Kenya;the Sondu-Miriu Hydroelectiric Project
the Minutes of
Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence
(Draft)(May 29,2001)
→→Also see "the Minutes of Committee on
Oversight of Administration"
(by Ms.Fukushima,June 11,2001)
"the Minutes of Committee
on Oversight of Administration"
(by Mr.Sakurai, June 11,2001)
"the Minutes of Committee on
Accounts"
(by Mr.Sakurai, June 25.2001)
The National
Diet of Japan
House of Councillors
Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence
May 29, 2001
Q. Mr. Sakurai, Member of the House of Councillors.
It is widely questioned by the citizens whether or not the aid to the Sondu-Miriu Hydroelectric Project should be continued. While it is noted that the economic conditions of Kenya have been degraded, should this type of an ODA project be continued?
A. Mr. Mizoguchi, Financial Ministry.
Various responding Miniseries, such as the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs are currently examining this issue thoroughly, addressing also the economic conditions of Kenya comprehensively.
As to the budgetary conditions of the Government of Kenya, they are known to have been slightly down due to a long drought; however, we are examining the economic impacts that the project are causing from many angles, in order to find a measure to improve Kenya’s economy.
Budgetary conditions of a nation may be influenced by various factors such as the economy of the nation and that of the world. Thus, a careful examination of these factors is warranted.
Q. Mr. Sakurai.
It is necessary to determine if this project is working in favor of the citizens of Kenya. This project has been carried out as an environmental project. How the construction of hydropower plants may be considered as an environmental project?
Mr. Nishida, Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
When the Government proceeds with environmental projects, a broad definition of the environment is to be used. For example, operation of hydropower plants does not produce air pollution. This is the reason in which we would consider this project environmentally friendly. While a case-by-case approach is favorable in evaluating the nature of impacts that a project may cause on the area, we have called this type of projects to be environmental in nature in the past.
Q. Mr. Sakurai.
What is the level of understanding of the Ministry of Foreign affairs as to the impacts that the project may be causing on the construction site? We are especially concerned with the Ministry’s awareness of negative impacts rather than positive ones.
A. Mr. Nishida, Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The Kenyan Government had made a request for the realization of this project so vigorously that we accepted Kenya as a recipient of our aid program. Meanwhile, we are aware of problems that have been raised by some NGOs. These problems include relocation of the residents, which is considered to be one of the environmental problems if they are to be considered in a broad manner.
We have suggested that the Government of Kenya clear these problems. Moreover, our understanding is that Kenyan citizens have set up numerous meetings to discuss on mitigating measures.
Q. Mr. Sakurai.
However, according to the materials that I have obtained, it is worried that in the dry season, water could be so short that operation of a hydropower plant would not be feasible. Moreover, it is predicted that there will be a large impact on the residents who earn living by way of agriculture or fishery due to the shortage of water. There is a waterfall downstream, and it is a sacred place to the residents. At the basin of the waterfall, there is a fish nursery. If the water becomes short, various impacts on these sites could be unavoidable. Moreover, currently, some issues of sanitation are pointed out in the construction area. For example, the tank in use for drawing swage is being used to water the access road. According to the study conducted by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, sanitation and environment of the project area have been improved; however, it does not sound plausible.
Mr. Nishida, Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The average flow of water is approximately 41m2/min. However, our research shows that there is a significant difference of the volume of water between the dry and the rainy seasons. Therefore, this project should be proceeded on the major premise that necessary water flow is to be kept available to minimize the ecological impact.
In order to deal with the negative impacts on the community, the Technical Committee has been formed among the enterprisers, residents, NGOs, and workers, which collects dues, and whose members gather every month. The members enjoy taking advantage of these opportunities to debate and argue in search for due correspondence to the addressed issues.
Q. Mr. Sakurai.
Issues of health are to be addressed. Residents are suffering for asthma, tuberculosis, and eye disease. Filthy water used in construction is flowing into agricultural plots, and affecting the crops. Livestock is alleged to be consuming pollutant, which possible effect is concerned.
Since the beginning of the construction of the tunnel, streams and springs started to dry up. Consequently, the residents are now forced to use the distant water spots.
Local NGOs have reported that there have not been appropriate measures taken to establish health facilities, even though concern about malaria has been expressed. These concerns represent the residents’ view against this project.
The project has stepped up to the Phase II, and we would like to be informed about the loan status at this point.
A. Mr. Nishida.
Representatives of the NGOs participate in the aforementioned Committee. Therefore, these NGOs can come up freely with their concerns, so that the Committee can reach to a resolution after a through and comprehensive deliberation.
As to the loan status, we have not reached to an official measure that reflects the Government’s position, and are still in an examination process.
Q. Mr. Sakurai.
It hardly sounds to be in a right order if the project was tendered for without an executive decision by exchange of official signatures.
A. Mr. Nishida.
Official tender should come after the final decision of the Government of Japan. However, the tender with regard to the Phase II was done prospectively by Kenya with its own responsibility. Therefore, the tender cannot be made invalid due to the irregularity of the procedure. After the official decision of the Government of Japan, the project will be examined to see if it is becoming to be an official one.
Q. Mr. Sakurai.
I have had an opportunity to have a look the official document issued in 1999, in which a corresponding person promised a Kenyan official to communicate with appropriate Ministries upon his return to Japan in order to carry the proposed loan project out smoothly. His attitude was that because the project had already been dealt substantially, a tender should be completed without any passage of time. This is not a sound process to get to a tender, and we would like to request an official investigation to clarify whether or not this kind of promise was made by a politician.
A. Ms. Tanaka, Minister of Foreign Affairs.
We will go ahead and examine this matter. This project was commenced four years ago and has been in operation in consideration of effective use of tax and contribution to the world community. However, with the progress of the project, issues on water and environment have started to be pointed out. In case this project continues to be carried out with presence of these problems, reexamination of the project with a through consultation with the Government of Kenya will be necessary. The status of ODAs in other projects also needs to be examined.
→→Go
to the Index