There is once again a plan to organise the small-scale gold sector. President Jennifer Simons received a presentation on 29 October on registration, higher state revenues, less mercury use and better oversight. Goals we support.
But to those following developments in the gold sector, this sounds familiar. Suriname is not starting today with organising this sector.
Fifteen years of organisational policy: what has been achieved?
In 2011, the Commissie Ordening Goudsector (OGS) was established. Registration, guidance and support for gold miners were already on the agenda at that time. Fifteen years later, society has a right to know what has come of this.
Has the new working group spoken to the people who carried out this work? Have their registrations, reports and experiences been collected? What has been achieved, where has implementation fallen short and why?
The report on the working group’s presentation does not make this clear.
That should have been the first assignment: to examine what is already in place, what it has cost and what it has delivered. Only from that knowledge can it be substantiated how things should be done differently.
Mercury-free gold mining was already on the agenda in 2011
Mercury-free gold mining is not a new discovery either. From 13 to 15 October 2011, the gold fair Go for Gold was held at the Kamer van Koophandel en Fabrieken (KKF), where environmentally friendly extraction techniques took centre stage.
Even then, a transition to an organised, mercury-free gold sector was announced.
I was also present at that fair. The current announcements are therefore also recognisable to TFD’s editorial team.
Over the years, visits followed with OGS, ministers and the French ambassador, including a flight to view the situation from the air. Questions were regularly asked about the approach, progress and results.
Demonstration project in Brokopondo: what has come of it?
On 19 April 2024, TFD was again present, this time in Compagniekreek, in the district of Brokopondo. A demonstration site for mercury-free gold mining was officially opened there, including a shaking table and a centrifuge.
Gracia Emanuel was present as acting Minister of Natuurlijke Hulpbronnen, on behalf of David Abiamofo. Minister Marciano Dasai of Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieu symbolically put the shaking table into operation.
Journalists were given explanations about techniques through which more gold could be recovered at lower production costs. A training centre in Brownsweg was also officially opened.
There was therefore already equipment, demonstrations and facilities to train miners.
But what have they delivered?
How many gold miners have been trained and how many of them actually use the techniques? Are the installations still operating? Who manages them? How much money was spent on them?
Where are the evaluations and financial accountability?
This criticism stems from years of involvement and recurring questions.
TFD has not been able to review a public evaluation and final financial accountability regarding the initiatives mentioned. The new working group does not provide those answers either.
We are not saying that nothing has been achieved. But it does mean that we cannot verify what it has all delivered.
Why are pilot projects being announced again without first making public what the previous ones delivered? What is being investigated that is not yet known? Which problems from earlier projects are now being resolved?
Why another working group?
It must also become clear why another working group is needed.
Which tasks remain with OGS or the existing organisational body? Who safeguards the accumulated knowledge and ensures that a next government builds on the work already in place?
Without clear answers, we will get the same approach, but in a different guise. Society will then once again receive a presentation, while accountability for earlier promises remains absent.
First accountability, then new plans
The working group should therefore first make clear what has been done in recent years, what it has cost, what it has delivered and where it has stalled.
Make that public. Then substantiate what needs to be done differently.
After fifteen years of organisational policy, that is not an unreasonable demand. It is the basis for responsible governance.
In part 2: Who will carry this out, with what powers and at what cost? And which critical questions did the president ask?
