Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[chris gadsden]

I am picking on John Weston, Conservative MP for West Vancouver – Sunshine Coast – Sea to Sky Country but it’s nothing personal. I’ve known Weston since 1978 when I gave a speech to the Harvard Canadian Club and John gave me a marvelous tour of Boston and environs and I even got the meet the Massachusetts governor Mike Dukakis. John worked in my Ministry of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. We played squash together. I like him but “liking”  irrelevant in my line of work.

 I’m beating up on John because of his utterly unschooled support of the called Independent Power Producers (I’ll call them IPPs hereafter) and I don’t think it’s unfair to assume that he represents the Conservative government’s position.

 These IPPs are mostly huge corporations like GE, Ledcor and the Dupont family companies. The Tories have even pumped money, our precious tax money, into the Plutonic undertaking. As I did in a recent mail-out, I reiterate what I said in a recent mail-out, namely that Weston has made this decision without hearing from academics, economists or the ever growing environmental movements.

 I can only assume, as I think you must, that Weston’s information comes entirely from the head of Plutonic, Don McInnes and his captive First Nations band.piled on with large doses of Milton Friedman/Fraser Institute philosophy I’ve asked him to hear me out and he hasn’t.

 I don’t pretend to be an expert but I am a former Minister of Environment and have spoken on this issue around the province with many more to come. I have not been challenged on my facts except by a silly man from Citizens for Green Power (the name tells you that they’re black as Toby’s my friend) who generally asks a technical question on an obscure fact. As I travel the province I hope this guy attends all my meetings.

 The issue goes way beyond John Weston but into the policy  the Conservative Party and I think, this indicates that the Tories simply will never interfere in anything involving which corporations that support them. Every indicator supports that and it’s an historical policy that goes back to 1986. The then Prime Minister, Mulroney, and the

Minister of Fisheries and Oceans , Tom Siddon, who, largely because of the Alcan bid to have approval of Kemano II, gutted and took over the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (a fact I can easily prove.) 

We are, then, ruled by our Conservative masters that hasn’t got an environmental bone in their body; thus we can conclude that it isn’t just Plutonic that will be supported but so will present and future private power projects.

But it’s not just private power that will be involved. The Tories can be counted upon to approve Enbridge’s and Kinder Morgan’s plans for piping Tar Sands “oil” across our province and transporting it to be shipped in tankers down the most treacherous areas on our coast.

The Common Sense Canadian  (www.thecanadian.org) of which I’m a founder and spokesman is scarcely a socialist coven. I can assure you that its political object is to protect our environment for future generations. (we have no institutional financing) Moreover, we have amongst our contributor’s outstanding writers and advisors.

The facts we put forward are unchallengeable – here they are in a nutshell:

1.   BC is a net exporter of energy

2.   As mentioned above IPPS are not little “Mom & Pop” operations but huge corporations who take their ill-gotten profits out of BC and apart from the construction, jobs, most of whom are from out of province, leave little more than caretakers as employed.

3.   Almost all the power produced by IPPs comes during the run-off when BC Hydro has full reservoirs and thus  no use for IPP power.

4.   Under Gordon Campbell’s mailed fist BC Hydro must pay on a “take or pay” basis double or more what they can get on the market for it.

5.   The environmental destruction is huge – the river can no longer sustain the ecology it supports. It destroys life, very much including fish, in all forms including forests decimated by clear-cuts for roads and transmission lines. This has a huge impact on animals like the bear and the eagle amongst others.

6.   Because Hydro can’t use the power, it must either export it at a huge loss or use it, paying about 12x what they can make it for themselves.

7.   BC Hydro is now on the hooks for about $50 BILLION in private power’

8.   Because of the above, BC Hydro can no longer pay taxpayers the huge annual dividend and, get this, want a rate increase (from us) to pay the lost dividend!

In an understatement to say the least, the BC Utilities Commission has stated that this policy is not in the best interests of the public,

This is the policy that John Weston and his Conservative Party endorses, a policy made by Campbell with the help and advice of Alcan, IPPs and the ultra conservative Fraser Institute (which believes all rivers out to be in private hands) without a single bit of input from any who might spoil their party.

This is a policy which excludes the public either through their municipal government or themselves.

The is a corporate/political policy, as is the fashion these days, for which couldn't care  less about people, the environment (for which they are responsible) or legacies for those who follow.

Our only defence is to throw people like John Weston and his ilk out of office

[StillAqua]

I never used to really like Rafe and his diatribes but he's starting to grow on me. We both must be getting old......

