Fiji’s Environment Ministry says a decision on the waste-to-energy proposal can only be issued following the completion of the full technical and regulatory review.
Photo: Faeboo / Fiji Ministry of Environment and Climate Change
Fiji’s Environment Ministry has rejected an environmental impact assessment (EIA) by the would-be developers of a controversial multi-million-dollar waste-to energy plant in the country’s tourism hotspot.
The incinerator and private port project at Vuda Point in Nadi was backed by Australian billionaire Ian Malouf and Fiji-born businessman Robert Cromb’s company TNG Fiji. It had the support of Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka’s government.
However, it received significant community backlash and hundreds of objections against the project, which would require the developers to import waste from other parts of the South Pacific to meet the 900,000 tonnes of waste annually.
On Thursday, the Environment Ministry said the proposal had been rejected following the technical review process as it failed key legal requirements, particularly around environmental protection.
“The review found that key issues remained unresolved, including the scale of the project, waste supply, imported waste, hazardous ash management, water supply, public health risks, environmental impacts, road and port infrastructure, social and cultural impacts, tourism impacts, and the overall economic case for the project,” the ministry said in a new release.
Environment Ministry permanent secretary Dr Sivendra Michael said the decision was not against investment or against new waste solutions.
“For a project of this scale, the [Environment] Department must be satisfied that the risks to people, communities, the environment, culture, livelihoods and the economy are properly assessed and can be properly managed,” he said.
“Several critical matters remained unresolved and were proposed for future assessment rather than being addressed within the EIA itself. As a result, the Department was not satisfied that the potential impacts and risks of the project could be adequately assessed or managed.”
Rabuka had stated in late April that his government was “committed to progressing the project”.
But following the rejection he released a statement, saying “I respect the decision.”
He acknowledged that the proposal had attracted “strong public interest”.
He said Fiji’s environmental laws exist to ensure ensure major developments were tested carefully, transparently and on the evidence.
“They protect communities, they protect responsible investors, and they protect the public interest. This decision should not be seen as a rejection of investment, innovation or new solutions to Fiji’s waste-management challenges. Those challenges remain real, and government remains committed to addressing them in a practical and sustainable way.”
However, he said every proposal, must meet the standards required by law and demonstrate its environmental, social, cultural, health and economic impacts are properly understood and can be properly managed.
“The strength of good governance lies in allowing institutions to do their work, respecting the law, and making decisions in the public interest,” he said.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
