Category Archives: Western Canada

A rare whale shark, de-finned (photo by Anthony Marr)

Rafe on Shark Fins and the NDP

Canada, Politics, Species At Risk, Western Canada,
Share

I urge everyone to get a copy of the Vancouver Province for July 10  and read, in the A section, pp 8 and 9, a story about shark fins. It’s a tragic story and proves once again that corporations – who have no environmental concerns whatever – will log the last tree, dam the last river, and kill the last fish.

Mentioned prominently is my good friend Anthony Marr. Let me tell you a bit about this unrelenting fighter for animal rights.

Anthony Marr holds a science degree from the UBC and has worked as a field geophysicist and an environmental technologist. In 1995, he became a full time wildlife preservationist, which has brought him to India three times, earning him the title of the “Champion of the Bengal Tiger” in the Champions of the Wild TV series aired in 20 countries. As an anti-hunting activist, he has conducted high profile campaigns in Canada for the bears and seals, and been to Japan twice for the whales and dolphins. He is the founder of Heal Our Planet Earth (HOPE) and is currently on his fourth Compassion for Animals Road Expedition (CARE-4), covering 40 states. He is also the author of Omni-Science.

Before going on, 8 years ago Wendy and I were in Tahiti. We took a trip with half a dozen other tourists, by boat, to a lagoon, to see the “Spinner” dolphins. Our guide was a fish biologist.

When we got to the lagoon we were fortunate enough to see these remarkable creatures come out of the water and, as advertised, do a couple of full twists before hitting the water. It was probably the highlight of a wonderful trip.

Our guide asked us what we thought and we were fulsome in our delight. The guide then said, “Two years ago this pod was at about 100 and it’s now over 135 – good news, huh?”

Even though I smelt a rat, I nodded, with the others, in enthusiastic affirmation.

“Not so,” said our mentor. “The increase comes as a result of the killing of sharks.”

“The dolphins, at night, leave the lagoon, cross the reef to find food. Their only enemy is the shark. The sharks are all but gone because of fishermen catching the sharks, cutting off their fins and throwing them, still alive, back into the water. Because the sharks are gone, the dolphins have expanded in numbers at the expense of the entire ecosystem in this area.” (Quite apart from all else, what sort of person would de-fin a fish then send it back into the ocean? And what sort of person would buy the product?)

As you will see in the story, it is mostly Chinese people who buy them as a status symbol, demonstrating their success in life or, in the case of men, for assistance in achieving an erection. (Yes, I know all meat eaters eat the product of cruelty but here added to that cruelty is extinction of a hugely valuable species in oceans all over the world. In fact there are 49 species of sharks in BC waters and 1000 species world wide.)

Why should we care?

Because our part of the oceans is home to many species which are of critical importance to us, including 6 species of salmon, halibut, black cod, several species of rock fish and crustaceans such as shrimp and crab. These are all part of the ecology of the world’s oceans – as John Donne said, “No man is an island unto itself.”

What to do?

Clearly there must be a ban on fishing for sharks and while we can’t make rules for the world we can impose our own ban and we can support Anthony in his battles.

It is possible to impose and police bans if we have the will to do it. An example:

Many years ago I was putting together a show from New Zealand and as part of it I visited Rainbow Springs, not far from Rotorua. This wonderful attraction had a Kiwi bird which is fully protected by the New Zealand government – the one they had was found wounded, and treated.

I went into the darkened room (Kiwi birds are nocturnal) and was permitted to hold it (whereupon it peed all over me!).

I saw some feathers around and I asked my guide if I could take a few and tie some fishing flies with it just for the fun of it.

My guide quickly informed me that if I was caught with them, whether or not I used them for a fly, I would be subject to a huge fine and perhaps jail. I got the message.

There is so much to do on environmental issues and just the thought can exhaust one. But they must be done and all of us must do our part.

Yes, it’s political and our senior governments have both failed us badly. There’s not much we can do for the next 4-5 years on the national scene but the provincial government has less than two years to run and election issues are starting to appear.

In BC we have a tradition of basing our votes on economic matters. Has it made any difference?

If you look back to 1991 can it really be said that the NDP, in fiscal matters, were worse than the present bunch?

