Report on the Rio Tinto plc AGM, London, 4 April 2024
Introduction
i) Two issues featured particularly prominently in this year’s Rio Tinto plc AGM: water and listening.
ii) The issues raised by friends and allies of London Mining Network all involved water in one way or another: contamination of water around its QMM ilmenite mine in Madagascar, water use and contamination around its Oyu Tolgoi copper and gold mine in the arid Gobi desert in Mongolia, water pollution at the Simandou iron ore operations in Guinea, the radioactive legacy of the Ranger uranium mine in Australia, and the potential for catastrophic overuse and pollution of water if the Jadar lithium project goes ahead in Serbia or the proposed Resolution copper mine is constructed at Oak Flat, Arizona, USA.
iii) The issue of listening went wider. The communities with whom London Mining Network co-operates very often feel unheard by the company, however much they speak. At the AGM it was clear that many retired company employees in Quebec, in Canada, feel the same way. The company’s officials are keen to stress how much they want to ‘engage’ with ‘stakeholders’ and how much they respect the communities affected or potentially affected by the company’s mining operations. But what is the point of seeking out communities’ views if the company is not going to listen? Former employees in Quebec have spent years explaining the hardship created for many pensioners by the company’s decision to stop the indexation of their pensions which had been in force for more than thirty years. Civil society organisations in Madagascar have repeatedly asked for information which the company has not provided. Indigenous Peoples and conservationists in Arizona have repeatedly explained how damaging the Resolution Copper project would be, but the company still presses on. Tens of thousands of people in Serbia have demonstrated against the company’s proposed Jadar lithium mine and the government cancelled the company’s licences, yet still the company wants to persuade people to change their minds. Why can the company not accept that No Means No?
iv) Years ago, communities resisting Rio Tinto’s plans in the Philippines told us that the company’s efforts to convince them made them feel ‘dialogued to death’. It seems the company still approaches dissent with the same unyielding attitude.
v) In several cases, people who feel both harmed by the company’s decisions and unheard by its representatives have taken legal action. A recent lengthy article in The Intercept about a legal case brought by people affected by the QMM mine in Madagascar mentions confidential reports by consultants about certain aspects of the company’s behaviour. The article states: ‘One of the confidential draft reports offered an unnamed company executive’s perspective on legal challenges: “Our legal strategy is straightforward. FUCK them. Frustrate; Undermine; Cost; Kick into long grass.”’
vi) Is this the attitude of a company which listens to and respects the concerns of people affected by its behaviour?
vii) The presentations by company Chair Dominic Barton and CEO Jakob Stausholm can be found on the company’s website.
viii) Further information on water around the QMM mine can be found on the Andrew Lees Trust UK blog. The legal case was covered by The Guardian and the Mining.com mining news website. Information about Resolution Copper at Oak Flat is on the website of Arizona Mining Reform Coalition. More information about the Simandou iron ore project can be found on the website of Advocates for Community Alternatives.
ix) Other recent press coverage includes issues of concern which were not raised at the AGM: a report on pollution around the company’s aluminium plant in Quebec, Canada, and the bauxite mine in the Brazilian Amazon which provides much of the feed for the Quebec plant, was published on the CBC website; the struggle to stop the Tamarack mine in Minnesota, USA, was covered by the Nibi Chronicles.
Read More: https://londonminingnetwork.org/2024/04/rio-tinto-dialogue-of-death/
madaraka.online 