[VAGAbond]

This is a policy which excludes the public either through their municipal government or themselves.

The Campbell government specifically took away from the Regional Districts the authority to have a say in whether IPPs and their transmission lines are located within their district among other removals of authority.     They and their corporate buddies obviously couldn't abide local democracy. The Liberals need to be held to account for this in the next election.

[Novabonker]

http://www.publiceyeonline.com/archives/005802.html#more

[VAGAbond]

Now the pirates  in Victoria want to allow the water rights leased to the IPPs to become theirs to sell:   

http://www.vancouverobserver.com/blogs/water/2011/01/26/bc%E2%80%99s-water-be-sold-highest-bidder

http://www.vancouverobserver.com/blogs/water/2011/02/03/what-does-privatization-water-look

[chris gadsden]

RAFE HERE... below is my latest blog on www.thecanadian.org (The Common Sense Canadian

Please let us be our own media and pass this on.

I cannot believe it! Liberal leadership candidate Mike Dejong talks about the Toba Inlet Independent Power Project (IPP) as not a private project because Plutonic (General Electric in drag) has partnered with the local First Nations! This, says Mike, makes it a “community” project. This is an interesting point of view considering that Don McInnes, head of Plutonic, told a legislative committee that the Indian Band was getting “zero”. I won’t dwell on this point because it's irrelevant to the main point, namely, are IPPs a good idea? Mr Dejong would be a premier who would encourage more and more IPPS even though he obviously doesn’t have the faintest idea as to what they’re all about.

For example, De Jong, to Bill Good, made the nonsensical claim that these projects don't divert much water - compared to a conventional dam, which is completely backwards. These projects are diversion projects, whereas dams hold back water, but don't particularly divert it. The Toba projects divert, in fact, something on the order of 90% of the mean annual flow.

It’s hard for me, a former cabinet minister, to understand the utter ignorance of the present Liberal bunch have towards IPPs. That a possible premier of BC doesn’t understand that these environmental disasters are making the energy when BC Hydro doesn’t need it yet must buy it anyway; that when they do they must export if at a huge loss or use it themselves paying 12x what they can make it for themselves, takes the breath away.

This is, however, not an uncommon syndrome affecting politicians called (forgive the technical term) believing your own my smelly socks, If those seeking the premiership don’t understand the pickle they’ve got us into God help us.

In fact there’s no evidence that any of them have the faintest idea of what’s involved here.

This is a dramatic turnaround for it was always the NDP whose policy was always wrapped up in a one-liner: now the Liberals have no idea of what this all about and use idiotic statements like “BC needs IPP power to become self sufficient whereas the opposite is the case.

BC Hydro’s recent statement of its needs takes the breath away.

Here’s what economist Erik Andersen comments:

-         the BCH statement shows that Hydro’s total liabilities have increased by more than 40% at least in the last 3 years

-         that as things look from their statement, BC Hydro may be bankrupt by this summer. Of course, it won’t officially go into bankruptcy, as a company in the private sector would under these circumstances but it does mean that what little independence they have will be gone.

-         Mr Andersen observes that BC Hydro was forced to buy 8300 GWH under the Hobson’s choice they face of either exporting the unwanted IPP power at a huge loss or using it instead of their own power at 12x what they can make it for themselves.

-         BC Hydro has always overestimated its needs – Mr Andersen says “I’m expecting the per capita demand by BC only customers to drop from about 11,00o KWH to about 9,000 by 2015. One should note that Mr Andersen’s experience in such matters was learned by preparing demand outlooks for Government of Canada Treasury Board applications in support of new capital projects.

-         Mr Andersen concludes that “this news release is about deflecting uncomfortable observations and as cover for more aggressive borrowing now in the works”.

Speaking of uncomfortable observations, nowhere in this press release does Hydro tell us how it’s going to pay the ungodly sums (now estimated at $50+ Billion) to be paid out to IPPs for power it doesn’t need. This scarcely chump change! This is huge – a million dollars times 50 thousand! It will increase as new cozy deals are made by the Liberal government’s favourite campaign donors 

Where the hell is this money to come from?

How can Hydro go to the BC Utilities Commission for enormous rate increases without telling anyone how they’re going to raise this unimaginable money going to the likes of General Electric – no wonder it’s the biggest corporation in the world!

