Pages

Friday, June 04, 2010

A healthy occupation?

From PAUL OATES

In the news today is a report that the US President has sent an account to BP for the clean up of their recent oil spill disaster.

So what happens if this sort of thing occurs in Papua New Guinea?
Considering that there is a US involvement in the LNG project, would the US be guilty of having one law for themselves in their own country but concerning a foreign company and another for their own operations in another country?
Where is the equity in this debate? If there is an environmental disaster over the poisonous tailings from the Ramu mine being pumped out into the ocean, clearly the mine's owners will not be held to account under the recently passed legislation because they met the requirements of the government permit they were given.
This is a classic example of when responsibility is in the eye of the beholder. Is the US government to blame for letting BP drill in their own waters without suitable safety provisions? Clearly the US President doesn't think so.
So where does that leave the PNG government if there is an environmental disaster from the Ramu mine's waste being pumped into the sea? Would the person who issued the permit without the necessary checks and safety provisions then be able to be personally sued by those who were disadvantaged or affected?
The PNG government has now effectively abrogated the mining company's responsibility should there be a disaster. A disaster that has apparently already been predicted in the government's own environmental impact survey on the project.
Issuing future permits under these provisions may not be a very healthy occupation.
______________________________
__________
White House to send BP bill over oil spill
From correspondents in Washington
From: AFP
June 04, 2010 10:12AM


THE White House has slapped BP with a $US69 million ($82 million) bill and demanded prompt payment for the first installment of government expenses incurred in the effort to halt the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Officials today also said they would keep billing the British energy giant for all associated costs from America's biggest-ever environmental disaster, under a US law requiring oil firms to pay for cleanups.
"The Obama administration today sent a preliminary bill for $US69.09 million to BP and other responsible parties for response and recovery operations relating to the BP/Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill," the US Government said.
"The administration will continue to bill BP regularly for all associated costs," the statement, issued by the oil spill incident centre said.
"The administration expects prompt payment and will take additional steps as necessary to ensure that BP and other responsible parties, not American taxpayers, pay all of the costs associated with the BP/Deepwater Horizon oil spill."
The White House said BP was given until July 1 to pay the full $US69 million ($82 million).
The total includes $US29 million ($34.46 million) for federal agencies to support operation of ships, aircraft and boats, and for environmental monitoring and related costs; $US29 million ($34.46 million) for National Guard expenditures; $US7 million ($8.32 million) for costs incurred by states for monitoring, oil removal and other expenses; and $US4 million ($4.75 million) for Defence Department support.
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said the total accounts for 75 per cent of the incurred costs to date.
The Oil Pollution Act of 1990, enacted after the Exxon Valdez oil disaster in Alaska, made oil giants liable for cleanup costs resulting from spills and is being used by the administration to hold BP's feet to the fire.
Mr Obama has also vowed to hold BP responsible if it is found that the company broke any laws before the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon rig in Apri
l.

No comments:

Post a Comment