I know it goes against the common mantras from the right but the stats show that the NDP was actually a bit better than the subsequent Liberal government and both faced very similar crises beyond their control – the “Asian ‘flu” for the NDP, the Recession for the Liberals.

My point is not to compare but simply to point out that there is really not that much to choose between them.

We have, however, some very real environmental issues including fish farms and their slaughter of migrating wild salmon, an energy policy that destroys rivers and their ecologies, bankrupting BC Hydro in the bargain, a highways policy that eats up farmland and bird sanctuaries and the serious threat to other species off our shores, including our shellfish.

And there is the huge problem of oil pipelines and tankers in our most dangerous waters.

These sorts of things are happening all over the world such that many species face extinction.

We must act and act promptly. We cannot allow ourselves to weary of the fight because it’s on many fronts. We must demand of political parties not just nice fuzzy words about the environment but specific policies in the areas I’ve mentioned.

Time is short – very short.

Share

A-G Report Confirms BC’s Sham Environmental Assessment, Enforcement

Canada, Energy and Resources, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, WATER, Western Canada, ,
Share

Vindication always feels good but as you read the Auditor-General’s report on the BC Environmental Assessment Office (BCEAO), which reports to the Ministry of Environment – it’s the government’s licensing and enforcement arm – the warm feeling of vindication quickly vanishes and you are swamped with the realization of what this government’s gross neglect has done and continues to do to our province.

 

The full story is the front page headline story in today’s (July 8) Vancouver Sun which indeed speaks volumes, considering their usual affection amounting almost to servility towards the government, the Fraser Institute, the fish farming industry and the like.

 

The report is not complicated. This quote from the AG, John Doyle, says it all:

 

I raise my eyebrows whenever conditions are placed on a [project approval] certificate which aren’t enforceable or measurable, I ask the question, what’s the point?

 

What the government needs is a single focus on compliance to make sure what the government requires to be done, is, in fact, done. (emphasis added)

 

Of some note is the “pie chart” showing that the BCEAO rejects 0.5% of applications! 

 

Mr. Doyle has shown how inadequate – too weak a word – the process is on the record. Now let me tell you how the environmental scam looks from the trenches.

 

Along with colleagues in the environmental field like Gwen Barlee and Joe Foy of the Wilderness Committee, Damien Gillis and I have attended a number of BCEAO public hearings and I would rather have a root canal without anaesthetic than attend another. And, speaking of roots, the main frustration goes right to the root of the matter.

 

These meetings are not to decide whether or not the proposal is acceptable on environmental grounds, but what the environmental assessment process ought to include! In other words, it’s a done deal so the wisdom of the project is moot. It’s “sit down and shut up and, in Mr. Mair’s case, stop saying ‘Bull Shit!’”

 

It’s also interesting to note that, with private power applications at any rate, the company gets to pick the venue for the “hearing” and they’re noted for picking halls too small which are situated as far as possible from where the interested population lives. Examples abound but the one for the Glacier/Howser private river project was a doozy. In that latter case, the main population is in Nelson so the company scheduled meetings in the villages of Kaslo and Meadow Creek (population a few hundred, tops)! Pretty neat, huh? But to the dismay of the company and the government, more people attended the Kaslo hearing than live there (1,100 of them in a town of 1,000)!

 

It may seem picky, but appearances are very important – perception is reality – and the first thing one notices is the chumminess between the government people and the industry people. They eat together, sip one together and then the Chair, while declaring those concerned about the merits of the project as out or order, permits the company spokesperson to sing the “virtues” of the project to his heart’s content.

 

What cannot be overestimated is the indictment of the government implicit in this report, considering that the Director of Environmental Assessment is a public servant appointed by the Minister which, in practice, means with the approval of cabinet including the premier. Public servants are selected because they will do as they are told which, of course, is their duty.

 

Without ministerial direction to allow the public to deal with the merits of a proposal, the Executive Director has no right to do so. The environmental policy of this government is to do nothing to safeguard our environment and nothing is done. To operate the sham process we have is worse than not even going through the motions because the latter case would at least be honest not an exercise in duplicity.

 

What this tells me is that every environmentally approved project under this regime must be opened for review and done immediately. Then the government must forthwith provide an environmental process wherein the public can make representations on the merits or otherwise of the project.