These matters have not occurred, evidently, to those who want to be premier. It has, one might note, occurred to two NDP wanabes premiers, John Horgan and Mike Farnworth who, casting aside traditional NDP slogans have presented platforms that indicate their understanding and solutions to the problems.

This government has got the taxpayers in very deep doo doo indeed and finding the way out will be a challenge for all our citizens.

T The sad part is that the Liberal leaders don’t even acknowledge that there’s a problem much less offer solutions.

[Dave]

I never used to really like Rafe and his diatribes but he's starting to grow on me. We both must be getting old......

X2.  Never thought I would type this but agree, must be age.

[quill]

The sad part is that the Liberal leaders don’t even acknowledge that there’s a problem much less offer solutions.

Because to them there is no problem. Privatize BC Hydro, BC rivers, BC water, get rid of bothersome, economic stumbling-block fish like wild steelhead, and you end up with the Fraser Institute/Liberal vision of nirvana. All according to plan.  
http://www.citizensforpublicpower.ca/files/uploads/institute_program_for_privatizing_hydro_1996.pdf
 

[chris gadsden]

SEE www.thecanadian.org

RAFE HERE -

THIS IS SO IMPORTANT I HOPE THAT EVERYONE WILL PASS IT ON

THE VANCOUVER PROVINCE SAYS THAT PRIVATE POWER DECISION “A FOLLY!”

Can the Vancouver Province’s stablemate, the Sun be far behind?

As I settled into Friday's breakfast I glanced at the title of the Vancouver Province editorial and saw “Hydro needs to get back to its roots". To my utter astonishment I read the following words in the editorial itself:- "a large part of the problems at Hydro is the government insistence that it pursue costly private run of the river projects and other so called “green” initiatives. A look at Hydro’s annual report shows the folly of this approach".  (emphasis mine)

Where the hell have they been as this ghastly program moved inexorably down the path to one environmental disaster after another, bankrupting BC Hydro along the way?

The Province goes on to state that in 2010 private power used by Hydro cost them 9X what they could make it for themselves. In fact it's worse - because Hydro must "take or pay",  IPP power which is only available during the "run off"  so comes when Hydro doesn't need it; Thus Hydro must either take the power at 9-12 times what they can make it for or export it at a 50%+ loss.

Some business deal from the "business" government!

I'm all but speechless at this editorial – and as you may have noticed it takes a lot for that to happen. What the Province and presumably  Post Media – successors to Canwest  which owns both the Sun and the Province – are saying is exactly what many environmentalists have been for several years and being vilified for it!

Surely they didn't come to this decision over a evening beer last Friday so one must ask The Province,  "when did you reach this conclusion?"  Nothing has changed for 7 or eight years - what made you see the light? And why weren't you frank with your readers the moment you concluded that this plan was "folly"?

Both the Sun and Province have excellent writers if they are left alone to write.- why weren’t they let loose to examine this issue with the same energy and talent they pursued when they (quite properly) took on then Premier Clark about a friendly neighbour wanting a gambling license and the “fast ferries” scandal?

The contrast between the Vancouver dailies during the NDP years and the Liberal decade can only be explained by assuming that they believe that it’s their responsibility to keep the NDP out of office. The old fashioned tradition of holding government’s feet to the fire clearly ended with the election of Campbell & Co.

The truth of the matter is that this issue didn’t down the river on a piece of bark. These papers have been stifling news and comment, either by non reporting or terrible reporting, for half a decade. The IPP issue has been raised over and over not only by Damien Gillis and me, and the Wilderness Committee but many others yet if all you knew about the matter was through the media, you would know virtually nothing about it.

Isn’t it the media’s duty to fairly inform customers when it comes to news? And to present thought provoking hard talk from their columnists?

The gut instinct of journalists is to question in depth all decisions of government. This simply hasn’t happened and their very best writers have been struck dumb. One can only conclude that Canwest cum Post Media censors its news and editorial staff and, by its policy, forces columnists to self censor, Absent any credible denial, one must conclude that the publisher hires editors who know what they want; and won’t print that which is contrary to the official line. You cannot blame columnists for putting their families before fighting for their traditional role. I know the feeling - I once was forced to grovel and it’s a very unpleasant thing to have to do.

 

I cannot and do not state that this is what happens – only that in the absence of a full explanation to the contrary reasonable people are likely to reach this conclusion

British Columbians a right to see these sweetheart IPP contracts and find out why the Campbell government concluded that damaging our environment and bankrupting BC Hydro was a sound policy. They are also entitled to expect decent media to ferret out matters of this sort and report upon them fully and fairly. This, I need hardly say, hasn’t happened.

