Tag Archives: Politics

Campbell/Clark Libs Have No Credibility – HST Promises Meaningless

Share

I commented here last week upon Premier Clark’s silence on all the great issues she faces and questioned what her policies will be. I expect no answer because she wants to put all Gordon Campbell did into the darkest corner of the cupboard. The strategy is “that was then and now is now”; I am Premier Clark and my responsibility started last March 14 when I was sworn in.

This, as I will show, is not so. It started the day she became a Campbell cabinet minister in May 2001.

Let’s take a trip down memory lane but start with a current issue – what does the HST have in common with the environment? The answer to this will weave an unbroken and unbreakable thread back to 2001.

Both the HST end the environment ask public acceptance based upon the credibility of the Campbell/Clark government – a government that has lied through its teeth for the seemingly endless decade-plus they have been in power.

Surely no one, not even the Fraser Institute, believes that the Liberal government will drop the HST to 10% in 2014!

First of all, God’s mercy will see that they’re no longer in power so they won’t be around to keep a pledge they never intended to keep on the first place. If God is just and not merciful, there isn’t a chance that a future Liberal government will keep that promise. In short, Ms. Clark has made a pledge she will never redeem and may never be required to.
 
All government policy depends upon credibility. Unfortunately, the public has learned to expect some government deceit but usually it’s deceit by way of exaggeration – rather like the gilding of the lily practiced in most societies in order to stay at peace with one another. We learn how to discount the statements made – political statements are expected to have a measure of barnyard droppings mixed in. As former New York governor Mario Cuomo said, “You campaign in poetry and govern in prose.”
 
But this is different. Big time. We’re talking about major league falsehoods.
 
I call this government the “Campbell/Clark” government for that’s what it is. Premier Clark participated in the deceit when she was in government, accepted it uncritically when she was a talk show host, and perpetuates it in office by not dealing with it.
 
It started when Campbell, after holding the NDP to the highest standards of probity, somehow forgot that idealism when he was thrown into jail for drunk driving. Christy Clark, Education Minister, offered not a whisper of criticism. Like all good Liberal toadies, she went along.
 
He lied about BC Rail, Fish Farms and private power.
 
With BC Rail, he pledged in two elections including the one that made him premier that he would not privatize BC Rail (as did Ms. Clark, as co-author of the Liberals’ 2001 campaign platform). Of course, he did and Clark went along with him at the time, during her radio career and to this date.
 
Not a peep out of Clark, on air or in office, as Campbell settled the Basi-Virk case just before he, former Finance Minister Gary Collins, and Sir Hiss, Patrick Kinsella, were to give evidence.
 
Premier Campbell let fish farms expand exponentially saying that he was following the best science available. The public now knows what opponents of fish farms have always known – the scientist he was listening to was a disgrace to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and a fish farm industry suck. He was out of synch with every fish biologist in the world that deals with this issue. Christy Clark has been silent since the beginning and is silent now.
 
With private power companies (IPPS) the Campbell/Clark government has uttered nothing but falsehoods. I hate to dwell on poor old former Finance Minister Colin Hansen because he seems to be such a nice guy, but in a video blog the Liberals have now erased, he made half a dozen statements about so-called “run of river” policy that were plainly and simply falsehoods. These falsehoods were not minor little errors – they went to the root of the matter. Ms. Clark has not uttered a word of criticism – or strangely support – of this disastrous policy which even the Vancouver Province called “folly” and which a recent op-ed in the Vancouver Sun, published under the aegis of former Fraser Institute “fellow”, Fazil Milhar, roundly criticized.
 
This policy forces BC Hydro to buy from IPPs power they don’t need and must thus export at a 50%+ loss or use it at double or more what they can make it for themselves. This cost Hydro $600,000,000 last year and this is just the beginning of the reckoning. Not a word from our premier.
 
We have seen this policy drive BC Hydro to where they would be, if in the private sector, in bankruptcy protection with much worse to come. Not a squeak of criticism or concern from Ms. Clark.

We’ve seen this policy destroy one river, and its ecology, after another yet not a word from the premier at the time the policy was made when she was a cabinet member, later as a talk show host, or now as premier. Premier Clark, a supporter of the Prosperity Mine proposal at Fish Lake, now in charge of energy and the demise of BC Hydro, acts as if nothing was happening. And now she has pipelines and tankers to deal with.
 
It is critical to understand that pipeline leaks and tanker accidents are not risks but certainties. The Liberal government told the Federal government, in writing, some years ago that it did not oppose super tankers on the coast. In the recent Premiers Conference Ms. Clark hedged on the pipeline issue; she refused to take a stand.
 
This issue, like the private power issue, has no middle ground as in “you can’t be a little bit pregnant.” All the evidence she ever needs is there in logic – an unfettered risk is a calamity in waiting – and evidence of the colossal negligence of pipeline operators generally and Enbridge specifically. The decision is “yes” or “no” and there will never be more information needed than the premier presently possesses.

