The Squamish council has promised that they would first hold a town hall meting on LNG on Sept 17-18 and then decide about a referendum.
It would have been a relief had they decided a pre-referendum, that could be electronically held at no cost, a random sampling to see what the public really knows about LNG and how engaged they are.
It is always a surprise to talk to Squamish residents of all age groups and to find out how engaged or knowledgeable, pro or against, they are. Opposite to the HST issue that affected everybody, Woodfibre LNG mainly affects Squamish. It is more than an epic endeavour to actually educate our population and get a true picture for what such an industry will mean. Once we get the facts, do we fully and vigorously combat or quietly let the outside dictate to us what they think is best?
No doubt Squamish will be changed after a decision is made. I don’t know whether it will be for the better or not, but I have made my plan and am working to make it happen.
Everybody at this time should ask themselves the following questions: Is the W-LNG going to be a good neighbour (please Google the name Sukanto Tanoto)? Will we be better off afterwards? Is LNG a growing and a continuous supplier of new jobs?
And the main question you need to ask yourself: if you use gas at this time, will you be prepared – once the floodgate to ship our valuable commodity is shipped out of Canada at minimum three times a higher cost to the new customers in Asia – to pay the same?
Howe Sound has restored itself to a healthier state from when Squamish was called “Chemical Alley” with five chemical plants that have thankfully finally shut down. We have clean air again and the fish have come back... Is this not worth fighting for? For the next generation now moving into Squamish who have not had to experience the stink that we had and the foam on the water?
Quite frankly the environmental assessment process is not the way to go, neither is the hand-picked DOS committee of 13. The only way to go is to establish a commission populated by accredited scientists and accountants and visionaries, to come up with an independent study to be presented to the government, as a truer picture, then what an EA process with government-appointed employees could possibly accomplish.
If nothing else, there should be a committed and trustworthy individual in the DOS office that could read through the EA submissions (http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pcp/comments/woodfibre_lng_comments.html) to analyze the data to ascertain how many people are for or against – and where they are from – to create an unbiased document that would then be made public.
Hans Schaer
Squamish