I agree with the Province saying that Campbell & Co’s policy was “folly”, but what kept them so long? The evidence was all there for them to see - what possible legitimate reason was there to, by their silence, tacitly support the government and its greedy corporate friends?
If the Province and the Sun wishes to do some penance they must do three things :

1.   Explain why it took so long for them to criticize their own policy towards the Campbell government’s energy policy.
2.   State why they haven’t dealt at all with the savaging of our rivers and their ecologies pursuant to this policy while approving, by their silence, the bankrupting of BC Hydro.
3.  Assure the public that they  will start investigating with the thoroughness they once did of all major government initiatives, reporting back honestly, and that it will permit, no insist, that their columnists investigate all the establishment and let us have it as they see it.

One can only hope. 

[chris gadsden]

RAFE HERE 

Below is my blog this week for The Common Sense Canadian (www.thecanadian.org) It’s critical that we understand what the Liberals have been doing – lying – because we can expect the same in the next election.

Please pass this on so we can, in a media less province, provide our own,

 

I have been in politics or commenting on them (same thing) going back to the days of WAC Bennett. My first published piece was a criticism of Bennett’s position on the failed (thankfully) Victoria Charter.
 
During that time I’ve seen plenty of gilding the lily, massaging of the truth, opinions presented as truth – in fact the things we all do ourselves - yet I’ve seen very little actual lying, deliberate untruths. When we would hear, say, a premier making a statement which the Opposition Leader says is untrue, that was a difference of opinion. I must admit that some opinions come perilously close to falsehoods but it was not until the Campbell government that we saw a government whose basic political strategy has been to lie. Not just puff up a story, slide over the troublesome bits - but outright lie.
 
I make that statement after considerable thought because it’s the worst behaviour possible in government.
 
I’m going to give examples.
 
With the Campbell government, it started early with fish farms and persists to this day. Campbell and his then most unsatisfactory Minister of Agriculture, Food and Fish, John Van Dongen pursued their disastrous policy saying that the science was all with them. This wasn’t a mistake or a bit of government flatulence – it was untrue and the government knew that; in short it was a lie.
 
In two election campaigns Campbell promised he would never privatize BC Rail yet after he won office he did just that and, it must be noted, lied like a dog when he called it a fair process. We lost our railroad and were left with a hugely expensive lawsuit in the bargain.
 
The government, through the mouth of then Finance Minister Hansen, got serious with deliberate untruths with their Energy Policy. These statements are based on a transcript of a youtube video Hansen made during the 2009 provincial election campaign:
 
Colin Hansen: “I think, first of all, that we have to recognize that British Columbia is a net importer of electricity. We seem to think that, with all the tremendous hydro electric generating capacity we have, that we are a huge exporter. Well, we do export some, but we are a net importer..."
 
This is unquestionably and demonstrably FALSE as the records of the National Energy Board and StatsCan prove. The province of BC over the past decade has been more often than not a net exporter electricity.
 
Hansen (cont'd.): "…from Washington State, which largely produces their electricity from dirty coal, and also from Alberta, which uses a lot of natural gas in their electricity production. So I think it's incumbent on British Columbia to develop its own source of needed electricity. And quite frankly, the independent power projects are the best source of that..."
 
Unquestionably and demonstrably FALSE. Even if we did need more energy, because private river diversion projects produce most of their power during the spring run-off when BC Hydro has plenty of electricity, their energy would be of little if any impact on our energy needs.
 
Hansen (cont'd.): "...where we can encourage small companies..."
 
Unquestionably and demonstrably FALSE - unless Mr. Hansen considers General Electric, Ledcor and the DuPont family small. The companies involved are huge, largely foreign corporations.
 
Hansen (cont'd.): "…to build small scale hydroelectric projects that are run-of-the-river, and what that means is, instead of having a big reservoir, a big dam that backs water up, and creates a great big lake, these are run of the river, so the river continues to flow at its normal [pace] but we capture some of the energy in the form of hydroelectric power from this."
 
Unquestionably and demonstrably AND EGREGIOUSLY FALSE. All these rivers are dammed and/or diverted, often using long tunnels and pipes and leave only traces of the original river in the river bed throughout the diversion stretch. The sheer scale of some of these projects and all the roads and transmission lines involved gives them an enormous ecological footprint.
 
