...the promise becomes no more than a caption.
(photo)
It was hailed just four months ago by Environment Minister Jim Prentice as one of Canada's "richest ecological areas" when he announced a landmark $5-million study aimed at declaring it a National Marine Conservation Area. But while one branch of the federal government has moved to protect Nunavut's Lancaster Sound as a one-of-a-kind natural treasure — "an area of incredible beauty that is teeming with wildlife," according the region's Conservative MP Leona Aglukkaq — the Geological Survey of Canada has confounded environmentalists and local communities by planning a seismic seabed survey this summer to probe for potential oil and gas deposits in the beluga and narwhal-rich waters north of Baffin Island, at the eastern entrance to the Northwest Passage.
While proudly announcing their intentions to declare Lancaster Sound a national marine conservation area (and including token Inuit in their promotional photo ops), Prentice and Aglukkaq stated consultations would be held on an ongoing basis with the Inuit concerning the area. What do the Inuit have to say about this latest bit of use-it-or-lose-it news?
"The legislation is very clear with respect to marine conservation areas: Oil and gas development is expressly prohibited," said Chris Debicki, Iqaluit-based director of the eco-advocacy group Oceans North. "They just don't go together."
He told Canwest News Service on Wednesday that the proposed resource survey conflicts not only with Parks Canada's high-profile push for a Lancaster Sound protected zone but also with the traditional use of the area by Inuit hunters, who have raised concerns through the Nunavut review agency about the potential impact of the Arctic Ocean survey — and any resource development that could follow — on caribou herds and marine mammals.
The Inuit may be the original inhabitants of the area. They may offer terrific photo ops. Their traditional outfits looked super cool at the Olympics. But really, does Harper intend to consider their needs or listen to their wishes when it comes to the Arctic?
Not likely, considering they were not even invited to the recent Arctic Council meeting.
"As global climate change continues and traffic through the Northwest Passage is expected to increase, our government is committed to safeguarding Canada's Arctic and protecting its most special natural features," Prentice said at the time (of announcing the marine sanctuary). "The Government of Canada recognizes the increasing importance of understanding and protecting the Arctic and this project will allow us to significantly advance our knowledge as well as our protection and conservation activities in this area."
Really?
The Harper government is rewriting the rules of environmental assessments, handing the Environment Ministry the power to minimize reviews of projects from open-pit mines to municipal construction along with other changes that critics claim will “gut” the environmental review process...Environment Minister Jim Prentice said the changes to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act will ensure “that we get good environmental outcomes” while “not delaying and frustrating projects through unnecessary red tape.”
The measures...would give the Minister of the Environment the power to determine the scope of any assessment.
That would be this Minister:
Canada's leading environmentalists say they're losing interest in lobbying federal Environment Minister Jim Prentice because the government has locked itself into an environmental policy "bunker" and is not giving their ideas serious consideration. Meanwhile, according to the Registry of Lobbyists, representatives for big oil companies frequently lobby the minister, and appear to be a major source of policy advice on energy and climate issues.
...Some say energy interests have an inordinate influence on Canada's national policy, something which is symptomatic of a deeper "corruption" in Canada. Among them is Thomas Homer-Dixon, who holds the Centre for International Governance Innovation Chair of Global Systems at the Balsillie School of International Affairs in Waterloo, Ontario.
In a December interview, Mr. Dixon asserted that "our political processes in Canada are being corrupted by narrow energy interests."
And in what direction are those narrow interests leading Harper?
"A strong and sovereign Arctic must be a healthy and prosperous Arctic. In the weeks and months that lie ahead, our government will continue to introduce measures aimed at unleashing the North's true potential," said the prime minister.
A recent post at Far and Wide talks about how the Liberals should approach the CONs undermining of environmental protection:
Unlike Carbon Emissions /Climate Change, the environmental concerns here are pretty cut and dry – very easy for the media and public to understand the issues at stake. The Reformatories would be on the defensive to explain why they put this into the budget, and why they feel it’s necessary to pollute our lakes and streams for generations to come for dubious short-term economic gain.
The Libs should put out a few trial balloons and see where it goes – have a few MPs talk to the media-types about this little nugget buried in the budget. Then if all goes well make the threat that you’ll vote against the budget unless this legislation is specifically removed. It would be interesting to see how Harper & Co. will try to defend overriding provincial jurisdiction to pollute lakes and poison indigenous communities - while saying this issue somehow proves that Iggy is just in it for himself.
As entertaining as the Guergis-Jaffer train wreck is to watch, and while they should be investigated if there appears to be corruption, opposition parties, and the Liberals in particular need to show Canadians that we can do better. That is not accomplished by lowering the opponent, but by elevating themselves. Fighting for protection of our environment is a good platform to speak from as it affects not just voters today, but future generations. Harper doesn’t care if he kills the golden goose because his narrow vision is also very, very short term.
No comments:
Post a Comment