Adrián Geldres: “They are ten years of postponement and abandonment of the State and companies”

What is the most important part of the agreement in Cora Cora with Prime Minister Mirtha Vásquez on the closure of mines?

The decision of the State, through the premier, to begin the process of definitive closure and withdrawal of the mining companies located in the headwaters of the basin that affect our very life.

Is that the starting point for the meeting on Wednesday?

On Wednesday we will go to Congress to support this decision, because there are mining entrepreneurs who irresponsibly question it and say that their environmental impact study is a living instrument and that they can, at any time, change it unilaterally without the consultation of the population or civil society organized.

With how many people are you going to support the premiere?

We are coordinating. I must go because I was syndicated by many means as an agitator, an anti-mining, a terrorist, in short. We have to defend ourselves because the factual, corporate power is so strong that every day we receive threats, in particular I receive threats. The authorities and leaders are going to support the premier.

In networks it is said that the premier talks about a closure of the mining companies, but what it is about is a final process of operations to which the closure plan corresponds. Is that so?

It’s right. Companies have their environmental impact study, they have a beginning and an end. That is why it is necessary to review national regulations, including the Constitution, because It cannot be possible that they want to modify it several times, and that does not seem fair to us.

In the SNMPE they consider that mining companies could continue to expand their production and mine closure processes. Why reject it?

We think it must be another project for them to consider the process of exploration, production or benefit, whatever they want to call it. They cannot be sustained by the social license of ten or 15 years ago and on that basis continue to exploit the resources. In practice it is looting.

Agriculture and livestock are important to Chumpi. Is harmonious coexistence with mining possible?

It is not a good coexistence, since it affects us. Mining does not benefit us at all. It is an investment that benefits large businessmen, not us. Besides being lucrative, it is not a sustainable activity. On the other hand, agriculture and livestock are sustainable economic activities that give us profitability and income for the inhabitants of the province.

And what is the negative?

For example, in the transport they use. The entire journey from the mining unit to the towns is full of dust. Animals consume grass and there is no way to do it because they are contaminated. It would be different if they implemented mitigation in this regard.

How much do they receive for royalty or royalties from mining?

Approximately S / 200 thousand per year for these concepts. That is almost nothing.

What is the proposal of your people, because each operation has a time, a deadline?

We have requested the Breapampa mining, which is in a straight line four kilometers away, to implement the progressive closure of this unit. In addition, we do not want more extensions because it hurts us enormously in our agricultural activity.

Is the mine closing?

They are requesting to modify their environmental impact study and there they consider sinkholes, tunnels and activities within an immense package. In addition, they ask for expansion in vulnerable areas, where the water is born, and that hurts us. According to their environmental impact study, they should have implemented their closure process from 2017 to 2023, which they have not done.

Is Breapampa the head of the account?

I’m not an expert, but we think it is. It is a vulnerable area where the water is born, and on our side there are puquiales fed by that head.

How many discussion tables did they have? Did they attend to them?

A lot directly in our district, as a joint with the three southern provinces of Ayacucho. In addition, this year there was a table where the former Minister of Energy and Mines attended and promised to begin the process of progressive closure of the mines that continue to be questioned.

Was a protest like the one that has been seen necessary to make itself heard?

It is not necessary, nor do I justify it, but they are ten years of deaf ears. Ten years of postponement and abandonment of the State and companies. Naturally there is a reaction from the tired, annoyed, mortified population, because their rights are violated, their activity is affected.

Will they sit down to talk with the mining company?

We tell the SNMPE that as citizens and authorities we are willing to dialogue and arrange the closure process. Also tell them that we are not anti-miners. Let’s sit down, talk, agree and get ahead without going to extremes. We are a peaceful people.

A dialogue is required to clarify the situation

Víctor Gobitz, President of the IMMP and CEO of Compañía de Minas Buenaventura

The Vice Minister of Mines clarified it and there is a legal procedure known to the industry that allows the industry to present, when it deems it appropriate, with the due technical support, a modification of the environmental instruments for an extension of life and that is practical. known. Mining businesses, especially underground ones, initially have a short life and over the years, via exploration, that life was extended, so that concept seems to have been unclear.

The closing plan is a photo, a reading in that minute and one cannot infer with a photo the end of the film, I think it is difficult to recognize when someone is wrong, but it is clear that what the representatives of the industry are doing is Clarify, because behind the company there is an ecosystem, there are workers, suppliers of goods and services, contractors, clients, shareholders and we owe all of these to each other, and a prime minister has to be very careful in the way he expresses himself, in the documents you sign. I hope that the subject will gradually return to the regular channel. It is difficult to rectify itself, but it will have to be clarified.

We are in a situation that requires dialogue and that dialogue has to be cordial and if someone has made a mistake they will have to clarify and correct it, let us be aware that decisions and public acts have a tremendous impact on the economy and not only on the country. One of the mining companies mentioned by the prime minister listed on the London stock exchange and the stock has fallen 27%, so you have to be responsible in that sense, you have to know that the statements of a person of that level of responsibility of the Executive Branch have an impact on the perception of the country from outside.