 

Once upon a time municipal bodies had the right to grant or withhold zoning approval of certain projects. This ended a few years ago when the Squamish-Lillooett Regional District was faced with zoning the Ashlu River private power project. The District held public hearings throughout the district, found opposition to the project overwhelming, and denied the company its required zoning – with a vote of 8-1 against.

 

Unable and unwilling to permit its corporate friends (Ledcor) to be subject to the law, Premier Campbell passed Bill 30, which took away from municipal authorities, retroactively, the right to zone this sort of project. Thus, the only opportunity of the citizen to question the wisdom of a project was snatched from them and thrown in the garbage pit by Campbell & Co. Citizens can turn down a Wal-Mart or fast food joint but when it comes to an enormous project that will affect them big time, they are legislated out of all right to ask questions and air their views.

 

What this scathing report does is add further evidence of this government’s utter indifference to the environment and we had better do something about it as the pipeline people apply for their permits and other private power companies want to bugger up (pardon the technical language) more rivers for the profit of large corporations and their foreign shareholders.

 

Mr. Doyle’s report tells us that for all practical purposes there is no environmental assessment process in our province.

 

There we have it – the game may be crooked but it’s the only game in town.
Share
Premier Gordon Campbell announcing his resignation

Was the Gordon Campbell Government Truly Corrupt?

Canada, Politics, WATER, Western Canada,
Share

Was the Gordon Campbell government corrupt? Does it matter?
 
The answer to both questions is a resounding YES!
 
For the purposes of this article I define corruption as “acting against the public good for political or other gains for the government party and/or its members, to the exclusion of meaningful public input”.
 
Let me summarize the Campbell corruption:

  • In 2001, Campbell, while saying the NDP left a threadbare cupboard, promptly gave a huge tax cut to the better off, mostly his supporters
  • Campbell, after raging at NDP ministers who allegedly misbehaved, got thrown in jail for drunk driving, promptly forgave himself and stayed in office.
  • Campbell, after I showed him a vial with Pink Salmon smolts covered in sea lice stated to me, “I saw a billboard showing salmon spawning and vowed that my grandchildren must be able to see this sight” – then promptly doubled the number of fish farms and pilloried the world’s scientists who confirmed the sea lice problem.
  • Campbell, after vowing in the 1997 and 2001 elections never to privatize BC Hydro, promptly unleashed just such a program.
  • Two men were charged with crimes involving the 990 year lease of BC Rail and on the eve of his former Finance Minister and his own call to the witness stand, Campbell promptly ended the case by paying $6 million to the miscreants’ lawyers.
  • In the 2009 election Campbell and his Finance Minister declared that their 2009 budget was accurate then admitted right after the election that they were more than a billion dollars out, claiming that they were blindsided by the Recession. In fact, the Finance Minister had to know of the true state of affairs or was grossly negligent or the Finance Ministry should fire its senior people for the warnings (reduced sales tax etc.) were all there.
  • In the 2009 election Campbell and his Finance Minister claimed that an HST was not in the radar screen then announced it right after the election. It turned out that two months before the election the Finance Minister had a Ministry document in hand which criticized an HST and it must be assumed that the Campbell government had been in negotiations with the Federal government months before – these things don’t happen overnight.
  • The Campbell government, taking the lead from Alcan, produced an Energy Policy which transferred the right to produce new energy from BC Hydro to the private sector then, through the mouth of Finance Minister Hansen, lied about the policy of private power.
  • The Campbell government has brought BC Hydro to the position which, if they were a private company, would be in bankruptcy protection or actual bankruptcy.
  • The Campbell government has done less than nothing on the oil pipelines and oil tankers issue, leaving it an open invitation to companies to bring on stream dead certain environmental catastrophes to our pristine environment both on land and in the ocean

It’s noteworthy that after Campbell resigned in disgrace the Liberals promised a testimonial for him either at the leadership convention or its annual party conference, neither of which have happened in the hope the public will not see this oversight as part of Christy Clark distancing herself from the ex premier – which it is. (Perhaps such a testimonial did occur on the quiet, maybe in the basement of the Fraser Institute or after midnight in the editorial offices of the Vancouver Sun or Province.
 
What has this to do with Premier Clark?
 
