interdepartmental coordination,
we need to join hands and ensure collaborative
responsibility in this regard, if need be,
we need to review the current procedures
to allow for implementation of the provision
of this Convention. Protection of the environment
is a concurrent competence among us such
that we need to engage each other on chemicals
management. It is the responsibility of
every individual to ensure that chemicals
or pesticides we are using are not detrimental
to the environment and to human health.
Finally, we are convinced
that through our coordinated efforts, the
intentions of this workshop would be achieved.
Thank you
Keynote address by Marthinus
van Schalkwyk, South African Minister of
Environmental Affairs and Tourism, at the
plenary Ministerial consultations on “International
environmental governance: help or hindrance?”
held during the UNEP Global Ministerial
Environment Forum in Nairobi on 19 February
2009
President
Executive Director
Distinguished Colleagues
We have gathered here
for a Ministerial plenary discussion under
the thematic question: “International Environmental
Governance: help or hindrance?”
I would, with respect,
venture to say that this is the wrong question.
We should rather be asking ourselves whether
the debate on strengthening the international
architecture for environmental governance
and sustainable development, which started
some 9 years ago, has been a help or a hindrance.
As we start preparing
for Rio+20 in 2012, I think it is time to
reflect honestly on where we are with the
debate that started in Malmo in 2000, that
grabbed our imagination in Cartagena and
at the World Summit, and that still continues
in New York and Nairobi today.
Before I share some
of my reflections with you, let me share
with you what my officials advised me when
I considered the invitation to make remarks
during this discussion. They said to me,
Mr Minister, it will just be a repeat of
the last nine years of debate on IEG reform.
Nothing will come of it. Everyone will simply
restate entrenched national positions, nothing
too controversial, lots of code language,
basically what they have been saying for
9 years. It will be “political theatre”
Minister.
Well, I decided to prove
my officials wrong. And I must add that
I am delighted that many Ministers did the
same during their frank and constructive
interventions over the past 3 days. This
was definitely not “political theatre”.
I will therefore also use the opportunity
to share with you some personal reflections
on where we are and where I believe we could
be heading.
In taking stock, I believe
that it is not only the system that is fragmented,
but also the debate on fixing the system.
This debate has been afloat without a compass
on a sea of uncertainty marked by competing
agendas for far too long. The impasse has
been characterised by limited agreement
on how to implement what has already been
agreed – not least in Cartagena, a widening
trust gap, and the lack of a higher level
shared vision for the next decade. It has
been marked by different interpretations
and expectations of what should constitute
a global environmental governance regime,
the balance between normative and operational
work, UNEP’s role and mandate in this context
and widely divergent options for institutional
reform (that is: the UNEP versus UNEO debate).
When I look back on
the last decade of IEG and IEG reform, I
have very mixed feelings. On the one hand
I feel a strong sense of achievement – and
I will elaborate on this in a moment. But
on the other hand I also feel a strong sense
of frustration - frustration with the lack
of fundamental reform, or even incremental
progress, in some of our important areas
of work. Most importantly, I feel greatly
disillusioned by the lack of implementation
of what we have already agreed, dating back
to 2002 under the Cartagena package for
global reform as well as under the Bali
Strategic Plan for Technology Support and
Capacity Building. These are all issues
of critical importance to developing countries.
And as we meet here
as Ministers, we also have to acknowledge
limited progress on the intention to use
the Global Ministerial Environmental Forum
to provide concrete policy guidance and
to indentify priorities at a political level.
Yet, I am convinced
that most of us are united in our desire
to place environmental challenges at the
centre of political and economic decision
making processes, not least where it has
bearing on the evolving global financial
architecture. We are committed to putting
in place economic, social and environmental
conditions that will ensure the survival,
prosperity and security of future generations.
I am also convinced that we share a common
conviction that this is not only about the
environment per se, but about humanity and
livelihoods in decades to come.
