Tag Archives: Water and Energy

SFU Report Calls for Drastic Water Conservation Reforms

WATER
Share

Read this story from The Tyee on a new report from the Adaption to Climate Change Team at SFU, urging drastic water conservation reforms in BC.

“The report outlines a new national proposition on water that aims to
strengthen Canada’s economy and ensure its environmental
sustainability, while at the same time enhancing our nation’s adaptive
capacity in the face of growing climate change effects…We are beginning to experience deeper and more
persistent droughts, and these are very costly. We’re also
beginning to experience the same intense rainfall and flooding events
that are becoming more common widely elsewhere in the world.”(October 5, 2011)

http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/Environment/2011/10/05/SFU-Water-Report/

Share
BC Auditor General John Doyle

AG Slams BC Liberals’ Bogus Accounting, Massive Hidden Debt

Canada, Economics, Politics, WATER, Western Canada,
Share

Forward by Rafe Mair

We now know that the BC Campbell/Clark government has deceived the public hugely in their financial statements. Below is a blog from our expert independent economist, Erik Andersen. BC Auditor General John Doyle has exposed this deceit and Mr. Andersen sums it up thusly:

“This is serial lying and a practice regular financial institutions would be fined and/or go to jail for. In your personal life you would not tolerate receiving financial statements that are either deliberately incomplete or deliberately misleading.”

Mr. Andersen writes below, “The burning issue here is why should taxpayers expect or tolerate anything less from those who collect and disburse those taxes?”

Supporters of the Liberals continue to plead the case that the NDP government of 1991-2001 were horrible managers of our money and that they, the Campbell Government, being great managers of business, have put things right – so, they say, don’t let the NDP get in and ruin us ahead.

Erik Andersen is too polite a man to say it but I will: This is a goddamned lie, for the facts released by the Auditor General show that since the Liberals came to power they have tripled the provincial debt!

How have they been able to do that?

By hiding debt in Public-Private Partnerships, a system that both Premier Campbell and then-Finance Minister Colin Hansen – in a conflict of interest that takes the breath away – helped to manage and who received honours from these same private sector partner organizations. That amount plus the hidden costs of private power contracts has enabled the government to hide its debts in a manner that the Auditor General has roundly criticized.

It is of interest and importance that Erik Andersen has been talking about this and been in touch with the AG for several months on this and related issues.

Erik Andersen has no political ties whatever.

Now, over to Mr Andersen…

——————————————————————————————

For those in government responsible for causing the Auditor General to have to write his recent damning report, “Observations on Financial Reporting: Summary Financial Statement 2010/11”, it must be embarrassing. What he and his team have written is a documentation of deliberate acts by folks we think are working in the public’s interest and who even sometimes think they are entitled to bonuses and great pensions.

The following quotations from the full report have been selected to illustrate two conditions. First is that the government’s financial statements are deceits. Second is that these deceits are deliberate.

From his letter of transmission to the Speaker of the House, Bill Barisoff, the AG writes the following:

“This report explains why I had to qualify my opinion on government’s Summary Financial Statement, as well as why I removed two of the three qualifications that were in my prior year’s audit report, despite the fact that government has not corrected these errors.”

Just to not have the reader miss the point, “qualify my opinion” is a polite way of describing a condition that is quite unacceptable to a person with high professional standards – you know, the kind of person you want looking after your personal financial affairs.

From page 5 one can read the following remarks as to how matters financial came to be in such a sorry state in BC:

“My audit opinion for the 2010/11 fiscal year contains one audit reservation, indicating that the financial statements are not in compliance with Canadian generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). This is one of the three audit reservations that featured in my 2009/10 opinion.”

Mr. Doyle goes on to write, “Government had amended the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act (BTAA). The amendments set the stage for the B.C. government to depart from reporting its financial statements under Canadian GAAP. Recently government took the next step by amending the BTAA to change its future definition of GAAP for BC Hydro’s rate regulated balances, which are very significant. I remain very concerned that government is choosing to override the independent standard-setting process.”

So to rephrase, government has used its legislative power to redefine accounting standards to accommodate its deceit. The principal beneficiary of this accounting trickery is BC Hydro. I hope no one is prepared to suggest that by this deliberate act of deception the people of BC, who own and guarantee the debts of BC Hydro, are better off – because if there is such a person out there we all want to know of you.

