Fact-Finding and Social Input — a Public Hearing (Mining, Canada) and a Multinational AGM (Rio Tinto Zinc, England)

Abstract

Impact assessments determine facts: what happened, where and when. These facts can then be used. But they must flow to decision-makers, and they must be perceived as the facts they are. If acted upon, predictable new situations develop from facts.

“A variety of submitters appeared, some carefully meeting the terms of the Inquiry, while others were marginal in details but had relevant points to make and issues to raise. In addition, someone succeeded in drawing attention of the media to claimed impacts out of control, conflicts of interest by inquiry personnel and submitters, and misuse of provincial university facilities. Such diversions from the fact-finding are not unusual in public hearings. They need documenting objectively to show how they affect the assessment of environmental risk.”

“Real issues of social impact, and consequent long-term financial profitability important to shareholders, underlie many of the questions raised at the AGMs. But in 1982–4, not one of the questioners, not even the closely reasoning lawyers present, was able to raise such issues in ways which provided much useful information to potentially sympathetic shareholders. Without proper information about the social and environmental impact of their company’s actions, share-holders who might be sympathetic to enlightened policies at the expense of some profit reduction in the immediate future (but maintenance of long-term profitability) are unlikely to influence their Board of Directors.”