Wasting the Nation.indd - Groundwork
Wasting the Nation.indd - Groundwork
Wasting the Nation.indd - Groundwork
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Chapter 3: The politics of wasteWhile all respondents to <strong>the</strong> Bill expressed support for <strong>the</strong> waste hierarchy, businesswas quick to emphasise <strong>the</strong> ‘overlapping jurisdiction’ with DTI in relation toproduction. It also played up potential ‘technical barriers to trade’ under World TradeOrganisation (WTO) rules, specifically noting “regulations to give effect to any productrequirements”. 54 Finally, business demanded a more rigorous ‘regulatory impactassessment’. Such assessments are pushed by <strong>the</strong> World Bank and share a commonpurpose with <strong>the</strong> Bank’s annual Doing Business reports. They are designed to restrict<strong>the</strong> regulation of markets. As French legal scholar Alain Supiot comments, <strong>the</strong>se areinstruments of a global economic system in which “it is no longer products that are incompetition but <strong>the</strong> normative [regulatory] systems” [2006: 119]. Government is in<strong>the</strong> process of developing a regulatory impact assessment system which will be used toreinforce arguments for making <strong>the</strong> country more attractive to investment capital.IncinerationPrior to <strong>the</strong> parliamentary hearings, it became clear that <strong>the</strong> DEAT had decided infavour of incineration. Following groundWork’s meetings with communities next tocement kilns, <strong>the</strong> DEAT initiated its own series of workshops within <strong>the</strong> ‘<strong>Nation</strong>al policydevelopment process for high temperature waste incineration and AFR [‘alternativefuels’] co-processing in cement production’. groundWork’s Musa Chamane observesthat, far from consultation, government was “essentially … marketing incineration”to communities. 55Background reports for <strong>the</strong> policy process were prepared by advocates of incinerationand <strong>the</strong> use of AFRs in cement kilns. They were subject to detailed criticism in aresponse from groundWork [Watson 2007]. These documents were put to <strong>the</strong>portfolio committee which subsequently held a discussion specifically on incineration.The DEAT argued that regulation should focus on emissions ra<strong>the</strong>r than technologiesand that modern incinerators have low emissions and provide a better alternative tolandfills, particularly for medical and certain hazardous wastes.For <strong>the</strong> incineration advocates <strong>the</strong>mselves, <strong>the</strong> claim of superior environmentalperformance depends both on ‘best available techniques’ (BAT) and ‘best environmentalpractice’ (BEP). Amongst o<strong>the</strong>r things, BAT incinerators are designed to burn particular54 Business Unity South Africa, Submission to parliament on <strong>the</strong> Waste Management Bill.55 Musa Chamane, Incineration in our backyard a big No No! groundWork Newsletter, Vol.10, No.2. June 2008.- 74 - groundWork - <strong>Wasting</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Nation</strong>