Mining projects debate heats up in Argentina as provinces unite to defend industry
The Argentine government faced with growing resistance to mining projects without the proper environment and resources assurances, which has led to demonstrations and sometimes violent clashes with police, has sponsored the creation of the Federal Mining Organization which brings together all those provinces with mining interests.
After holding a meeting with Planning Minister Julio De Vido, Jujuy province Governor Eduardo Fellner stated that one of the goals of uniting the mining regions in the country was to be able to “reach a greater profit rate” in mining production within these provinces and “look toward further training staff, creating a higher-skilled workforce.”
The decision was supported by many of the attendants, including Salta province Governor Juan Manuel Urtubey, who underlined the need for the Federal Mining Organization, due to it being “essential to uniting policies” in the industry, especially amidst the escalating environmentalist protests.
Likewise Catamarca province Governor Lucía Corpacci defended mining sites in her province and assured the controversy that sparked is a problem of Catamarca and must be solved by its residents.
Corpacci assured that her administration has “set out the defence and the importance of mining developments with clear rules.”
She added that she met with mining businessmen to tell them that mining should benefit all of Catamarca’s residents and not only a few. She also clarified the fact that her Government has not authorized new mining venture and that is why this conflict calls my attention.
“I’m concerned over the disinformation spread by certain national media outlets,” regarding the alleged use cyanide and the contamination of water in Catamarca.
She also criticized the roadblocks that activists have staged in the last few days. “We are tired of being accused violence and called for a debate that can create social consensus. This is a problem of Catamarca province and it must be solved by its people.”
“I will not allow economic interests to be over the health of our people. I’m a doctor, a mother and nothing worries me more that we live healthily,” she concluded.
Suggested Stories
-
May 21st 2012
Bargains forecasts in Uruguay as Argentine investors withdraw funds following new bank rules
-
May 25th 2012
Three former presidents admit Mercosur has failed and has Uruguay ‘trapped’
-
May 25th 2012
Argentina extends dollar purchase control to residents travelling abroad
-
May 25th 2012
Argentina revokes commuter railway concession involved in crash that killed 51m and injured 700
18 comments Feed
Note: Comments do not reflect MercoPress’ opinions. They are the personal view of our users. We wish to keep this as open and unregulated as possible. However, rude or foul language, discriminative comments (based on ethnicity, religion, gender, nationality, sexual orientation or the sort), spamming or any other offensive or inappropriate behaviour will not be tolerated. Please report any inadequate posts to the editor. Comments must be in English. Thank you.
If only we could just get rid of them.
On the way to make that profit they employ people and pay them wages: the people have a choice whether to work for them of not.
They also pay taxes to the government, the the people they employ also pay taxes.
What is the problem here?
Outsiders, like the bunny hugging 'environmentalists' clearly started the trouble. It is about time the Regional Governors stood up to the trouble makers.
Yoghurt you can't surprise anymore you may as well get genuine or quit.I,at least won't read your posts,I've read my last one.goodbye yoghurt.
In the end I believe the poorer provinces in the northwest will go ahead as such industry is simply too difficult to not . In a richer province like Mendoza though, which has a much more diversified economy in which some sectors require a healthy environment (fine wine, tourism and ski, agroindustry, mineral spring water), the environmental lobby may deter most investments.
“Yoghurt you can't surprise anymore you may as well get genuine or quit.I,at least won't read your posts,I've read my last one.goodbye yoghurt.” >> Read this (www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/AMR13/006/2011/en) and this (www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/argentina-indigenous-community-takes-eviction-threat-2011-06-07) before you accuse me of not being genuine.
Now you can get back to goose-stepping.
How is it that these fights Occur still over what should now come under a company's ethical policy.Of course for some idiots,profit justifies all things.They can't be expected to change,they'll never realise the world of capitalism has changed since their glory days of the 19th cent.
I agree.
The fabled Yuleno thinks that capitalism has changed.
Only in ARG. Nobody with half a brain would even think of investing in the place.
Somewhere near the Philippines is a swirling torrent of millions of plastic bags clearly outlining the fact that capitalism and mass consumerism is about earning money and not caring about the fact humanity even exists. How many suicides per iPhone is it currently?
I don't want to live in my rubbish bin, and I'd rather my children didn't.
yankeeboy was not saying you had to abandon the environment. But he is quite correct in my EXPERIENCE that these people use all sorts of made up reasons to try and prevent genuine projects from going forward.
What is clearly wrong are these protesters, who are not representative of the people, attempting to stop much needed money coming into the area. Quite what 'millions of plastic backs in the Phillipines has to do with this escapes me.
If you were one of the poor people in this area with a chance to earn good money and look after your children in a much better way, would you reject it.
This does not mean that mining companies should not abdicate their responsibilities to the environment.
I'm not a communist, a nimby, nor a beardy weirdy, I just a proponent of sustainable trade that doesn't like living in a toilet.
But I suspect you run a petrol / diesel car and have gas central heating? In other words you want the utility of gas and oil but don't want to think of how or where it comes from. NIMBY jumps to mind.
Fracking has to be done in an intelligent and experienced manner. Which is a contradiction in terms when it comes to Argentina.
Forget the earthquakes and concern yourself with contaminating the artesian wells problems.
Fracking for gas is one thing. It can be done and a profit made. So far as I can tell no-one has yet gotten oil out of the ground without problems or making a profit.
Nothing is black and white in the petrochemical business: it can only be a trade off - minimising the 'damage' against the loss of utility.
Fracking is not something people currently know what to do. Even experienced frackers like those in Lancashire fully admit they don't know the seismological effects of what they are doing. Water supply, earthquakes, etc ... it's not really a great choice even when considering energy security of your country.
Best option is actually nuclear energy, but not the French-loved nuclear method we currently use because this is incredibly dirty and can cause bed-wetting scenarios (see Japanese tsunami). Thorium is the current bet.
I use oil, I just like to minimize my energy footprint. Doesn't make me a Nimby.
Very interesting response, I take the NIMBY comment back as you obviously DO think about what you do with your life.
Absolutely spot on with nuclear, especially thorium. Probably not in my lifetime though. :o(
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!