On page 7, the “recommendations” to government are presented.

It starts off asking for honesty in disclosure of debts. Featured further on is a concern about contracts that need full disclosure.

Featured on page 15 is a discussion on the use of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). The AG points out that IFRS does not permit the use of rate-regulated accounting as has and is being done at BC Hydro. In fact the rate-regulated assets at BC Hydro in Mach 2011 totaled a breathtaking $2.160 billion! This account was zero as recently as 2005.

To put the cap on what is so horribly wrong with BC and BC Hydro’s finances, read page 17:

“As a result of this legislation, government has taken it upon itself to define GAAP, rather than following the standards set by the Canadian Accounting Standards Board. It concerns us that government is willing to override the due process that is involved in the setting of Canadian accounting standards, and instead legislate an accounting result that will have a significant effect on the financial statements of BC Hydro and the Province’s Summary Financial Statements.”

Our Auditor General has given us “smoking gun” evidence that proves our government is addicted to deception. What are you going to do about it?

Perhaps now folks will take seriously the representation that government has crafted a design to take BC Hydro private. How much more legislation needs to be presented as evidence in support of such an assertion before the media and public finally deal with what is so obviously occurring right under our noses?

Share

Dealing with Rigged Game; New Local Issues Page

WATER,
Share

Two items for you today.
 
I have written a bit lately about civil disobedience and have got some feedback.
 
Civil disobedience must not under any circumstances be violent and it must be carried out as Mohandas K Gandhi saw it – passive resistance. If there is any violence it must come from the other side. There must be no damage done and, most importantly, those who commit civil disobedience must be prepared to take whatever the law dishes out. This was Gandhi’s history and has been, as a good example, the history of roadblocks which have been raised by First Nations when the Government (usually) has refused to recognize their rights.
 
Civil disobedience comes after civil dissent has not brought about justice.
 
Traditionally, the story goes like this: A project is approved by the government, and dissenters, having done all the peaceful dissenting they can, try to stop the process by standing in front of bulldozers and similar deeds. The company, with the active assistance from the government, goes to court and a judge issues a ruling that the dissenters refrain from impeding the undertaking; when the dissenters disobey, the court orders them jailed until they have “purged their contempt”, meaning they have said they’re sorry and promised never to do it again. In short, the court turns a civil matter into a crime.
 
Those who support these kind of legal shenanigans say “the dissenters broke the law and therefore should pay, smothered by pious statements about the Rule of Law. On the surface this is a very tempting argument but it ignores the facts leading up to these “crimes”, namely, that the public has not been consulted about the project in question. There has been no opportunity for the public not only to speak on the matter but also be heard.
 
The Public hearings on environmental matters arising of private power cases tell the story: they are held by the company, which invariably holds them at an inconvenient location, far from where most people live, in a venue which is not big enough to accommodate those who wish to be heard. The hearing is chaired by a government suck and no questions as to the wisdom of the project are allowed. Whether or not the people want their river to be destroyed is totally out of order – EXCEPT when the company rep wants to sing the praises of the project he can do so to his hearts content. I have been to several of these and ruled out of order in all of them and rather than go through that sham again, I’d rather have a root canal without anaesthesia!
 
The strategy has been worked out in advance by the government, which you would think would strongly support the right of the people to be heard, but, knowing where its election funds come from, conspires with the company to go through the motions of a sham then put people in jail.
 
Hundreds leave these meetings feeling cheated of their democratic to be heard and they have indeed been cheated. When they refuse to obey a sham decision it is they, not the ones abusing their democratic rights, who go to jail.
 
When, out of this disgraceful exercise in dictatorship the bulldozers come out, it’s the moment of truth – do dissenters simply walk away saying, “Oh, well, the fix was in as usual but I must do as I’m told” – or do they continue their dissent right into the jail cell?
 
They know that the judge, just like the chair of the so called environmental hearing, will rule as out of order any defence demanding the right to be heard on its merits.
 
The mindset of governments in general but especially the Campbell/Clark government has was neatly set forth by its former Transport Minister and now Finance Minister Kevin Falcon as follows: ”China really has the ultimate government structure…the Chinese don’t have the labour or environmental restrictions we do. It’s not like they have to do community consultations. They just say ‘we’re building a bridge’ and they move everyone out of there and get going within two weeks. Could you imagine if we could build like that?”