I do not want to paint
too grim a picture. We should also acknowledge
that we have achieved much – globally and
at the country level. There are some 500
multilateral environmental agreements, a
proliferation of funds and entities and
a variety of agencies dealing with the environment.
We have also, to varying degrees, managed
to integrate the environment in other areas
of work of our respective governments and
public awareness has been raised to unprecedented
levels. And we have created new policy and
scientific capacities, with international
environmental law on the compliance side
developing rapidly.
At a country level the
international regime has helped to deliver
some concrete gains, and we can probably
all find many examples. But on reflection
I think many of these achievements at the
country level are still ad hoc. At a global
level our work remains fragmented, our institutions
overloaded, and the scale of action does
not reflect the urgency indicated by science.
From a developing country perspective, the
implementation deficit, that is the widening
resource gap between commitments and actions,
is most concerning.
I also believe that,
besides burgeoning fragmentation and duplication
in an overburdened system, the absence of
a strong international political base for
IEG has contributed to our inability to
fully and effectively integrate the environmental
pillar of sustainable development into the
wider macro-economic environment.
Chair, the world around
us is changing, and IEG reform must keep
up with this changing context. On the positive
side I observe a new generation of green
leaders emerging in government, business
and civil society. This reverberates through
the G77, the World Economic Forum in Davos,
the G8, the G5 and the African Union. There
seems to be a new resolve amongst the global
citizenry to act wisely and to act now.
Our task as Ministers are to convert this
public will into political will, and political
will into action and implementation.
But there are also red
lights; most significantly, the global financial
crisis in the face of which some waver,
in stead of rising to the challenge and
the new opportunities for green growth and
development.
Science tells us that
the environmental threats to sustainable
development and the Millenium Development
Goals are even greater than previously thought.
The challenges associated with biodiversity,
desertification and climate change are of
a significantly greater magnitude than we
had understood in Rio seventeen years ago.
It is in this context
of great achievement and great frustrations,
of new threats and new opportunities, that
we as Environment Ministers must make a
fresh start. Maintaining the status quo
for IEG is untenable.
My challenge to our
collective gathered here today is that we
must use the next 3 years, up to Rio+20
in 2012, to define a new paradigm for our
cooperation. We must transform the politics
of distrust, break the impasse and build
a common vision for IEG reform. Whilst building
on UNEP by enhancing its legitimacy, authority
and resources, we must ask ourselves fundamental
questions on the desired future and how
we can find innovative ways of achieving
it.
As we reassess, review
and rethink, the starting point should be
principles, objectives and priorities for
IEG, with environmental financing taking
centre stage. Only once we are clear where
we want to go, should we ask the institutional
questions relating to format and structure.
Form must follow function. If we start with
a polarised institutional debate rather
than seeking consensus on principles and
objectives, we run the risk of yet another
inward-looking dialogue and potentially
a weaker mandate for the environment and
sustainable development across the UN system.
To be in a position
to use Rio+20 in 2012 to celebrate our political
decisions on a reinvigorated regime for
environmental governance, we should set
clear milestones for the next 3 years.
And in particular, we
should bring high-level political guidance
back into the process. The political authority
should vest in governments. Ministers are
the nucleus of this Global Ministerial Environmental
Forum, and we must give UNEP the necessary
political weight to take us through to 2012.
It has now been 9 years
since we as politicians, as Environment
Ministers, really owned this process and
its outcomes. The last time that the outcomes
of these deliberations were captured in
a Political Declaration was in Malmo, Sweden
in 2000.
It is no reflection
on you, Mr President, or on your august
judgement, but I hope that this Forum will
be the last one where we will conclude with
a Summary and not a politically agreed Ministerial
Declaration. UNEP cannot be steered by a
governance system that gives a voice to
only a few. The political voice of UNEP
must belong to all.
Chair, I would therefore
hope that this GMEF will mark a fresh start;
that it will mark the re-launch of the debate
on IEG reform at a political level, to conclude
before 2012; and that it will be the beginning
of an open debate on the successes and new
challenges for IEG.
