I became involved in the Ilisu Dam campaign because it is about sustainability and because I could not believe that our Government could seriously consider supporting such an insane scheme.
Ilisu brings together issues of human rights, environmental protection and international security. Ever since I heard about the GAP project years ago, I could not believe anyone could be so stupid as to try to control the water supply of Iraq and Iran in such a volatile area - an area where there was virtually a civil war going on around the Kurds struggle to be recognised as a people. Given all that we know about the damaging effects of large dams: their impact on the environment and biodiversity; the silting up of the waters and the problems for agriculture; the fact that they are so often constructed in areas where the poor are dispersed with no adequate recompense and the loss of their culture and community etc. How could we be so stupid as to even begin to consider supporting such a scheme?
As many have already said, this campaign had a great coalition. Not least, it was an international campaign, bringing together information from many countries such as Sweden, Germany, Switzerland, Italy and people on the ground in Turkey. We could learn from each other and weaken different parts of the consortium. When I was in Hasenkeyf, I met (accidentally) two journalists from a Swedish Construction magazine checking whether to see if SKANSKA had done a real study of the impact of the dam in the area. I have been told that if Balfour Beatty had done a proper screening study of the environmental and social impacts of the dam, they would never have considered going ahead.
So we made use of our international contacts: we had media contacts and advocates. Not least of these is Mark Thomas - no one in their right mind would want him turning up unannounced on their doorstep to ask difficult questions. I never want to see that - I only want to see him on my doorstep clutching a bottle of wine and no camera or microphone in sight!
So, we built a wide and unusual coalition - the archaeologists, the activists, the politicians, media and the people directly affected - the Kurds. This meant we could not be easily written off: we were approaching this from many angles and we were offering alternative ideas.
I don't think we can now expect this coalition to hold together in the same
ways. We have different priorities but we do now have a network that can come
together at critical points to ensure that we deal with some of the underlying
issues. Because we still have work to do. We have already heard of the new request
from AMEC for an export credit guarantee to support another dam project in another
part of Turkey, so -"the nightmare is back!"
As we have also heard, the Government has introduced a Business Principles Unit
attached to the Export Credit Guarantee Department (ECGD) - largely as a result
of this campaign. It has now been in operation for about a year and, according
to our information, is due for review in a few weeks time. It is important that
as many of us as possible contribute to that. So, if you want to get together
with a few friends and spend a cold winter's night indoors putting your ideas
together, it would be a good use of your time.
FOE already has a number of useful points we could use. A key issue is to whom does information belong? At the moment, any information provided to the ECGD by a company or another government will not be released without their permission. It is not clear how the Aarhus Convention on access to information will affect this, if our Government decides to ratify it. It is also clear that projects applying for funds should also have carried out a preliminary screening before they apply. But we need clear, legally binding ethical and environmental criteria for funding.
We are also due to see the Draft Agreement from the OECD on "Common Approaches on the Environment and Officially Supported Export Credits" come into effect in January this year and be up for review next year. Only 2 countries have refused to sign up out of the 26 who could: no prizes for guessing who - the USA and Turkey (Note: Nick Hildyard pointed out later that the USA had refused to sign because the agreement was not strong enough.)
At the EU level, we are looking at the issue of corporate social responsibility. The main report will be drawn up by Richard Howitt, Labour MEP for the East Anglia region. Some of you may remember him from Mark's programme that focused on Adidas trainers. The Opinion for the Industry Committee is being done by my Green colleague from the South-East, Caroline Lucas. That's a formidable combination. Have a look at it on the European Parliament's web-site and put in your contribution. Or have a meeting and invite them both - something else for your "to-do" list. This could all provide essential information to use in Earth Summit later this year.
At the regional level, there are still major problems, especially since September 11th and the future policing of the "no-fly" zone in Northern Iraq. The Turkish Government has recently asked the EU to add two more names to its list of terrorist organisations: the PKK and the DHKC, despite the cease-fire from the former. It is also demanding a date for the start of formal accession talks.
There has been some progress on Human Rights issues, though it is very inadequate as we have already heard tonight and we cannot let up on that pressure. I think that has been another strength of this campaign: that we have all worked for the recognition of minority and individual rights in general, while obviously recognising the particular struggle of the Kurdish people.
So, we have to keep the links we have forged. There is still a long way to go, but let us enjoy the knowledge that we have made some progress and, together, we make change possible.
Notes/
Jean Lambert's office can be contacted on tel: 0207 407 6269 or email jeanlambert@greenmeps.org.uk
1) After one and a half years of very active campaigning, the Ilisu Dam Campaign finally prevailed in getting the UK out of the Ilisu Dam project. The proposed Dam was set to destroy the town of Hasankeyf in Southeast Turkey, an area of significant cultural heritage, and leave 78,000 local residents homeless. Many believed the Dam was part of the Turkish government's wider plan to ethnically cleanse the area of its Kurdish population.
2) On 13 November, Balfour Beatty, the lead contractor for the Ilisu Dam, announced its withdrawal from the project on social, environmental and economic grounds. Balfour Beatty had been seeking export credit support from the UK Export Credit Guarantee Department (ECGD). The UK Government had stated that it was 'minded' to approve a credit, subject to a number of environmental and social conditions being fulfilled. The company admits that the project failed to meet the conditions laid down by the export credit agencies.
3) The collapse of the UK's involvement in Ilisu has major implications both for future investment in the region and for the future of the UK's export credit policy:
Ilisu and Export Credit Policy
The UK Government acknowledges that the controversy over Ilisu helped prompt a reform of ECGD procedures and guidelines, notably through the adoption of a set of "Business Principles". There is strong evidence, however, that the key lessons of Ilisu have yet to be learned - and that the ECGD's procedures remain inadequate and lacking in teeth. For example, the ECGD still refuses to release Environmental Impact Assessments and Resettlement Action Plans for projects unless it has the permission of the companies involved and the host governments - in possible contravention of EU law, the Aarhus Convention and the European Convention on Human Rights. And even parliamentarians continued to be denied access to the names of those companies applying for public support without the companies' prior permission.
As the ECGD considers support for a further massive dam in Turkey - the Yusufeli project - the Ilisu Dam Campaign is calling for a thorough public review of the lessons to be learned from Ilisu. In particular, it is demanding that the ECGD and other export credit agencies adopt legally binding human rights, environment and development standards - so that other 'Ilisus' cannot happen in future. The failure of the OECD to agree such standards highlights the need for both unilateral and multilateral action.
Ilisu and Corporate Governance
Ilisu highlighted major corporate governance failures within one of Britain' s flagship construction companies. Balfour Beatty has admitted that it would never have become involved in the project had it known in advance the controversy that the project would generate. A key question is why the company even considered the project, given its clear failure to meet international standards - and why it remained in the project for so long. What does the company's involvement tell us about corporate governance standards in the UK - and the case for stronger human rights and environmental regulation of UK companies?
Ilisu and Future Investment in the Region?
Balfour Beatty stressed that the four conditions laid down by export credit agencies for Ilisu were far from being met. Campaigners are now asking whether international human rights and environmental standards can ever be met whilst the Kurdish region of Southeast Turkey remains under military rule. Given the desperate need for investment in the region, the necessity for a political solution to the Kurdish question becomes increasingly urgent. The foreign and trade policy implications for the UK have yet to be analysed.
For more information on the campaign contact Ilisu Dam Campaign, Box 210, 266 Banbury Road, Oxford, OX2 7DL tel: 01865 200550, web:http://www.ilisu.org.uk/