Civil Dissenters who become civilly disobedient have shaped the democracies we live in be it for the vote, women’s rights, or fairness in the workplace and by so doing have consistently demonstrated that the self centred and comfortable establishment don’t support anything, including justice, to interfere with their privileged position.
_______________________________________________________________________

Since Damien Gillis and I founded the Common Sense Canadian a year and a bit ago, the response has been overwhelming and we have to accommodate ourselves to that. There are but two of us without clerical staff to help us. Because of what was going on at the time, we tended to work mostly on private power issues (both of us having been part of the Save Our Rivers Society), fish Farms, because of my long association with Alexandra Morton, and pipelines and tankers, as a direct result of their harm to fish and rivers and farmland. These are by no means the only issues and that’s my point – almost daily it seems another environmental outrage comes across our desks. We want desperately to help but just don’t have the wherewithal.
 
Damien and I have thought about this – a lot. Our website, TheCanadian.org gets wide readership, so why not create a bloggers’ page where we can give publicity to efforts we just don’t have the time ourselves to do them justice.
 
We’re working out the details now so stay tuned – changes are on the way!

Share

A Warning From the People to Christy Clark

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

This is not a threat – just a warning to both senior governments. Something is happening in this province that I’ve warned about for a couple of years – let me explain.
 
For years governments have brought in environmental policy, especially as it relates to fish, rivers, wildlife areas and the like which divides the environmental community.
 
In the fishing area, the federal government, in particular, has encouraged all manner of interest groups – some based upon geography, some on species of fish, some professional fishermen, some sports, and on it goes. Divide and rule.
 
With wildlife issues, it’s been much of the same approach.
 
Starting about five years ago something happened that I and others in the environmental field noticed and reported on – a great number of what I will call well-off people from West Vancouver who had fought to save Eagleridge Bluffs from the rape the tractors of the uncaring and stubborn Transportation minister, Kevin Falcon; who went en masse to Delta to help local people fight the desecration on their area, also by the same Transportation Minister who, incidentally, has complained that we’re not like China, which couldn’t care less about the environment and brooks no dissent.
 
The “better-off” communities getting seriously involved in environmental issues was demonstrated by the good citizens of Tsawwassen fighting the overhead power lines, a battle that again brought people from other communities into the ring. These were not the first times environmental groups have helped one another but it showed that environmental concerns had crossed, for want of a better word, “class” lines.
 
Then, Delta did the unbelievable – it voted in an independent MLA who defeated the Attorney-General of the province – didn’t you notice that, Premier?
 
The good folks in the Kootenays have risen as one against the Glacier-Howser private river power project and have made it plain that it just is not going to happen!

All around BC, people are rising against their political masters and saying, “No damned way.”

The BC government has seemed anxious to piss off as many citizens as they can, as their policies destroyed our salmon and traumatized our rivers. They clearly didn’t give a fiddler’s fart for our wilderness or farmland – our precious “Supernatural BC”, as Grace McCarthy aptly named it.
 
In my travels around the province doing speeches, I noticed people there I would not have expected. The mail I get is short on the old chants of days of yore and long on impatience with both senior governments – and they’re deadly serious about stopping them.
 
Now we have both senior governments in favour of pipelines across our wilderness, carrying Tar Sands sludge, called “bitumen” in polite society, and putting this highly toxic petrochemical into huge tankers to move it down the world’s most dangerous (and perhaps most beautiful) coastline.
 
Very early we’ve seen how the feds will fight – as dirty as the shit in their much loved pipelines. They have set up a federal panel review but, get this, you only have until next week to file your intention to attend but they’re not going to tell you when and where the hearings will be held until sometime in 2012! This is the sort of merry little trick the Private Power bastards work – hold the obligatory, fixed, in-advance hearing at as inconvenient a time as you can, in a place too small for the expected crowd and as far as possible from where most people live.
 
Now let’s issue the fair warning to both governments. Premier Photo-op and Prime Minister Harper – he who so nicely rewarded the worst polluter in BC history with the softest and most pleasant diplomatic post in the world – listen carefully!
 
The public of BC is no longer disputing amongst themselves. All of us now support one another, speak at each other’s gatherings and in every way possible, help each other fight our battles, shoulder to shoulder. We will no longer be divided and, to put it plainly – there’s going to be hell to pay.

