I am surprised that I thought things would change under the new government. I thought that fossil fuels would be passé after the Paris Agreements, that the prime minister and Liberal caucus were serious about immediately cutting back on fossil fuels into the atmosphere. Obviously this meant no more liquefied natural gas and that Woodfibre LNG would therefore not proceed.
I also thought that we would have better representation from our MP than hitherto so that we would get ample notice of any government activity that affected our constituency. Obviously I was wrong on all counts and, I of all people, ought to have known better.
Trial lawyers (I was one for 15 years) have a rule: “Never ask a question in cross-examination unless you know what the answer is going to be or you don’t care.”
If there were a manual for these matters in government, it would say: “Avoid all formal public comment if you can, but if you can’t, when consulting the public, don’t ask them anything unless you know what they’re going to say or you don’t care. If circumstances force you to have some sort of public hearing, give them no real chance to gather information and make cogent representations.
Cynical? No, demonstrably true.
This maxim has obviously been followed here by the Justin Trudeau government. Unfortunately, we cannot afford to boycott the federal comment process on WLNG because it will be said that the people in Howe Sound don’t care. So what do we do?
First, we must make it clear that the process is grossly unfair from the start for the reasons I have just given.
Next, we make it clear that we understand from experience that any environmental assessment hearing is also unfair right from the get-go. The government that sets it up has already made up its mind and this is simply a show hearing so it can say that the public was heard. We know this from experience with the recent joint federal-provincial EAO into approving Woodfibre LNG.
This process is scarcely independent of the government no matter what you plead; this is two government agencies “cooperating” with one another and then asking the public to give its blessing.
Surely if this government is to be taken seriously with all that time, effort and money they spent on the recent Paris conference, it would not be considering any LNG plant anywhere in the country.
The fiction, perpetuated by political leaders including our premier, is that LNG is the least harmful to the atmosphere of all the fossil fuels. It’s not true. Recent science has indicated conclusively that LNG, from the time it is extracted as gas to the time it’s sent into the atmosphere, is the worst of the fossil fuels for the atmosphere and climate change. Why are we considering this at all?
Why, then, should the citizens of Howe Sound dignify a process that violates solemn agreements made by almost all the countries in the world at Paris?
There has been a demonstrable lack of democracy and a lamentable lack of investigation into the affairs of Woodfibre LNG. Why shouldn’t that happen? We will all, if this ghastly project is approved, be subject to how they behave themselves fiscally and environmentally. Their record elsewhere is appalling.
But looking at the record of previous governments in these matters, it’s hard not to conclude that the results of this environmental assessment exercise are a foregone conclusion.
Rafe Mair
Lions Bay