Silence implies consent. One of the penalties of consenting to the Liberal record is that no credibility remains.
 
As it is with the HST, as it is with the disgraceful deceit by this government from the outset, so it must be predicted for the future – an utter lack of credibility.
 
It is a millstone around Premier Clark’s neck she consented to.

It’s a millstone she can never be rid of.

Share

Christy Clark’s Silence on the Big Questions

Share

I worry a lot when politicians are talking – usually double or even triple talk. Did I do that when I was in government?…Well it takes one to know one.
 
I worry even more when they say nothing, something that Premier Christy Clark finds impossible when fudging on motherhood “issues” and tossing out the usual barnyard droppings. What Premier Clark is very good at is deathly silence on matters of great consequence.
 
What is the premier’s stance on Independent Power Projects (IPPS) in the environmental sense?
 
Does she care about the enormous environmental impact they have? Has she considered the clouding of the river during construction? Is she concerned that the main river goes down to a trickle when it’s diverted into a tunnel? Does she concern herself with the clear-cutting for roads and transmission lines? It would be good to know.
 
Her only environmental pronouncement I know of is her support of the Fish Lake project which is not, to say the least, encouraging.
 
Does the premier care that because her government has forced BC Hydro to take IPP power when it doesn’t need it, Hydro must either sell it at a loss or use it instead its own much less expensive power? Does she even understand this? I ask because her spokesperson on the political panel on CBC at 7:40AM on Mondays clearly doesn’t.
 
Does the premier know that BC Hydro is carrying over $50 BILLION dollars in obligations to IPPs and that this increases with every new contract?
 
Surely Ms. Clark understands that this is the prescription for bankruptcy – or does she? Maybe she’s never had to balance a home budget and doesn’t comprehend these things.
 
Does the premier know that early in the Campbell regime – when she was deputy leader – her government told the federal government that it had no objection to oil tanker traffic on our coast? Do we take from her silence that even though a spill (and there are no good ones) is a certainty she doesn’t understand this or just couldn’t care less?
 
Moreover, if she and her government support these issues, why aren’t they boasting about them as good politicians always do when, like Jack Horner, they pull out a plum?
 
And what about pipelines? The Enbridge and Kinder Morgan lines will crisscross the province, over its most sensitive terrain and again, a spill is not a risk but a certainty – does that concern her?
 
Come to think on it, does the premier understand and does she care that BC hardly makes a dime out of these catastrophic oil transport deals?
 
What’s the premier’s attitude to the Highways Ministry paving agricultural land? Threatening sensitive wildlife preserves (in the case of Eagleridge they just paved it) and wildlife sanctuaries?
 
Does Christy Clark care that the Ministry of Environment – the resident eunuch in her harem – has virtually nothing to say on these matters because, thanks to her government, it’s a mere shell of its former self?
 
Does she care about anything except money?
 
Ah, Rafe, you must be fair here for she does say she cares for the family, although you’d never know it by the record of her government.

I think that the voters of BC are entitled to specific answers to these specific questions.
 
I also think that the best we can expect is platitudinous bullshit.
 
When Premier Clark flouts the fixed election term legislation passed by her and her government accompanied by passionate concern for democracy and fair play and calls a snap election, she will be asked these questions.
 
The Liberals were spared these questions in 2009 during an appalling campaign by the NDP – I don’t think they’ll be so lucky next time.
 
In the meantime, Damien Gillis and I of the Common Sense Canadian will be taking these issues by the internet and in person to every corner of the province and she should know that.
 

Share
Dick Beamish, a key government apologist for fish farms, has been thoroughly discredited by a colleague

Salmon Farm Apologist’s “Shoddy Science” Outed by DFO Colleague’s Memo

Share

“Blockbuster” hardly describes an internal DFO memo recently uncovered through the Cohen Commission on collapsing Fraser sockeye stocks – now made public in a blog by Don Staniford, the doughty fighter against Atlantic Salmon fish farmers, which battle has included a lawsuit by the shameless bastards.

The 2003 memo (download here) contains some truly shocking passages for their candour and for how clearly they vindicate those who have been critical of DFO’s salmon farm science. Written by a respected DFO scientist, Dr. Brent Hargreaves, the memo severely attacks the credibility of a colleague, key salmon farm apologist Dr. Dick Beamish, whose science Hargreaves labels as “shoddy” and “unethical”, among other pejoratives. Here are a couple of choice passages:

“The research on sea lice that has been conducted by Beamish has been strongly and widely criticized in both the scientific community and the public media…I think to a large degree it was the inadequacies of Beamish’s research and conclusions that led to the lack of public confidence in DFO science…

…I also do not want to be directly associated, either professionally or personally, with either Beamish or his research…He always does exactly as he pleases, regardless of the (often negative) impacts on DFO staff and research programs.”

