NDP Attacks Harmonization of Environmental Approval Process
Friday, March 30, 2012 @ 4:00 AM
Prince George, B.C.- One of the highlights of the Federal budget delivered yesterday, was the promise to harmonize the provincial and federal environmental assessment process to create a single process for projects involving natural resources and capping the time limit for the review at 24 months.
B.C.’s Miinister of Jobs, Tourism and Innovation, Pat Bell, says this is a postive move "It’s something we have been calling for, for some time." Bell says the time limit is also welcome"We think it is absolutely appropriate to have decisions made in a timely manner, they stillhave to be thorough. Just because a decision is made in a 24 month period instead of a five year period doesn’t mean that all of the issues can’t be dealt with appropriately." Bell says the news comes at a very important time for B.C. "It is very good news when you consider the liquefied natural gas projects, the mining projects and so on that we’re working on."
Federal Minister of Finance Jim Flaherty says the Federal Government will revise the process to a single approval process so Canada doesn’t miss the opportunity to deal with trading partners who can shop for their resources elsewhere.
NDP M.P. Nathan Cullen is anything but happy with the announcement, and says the Minister of Finance has also indicated the rules will be changed for the Northern Gateway Enbridge project “They are changing the rules mid stream, I’ve never heard of any government doing this . You can’t get this many months into the process, engage this many stakeholders and then half way through say we’re willing to change the process in the company’s favour.” He accuses the Federal Government of “rigging the entire process.”
He also points out this change was buried in the budget documents. “This is how Republicans do itin the States, they attach a rider to the budget, and it has nothing to do with the budget. Because it’s forced in, there’s no debate on it and the public is supposed to stay blind The danger in this one is it further backs people who are opposed to , or have concerns with the pipeline, into a corner, because the Government has now effectively said ‘there will be no fair hearing on this, we will do whatever it takes to get an approval’.”
Cullen says the problem with this type of action is that the people on the ground will not stand for this because of what he calls “a procedural, cynical trick”. He says the NDP will try to have this item removed from the budget.
But Minister Bell says he fails to see how a two year time frame can’t be considered substantive when you’re looking at any project "If you can’t make a decision in 24 months, you’re not going to get a better decision in 60 months. So just because a decision is made in a shorter period, doesn’t mean that the proponents are going to get a yes, they may get a no, they’re just going to get a no in a timely fashion which will allow them to move on and focus their efforts somewhere else."
Comments
There are layoffs happening right now at the proposed LNG plant site out of Kitimat. This is supposed to be one of the big economic drivers for the province. Did Christie blow off the Chinese investors now too?
I am definately not in favor of a heavy crude oil pipeline through BC after seeing the way Enbridge covers up its’ leaks elsewhere.
I am definately not in favor of a heavy crude oil pipeline through BC after seeing the way Enbridge covers up its’ leaks elsewhere.
Maybe the US and Canada can go back in time and do an “environmental assessment” process for the Alaska Highway. In this day and age, it would never be built. Ahhh, progress.
Harb: “In this day and age, it would never be built.”
…nor would a lot of the infrastructure everyone relies on.
Yes, the alaska hiway is going to capsize and spill millions of gallons of crude onto our shores or leak and contaminate our creeks and lakes. Get real. There is no comparison. And as for you johnnyboy, there you go with your everything or nothing philosphy you think everyone should live by. The belief you have to let the multinational oil corps do as they please or everyone should go back to the stoneage is so ludicrous it is getting tiresome.
And But, you know quite a bit about ‘all or nothing’, don’t you?
Digging in your heels and saying ‘no’ under any circumstance is a bit of a ‘nothing’ stance, wouldn’t you agree?
I don’t say “no under any circumstance” to every resource based project, just to enbridge and thier pipeline and to oil tankers off the coast. Mainly because, with this project, they can’t make a circumstance that I would agree with. That is the definition of opposing something. But, I don’t go around saying those who don’t oppose it should not use or do anything that doesn’t have anything to do with oil, that would make me a hypocrite.
You mean they could guarantee an environmental review can be completed in 24 months….but charged criminals cannot be guaranteed to face a court within 24 months? Even child molesters?
You mean an environmental review can be completed in 24 months, but a Treaty can take over 200 years?
Is it possible tha a review can be guaranteed complete in 24 months…and yet some Canadian citizens wait that long for an important surgery?
Sure makes you wonder what the priorities are???
But: “I don’t say “no under any circumstance” to every resource based project”
Maybe I misunderstood. You must be in favour of Site C then, right?
Comments for this article are closed.