Just everything, that’s all.
 
To start with, Ms. Clark helped draft the 2001 Liberal platform which, amongst other things, promised not to privatize BC Rail. In fact she was in office during the planning and/or implementing many of these policies and it’s noteworthy that she didn’t contradict any of the Campbell outrages while in radio because she wasn’t remotely independent.
 
The real issue in the next election is a simple one: Will Premier Clark succeed in making us forget the harm perpetrated by her corrupt predecessor? You can be damned sure that she’ll not bring it up!
 
What does this mean in real terms?

  • The bankruptcy of BC Hydro, which will remain only as a conduit by which the private producers (IPPS) funnel their ill-gotten gains to their shareholders abroad.
  • It means that more and more of our precious rivers will be dammed (IPPs prefer the word “weir” in keeping with the Orwellian “newspeak” that abounds with these guys), with clear cuts for roads and transmission lines.
  • It means that new pipelines and enlarged old ones will carry the sludge from the Tar Sands to our coast with the mathematical certainty of environmental disasters – without our government making a nickel out of it.
  • It means that supertankers will proliferate on our coast again with the mathematical certainty of catastrophic spills.
  • It means continuation of the phoney environmental hearings where the public is denied its right to challenge the need for the project in the first place.
  • It means that the already truncated BC Utilities Commission, which overseas (or is supposed to) all energy proposals, will be abolished or maintained as a lame duck puppet of the Liberal Government
  • It means that the private sector will, unhindered, do as it pleases to our environment.

People like me will be jeered as being “against progress, against profit and anti-business”.
 
In fact what I’m doing is urging that environmental decisions be made by the BC Public, not party hacks supported by corporations that couldn’t care less about our environment – nor should they be expected to, for their obligation is to make profits for shareholders.
 
I’m trying to get across that there is a limit to what we can do to our environment, much including our farmland. I’m reminding folks that history teaches us that unrestrained industry will go after the last fish in the ocean, cut down the last stand of trees and ruin without a blink any rivers it needs for power or a sewer or both.
 
I ask this: If not now, when do we decide that enough is enough?
 
The truth of the matter is that Christy Clark has no greater concern for environmental issues than Campbell has, such that in the next election she must be assessed on that basis. Elect Clark and fish farms will flourish, lakes and rivers will be contaminated, BC Hydro will die, farmland will be destroyed, and the public will continue be shut out of the approval process.
 
We know all this because Clark has perpetuated the corrupt policies that Campbell initiated.
 
If we re-elect a Liberal government, we know what it will mean and we will deserve what we get. 
 

Share

Why the Precautionary Principle Should but Doesn’t Apply in BC

Canada, Energy and Resources, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, WATER, Western Canada, , , , ,
Share

There is a reason that we who want to save our environment are losing the war and may lose it outright unless we gird up our loins and fight to the death, politically speaking.
 
The reason is simple: no government set in authority over us will apply the “Precautionary Principle” (despite Canada’s international commitment to uphold it) to undertakings in the environment and thus they permit despoilers to get away with, literally, murder.
 
Here is the principle as generally stated. “The precautionary principle …states that if an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public or to the environment, in the absence of scientific consensus that the action or policy is harmful, the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on those taking the action.”
 
This is what this means to British Columbians – the Precautionary Principle prevails, or rather should prevail, in the following cases: Fish farming, power projects, threats to the atmosphere, pipelines and tanker traffic. It also should apply, in my opinion, to highway and bridge construction.
 
In fact, in each of the above cases the onus has rested not on the potential despoiler but on the general public. This turnabout provides the despoiler with a one line defence which runs, “You don’t really believe that crap do you?” That becomes an effective reply to the strongest scientific argument – it’s really a thinly disguised “Big Lie” technique.
 
Let’s look at how this has been applied.
 
For over a decade the persistent and courageous Alexandra Morton has led a scientific investigation into the adverse – to put it mildly – impact of sea lice from fish farms on migrating wild salmon. Her studies have been peer-reviewed (that is to say reviewed by other scientists and published in recognized scientific journals) by virtually every scientist in the world who deals in this area. Moreover many fish biologists have carried out their own peer reviewed studies which have concluded, as Ms. Morton has, that the impact from sea lice from fish farms is enormously destructive.
 
