March 2018 was a difficult month for those living in Hout Bay, with the noxious, gut-wrenching emissions a regular feature in our everyday lives. There has been an outpouring of complaints to the City about this and we appreciate all your continued efforts to document and raise awareness about this issue.
A lot happened in March and while this update is longer than usual, it is very important.
1. Understanding the Situation
Over the past month, there has been an influx of complaints and many people have angrily called to ‘shut the factory down’ or to ‘take Oceana to court’. This frustration is completely understandable – the situation is unacceptable and it needs to change.
This is not, however, an easy situation to fix and everyone needs to understand its complexity.
First, Oceana supports a significant number of long-term jobs, as well as providing various contributions to the community at large. It is estimated that Oceana directly supports approximately 450 people through about 91 direct jobs. They also have a long-standing relationship with the community and have been a stable employer for nearly 60 years – this touches on several legacy issues and makes any discussion around the factory very sensitive and the idea of simply ‘shutting the factory down’ is not a viable option, especially considering that Oceana is operating legally.
At the same time, the emissions from the factory are unacceptable and cause a variety of negative impacts to health, well-being and business that cannot be ignored. It is well understood that the harbour offers enormous potential for development and there is an opportunity to make change that would positively benefit the whole community.
The question is: how do we find a solution? How do we find a way of getting rid of the noxious emissions while at the same time protecting the jobs, incomes and ideology of the people affected?
Yes, it is true that more jobs could be created if the harbour was developed, but this would take time and the current employees would not be able to survive this.
Yes, there is a possibility of finding alternative employment for the factory workers, but there is no immediate employment available for this skill-set and up-skilling would again take time.
Yes, there is a possibility of relocating operations to Saldanha Bay and also relocating jobs (as proposed in 2015), but the people of Hangberg have lived and fought for this mountain for generations and they rightly don’t want to be relocated. They also have a history of forced relocation under the apartheid system, so this opens other wounds.
Yes, many people relocate for their work, but appreciation must be given to the low socio-economic incomes of these factory workers and their lack of institutional support and resources. They do not have the same levels of resilience that most ‘middle-class’ people have and such relocation would affect them enormously.
No, the factory cannot be shut down immediately.
These are some of the sensitivities we need to be aware of when discussing this issue and we encourage everyone to consider this when you provide comment. A solution can be found but it requires a positive contribution from everyone and an understanding of the complexity of the situation.
As always, we are open to hearing your thoughts and opinions so feel free to get in touch.
2. Meeting with the City of Cape Town
On 26 March 2018, nine members of FAHB met with City representatives at the Council Chambers in Cape Town. Alderman JP Smith, MAYCO Member for Social and Safety Services, Rob Quintas, Hout Bay Councillor, Ed Filby, Air Quality Management, and Clinton Davids, representing Suzette Little, Area Based Ward Councillor, attended the meeting. Representatives from Oceana were invited but declined to attend.
In preparation for the meeting, FAHB submitted a series of questions to the City gathered through our social media sites. Thank you to everyone who contributed.
A number of important items were discussed at the meeting, and the responses from the City can be summarised as follows:
- Health: The new Atmospheric Emissions Licence (AEL) allows Oceana to use formalin in its production process. Formalin was introduced for the first time on 19 March 2018. The City maintains that formalin is regularly used in the fishing industry and has no negative health implications, as determined by a formalin health assessment conducted in 2017. FAHB has requested access to this report through the Public Access to Information Process. The City also maintains that while anecdotal evidence of health impacts has been presented by FAHB, this is not regarded as solid ‘proof’ and further efforts will need to be made in this regard.
- Well-being and Socio-Economic Impacts: The City recognises the impacts experienced by the residents but also commented that solid ‘proof’ has not been presented. There is some debate about why the responsibility for such proof has been placed on the community and not the City, but this was not discussed further.
- Emissions Limits: As discussed in detail here, there are currently no legal emissions standards for Hydrogen Sulphide and these standards can only be set by the Minister of Environmental Affairs. The City has sent a letter to Minister Edna Molewa requesting that emissions levels be considered and we await a response from the national department. It is also important to note that even if emissions levels are set, there is no way of determining how those levels will be determined and may not result in a positive outcome.
- FAHB Appeal to the AEL: In February 2018, FAHB submitted an appeal to the decision to grant Oceana their AEL. This decision is still under consideration but it is expected that a response will be received within the following weeks.
- Notification of Production Times: In response to the request for a notification system for when the factory is in production, Oceana sent comment via email stating that such a system would not be possible but they were willing to ‘raise a flag’ at the factory when in production. While this is obviously not a reliable system, FAHB will continue to follow up with the City’s Air Quality Management team to determine a more suitable form of notification.
Most importantly, the City discussed the following intentions regarding the development of the Hout Bay harbour:
- The harbour is currently managed at a national level and the City is advocating for autonomy of small harbours within the Western Cape. This debate is on-going and the general political movements within the country impact this significantly.
- The City has met with Oceana and is exploring opportunities for economic development in the harbour, with a primary focus on creating employment for Hangberg and Imizamu Yethu.
- While the City recognises the opportunity presented in the harbour, it stressed that the final decision can only be made by the National Department of Public Works who currently hold the leases for all development. Oceana is considered a ‘good tenant’ and any change to lease agreements would require an alternative tenant to be found.
- The initiative to explore economic opportunities in the harbour is being driven by Cllr. Quintas and Cllr. Little. They are working with various stakeholders to explore private investment opportunities but there are no established plans currently underway. It was stressed that any potential plans would take time to develop and would require engagement with the current employees as well as the general public of Hangberg.
- The City also commented on the political movements within Hout Bay that are hindering productive discussions. They reflected that several ‘self-appointed spokespersons’ had political agendas and that these often derailed the process. Discussions on this topic thus require sensitivity and awareness, and this understanding should be adopted by all involved.
Please note: we asked the City to provide the materials presented at the meeting and to comment on this summary, but they declined.
3. What do to from here?
There are a number of initiatives that FAHB is undertaking in response to these updates and we would appreciate your support with the following:
1. Documenting business impacts
We need to officially document the impacts experienced by small-business owners, particularly those in the hospitality and tourism industries. FAHB has developed a series of templates and a set of instructions for what to do. If you have a business that is impacted by the emissions, please send an email to kiara.worth@gmail.com for further details on how to get involved.
2. Legal Advice
FAHB is currently in consultation with attorneys regarding a legal strategy. We are awaiting the outcome of the AEL appeal decision to develop this strategy further.
3. Meeting with Area Based Ward Councillor
FAHB has initiated further discussions with the Area Based Ward Councillor Suzette Little and Hout Bay Councillor Rob Quintas. This is an on-going process and further updates will be provided.
4. Keep the Pressure ON!
Ald. JP Smith noted that the continuous emails from residents had put significant pressure on the City to find a solution. It is important to keep the pressure on and to register your concerns via email every time you are impacted.
In an effort to shift the conversation from just complaining to finding a solution, please write a respectful email including the following information:
- Residential address
- How you are impacted
- Attach any important information or documents, such as reviews left on social media or websites, quotes from people, photographs, receipts, etc., to the email
- Any constructive ideas or contributions you think could help the situation
Many thanks for all your on-going support.
***
If you have any questions regarding this update or information or ideas you would like to share, please feel free to get in touch.