Argentiinalaisnäkemys Botnian selluun

Zorro kirjoitti:

Argentiinassa uskotaan, että Suomessa on hieman kapea näkökulma Uruguyan sellutehdaskysymykseen:

Press release

- What the Finnish public should know about its government’s support to
Metsa Botnia in Uruguay

Until fairly recently, the existence of Uruguay was probably unknown to most
Finnish people and even those that knew it existed had very little knowledge
about our country. Things have now changed as a result of Metsa Botnia’s
investments in Uruguay and this country has now become news.

As a result, many Finnish people now know that there is a conflict between
Uruguay and Argentina over Metsa Botnia’s investment –a 1 million ton pulp
mill- on the Uruguay River which is shared by both countries. This pulp mill
would double the size of existing pulp mills in Finland and a Spanish mill
is planned a few kilometres away on the same river. Together, they would
therefore be equivalent to three pulp mills in Finland, but established in
the same place.

What most Finns do not know –because they have been misinformed- is that
there is also strong opposition in Uruguay against Metsa Botnia’s
monoculture eucalyptus plantations established on 100,000 hectares of land
bought by the company, as well as against Metsa Botnia’s and the other pulp
mills planned for this country by Spanish company ENCE and Finnish-Swedish
Stora Enso.

Finnish people have not been informed that those eucalyptus plantations are
resulting in the destruction of Uruguay’s native grassland ecosystems, as
well as impacting on soils, water, wildlife and human livelihoods. From an
ecosystem perspective, large-scale tree planting in Uruguay is the same as
converting Finland’s forests into grasslands. Finnish people would –rightly-
oppose this conversion. Also rightly, Uruguayans are increasingly opposing
the conversion of the country’s grasslands to tree plantations.

Finnish people also have not been informed about their government’s
involvement in this and the role it is playing to favour Metsa Botnia’s
investment. More importantly, they don’t know that their government is not
telling the truth, both to the Finnish and Uruguayan people, pretending to
be “neutral” while fully supporting Metsa Botnia.

The Finnish Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Paula Lehtomaki
visited Uruguay and made a number of public comments on April 25, clearly
supportive to Metsa Botnia’s investment. However, she pretended to be
neutral by saying that the Finnish government cannot intervene –in the
Uruguay-Argentina conflict- because this is a private company and the
government can in no way tell a private investment what to do. But it seems
that it can –as she publicly did- tell the Uruguayan government and the
Uruguayan people what to do: to support Metsa Botnia.

That statement of “neutrality” hides the fact that the Finnish government
has strongly supported Metsa Botnia’s investment through different
mechanisms, among which the approval of an International Agreement with
Uruguay for the “Promotion and Protection of Investments”. Uruguay is
certainly not in a position to invest in Finland, so this agreement was
signed primarily to provide legal support to this company’s investment.
Uruguay is now tied up by this agreement and will need to compensate the
company if any problems arise –even though the party now in power voted
against that agreement when it was approved during the previous government.
This explains the current government’s support to this investment in its
dispute with Argentina.

The Finnish public should know that Article 6.1 of this agreement
establishes compensation for economic losses deriving from a number of
causes, among which “demonstrations” (“manifestaciones” in Spanish ) that
might affect the company. This means that if the local people are impacted
by the company’s activities and organize demonstrations, the Uruguayan
government will need to compensate the company for any losses this may
result in.

During her visit to Uruguay, Minister Paula Lehtomaki told the media that
the 19 pulp mills existing in Finland have not polluted and that until now
they have not caused any problem of environmental pollution. This is simply
not true. Finnish people remember very clearly that until the early 1990s,
Finnish pulp mills were highly polluting and know that only after civil
society campaigns in Europe –including Finland- did the pulp industry begin
to introduce changes to improve its environmental performance and
governments tightened environmental regulations.

But pulp mill pollution is not simply historical. Minister Lehtomaki should
know about the Summer 2003 accident at the UPM mill at Lappeenranta that was
reported in the Finnish press. Suomen Luonto, in its English summary
reported that: “This summer 7,500 cubic metres of black liquor flowed out of
UPM-Kymmenen's Kaukas pulp mill into Lake Saimaa. The biological treatment
plant was unable to cope with the sudden discharge and within the space of a
few days the black liquor spread far out into the lake and even into the
Saimaa Canal. Black liquor consumes oxygen in water, causing a high rate of
fish mortality, and it also darkens the water and pollutes shores. Moreover,
it has a very unpleasant odour. Half of the fish biomass was eradicated over
a three-kilometre radius from the pulp mill”.

Was that not a “problem of environmental pollution”? Did this not happen in
Finland? Shouldn’t Finnish people ask Minister Lehtomaki about her reasons
for hiding this to the Uruguayan people?

Being Paula Lehtomaki the Finnish Minister for Foreign Trade and
DEVELOPMENT, the Finnish public might also ask her about how Metsa Botnia’s
investment will assist Uruguay’s development. Most Finnish people are
probably unaware that this pulp mill will be operating within a free trade
zone. This means that it won’t pay any taxes in Uruguay, which will enable
the company to increase its profits. These profits will be taxed in Finland,
which means that there will be a net transfer of revenues from Uruguay to
Finland. Additionally, while the production of the mill’s expensive
machinery and equipment will generate jobs, incomes and taxes in Finland,
its import to Uruguay will be tax free. In sum, this investment will assist
Finland’s but not Uruguay’s development.

We believe that the Finnish public has the right to know about its
government’s role in supporting Metsa Botnia’s investment in Uruguay and
about how its actions are tarnishing the country’s image in Uruguay,
Argentina, Brazil and many more countries that are currently closely
following this issue. We hope that the information provided above will be of
assistance.

The Guayubira Group is a network of organizations and individuals which
since 1997 has been campaigning for the protection of native forests and
opposing large scale monoculture tree plantations and associated pulp mills.

Its main member groups are:

From Montevideo (the Capital of Uruguay):
- Friends of the Earth, Uruguay
- World Rainforest Movement International Secretariat
- Uruguayan Center of Appropriate Technologies (CEUTA)
- Latin American Regional Secretariat of the International Union of Food
Workers (UITA/Unión Internacional de Trabajadores de la Alimentación)

Local groups from different Provinces of the country:
- MOVITDES, Fray Bentos (the town where 2 pulp mills are planned to
be built nearby)
- ASODERN, Mercedes (a town very close to Fray Bentos)
- Grupo Ecológico de Young (also close to Fray Bentos)
- Intersocial de Salinas (groups from several villages close to Montevideo)
- Productores de Rocha (where a Canadian pulp mill is planned)
- Eco Tacuarembó (where the US Weyerhaeuser has planted tens of thousands
of hectares)

Individual members include people from the capital and other Provinces such
as Durazno, San José, Maldonado, Canelones, Salto, Paysandú, Colonia, Cerro
Largo and Rivera.

Individual members also include academics from different Universities.

kirjoitti:

Anonyymi

Kirjoita kommentti

5000

Lähetä