Hansen (cont'd.): "…Again, from the perspective of some of the opposition, they would have you believe that every single river in British Columbia is being impacted. In reality, it is .03% of the rivers in British Columbia that could sustain any kind of hydroelectric activity, are being used for these independent power projects."
 
Unquestionably and demonstrably FALSE. In fact it’s double that amount but this is a numbers game. The fact is over 600 river systems (with over 800 individual diversion applications) and the ecologies they support are at risk.
 
Hansen (cont'd.):  "So, it’s being widely supported by many of the leading environmentalists, because it's clean and sustainable. It's also being supported by many of the First Nations communities in the province. So, I think that we have to look behind the scenes on this, and really question who is funding the opposition, and clearly they have their own agenda, and in my view, it's not a responsible environmental agenda."
 
Misleading at best and you should judge the matter with these facts in mind:

1.    Some of the key opponents (apart from the NDP), have been  the Wilderness Committee, Save Our Rivers Society, and now our organization, The Common Sense Canadian. Speaking for The Common Sense Canadian, it  has no institutional funding (corporations, Labour or otherwise).

2.    Who is or is not an environmentalist is a matter of choice but here are the ecologists, biologists and academics upon whom we rely: Dr. William E. Rees, Dr. John Calvert, Dr. Craig Orr, Dr. Michael Byers, Dr. Marvin Rosenau, Dr. Gordon F. Hartman, Dr. Marvin Shaffer, Dr. Elaine Golds, Dr. Michael M'Gonigle, Rex Weyler, Wendy Holm and Otto Langer.

We have, then, an Energy Policy based on a tissue of lies – not mistakes.

Perhaps the biggest lie of all is that BC Hydro is in good shape when our independent economist, Erik Andersen – a conservative-minded fellow with decades of experience working for the federal government and the transportation industry, I might add – says that if BC Hydro were in the private sector it would be headed for bankruptcy. The only reason it’s not is its ability to soak its customers – me and thee – with increasingly higher power bills to keep itself afloat.

In the election of 2009 Hansen and Campbell stated clearly that the budget of the past April was a statement of the true financial situation. Then, with the election safely behind them, they admitted that the budget was way out of whack but they didn’t know it until, conveniently, the election was over.

I’ve been there and I can tell you that the Finance Minister knew the province was in financial doo doo. For Hansen and Campbell to say that they didn’t have the evidence of falling tax revenues – the sales tax and stumpage are reliable barometers of the truth – is like a man standing across the road from a burning building with people jumping out windows saying he didn’t notice a thing because he was busy reading his paper.
 
The same scenario prevailed with the HST as Campbell and Hansen announced the HST after the election saying that it “wasn’t even on the radar screen” during the campaign, whereas it transpired that Hansen had received a detailed analysis from his ministry long before the election, which told him the HST would be a big mistake. Again, Hansen was apparently reading his newspaper across from the burning building.
 
There we have it – the government now led my Premier Clark won three elections by lying to the people.
 
The Common Sense Canadian will be doing a great deal in the days to come on Site “C” and we will, I assure you, be exposing interesting facts on the need (or lack thereof) for this mega-project; the costs, and what it means for the environment.
 
The plain facts are that the Campbell/Clark government has lied and thus fooled us in three elections.
 
If they do it again, we will get what we deserve and future generations will inherit the consequences of our shame.

 

[chris gadsden]

The Silence of the Mainstream Media on Private Power, Fish Farms Featured

Written by Rafe Mair

 

I sat in my hotel room in London on a recent vacation, reading the comments on my last article in thetyee.ca in which I had congratulated the Vancouver Sun for printing an op-ed piece by Dr. Marvin Shaffer of SFU which stated the elementary truth that the government is forcing BC Hydro to pay more for private power than they can make it for themselves or sell it for. The general consensus seemed to be that I’d gone soft in the head and that we need not assume that Postmedia would suddenly be printing the truth on this subject.
 
I then looked at the reaction to a similar article I wrote on this website and thought - there having been no response from any of the media I had critiqued - that the critics were right that I was naïve to suppose that any of the columnists, reporters or Postmedia editors gave a damn, and that I was terminally naïve to think that the Sun or Province would publish any more op-ed pieces criticizing the Clark government on any matters which could hurt their chances in the snap election Ms Clark seems determined to call.
 
