The resumption of talks concerning the development of Las Bambas is expected to take place on 7-8 September, following protracted delays and accusations by the community of bad faith on the part of the government. This follows weeks of pressure by the community and the NGOs supporting them.

Dialogue at the gigantic Chinese-owned copper project at Las Bambas, has gone badly up to now. After a slow start following agreement last September to hold a mesa de diálogo, talks broke down in April, and were finally suspended in July.

Over the past two weeks, a strong campaign has raged in the press and on all the social networks, with many vivid videos in circulation and, for their part, community members have blockaded a controversial road. Now a breakthrough is in prospect.

The mesa promises to involve high-level representation on the part of the authorities to discuss (once again) the terms of reference and procedures used. Importantly, the period of dialogue has now been extended by 180 days.

The agreement was reached at a meeting of the executive, the company (MMG) and community representatives from the province of Cotabambas, with the mining ministry (MEM) presiding.

For the executive, present were the vice-ministers of energy, agriculture and housing and representatives from the ministries of health, environment, transport, and development and social inclusion, as well as from the Council of Ministers.

The Oficina Nacional de Diálogo y Sostenibilidad (ONDS) played a significant part in resuscitating the talks, as did Richard Arce (the Frente Amplio congressman for Apurímac) and the Ombudsman’s Office (Defensoría del Pueblo). Representatives of local and regional governments were also present at the meeting.
http://www.expreso.com.pe/economia/se-reanuda-mesa-de-dialogo-para-no-paralizar-las-bambas/

Needless to say, the proof of this pudding will be only in the eating. The communities and their representatives have become seriously frustrated by the slow progress of the dialogue and the apparent lack of commitment on the part of the authorities.

According to a compelling analysis by José de Echave (the former vice-minister of the environment), the communities have legitimate concerns abut the environmental impacts of the new plans and about the concentration of these in Cotabambas province. The key instrument for consultation and dialogue is supposedly the environmental impact assessment (EIA), but this was modified without consultation. In addition, what are called ‘Informes Técnicos Sustentatorios’ (ITSs) have been employed that require no consultation. There have been five such modifications in the last twenty months.
http://www.grufides.org/blog/las-bambas-sin-voluntad-de-solucionar-el-conflicto

These operational modifications mean that the impacts are concentrated almost entirely in Cotabambas rather than in three provinces as originally envisaged, increasing their severity. Further, the company’s change of plan from using a pipeline system to transporting ores by road has raised complaints as the dust raised affects humans, cattle and crops.

The communities claim that they had agreed to the use of roads only in the construction phase. The company claims it is using a public road in accordance with the bylaws and that it is the government’s responsibility to pave it. MMG claims it voluntarily sprays water on the road to reduce the dust, but the communities say that its use of contaminated water is affecting their health.

Further, the procedures for the mesa de diálogo have been a source of friction. The communities want a Quechua-speaking interpreter to be available, and for the government to present clear evidence of its good faith. A further concern is employment. The company has employed over 18,000 people in the construction phase of the project, but since start-up this has fallen to 4,000. The expectations raised at the outset are now becoming a source of grievance.

Community representatives have been at pains to make it clear that while they care deeply about how mining is organised and the costs and benefits it involves for them as a community, they still support the mine. They are not against mining as such.