View topic - A day to remember - governments and the environment

It is currently December 16th, 2019, 5:26 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: December 6th, 2012, 2:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: June 20th, 2001, 7:00 pm
Posts: 7513
Location: Scarbados, Ontario Canada
I got this in the mail from the LAke Ontario Water Keepers. It's a good summary:
the Government of Canada is no longer in the business of protecting the Canadian environment.

Quote:
If you’re reading this – an email newsletter written by an environmental organization – then you’ve definitely thought about “water issues” or “the environment” before. And if that’s the case, then you’re going to want to remember today.

Some day, probably well off in the future, you’ll be thinking about “water” and “the environment” again – you’ve demonstrated an interest, after all. And we’re willing to bet that on that day, in the future, you’ll be trying to figure out when things changed.

Here’s the answer: This week. Now.

It’s no secret that the Government of Canada’s been undergoing some kind of post-environmentalism re-envisioning exercise. You’ve seen the stories about massive layoffs in federal environmental departments, heard about scientists being “muzzled”, listened to members of parliament debating sweeping changes to federal laws.

The exercise is over. The “new normal” is here.

For the last thirty years, Canada was a rule-of-law kind of country. Our environmental laws spelled out what you can’t do (pollute or block a river, for example). They spelled out how decisions had to be made (major projects were reviewed by independent panels, with input from qualified experts, for example). Those who wanted to develop or dump on the water had to prove to a decision-maker that their actions would not harm other people’s abilities to safely swim, drink, or fish those same waters. With a few notable exceptions, the federal rules were generally the same across Canada.

This is no longer true. When yet another omnibus budget bill passed through Parliament this week, it ushered in a new era in Canadian history. The “Navigable Waters Protection Act” no longer protects “Water”. The “Fisheries Act” no longer protects “Fish”. The “Environmental Assessment Act” no longer requires “Environmental Assessments” be done before important decisions are made. If you are looking to federal environmental law and policy to protect Canada’s environment, you’re a dinosaur. A throwback. A relic of the 20th Century.

“No need to worry,” the federal government says, “the provinces will protect you now.”

Just this past Monday, at the Darlington Nuclear Refurbishment hearing, an official from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans explained that the Canadian government is in the business of protecting fish habitat. But not fish. Fish, he said, are the province’s responsibility. That’s news to anyone who has ever read Canada’s Constitution. Ontario has, from time to time, prosecuted offenders under the Fisheries Act, but Canada still had ultimate authority to protect fish AND fish habitat. Until this week. When they said they didn’t want to do it anymore.

It’s alarming, this brave new world we’re in. The provinces can’t pick up the federal government’s slack. In most cases, they don’t have the constitutional authority, the financial resources, or the political will to do it.

You’ll have to prove on your own that any act of pollution or development absolutely will interfere with the environment. Of course the only sure way to prove harm is to wait for harm to happen. That means more fish kills. More drinking water advisories. More off-limits waterways. Environmental laws were supposed to prevent harm from ever happening; now they encourage developers to push the envelope, to see how much they can get away with before citizens push back.

There’s no question that the old way worked better. The Melancthon Megaquarry, Lafarge Alternative Fuels projects, and the Nelson Aggregate/Mount Nemo case show how bad ideas crumble when the burden of proof falls on developers’ shoulders. Would it really be “better” if we had to wait for wells to run dry, for fish to die, or for the salamander to go extinct before we could be heard?

The truth about this brave new world is that it’s up to us now, to individuals and citizens who care about swimmable, drinkable, fishable water. The omnibus bill and the Darlington Refurbishment hearing made one thing perfectly clear: the Government of Canada is no longer in the business of protecting the Canadian environment. Period.

_________________
“What is the good of having a nice house without a decent planet to put it on?” - Thoreau


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: December 6th, 2012, 9:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: December 19th, 2011, 4:44 pm
Posts: 525
Location: Waterloo, ON
All the Cons have to do is motivate their base to go out and vote. The remaining 62% are either marginalized through vote-splitting, or are so apathetic that they won't turn off American Idol long enough to make it to the polling station and back. Even if they did show up to vote, most wouldn't know what the issues are, or where the parties stand on them. At the risk of being politically incorrect, I've come to the conclusion that there is a critical mass of stupid people out there, and the Conservatives know it. Ever notice the propaganda flyers the Cons send to your mailbox each week? One recent flyer touted them as champions of the environment! For many, these flyers constitute the extent of the information that they draw upon when casting their vote.

I work for a large crown corporation. We just had a ratification vote on THE most important contract in our history. We have everything to lose. In my local, 31% bothered to vote. In other cities the turnout was worse. Meanwhile, in the Middle East people are putting their lives on the line to achieve democracy. Frightening times.

_________________

www.mikemonaghan.ca



Last edited by canoeguitar on December 12th, 2012, 4:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: December 12th, 2012, 12:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: October 16th, 2008, 9:20 am
Posts: 1367
Location: Oshawa
Thank you for posting Erhard.

_________________
"It's healthy to be dirty" - Lars Monsen


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group