The first milestone
will be when we meet in a year from now,
in February 2010. At that meeting we should
ideally adopt a Ministerial Declaration
on the principles and objectives that will
guide our further work in the run-up to
Rio plus 20.
Our further work, to
be concluded before 2012, would be: firstly
to finalise the details on institutional
reform and its relationship to UN reform,
secondly to improve coordination between
MEA’s and system-wide coherence, thirdly
to build local capacity and bridge the gap
between science and policy implementation,
and fourthly to review or audit the effectiveness
of existing international funding mechanisms
for environmental activities.
In the latter respect,
I believe UNEP should be requested to lead
an audit to determine how much money for
the environment is flowing through the UN
system, the adequacy of funding, what it
is used for and how it is aligned, whether
there are equitable distribution to participants
(including the role of GEF in environmental
financing), whether there are any obstacles
or conditionalities that unnecessarily hinder
access and finally, whether we are fully
exploiting the synergies and co-benefits
of environmental and development financing.
Chair, in conclusion,
whether the road ahead is “ambitious incrementalism”
or “fundamental reform”, we need to make
a fresh start in our discourse. The road
from Nairobi in 2009 should truly enhance
the role of the GMEF and Ministers in providing
policy advice and guidance. We have a 3
year window to think BIG and ambitious,
in a way that reflects the scale of the
challenge. Together, we can inspire a new
generation of thinkers, scientists, leaders
in industry, activists, women and youth
to take our hands in government towards
a sustainable future.
I thank you
NOTICE ON THE IMPLEMENTATION
OF A NATIONAL MORATORIUM ON THE TRADE IN
INDIVIDUAL RHINOCEROS HORNS AND ANY DERIVATIVES
OR PRODUCTS THEREOF AND THE PUBLICATION
OF DRAFT NORMS AND STANDARDS FOR THE MARKING
OF RHINOCEROS HORN AND HUNTING OF WHITE
RHINOCEROS FOR TROPHY HUNTING PURPOSES.
18 FEBRUARY 2009 - Minister
of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Mr.
Marthinus van Schalkwyk, announced on Friday,
13 February 2009 the implementation of a
national moratorium on the trade in individual
rhinoceros horns and any derivatives or
products thereof within South Africa under
Section 57(2) of the National Environmental
Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act
No. 10 of 2004) (NEMBA). The moratorium
will take effect immediately and will stay
in place until further notice (Gazette No.
31899).
On Friday, 13 February
2009, the Department also published in Gazette
No. 31899 under Section 9(1)(a) of NEMBA
draft norms and standards for the marking
of rhinoceros horn and the hunting of white
rhinoceros for trophy hunting purposes for
public comment.
The procedure was published in July 2008
for comments as a schedule to the draft
moratorium. The department has since decided
to augment this with further legally binding
mechanisms, which are the norms and standards.
It was therefore decided to publish the
schedule on marking of rhino horn and management
of white rhino hunting trophies as norms
and standards which can be enforced.
The various conservation
authorities affected by rhino poaching have
been working with police to investigate
poaching incidents. In a joint operation
by various disciplines of the South African
Police Service including the Mpumalanga,
Limpopo & North West Organised Crime
Units, the Gauteng Provincial Task Team
together with South African National Parks,
11 suspects were arrested and charged in
connection with rhino poaching earlier this
year.
The moratorium and draft
norms and standards are steps that intend
to strengthen the current legislation and
thus assist conservation authorities in
their efforts to combat rhino poaching.
Any person who wishes
to submit written representations and/or
objections to the proposed norms and standards
is invited to do so within 30 days of the
publication of this notice. For further
details on the abovementioned visit the
link below: http://www.deat.gov.za/Documents/Documents/2009Feb17/markingofrhinoceros.pdf
Launch of the National
Environmental Compliance and Enforcement
Report 2007/08, Authorisations Manual for
Assessing and Issuing Environmental Authorisations,
and EMI-SAPS Standard Operating Procedure
– Deputy Director General Corporate Affairs,
Mr Ishaam Abader
