No fish in the water, no rice in the field

2 October 2000

“We’ve discussed going back. But there’s nothing to go back to.” Life on a Bangkok street is horrid. It’s two months since Chuan urged the Pak Mool villagers to stop their hunger strike because he would solve their problems. The decision to stay is simple economics. They used to be fishermen. Now there are too few fish. They have no access to land.

The World Commission on Dams (WCD) case study on Pak Mool is now complete (www.dams.org\studies\th\). It has been reviewed by experts in the field. The conclusions have not changed much from the draft version. But they are now precise and final. The dam should never have been built. EGAT used wrong methods and imaginary data to justify the project. The World Bank offered financing without applying stringent checks. The damage to the Mool river fishery is large and unjustifiable. The report identifies the critical point as 1991, when the dam’s promoters avoided a proper environmental and social review. In retrospect, such a review would probably have killed the project and prevented the dreary history of environmental vandalism and official thuggery that followed. “Nor would the country as a whole have lost an important ecosystem.”

But the real drama of the report is about the impact on the fishing communities. Their livelihood was stolen. Traditional fish traps have disappeared from the river upstream of the dam because there is nothing to catch. Riverside swamps and forests, where they used to collect herbs, fungi and vegetables, have been flooded. So have grazing lands. So have banks where they could grow seasonal crops. The village wells no longer function because of changes in the water table. The village community has been torn apart by the divide-and-rule tactics of EGAT. Even the site for their biggest annual ritual has been submerged.

It may be difficult for Bangkokians to understand the full impact. Imagine the government closed down your office; banned access to the local Big-C; turned off the electricity and water supply; blew up the local temple; and told you to be proud of making such a big sacrifice for the national interest.

From the very beginning, the WCD study notes, the villagers pointed out that the project would be an environmental disaster. But nobody consulted them. Nobody listened when they protested. Chuan sent men in uniform to beat them up.

In retrospect they deserve to be celebrated, and their expertise needs to be harnessed. The little people who depend so much on nature are always the most sensitive to the threat of environmental decline. This is true of the small fishermen in the Gulf who want the government to restrain over-fishing. It’s true of hill communities who know about the real threats to the forests. But Thailand is still governed in the interests of people who make fortunes from the destruction of the environment.

The protest over Pak Mool has bogged down again. The press and public opinion have lost interest. Ministers are totally focused on looting the budget before the election. Bangkokians lapse into thinking that these protesters are lazy compensation-seekers who ought to go home.

About compensation the WCD report is precise. Yes, EGAT has paid money in compensation. But almost every baht was conceded with spectacularly bad grace in the face of long and concerted protests. Moreover, all the compensation that the fishing communities have received is for disruption during the time of the dam’s construction. Not one satang has been paid for their long-term loss of livelihood.

A visit to the village alongside Government House should dispel any thought that these people are lazy. Catfish are being raised in ponds of blue plastic sheeting. Vegetables are growing in the canal and along its bank. Groups go out everyday to fish in other city ponds and canals. Rice is being hand-milled and pounded. Baskets, hats, and fish-traps are being plaited for sale. Women are working piecework making plastic bags. Kids have formed a band to earn money. People go off each day to work in shops, factories and construction sites. These are people with a capacity for hardship and a talent for survival. “Nobody is paying us to sit here like beggars.”

So what reaction has there been to the WCD report? The World Bank has mumbled the nearest any such institution will get to an apology for its role. The Thai government is as silent as a stone.

A few weeks ago, Chang Noi had a momentary opportunity to press the prime minister to take the protesters seriously, especially over the broader issue of access to land. His response was a kneejerk: “But it’s all political.” Protests are being stirred up to embarrass the Democrats. Someone is behind it – Chavalit, Thaksin, the Third Hand, or the remnants of communist revolution. Political leaders move in a world of conflict, intrigue and manipulation which endangers their own humanity. A break from the business of government might do them good.

But how to move the issue along? A few days ago, the Assembly of the Poor called together the collective social conscience of the nation (Prawase, Saneh, Nithi, Thirayuth, Sophon, Piphob, Parichat, Kasian, Jon etc) for advice. The important issue for the Pak Mool villagers, and for all the others dislodged by dams and national parks, is access to land. The King has highlighted self-sufficient agriculture as a strategy for ordinary people to survive the crisis and escape from poverty. But self-sufficiency is meaningless without land. Maybe the Assembly should apply to the forestry department to rent degraded forest land. The department grants such leases to businessmen. Why not to villagers too?

The World Bank has just published its landmark report on “Attacking Poverty”. This talks about “empowering” the poor and improving their access to assets such as land. Maybe the Bank should do more than mumbling sorry about its role in disempowering the poor and destroying their assets at Pak Mool. This would help to dispel the widespread suspicion that this report is just a lot of pretty words to disguise the Bank’s old policies of free markets and big projects.

Meanwhile outside Government House, as a result of much hard work, there’s still rice in the sack, and fish in the blue plastic pond. And that’s better than a blasted riverbank in Ubon.