What have industry and the government done?
 
Through discredited former environmentalists like Patrick Moore and industry flacks like Mary Ellen Walling they’ve simply denied the findings and distorted the evidence hoping, and often succeeding, to be able to ask the public, “You don’t really believe that crap do you?”…”Would you deny British Columbians jobs because of unproved charges by some so-called scientist?”
 
NOT BEING REQUIRED TO DEMONSTRATE THE SAFETY OF WHAT THEY DO, THEY ARE ABLE TO SIT BACK AND RAISE DOUBTS ON NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER!
 
The ad hominem attack on a scientist by an industry or, sadly, government flack counts for more than properly researched science. Thus has the proper method of determining environmental safety been subverted to high priced PR flackery.
 
Thus the silly but effective question, “You don’t really believe that crap?” trumps science.
 
This industry/government defence has a slightly different twist when it comes to the private/public power debate. Here the government – wonders never cease – actually admits that some environmental harm could come from gutting rivers, diverting the water with dams and clear-cutting for roads and transmission lines; so they convene environmental hearings and in doing so don’t follow the “precautionary principle” – heaven forefend! – but the political principle which states simply, “Never hold a hearing unless you know what the result will be.” Consequently these hearings are convened by the company in a location least likely to be conducive to large crowds and the government fixes the result by making it out of order to ask any questions about the desirability of the scheme in the first place!
 
In short, by the time the public has a say, it’s a done deal and the only issue left is the terms of reference for the “scientific” investigation by – hold your breath now – the government that has already approved the deal in principle, and the “environmental department” and paid consultants of the company!
 
When Dr. John Calvert, Dr. Marvin Shaffer, noted scientists, economist Erik Andersen, environmentalists Joe Foy, Gwen Barlee, Damien Gillis or Rafe Mair lay before the public the facts on how the Liberals destroy the environment to make power BC Hydro must buy at a huge loss, putting BC Hydro in mortal peril, the company and government need only ask, “Do you believe that crap from those environmental maniacs?” – and the job is done.
 
With pipelines and oil tankers the story takes a slightly different tack. There have been so many spills and ruptures that neither government nor industry can deny that they happen – they would like to but even their PR flacks have some credibility limitations. The propositions put forward by the companies and their hired governments are even more breathtaking for they say that the risks are “reasonable” or “slight” or “manageable” – and outweighed by the stated (and grossly exaggerated) benefits.
 
Think on that for a second and several facts pop up. For one, if you are going to do something forever with no limitations on how often or how long you will do it, a spill or a leak is no longer a risk but a certainty waiting to happen.
 
Then comes the inevitable conclusion: when it happens it will be devastating! Every oil spill or leak is!
 
Thus the emollient offerings by company and government are met by the certainty that their project will be a major catastrophe, yet the cries of those who know that a catastrophe will certainly occur are drowned out by the cry, “Do you believe that crap from those people who don’t want any ‘progress’ and who hate industry?”
 
The absolute certainty of environmental catastrophe is met by bought-and-paid-for government and industry flacks who pour it on with the basic theme that “life is risky; we must take risks to develop and grow and create jobs and are you going to listen to that shit from eco-freaks like Rex Weyler?”
 
Let me ask of you this question: who of you, after the disaster, will agree it was a “risk” worth taking, especially when you’ve known in your tummy all along that it was no risk but a dead certainty?
 
The matter must be fairly stated – development in this province is done by corporations who don’t give a fiddler’s fart for the environment, and why should they? Their obligation is to make money for their shareholders, so why would we expect them to care? If they did care they would be in breach of their shareholders’ trust.
 
This industry finances the Liberal and Conservative governments – make no mistake on that account. Those governments have an obligation to repay that debt and can be counted upon to do so.
 
There is an interesting sidelight to all this. Opponents to the Liberal government either have a history – or have been painted as having a history of incompetence. That’s the rap and the Liberals play it like a finely tuned Stradivarius. 
 
Is that to say that the government that has privatized BC Rail, forced BC Hydro to the brink of bankruptcy, run up huge deficits and nearly doubled the provincial debt while turning over our outdoors to large, mostly foreign corporations is to be seen as competent? A government that lies about its budget, the HST and destroys our environment is a good government?
 