Yes, there will be civil disobedience and lots of it if these pipelines are approved or there is one more river dammed. For example, with the Enbridge Pipeline, if the governments are sufficiently unfeeling and arrogant to proceed, there will be agro virtually every meter of the way.
 
It’s clear that BC First Nations, many of them hard-up, will be a huge part of the battle.
 
I might just add for Premier Clark: You’re toast unless you have a Damascus-like conversion – and I say that without a care about when you hold the next election. I also warn you that the polls you will get do not ask the right questions – I know because I’ve been questioned. You and your economic pals at the Fraser Institute are passé – you’ve disgraced yourselves from that deadly day in 2001 when you were elected, and unless there is a miraculous change, you will get your comeuppance on the next chance we have to send you back into radio, where you won’t have a government’s ass to kiss as before.
 
No one I know in the environmental movement wants trouble but that can’t and won’t stop us if you don’t stop ravaging our province. People now understand that pipelines and oil tankers are not risks at all but dead certainties.
 
You see, Premier, no one believes a single word you or the corporations say.
          
 

Share

Campbell/Clark’s $100 Billion in New Debt for BC!

Canada, Politics, WATER, Western Canada,
Share

Read this stunning piece from Gabriel Yiu in the Georgia Straight, exploding the myth of BC Liberal economic superiority. Learn how the Campbell/Clark government has secretly hidden over $100 Billion in long-term liabilities for the people of BC.

“The biggest deficits in BC’s history were recorded during the decade of the Liberals’ governance. On the debt front, the Liberals’ record is very scary. In 2011, the
traditional debt on the books is $53.4 billion—that is, an increase of
$19.6 billion in the years after they formed government. It’s 42 percent
higher than the NDP government’s debt increase in the 1990s. Nevertheless, behind the image of adroit fiscal management, the
Liberals have another ledger that they’re unwilling to account for. The
debt load in this ledger is a staggering $80.2 billion!” (Sept 25, 2011)

http://www.straight.com/article-470026/vancouver/gabriel-yiu-gordon-campbells-100billion-legacy

Share

Clark, Big Oil Want BC and Alberta’s Raw Resources Open for Business to China

Energy and Resources, Fracking, Mining, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, WATER, , , , , , ,
Share

Read this report from the Province on the Business Council of BC’s annual economic forum in Vancouver, where industry leaders and politicians joined arms in calling to make BC’s raw resources open for business with the growing Asian market.’

“‘We need to open up the B.C. gate more fully,’ said Lorraine
Mitchelmore, president and county chair of Shell Canada Ltd. ‘Canada
really needs to diversify its customer base for energy products and
create access to global energy markets. This is a real time of great
opportunity for Canada.’ Lindsay Gordon, president and CEO of HSBC
Bank of Canada, echoed these sentiments, and added that British
Columbians need a ‘wake-up call’ of the importance of Asia to ‘their
future and prosperity.'”

Share

Dr. Marvin Shaffer on BC Govt’s Energy “Self-Sufficiency” Myth

WATER, ,
Share

Read this op-ed on Rabble.ca by one of BC’s leading independent energy experts, SFU economist Dr. Marvin Shaffer, refuting the BC Liberals’ wrong-headed “self-sufficiency” policy – which has driven the purchase of billions of dollars in private power contracts.

“The government’s self-sufficiency policy requires BC Hydro to guard
against the risk of drought by entering into long-term firm power
purchase contracts with British Columbia IPPs — power that in many
years it will not need and be forced to sell at a loss. It precludes BC
Hydro from even considering more cost-effective and in many ways less
environmentally damaging options — in particular relying on the spot
market for electricity in those years that its own hydro production is
limited by drought.” (Sept. 9, 2011)

http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/mgregus/2011/09/self-sufficiency-energy-policy-so-where-science

Share
Peterson Farm wheat harvest - 1990s (courtesy of Lynda & Larry Peterson)

Site C Dam: The Folly of Choosing Energy Over Food Security

Farmland and Food Security, Food, Hydropower, WATER, ,
Share

I recently returned from a trip up to Peace River Country in Northeast BC, filming for a forthcoming short documentary on the Campbell/Clark Government’s proposed Site C Dam.

