As opposition mounts against the proposed 900,000-tonne waste-to-energy incinerator across the scenic Vuda-Saweni coastline where families dream of tourism growth, former journalist Charlie Charters has challenged government’s comments on the proposed project.
In a strongly worded open letter to Foreign Affairs Minister Sakiasi Ditoka, Charters praised the minister’s past work in rural development but warns that senior Cabinet members must “command the facts” before shaping public debate on such a high-stakes project.
The letter, which adds fuel to growing public opposition, questions the urgency, scale, necessity, and legality of the giant facility planned for the 85-hectare site near Vuda Point and Saweni beach.
He argues that Mr Ditoka’s recent comments in The Fiji Times were among the first public statements from any senior government figure or the Prime Minister on the project – which he claims has “all the appearances of being cooked up in secret since June last year”.
Challenging the narrative
At the heart of Charters’ critique is what he calls a “reckless urgency” injected into the debate.
“It is simply not true to say that Fiji’s landfills continue ‘to grow by the millions of tonnes’,” he wrote.
Charters notes the country would need a population five times larger to approach “millions of tonnes.”
He accuses the minister of framing the issue as if “the ship is sinking, the plane is about to crash”, warning against rushing into “anything, no matter how ill-conceived”.
Time on our side? Naboro’s 40-year buffer
Charters points to Naboro landfill, Fiji’s main engineered site near Suva, as evidence that panic is unnecessary for disposal.
He states the facility has “at least another 40 years’ worth of capacity” at recent intake rates of about 100,000 tonnes per year – a claim he says can be verified with the Department of Environment or the site operator.
This, he argues, shows Fiji does not need to act “as if our hair is on fire” on national waste disposal, distinguishing it from collection and recycling challenges.
He acknowledged problems at other sites, especially the poorly managed Vunato dump in Lautoka, calling it “testimony to the danger of inaction, neglect and wrong-headed decisions over successive governments”. But he questioned whether importing waste is the answer.
“Does it really make sense to import and incinerate 700,000 tonnes per year from Australia to help solve a Vunato-sized problem?” he asks.
Scale, profit and tourism risks
Charters describes the proposed plant as bigger than any waste-to-energy incinerator in Europe and more than twice the size of Australia’s largest.
“Anything is not better than nothing,” he warns, “if anything is a bigger waste-to-energy incinerator plant than exists anywhere in Europe”.
He raises conflict-of-interest concerns, noting the project would be run for profit by “two already very wealthy men,” including Rob Cromb, who holds the 25-hectare Crown lease on which the development turns. Their ability to fairly weigh costs and benefits “may be compromised”, he suggests.
Locally, he paints a grim picture: an 85-hectare “waste incinerator park” that could “smother Vuda-Saweni in environmental gunk and erase permanently any existing and future tourism potential” in the culturally and scenically rich area.
Legality under Waigani Convention
Where Charters hits hardest is on the legal minefield surrounding the project
He quotes a recent Australian government statement classifying unsorted household rubbish as hazardous waste under the Hazardous Waste Act. Under the Waigani Convention to which both Australia and Fiji are parties – exports of hazardous waste to Forum Island Countries like Fiji are effectively banned.
“Minister, with respect, can we stop pretending that there is a single stitch of lawfulness about any of this,” he wrote.
As Minister for Foreign Affairs, Charters suggests Mr Ditoka is well-placed to verify Canberra’s position.
Petition power and Malouf’s comments
Public opposition continues to build everyday. Charters highlights the Change.org petition “Stop WtE incinerator Vuda-Saweni,” which had gathered over 4192 signatures at the time of writing – ranking it among the stronger anti-incinerator campaigns globally, ahead of several Australian ones.
He notes similar resistance to waste-to-energy projects in Australia, suggesting entrepreneurs are now seeking “gullible and desperate” destinations for their waste.
Charters also slams comments attributed to project proponent Ian Malouf in The Australian newspaper, where opponents were reportedly called “just a few selfish people.” He points out this includes traditional landowners from Viseisei and Lauwaki.
“I suspect you are privately horrified to read such crass and unthinking comments that shriek white, billionaire privilege,” Charters tells Mr Ditoka.
He questions why the Prime Minister and Cabinet have not clearly responded to Malouf’s claim of government “in-principle” backing.
Government insists on due process
Environment Minister Lynda Tabuya has repeatedly clarified that Cabinet has not approved the project. It was only presented to Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka, who directed the investors to follow proper processes.
A full Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), funded by the proponents, is currently under review by the Ministry of Environment.
Public consultations with Vuda-Saweni residents, landowners and traditional custodians are mandatory and expected soon.
The 21-day public review period for the EIA recently began, with submissions open until mid-April.
Government maintains that exploration is not endorsement, and any decision will balance environmental safety, legal compliance, community views and national needs.
The bigger debate continues
The debate shows a clear tension. Fiji faces real problems with waste, like illegal dumping, burning, weak recycling, and pressure on sites such as Vunato.
At the same time, people worry that a huge, profit-driven incinerator using imported waste could harm health, the environment, tourism, and Fiji’s control over its own land.
Charters calls for “real and practical solutions” that involve and have the approval of the people.
He says the Government should be open and follow the law, instead of rushing into a mega-project.
As the Environmental Impact Assessment continues and communities speak up, the Vuda incinerator plan is far from settled.
Questions about the facts, the size of the plant, imported waste, and international laws are now in the spotlight.
Ordinary Fijians, especially those living along the heritage coast, are watching closely to see if proper processes really protect their future.