I had plenty to say about the NDP governments in their 1991-2001 decade and very little of it complimentary. But compared to this Liberal bunch they were paragons of fiscal probity. Whatever index you like – corporate profits, economic growth, provincial debts and contributing deficits, employment – you name it – the NDP are clear winners and you only need read what the far right wing Canadian Taxpayers Federation has to say for the proof.
 
We, the people of British Columbia must, in my view, ponder the consequences of more of the same from this Liberal government: ruined rivers and streams, tar sands bitumen spilled on our virgin lands and in our oceans, our soul – the Pacific Salmon – destroyed, our coveted power company ransacked by private and mostly foreign corporations, our farmland and sensitive habitat ravaged; a government that promises more of the same and defends itself only by defaming those who are critical of it. A government that had to change the law to avoid balancing its books.
 
If you stop and examine the Liberal’s rationale for its uncaring attitude towards the environment, it fails and fails badly in economic terms. Their policies not only are ruinous to our environment, but they provide virtually no permanent jobs, bring little, if any, revenue into the provincial coffers and leave behind damage that will be with us forever.
 
Fish farms don’t produce jobs, only a handful of caretakers. The same applies to private power corporations after short term construction; pipelines and oil tankers not only don’t provide jobs, their profits go out of province. In short, the vaunted Liberal talent for enhancing the economy doesn’t do that – it enhances Alberta’s revenues and those of the huge corporations whose ads tell us how much they care, while leaving permanent destruction for us who live in its path.
 
All elections are crap shoots and all politicians disappoint. We are, however, looking at an opposition that has a much strengthened and experienced front bench; it is an opposition that has put a great deal of its political cant behind it while retaining what I see as critical sensitivity to our traditions and the legacy we leave; it is also an opposition that has learned bitter lessons from its past.
 
It is possible to have social sensitivity and prosperity – in fact the latter, if it’s to last, must have the former. That the NDP have learned that destruction of our environment doesn’t bring prosperity is surely a plus.
 
Looking at the choice that faces us I can see no sensible alternative to throwing out the Liberals – and the sooner, the better.

Share

NDP MP Fin Donnelly Reintroduces Bills on Salmon & Oil Tankers

Canada, Energy and Resources, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, Western Canada, ,
Share

This week in Ottawa, NDP MP for New Westminster-Coquitlam-Port Moody Fin Donnelly reintroduced two private members bills he authored last year. The first calls for a legislated ban on oil supertanker traffic on BC’s North and Central Coast. The second, called the Wild Salmon Protection Act, calls for open net pen salmon farms to be transitioned to land-based closed-containment technology.

Donnelly reintroduced his oil supertanker bill yesterday, seconded by BC MP for Skeena-Bulkley Valley, Nathan Cullen, whose riding would encompass much of the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline route and tanker port in the coastal community of Kitimat.

“British Columbians have been clear. They want to protect our north coast and permanently ban oil tanker traffic though the Hecate Strait, Dixon Entrance and Queen Charlotte Sound,” said New Democrat Fisheries and Oceans Critic Fin Donnelly. “A major spill off BC’s north coast would be catastrophic to the ecosystem and would negatively affect the economy in this area.”

A recent poll reconfirmed 80% of British Columbians oppose oil tanker traffic off the province’s rugged north coast – which is consistent with polling figures over the past year.

Donnelly said in Ottawa, “I urge Parliament to consider the risks associated with oil super tankers travelling off BC’s north coast and legislate a permanent ban.”

As the NDP’s Fisheries Critic, Donnelly has also been pushing his wild salmon bill in Ottawa for over a year now, with support from the likes of renown biologist Alexandra Morton, Hollywood icon and sports fisherman William Shatner, Chief Bob Chamberlin of the Broughton First Nations, and famed Vancouver chef Robert Clark.    

According to Donnelly, “The bill would direct the Fisheries Minister to develop, table and implement a transition plan to move to closed containment.”

“My bill has received tremendous support since I first introduced it in Parliament last year,” said Donnelly. “Thousands of British Columbians have signed postcards and petitions to encourage the federal government to adopt this legislation. I hope that the federal government will listen and pass this critical legislation.”