First, a bit of background.

For nearly a decade we who were fighting Atlantic Salmon fish farms, led by the intrepid Alexandra Morton, were told by the provincial government that the “science” was on the side of the fish farms and that they would continue to permit the industry to expand.

The international scientific community familiar with the issue of sea lice from fish farms killing migrating Pacific Salmon supported her fight against. Her findings were published and peer-reviewed; several fish biologists also published papers condemning fish farms and Dr. Daniel Pauly of UBC, one of the most distinguished scientists in the world according to Scientific American, said flatly “the debate is over.”

Still, the Campbell government had the “science on their side.”

At the request of Premier Campbell, I presented him with an analysis of the scientific evidence which he ignored. He had the “science on his side.”

On it went – study begat study, all of which endorsed Alexandra Morton’s findings.

Still, the government pressed on. And so did Alex, who brought lawsuits, wrote, marched, all at considerable personal expense – not to mention the huge emotional beating she took.

And the Campbell government maintained that it had the “science on its side.” (Needless to say, Premier Christy Clark was part of that government in the critical early days.)

Alex has had lots of supporters very much including her “Boswell,” Don Staniford – here is an excerpt from is his July 13 release:

…The memo went on to describe Dr. Beamish’s scientific research as “unethical”, “unprofessional” and a “‘lapse’ in judgment”.

In his testimony to the Cohen Inquiry last week, which saw his career flash before his eyes like Klingons off the starboard bow of the Star Trek ship ‘The Enterprise’, Dr. Beamish said: “Maybe it’s aliens” before adding unbelievably: “Obviously I don’t believe in aliens”.

Dr. Beamish certainly doesn’t believe that sea lice from salmon farms are killing wild salmon and spent his career staunchly defending the Norwegian-owned salmon farming industry.  At last year’s ‘Sea Lice 2010’ conference in Victoria, Dr. Beamish refused to answer questions on sea lice from salmon farms.  This was even more incredible since Dr. Beamish was the plenary speaker in a session on ‘Wild/Farmed Interactions’.

The audience in the public gallery at the Cohen Inquiry last week were left in no doubt which side Dr. Beamish was on when he greeted Mary-Ellen Walling, executive director of the BC Salmon Farmers Association.  “My inspiration,” he gushed as he hugged her like an old flame.

“This is bad science?” asked lawyer Greg McDade as he ripped apart Dr. Beamish’s scientific work.  Thankfully, Dr. Beamish recently called last orders on his career with the DFO.  His future scientific credibility would be in jeopardy otherwise.

I find it hard to speak on this – a rare thing for me – my anger is so intense. The scientist Campbell and co. relied upon so stubbornly was, according to a respected colleague, “unethical” and “unprofessional”.

Just one or two thoughts:

  • The shit and abuse we all have taken, most especially Alex, at the hands of environmental turncoats like Patrick Moore to say nothing of Liberal Party hacks.
  • The refusal of the government to apply the “precautionary principle” – it’s the law – placing the onus of proof on the industry not private citizens.
  • The deliberate bias of the media who allowed the fish farm flack, Mary-Ellen Walling, to roam the op-ed pages virtually at will…and their utter lack of any scrutiny.
  • The silence of the media columnists who trashed the government when it was NDP and have been struck dumb on this issue.
  • The lawsuits Alex took and won and paid for – to a large extent – out of her own pocket.
  • The lies of the industry, deliberate lies – I say deliberate because the largest shareholder of the biggest company, Marine Harvest, admitted that sea lice were slaughtering migrating wild salmon.
  • The terrific support we’ve all had from the decent public which BC is mostly made up of.
  • Most of all, the appalling loss of millions of our precious salmon – destroyed because the Liberal government consciously and deliberately refused to look at the massive evidence.    

Will the Clark Liberals do the decent thing and apologize?
 
Not a chance. The moral compass of this bunch was set when Campbell got thrown in jail for drunk driving and imposed no penalty on himself.
 
Will they immediately act to stop all new licenses and give the present farmers 60 days to dismantle and leave?
 
You have to be kidding! Admit error? Bite the hand that feeds them? Show a little contriteness?
 
Hell will definitely freeze over before that happens.
 
Every single Liberal MLA from 2001 until now ought to hang their heads in shame.
 
I’m sure I speak for Alexandra Morton, her loyal “Boswell”, Don Staniford, and the thousands of citizens who have supported what often looked like a lost cause, in saying that the vindication of Dr. Hargreaves’ evidence is swamped by the sense of the massive loss of our province’s soul, the Pacific salmon, which would have lived were if not for deceit and negligence of a government which, if they had an ounce of decency, would resign en masse.

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

Rafe on Shark Fins and the NDP

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

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