The message issued from QMM to the protestors via a local Deputy is, according to local reports, that 80 per cent of the social budget for 2023, 2024 and 2025 has already been disbursed. So, these funds are no longer available. The people are asked to accept this and discuss the 2026, 2027, 2028 budget instead. Local people have rejected this and say the projects delivered from 2023 bear no relation to any of their needs.
In this, they refer to QMM’s purchase and distribution of radios and a fuel efficiency programme, the latter apparently extending well beyond Anosy region and therefore not directly targeted to mining affected beneficiaries.
Another project has been rehabilitation of the road in front of the Bank of Africa in Ft Dauphin. Again, not something that directly benefits rural villagers living around Mandena who bear the immediate, negative impacts of the QMM mine. The communities’ priorities include health, education and income generation, and are putting together a list of their needs to submit to QMM.
Narrative
QMM claims its corporate social responsibility programme addresses development goals. In 2023, Rio Tinto increased its commitment to $100 million over 25 years, replacing a 2022 target of $10 million over three years. The increase was a condition of the government for renewing Rio Tinto/QMM’s lease.
In the NewsMada article, Rio Tinto/QMM is at pains to explain the social funds are not compensation. There is no mention that this ‘clarification’ comes in the wake of three days of protests around legitimate compensation claims. As is often the case, the protestors’ legitimate demands are not reported.
QMM boasts that its social programme is pioneering, an innovative co-creation process with local people. It focuses on the large sums of money Rio Tinto is investing in QMM – just as it did at the Mining Indaba in February.
At the Indaba, QMM emphasised the importance it places on dialogue with the authorities and local stakeholders to maximise the economic and social benefits of mining. Yet QMM is currently absent from dialogue with the Antanosy protestors – at the very mine Rio Tinto showcases as exemplary.
Future
QMM also fails to communicate and clarify on one important question. That of its future in Rio Tinto. It is hanging in the balance, subject to internal “strategic review”, with some probability the company will be sold off.
The fear locally is that Rio Tinto will cut and run from Madagascar leaving a toxic legacy of contaminated water, deepened poverty, unpaid claims and a fractured governance landscape.
In the absence of clarity on QMM’s future, banging the company drum about how much money is being invested in QMM looks more like a public relations exercise – possibly to assuage Malagasy government and investor concerns, pacify protestors and, in doing so, sweeten the pill for prospective buyers of QMM.
However, more money does not in itself equate to good solutions. It does not yield answers, create peace, or deliver on social and human rights obligations without meaningful engagement.
Evaluation
In reality, only half of the fund (2m$/year) has been designated to benefit local communities. The other half goes to the region. In both instances, there is a lack of consultation, transparency and accountability.
The failures of QMM’s social programme have resulted in regular conflict locally since operations began, all of which has been well documented and raised with Rio Tinto.
Last year, Antanosy notables (Toteny) issued a report documenting these failures and the deepening poverty in the region. They also issued a 24-point paper detailing unresolved problems and QMM’s broken promises over the last two decades, including a failure to provide jobs. These issues are all awaiting responsive action.
The lack of any meaningful evaluation of QMM’s social programme over twenty years and, more essentially, before it began investing further, larger sums of money, was the subject of questions to the company board at last year’s AGM.
Conflict
Loss of land has serious consequences for rural producers and their food security, and this conflict over land compensation is chronic. It goes back to the first QMM land displacements in 2006, when people felt cheated of their entitlements due to poor communications and lack of transparency around the process.
Even now, villagers report that QMM asks them to sign papers and promises to bring them back a copy. It then does not do so. Poor governance has led to inevitable grievances and also caused intra community conflict (PWYP MG 2022).
These latest protests show the company has learned nothing. Multiple efforts and initiatives have sought to broker better dialogue around QMM but have failed to deliver long-term solutions. No one in Rio Tinto seems willing to ask why.
One barrier to opening up such scrutiny is the company itself. Rio Tinto has been repeatedly asked by local, national and international civil society to allow an independent human rights and environmental assessment of QMM. The company has resolutely refused.
Can Rio Tinto take responsibility for QMM, or will it ditch its problems in Madagascar leaving a wad of cash flying in the air as it runs – a desperate attempt to camouflage the mess it has made and cover up the simmering, unresolved social unrest?
This Author
Yvonne Orengo is an independent researcher, writer and campaigner. She is the former director of the Andrew Lees Trust (UK). She has lived and worked in the Anosy region and has a thirty-year relationship with the south of Madagascar. She has been in collaboration with The Ecologist since 2014 to raise awareness and advocate for human rights around the Rio Tinto/QMM mine. Read more of the coverage of Rio Tinto from The Ecologist here.