Share

Coleman, Palmer on Hydro: Ignoring the $50 Billion Elephant in Room

Canada, Politics, WATER, Western Canada,
Share

This will be harsh, I warn you. In preparation I urge you to read Dr. Marvin Shaffer’s (SFU) article in the Vancouver Sun last Monday.
 
My position today is that the Vancouver Sun’s lead columnist, whom I once greatly admired, Vaughn Palmer, has abandoned his journalistic duty; while Energy Minister Rich Coleman, whom I had come to regard as a man of integrity based upon his work for homeless, is a political hack unworthy of his “Honourable”.
 
I do not say these things lightly and ask you to be the judge.
 
The subject is BC Hydro and its proposed rate hikes, which Coleman has vowed to examine closely and Mr. Palmer has spent his last two columns on.
 
Here is one of the salient facts that stands out in Dr Shaffer’s presentation:
 
“The fact that the electricity BC Hydro is being forced to buy is costing more than double what the electricity is worth, now and in the foreseeable future, does not seem to matter. The legislation is absolute. BC Hydro must acquire this extra electricity supply whatever its impact on costs and rates” (it’s also power created, for the most part, when BC Hydro doesn’t need it. – RM)
 
Dr. Shaffer is a man whose credentials and honesty are above reproach – to say that he is highly respected goes without saying. Great credit to the Sun’s editors for printing his op-ed.
 
This madness had escaped the notice, evidently, of the Minister and Palmer. Is that because the amount is small?
 
The amount, today and climbing, is approximately $50 Billion dollars – which sum is carefully concealed – but because of an earlier statement by Coleman has been verified and is also verified by Erik Andersen, a highly respected (non-political, I hastily add) economist who specializes in assessing public finances.
 
Vaughn Palmer and Rich Coleman are “investigating the rate increases BC Hydro claims it needs” by overlooking $50 Billion.
 
How much is $50 Billion?
 
It is 50,000 million dollars. If you live in Kamloops or Kelowna every one of your neighbours has $500,000 in the bank!
 
This amount is owed by BC Hydro to private power corporations, paid as it presently stands, at over $1 billion (1000 million) a year and rising, for energy they don’t need – at twice or more its value. And Mr. Coleman and Palmer slough it off! Don’t even mention it!
 
And who do you think is going to pay this?
 
Three guesses and the first two don’t count!
 
This is, in effect, what we’re all doing as ratepayers – subsidizing huge corporations like General Electric to destroy our rivers for power we can’t, for the most part use, for which we must pay twice or more what its worth.
 
The net effect of this is that BC Hydro is no longer able to pay its annual handsome dividend to our government. BC Hydro, were it in the private sector and unable to pass its losses onto the public, would now be headed for bankruptcy protection. Did you get that? The only way BC Hydro can avoid bankruptcy is this: soak British Columbians with higher and higher rates!
 
The dots are easy to connect – because of government policy we pay General Electric, Ledcor and other similarly small “mom-and-pop operators” to make power that BC Hydro must (under the take-or-pay contracts) pay for when they don’t need it, or export it at a huge loss – all the while destroying our rivers and the ecosystems they support.
 
I don’t impugn the motives of Mr. Palmer or the strange silence from the pen of Mike Smyth – I simply don’t know how and why they would not do the same kind of work on the Liberal government as Palmer did with NDP premier Glen Clark and his fast ferries.
 
The motives of Mr. Coleman can be easily stated: he’s a politician prepared to say anything – or remain silent on anything – to avoid confessing government error.
 
I issue this warning to Christy Clark: the chickens are coming home to roost and soon. It’s now too late to avoid this in time for a snap election.
 
Premier W.A.C. Bennett created BC Hydro so that British Columbians could use their massive hydro power to compete for industry and until Gordon Campbell came along it worked brilliantly. Now it’s in tatters with BC Hydro pleading with the public to fill its begging bowl.
 
Our government, lying through its teeth*, has not only destroyed our rivers and their ecologies, it has subsidized large corporations to fleece us, destroy one of the world’s finest power companies while paying them billions of our dollars as a bonus!
 
Surely the very least we must conclude is that Palmer is not worth reading and this government is unfit to govern.
 
*Please watch this 2 min video of Colin Hansen spewing falsehood upon falsehood, in his presentation as then Finance Minister of the Liberal government’s Energy Policy.
 