While I wasn’t raised in the region, I have a personal connection to the land and its history. I spent many summers and winter holidays there as a child visiting relatives. My family were early settlers in the Valley, circa 1910, and most of them still reside in the area. Some fifty years ago we lost our farm – Goldbar Ranch, West of Hudson’s Hope – to the province’s first big hydroelectric project, WAC Bennett Dam.

But that was a different time – guided by a very different vision for the future of a burgeoning young province. While it wasn’t easy for families like mine and First Nations who lost much of their ancestral territories and traditional way of life, there was a real purpose to building those early dams. Knowing what we knew then, it was an understandable decision that Premier WAC Bennett made, with the overall public good in mind (though he certainly should have consulted better with First Nations and local citizens, something that was sorely lacking).

By contrast, today, there are many good reasons why the final of three dams long planned for the Valley – Site C Dam, near Fort St. John – isn’t in the public or environmental interest, despite what our government has been telling us to the contrary.

Besides its breathtaking beauty and tremendous fish and wildlife values, the Peace River Valley is home to some of the best farmland in BC.

The soil is of very high quality: nearly 12,000 acres of good agricultural-grade land would be flooded for the project – several thousand of which bear class 1 and class 2 soils.

But it’s not just the earth that makes the Peace Valley ideal for a diverse range of food production. The valley also produces a unique micro-climate that yields a longer growing season than anywhere north of the Fraser River Delta and Valley (another critical food security region in BC under siege from development – in this case highways, ports, and housing and industrial development). Everything from corn and potatoes to cantaloupes and watermelon have been grown in the Peace Valley.

At one time, a single farm run by Lynda and Larry Peterson provided a quarter of the region’s potatoes and a market garden with fresh fruits and vegetables of a wide variety.

But today, the Valley isn’t producing nearly what it could, due to a flood reserve which has held vast tracts of land hostage to the recurring threat of another dam. Consequently, much of this land lays fallow, while the region has seen many of its farming and food processing services disappear, along with the market gardens that once flourished, supplying residents with locally-grown produce.

For me, the question of Site C Dam really comes down to a choice between energy and food security.

Despite what the public has been told about BC’s energy situation, the province is more than able to meet its own electricity needs without building Site C – or paying billions of dollars for exorbitant, unnecessary private river power. Our electrical consumption has actually been trending down, thanks to a slow-down of the global economy (which shows no signs of reversing) and power smart programs taking effect (from 53,500 GWh of electricity in 2009 to just over 50,000 last year).

Under pressure from BC Hydro’s CEO, a recent panel review of the public utility, and the media and public, the Clark Government appears to be backing away from its ill-conceived and improperly named “self-sufficiency” and “insurance” requirements that falsely inflated the province’s need for electricity.

By contrast, BC is facing a food security crisis. According to data from the provincial Ministry of Agriculture and Lands, as of five years ago, we were less than 50% self-sufficient in food and down from approximately 80% self-sufficiency in vegetables in 1970 to about 40% today.

It’s clear that food self-sufficiency is a far greater concern for the province than electrical self-sufficiency; ergo, the Peace Valley should be preserved for food production and wildlife habitat, not flooded for power we don’t need.

So where is this power really going? To natural gas fracking operations in the region. I’m told by people researching the matter that two of the major gas processing facilities in the Horn River Basin, northeast of Fort Nelson – Encana’s Cabin Gas Plant and Spectra’s nearby operation – could eat up close to a quarter of Site C’s total power output alone. And there are many other large operations being built for natural gas extraction and transmission – in addition to major coal mines throughout the region, all in need of significant power. Energy Minister Dick Neufeld told locals publicly in 2008 that half of the power from Site C was destined for Horn River shale gas operations – evidenced by the fact the government wants to build a major transmission line from the Fort St. John area up to the Horn River Basin, to carry this new power from Site C.

All of this once again begs the question, why are talking about wiping out 12,000 acres of productive farmland and important wildlife habitat to subsidize natural gas and coal operations? (And bear in mind that not only will you be financing the $8-10 BILLION dam as a taxpayer and shareholder of BC Hydro, but you will continue subsidizing large industrial power users – who pay half or less what you pay for electricity – through your much higher power bills and tax bills well into the future).

