Member-countries-to-conclude-the-Pak-Lay-prior-consultationber-countries-to-conclude-the-Pak-Lay-prior-consultation

Member countries to conclude the Pak Lay prior consultation on time

On 17 January 2019, more than 120 participants from various stakeholder groups gathered in Luang Prabang at the 2nd regional stakeholder forum on the proposed Pak Lay hydropower project. The forum, which was convened by the Mekong River Commission (MRC), provided a platform for stakeholders to debate the proposed project, follow up on comments made at the 1st Regional forum, and provide recommendations on findings from a preliminary technical review undertaken by the MRC Secretariat.

This is the fourth time the MRC has carried out prior consultation under the Procedures for Notification, Prior Consultation and Agreement (PNPCA). Prior consultation has previously been conducted for the 1,285 MW Xayaburi hydropower project, the Don Sahong hydropower project (a 240 MW dam), and the 912 MW Pak Beng hydropower project.

Prior consultation on the Pak Lay hydropower project officially began on 8 August 2018 and will run until late March 2019. By that time, the Joint Committee Working Group (JCWG), a technical advisory body of the MRC, will deliberate recommendations to be submitted to the MRC Joint Committee (a policy-implementing body consisting of representatives from the four MRC member countries). The prior consultation process normally takes six months but could be extended by agreement of the Joint Committee.

In late February 2019, the JCWG will convene its third meeting to review the final draft TRR, discuss a summary of key recommendations and draft a statement on the proposed project.

H.E. Watt Botkosal, Deputy Director General, Cambodian National Mekong Committee

I found that the member countries participated very well at the regional stakeholder forum, especially sharing their concerns and suggestions from their respective national consultation for PNPCA processes. I was impressed by presentations prepared by the MRC Secretariat which incorporated most comments of the member countries for this Forum. I could see the willingness of the Chinese developers when they took into account all the comments for consideration. It was good to see that developers and countries could work together under the coordination and facilitation of the MRC Secretariat.

It is important to apply the MRC’s updated 2018 version of the Preliminary Design Guidance (PDG) to this project. The PDG 2018 provides good background information and guidelines for improving dam construction. We also expect that the MRCS can act to integrate and encourage NGOs in the region to participate in the process with us. The boycott by some NGOs is challenging for both the MRC and for member countries for further discussion.

KETSANA XAIYASARN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF THE GOVERNANCE AND COOPERATION DIVISION, LAO NATIONAL MEKONG COMMITTEE

I found constructive comments from the participants at the forum, and they will be further studied and investigated by Lao PDR. Lao PDR is open to comments from our concerned stakeholders, not only from those who participated in the forum, but from others received through MRCS channels However, we expected the stakeholders to understand and respect our views, as well as roles and mandate of the MRC as well.

I appreciate the role of the MRC Secretariat in the whole process, not only the organization of the two regional stakeholder forums but also the numerous meetings and activities that make up the prior consultation process. The documents submitted for the Pak Lay hydropower project were transferred to the member countries on time. Broadcasting a live stream of the forum on social media was a good way to attract a wider audience to comment and share opinions on the proposed project.

I found that several information and comments that had already been submitted and addressed by Lao PDR were not fully integrated into the Technical Review Report prepared by the MRC Secretariat. I also concerned on misunderstanding from the stakeholder on the intension of applying unapproved MRC documents mainly the MRC’s Design Guidance 2018 and results from the Council Study. I recommend further discussion on these issues before we finalise the Technical Review Report. I believe that the Secretariat can complete the prior consultation process on timeost of the comments from the meeting will be addressed in the design and operation periods. Other comments can be discussed during the design steps and the feasibility study.

Satit Phiromchai, Director of the Planning Division, Thai National Mekong Committee

For this event, Thailand brought key community stakeholders to an MRC regional stakeholder forum. The stakeholders, who are from communities vulnerable to the effects of development projects on the Mekong River and have an interest in issues in the Mekong River basin, will share what they have learned with their communities when they return to Thailand.

We have experienced the PNPCA four times. This time, in Thailand, we witnessed a large number of national and regional stakeholders and key local people participate in the national consultations. We covered eight provinces along the Mekong River and tried to reach as many people as possible. To provide a good understanding of the situation, we prepared meeting materials and documentation in Thai language and summarized key points from MRC documents as well as from regional meetings. We received valuable comments as well as concerns from those most affected by the development projects. People expressed their concerns on; in particular, the fluctuation of water levels impacting local livelihoods and decreasing fisheries in the river. These concerns, among other things, would be forwarded to the MRC Secretariat for further consideration later on.

The Forum was well organized. Several of the MRC publicity materials were in the Thai language, which is effective for reaching people at local levels; for example, MRC procedures including the PNPCA . From my point of view, the Technical Review Report in general was well prepared, addressing key issues and concerns raised by stakeholders. The materials were uploaded online ahead of time and were simple to download. Unfortunately, there was an absence of some NGOs, because we want to know their opinions and concerns on the proposed project. Nevertheless, we conducted consultations with diverse groups of people from national, provincial and local communities.

Hong Phuong, Deputy Director General, Vietnam National Mekong Committee

I found the forum very interesting and useful. There were a lot of comments, suggestions and recommendations from different stakeholders from the member countries. We received updates on the Technical Review Report from the MRCS on time, which helped us during the consultation. We were happy to hear presentations and views from the developers and designers and could see their confidence in the design standards. They considered all the comments and concerns regarding impact, mitigation measures, and monitoring. We also obtained a commitment from the Lao Government to share all updated versions of the project.

At national level, we also undertook consultation with stakeholders from the relevant line ministries, agencies, research institutions, universities, NGOs and local communities. We shared information well in advance to stakeholders so they had enough time to study the issues. They actively shared their views, comments and concerns, and provided updated information on the current situation of the Mekong River, which provided key insights for further reflection.

It would be more effective if the MRCS could share information more widely to the public and create a better platform to receive public comments and opinions.