 
 

Share

Public Eye: Clark used chartered plane from CN Chair McLean’s company

Canada, Politics, Western Canada,
Share

From Public Eye Online – June 8, 2011

by Sean Holman

When Christy Clark was running for the provincial Liberal leadership, she did so using a chartered plane from one of businessman David McLean‘s
companies, Public Eye has exclusively learned. A spokesperson for the
premier has confirmed the use of that plane was recorded as a $23,035
in-kind donation from Blackcomb Aviation LP, which is part of the McLean Group of Companies. Mr. McLean is chair of the group, as well as Canadian National Railway Co. – which was the successful bidder to operate British Columbia Railway Co.

That contribution shows up in Ms. Clark’s Elections British Columbia
leadership campaign filings, which were released last month. But it
wasn’t included as part of the voluntary financial disclosure statement
she released on February 22, even though $18,799 worth of Blackcomb’s
billings are listed as having been made before that date.

The premier’s spokesperson said that’s because only cash
contributions were included in the voluntary statement. In-kind
donations were tallied at the end of the campaign, which wrapped up on
February 26.

Read original article

Share

Rafe on Being Old, Fixed Elections and Christy Clark’s Mandate

Canada, Energy and Resources, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, WATER, Western Canada, ,
Share

I received an email recently saying I was too old and should begone – not his precise words but that was the gist of what he said. And I suppose that requires an answer.
 
I am old and will be 80 on New Years Eve; there it is – make of it what you will.
 
Having confessed, perhaps my correspondent would say whether his criticism goes to my antiquity or the message I bring. That will always be your issue and I accept your verdict. OK, let’s get down to business.
 
Gordon Campbell brought in a fixed term for elections to avoid election by ambush. It just wasn’t right that governments could pick the most propitious time (for them). Fairness was the test. Now Premier Clark, who was in cabinet when this decision was made, is prepared to forget all about this and will go to the people soon, probably this fall.
 
She will ask for a mandate and it’s critical that we know just what that mandate actually will be, not the one she claims.
Here are some of the issues she and Liberals will avoid like the plague in hopes voters will ignore them too.

  • The private Energy Policy will continue
  • Large corporations will continue to desecrate our rivers and the ecology they support
  • BC Hydro will continue to be forced to buy the private power under a “take or pay” clause meaning it must either use it at a much higher cost than they can make it for themselves or export it at a huge loss
  • BC Hydro, now technically bankrupt (their raising of rates is all that keeps them afloat), will be broken up and the most valuable parts sold off
  • New private schemes will be approved and new construction will begin
  • Site C Dam will be built to supply shale gas, coal mining and the Tar Sands – flooding 11,000 acres of vital farmland in the process
  • New fish farms will be licensed and there will be no effort to make the existing ones to go to closed-containment
  • The Prosperity Mine (Fish Lake) will go ahead
  • The two Enbridge pipelines from the Tar Sands to Kitimat will be approved.
  • The Kinder Morgan pipeline to Burnaby will be hugely expanded and the company will construct a “spur” also to go to Kitimat
  • Huge tankers will ply our waters using the most treacherous coast line in the world
  • Massive oil spills on land and sea will become a certainty
  • Desecration of the Agricultural Land Reserve will continue

The obvious plan is to push ahead on so many fronts that opposition will be badly divided.
 
The voting public ought to be forewarned and understand that no matter what Premier Clark says is the mandate she wishes, the forgoing is the mandate she will get.
 
Can she be stopped?
 
Of course she can by simple “X’ on a ballot on a piece of paper.
 
This old fart is going to help leaders like Alexandra Morton, Rex Weyler, Joe Foy, Gwen Barlee, Erik Andersen, Donna Passmore, First Nations and so many others with whatever strength he can muster to carry the fight to the people.
 
This is what we all must understand – those proud to call themselves environmentalists are not some wild eyed anarchists or loony left-wingers. This is how we’ll be portrayed because the government has no answers except ad hominem attacks. These are not issues of left or right but right or wrong.
 
Let me end on the “old man theme”.
 
The numbers speak for themselves and I can’t change them. I can only ask you to judge these issues on their merits not on birthdays.

Share