Comments on: Environmental Assessment: Worth the cost?

By: jan ferguson

jan ferguson — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 15:21:53 +0000

"Government will untangle the daunting maze of regulations that needlessly complicates project approvals,…replacing it with greater certainty to industry …" These are the words that are hauntingly familiar of an agenda that does not put the people first. In my home town in Northern Alberta, the oil industry takes the water out of the man-made reservoir on an ongoing basis and where are they when the reservoir goes dry? At the next town taking their water. It seems to me they need to stop this opportunist approach, start thinking of human rights issues and green policy to regulate themselves instead of everyone else.

By: Mike

Mike — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 06:31:53 +0000

Jim Prentice only wants to push this off on someone else. They will have a fight on their hands because Albertain’s won't put up with this when it comes down to brass tacks. It wasn't even a month ago in Owen Sound that over a hundred were exposed to radiation poisoning and of coarse the results will not be available for a couple of months. The sad part of this is it will be swept under the rug and we will not hear about it again. It is unfortunate that we live in a country where that happens. Here is the article from Feb 18 2010.
Radiation exposure results could take months
Levels within safety regulation guidelines, Bruce plant owner says
Last Updated: Thursday, February 18, 2010 | 2:32 PM ET Comments47Recommend25CBC News
Over 190 workers may have been exposed to nuclear radiation at the Bruce Power nuclear generating station near Owen Sound, Ont. (J.P. Moczulski/Canadian Press)
Workers potentially exposed to nuclear radiation at a Bruce nuclear power plant near Owen Sound, Ont., last November could wait as long as 14 more weeks for results.

By: N beerman

N beerman — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 16:54:02 +0000

I'm afraid I cannot buy what Jim Prentice is saying. Though he may claim that there will be little or now change in the environment impact laws, his and his party have opened up a loop hole that could let them pick and choose which procjects should get the full treatment and which don't. All this will be in favour of their supporters.

By: Dr. Brian L. Horejsi

Dr. Brian L. Horejsi — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 22:55:09 +0000

The NEB, even more so than CEAA, has proven itself to be completelly captive to commercial and corporate interests, and has not ever seen a energy related development it did not embrace. It has NO functional environmental impact capacity, does not allow full public particpation, confines its hearings to one or two locations, is extremely prejudicial in handing out intervenor funding, and does not have mandate to do anything but promote consumption and export. It is a massive regulatory, democratic and scientific failure.

Canadians have been undressed by the fraudulent nature of "democracy" as shoved down our throats by the corporate world and compliant corporate dominated governments. We are, to put it figuratively and functionally, exposed. Until we take to the streets in full scale civil disobedience, we can expect more of the likes of Harper, harmonization, and "efficiencies"; all of these are attacks on public resources and public processes fronted by a propaganda blitz designed to mislead / convince Canadians we are doomed unless we reduce and eliminate red tape and regulatory burdens for privatization and corporate exploitation.

By: Dr. Brian L. Horejsi

Dr. Brian L. Horejsi — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 22:53:37 +0000

I'm alwaysl shocked at how naive Canadians are; the opposition cannot do a thing EXCEPT dump the existing government, (and that they can do onli in these relaltively rare minority govt situations) but then we'd have to fret that they (new govt) would not reverse the pending democratic and environmental doom. There are no indications they would move aggressively to allow Canadians into the regulatoyr process.

Todays CEA is pretty much worthless; it does NOT allow anyone to stop any project, and rarely allows even minor tinkering. It has built in resistance to full public participation (open to any Canadian). Access by SOME groups is not adequate – in fact is counterproductive – and the act and agency have proven to be a regulatory failure.

By: DSS

DSS — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 00:41:05 +0000

Rose,It's too early to tell. Aboriginal and other groups will presumably have to make their comments before the National Energy Board and other tribunals; we do not yet know whether they will receive any government assistance to tell their story. It seems pretty clear, though, that significant changes are intended in how the process works.best wishesDianne Saxe

By: DSS

DSS — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 23:42:04 +0000

absolutely. If the public is interested.
Best wishes

Dianne

By: Christine

Christine — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 22:50:03 +0000

But they could raise the alarm with the public, couldn't they?

By: Rose

Rose — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 20:26:27 +0000

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency ensures that public groups have a voice. How will this move impact affected parties, such as Aboriginal groups?

By: DSS

DSS — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 19:23:05 +0000

Christine,
The opposition parties may not be able to do anything about this — it may not require new legislation.
best wishes
Dianne Saxe

By: Christine

Christine — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 16:59:56 +0000

Yikes – it looks like the environment – and Canadians – are going to be the losers if these changes go through. Any response from the opposition parties yet?