Thus I think, on reflection, that they are right. This is not going to happen. We will not be seeing analytic articles by Vaughn Palmer or Mike Smyth; nor, lamentably from Stephen Hume. They won’t be writing anything terribly troublesome for fish farmers even though their flacks and apologists seem to have little difficulty getting op-ed pieces and even news stories printed. I see no indication that the government bankrupting BC Hydro has caught their eye - or if it has, that they would have the editorial freedom to write about it.
 
Some time back I suggested that these and other writers self-censored for the simple reason that they otherwise won’t be printed. The editor of one of these papers phoned me whining that I had been unfair and asked if I really thought he told his writers what to write?
 
When he denied that he did this I asked why, then, they never had explored the questions I and others had raised on these matters. He replied that what they wrote about was their affair. I can’t prove what I say but only point out that most editors I have worked for and work for now have suggested a topic that seems important. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn’t.
 
I might add that when papers and radio stations didn’t like the opinions I wrote on or spoke about, I got fired – often, I might add.
 
Perhaps I should take that editor at his word. Could it just be that they haven’t considered the rape of the fish farms and the ruin of our rivers and the accompanying bankruptcy of BC Hydro real issues affecting the public interest?
 
But I can’t do that for it would be accusing Postmedia and their writers of being stupid and I know that they aren’t. In fact, quite to the contrary they are highly intelligent and excellent writers.
 
I owe them one more chance to respond. Thus I then ask Mike Smyth, Vaughn Palmer and other writers why, over the past several years, they have not written about the fish farm issue? ALL the independent scientists have excoriated the industry and the issues, yet the closest Postmedia (Canwest in drag) has printed are the fish farmers' formal flack and the utterly discredited environmental turncoat Patrick Moore.
 
UBC’s Dr. Daniel Pauly, one of the world's acknowledged top marine scientists has said that the scientific debate is over on the sea lice question, yet the fish farmer flack seems to get space on demand with nary a dissenting word,
 
I then ask why haven’t Mr. Palmer or Mr. Smyth - or any other Postmedia columnist - examined the BC Hydro scandal? Never mind the gross environmental degradation caused by private power dams (they prefer to call them “weirs”, in their Orwellian  “New Speak”) and the wreckage of clear cuts for roads and transmission lines; leave aside for a moment the fish they kill and the habitat they destroy. Simply answer this: why haven’t you written on the issue that Dr. Shaffer and other academics and economists have raised - namely that this government in Victoria has forced BC Hydro into contracts with large corporations under which each transaction hits Hydro with a huge loss?
 
Never mind that the entire Energy Policy is based on utter falsehoods; leave aside the Orwellian claim that private power is “clean and green” – simply address the points made by Dr. Shaffer which fortify those of his colleague Dr. John Calvert in his formidable account of the whole situation, the book Liquid Gold.
 
Surely any fiscal theory that you can “buy high and sell low” and still make money bears some examination. The “Fast Ferries” issue of the NDP days, which Mr. Palmer so bravely and thoroughly exposed pales into insignificance when compared to the Campbell cum Clark Energy Policy.
 
Erik Andersen, a highly regarded economist specializing in government financing, makes the obvious point that BC Hydro would go broke under the Liberal Policy were it not for the fact that they can pass their losses onto the poor ratepayers (that’s us folks. In fact we get it twice, once at home, then as a cost pass through from the industry whose power we subsidize more and more).
 
A modest request to Mr. Palmer, Mr. Smyth et al.: prove that I’m wrong to suggest you self-censor. Do it with some of the incisive journalism, take-no-prisoners investigations for which you have great reputations, centred this time on the fish farms and the BC Hydro issues. Failing that, surely you owe an explanation why you won’t!
 
I can assure you both that I would rather be proved wrong and see you bring your talents to bear examining these issues carefully…than right.
 
Somehow, though, I think I’m right and that freedom of speech is something you are prepared to compromise for personal security.
 
Pity

[chris gadsden]

Was the Gordon Campbell Government Truly Corrupt? Featured
Written by Rafe Mair


Premier Gordon Campbell announcing his resignation
 
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 Hydro and on e 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.  

[Novabonker]

Don't let AF see this.He'll just blame Rafe Mair's writings for fueling Campbell haters.

[chris gadsden]

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 governments 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 Vancouver Sun which indeed speaks volumes, considering their usual affection amounting almost to servility towards the 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 cupcakes!'”
 

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 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.

[chris gadsden]

Please let’s be our own media and pass this on!
 
 
Rafe on Shark Fins and the NDP

Written by Rafe Mair

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

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

 

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.) Incidentally. Anthony Marr is a Chinese Canadian.
 
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.