Clearly this is the wrong direction for BC to be going in. What needs to happen now is for Site C to be cancelled once and for all, for the long-standing flood reserve to be lifted off the Peace Valley, and for local farmers to return to the land. If farmed to its full potential, this valley could feed the whole region and a significant portion of Northern BC.

Watch for a forthcoming short documentary by Damien Gillis on Site C Dam in early 2012.

Share

Gwen Barlee Guest Column in Province: End Failed BC Private Energy Plan

WATER, , ,
Share

Read this recent guest column in the Province by the Wilderness Committee’s Gwen Barlee on why the Clark Government should cancel its failed private power program.

“It is possible we have turned a corner. The B.C. government’s panel
recommendation to redefine “selfsufficiency” is a step in the right
direction. But much more needs to be done if Victoria is serious about
protecting our wallets and rivers from private-power developments. The
provincial government needs to implement an immediate ban on
run-of-river projects. At the moment there are scores of unneeded
projects that have contracts with B.C. Hydro but have yet to be built
that would cost untold billions of dollars. These projects need to be
stopped. Existing power contracts also need to be opened up and examined
to see if they are in the public good. The Clean Energy Act, which
hobbles B.C. Hydro, must be revisited.” (Sept 9, 2011)

Share
One of two proposed loacations for Site C Dam (Damien Gillis photo)

Site C Dam: A Bad Deal for British Columbians

Hydropower, WATER, , ,
Share

EDITOR’S NOTE: This letter was originally published in the Prince George Citizen, in response to a previous article on Site C Dam.

I live in the Peace Valley, upstream of the proposed Site C dam.  That has led to a lifetime interest in electricity policy.  I read with interest the recent article entitled, “Site C update: more power, more cost.” (July 27) which states, “BC ratepayers will be forking over the estimated $7.9 billion to build the Site C hydro-electric dam on the Peace River…”

Hydro customers do guarantee the corporation’s debt although very few of us give that much thought.  There’s been no need so long as the debt remained stable, was prudently managed, and publicly available.  But things have changed.  After many years of remaining stable, the debt load in the past three years has steadily climbed and those figures do not include the longterm contractual obligations for supply from BC independent power producers, which the province requires Hydro to use.  The public is refused access to those contracts.  How willing should ratepayers be to guarantee an additional $7.9 billion without having the right to scrutinize what they are already on the hook for?

The article says we need Site C because provincial demand is expected to rise 40% in 20 years.  In the past, Hydro ratepayers could – and did – use BC Utilities Commission (BCUC) hearings to hold Hydro and its government handlers to account for their claims.  But last year, the Energy Act removed Site C and ten other projects from BCUC oversight.  Now ratepayers are told they’ll pay the costs but are denied a forum to check the need for and suitability of those costs.

Last year’s Energy Act requires BC to be ‘self-sufficient’ in electricity.  All generation must occur within the province.  Hydro must be able to meet the province’s future need under “the most adverse sequence of stream flows within historical record.”  So self-sufficiency is to protect our electricity supply in times of drought.  Why, then, would we build another dam and reservoir that would be subject to the same drought we’re trying to protect ourselves from?  Surely it would make more sense to diversify our source of supply so that when droughts do occur, we have other sources (natural gas, geothermal, wind, solar) available.   

According to the article, Site C is “extremely cost-effective” at $87-95 per megawatt.  The comparable cited is $125/Megawatt for the green energy call – a most expensive source.  I’m told that firm power with delivery in 2012 was recently quoted at $27-35 on the Pacific Northwest wholesale market.  Longterm predictions are chancy but the projected $81-85 for 2030 doesn’t make Site C look shiny either.  It appears that Site C can only be called “extremely cost-effective” if cheaper sources are somehow eliminated.  The self-sufficiency requirement has created artificially expensive electricity in BC.

Ratepayers have every right to call “Foul!” when they are taken for granted in the manner we are seeing.  Every avenue they might use to protect their interests is blocked.  They are expected to swallow the rate increases and guarantee the risk, all while having no control over the policy.  That’s wrong.

Gwen Johansson has served on numerous energy-related endeavours.  She co-chaired  the Northeast Energy & Mines Advisory Committee; served on  BC Hydro’s Integrated Electricity Planning Committee; is a former BC Hydro Director and a former member of  the BC Energy Council.  She lives in the Peace Valley near Hudson’s Hope. 


Share