'Progress' on native concerns rings hollow with the leaders
Vaughn Palmer, Vancouver Sun, 14-Feb-2008

The new Throne speech energy corridor proposal turns rumblings from a pipeline giant into a real threat of oil spills.
Charles Campbell, Dogwood Initiative, 14-Feb-2008

VICTORIA - For the capstone of the throne speech this year, Premier Gordon Campbell went with a 45-year-old quote from John F. Kennedy.

"History and our own conscience will judge us harsher if we do not now make every effort to test our hopes by action."

The U.S. president was speaking in favour of a treaty banning atmospheric nuclear testing, initialled in the summer of 1963.

Campbell enlisted those words to rededicate his B.C. Liberal government to a saving-the-planet concern of our time, the fight against climate change.

He launched this crusade with last year's throne speech and this year's model took direct, argumentative aim at those who've disparaged his ambitions.

"Taking refuge in the status quo because others refuse to change is not an answer," said the text read Tuesday by Lt.-Gov. Steven Point but unmistakably voicing Campbell's thoughts. "The argument that B.C.'s mitigation efforts are, in global terms, too minuscule to matter, misses the point."

Never mind those tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions spewing from coal-fired power plants in China.

Never mind that Alberta's expectations for increasing emissions by 2020 exceeds B.C.'s targets for reducing them.

Our premier is worried about quantities far smaller than the tonne. "Every molecule of carbon dioxide released into our atmosphere by human activities matters," the speech declared.

"It hangs there for decades or even centuries and adds to the accumulated burden of global warming on our planet."

They were the words of a Gordon Campbell throne speech. But they would not be out of place in the mouth of the greenest activist.

Along those same lines, the speech cautioned today's crop of legislators against being "generationally selfish" -- putting current interests ahead of future generations.

"Critical to our success is long-term thinking that transcends the timelines of electoral cycles," was the way the speech put it.

"Most members of this legislature will not be alive in 2050. But most have or will have children and grandchildren who will be. It is for them and all who follow in our footsteps that today's decision makers must act."

Not the usual theme for a government facing the start of a reelection campaign in 14 months, as this one does. But it fits Campbell's current visionary and activist frame of mind.

More than three decades in public life, 14 years in the legislature, seven as premier, and he shows no sign of losing interest in the job or running out of ideas.

On the contrary, the throne speech overflowed with proposals and not just on the environment. There were 10 pages on health care and several on education and other social concerns.

About the only area where the Liberals didn't offer much was on the economy. They figure it's ticking along well enough to make do with a forestry roundtable, the promise of an agriculture plan and a few other tidbits.

Some of the throne speech proposals displayed the premier's penchant for loading up the public sector with agencies and programs for this, that and the other thing, all set out in capital letters.

Forests for Tomorrow. Live Smart BC. Brownfields to Greenfields. Youth Climate Leadership Alliance. Youth Live Smart. Trees for Tomorrow. Centre for Brain Health. Walking School Bus. Bicycle Train. Early Childhood Learning Agency. Centre for Autism Education and Research. And the Hip Centre, which regrettably has nothing to do with jazz musicians or beat poetry.

But in the midst of that bewildering variety of possibilities, one comes across an item that as a standalone announcement would probably make a front-page story.

This: "British Columbians want to understand why sentences in their province tend to be shorter than in other provinces for crimes such as homicide, theft, property crimes, fraud, impaired driving and drug possession. A comprehensive review of sentencing practices in B.C. courts will address those questions."

Or this: "New powers will be given to the college of teachers to remove teaching certificates from any member who is found to be incompetent."

Or the call for a tax-sheltered savings account that would allow people to put money aside for home support or assisted living in their old age.

But one has to note that this was a typical throne speech, meaning it came minus budget figures, legislation or the other trappings of actual, cost-able, checkable programs.

On climate change, for instance, the government won't be laying out the "action plan" for several more weeks.

"It will be annually updated and founded on personal responsibility, sound science and economic reality," the speech promised.

"And it will be driven by one simple truth: It is people who cause global warming and it is people who must act to stop it."

Details to follow. But as for the vision thing, he's got it and got it big.

vpalmer@direct.ca

© The Vancouver Sun 2008

Once upon a time, there was a premier who believed the No. 1 job of government was to get out of people's lives and out of your wallet.

That premier was Gordon Campbell. Remember him? The guy who said he could run the province with a dozen cabinet ministers and around half the MLAs we have now?

That Campbell was a big believer in smaller government.

"It is time to rein government in," Campbell said then. "It is too big, out of touch and too expensive."

Looks like Mr. Lean And Mean must have misplaced his ThighMaster. Now Campbell's roly-poly government is sprouting more new tentacles than squids during mating season. Yesterday's throne speech unveiled at least 17 new government programs and agencies, many of which appear to duplicate work already being done by other departments. "Your government will build on the expertise and success of the Brain Research Centre with a new Centre For Brain Health," Lt.-Gov. Steven Point told the legislature. Now, I'm all for brain centres, but do we really need one for each cerebral hemisphere?

But the announcement soon became a recurring theme in the speech: Why create just one government bureaucracy when two will do? There's the new "LiveSmart B.C. Initiative," for example, to create "more people-friendly neighbourhoods." But if that's not enough to rock your world, there's also the "Youth LiveSmart Outreach Campaign" that will encourage "young British Columbians to make carbon-smart lifestyle choices."

Just what we needed! And the two-for-one deals didn't end there. "A new Trees For Tomorrow program will launch a large, urban afforestation initiative," Point revealed. Then a few minutes later, he added: "The Forests For Tomorrow program will plant an additional 60 million seedlings over the next four years."

I know what you're thinking: What, no Woods For Tomorrow program? No Timberlands For Tomorrow secretariat? No Shrubbery For Tomorrow community round table?

Don't worry. Those are probably coming in the budget next week.

Meanwhile, you have lots of other new government programs to get excited about, like the B.C. Patient Safety Council; the Brownfields to Greenfields Redevelopment Strategy; the B.C. Bioenergy Strategy; the Citizens Conservation Council; the Youth Climate Leadership Alliance; the Walking School Bus Program; the Bicycle Train Program; the Patient Care Quality Review Board (five of those, actually); the Health Profession Review Board; the Community Safety Strategy; the Early Childhood Learning Agency; the Centre For Autism Education and Research; the Education Quality Assurance Program; and the Working Roundtable On Forestry.

Don't bother asking how much all these new programs will cost or why many of them apparently need their own government departments or bureaucracies to function. Those are the type of questions that simply don't get answered on throne speech day.

Just be grateful that Campbell, the guy who promised to rein in government, now has the wisdom to set up a Trees For Tomorrow program and a Forests For Tomorrow program at the same time -- even if you think he can't see the forest for the trees.

msmyth@direct.ca

© The Vancouver Province 2008

Green Gord: Unclear on Concept?
By Andrew MacLeod
TheTyee.ca
February 13, 2008

Throne speech still fuzzy on global warming plan.

Premier Gordon Campbell's position at the head of the climate change fighting parade has been drawing criticism from the province's business leaders, so observers were wondering if the Feb. 12 throne speech would signal a renewed commitment to the file or a retreat.

They could not have been disappointed by the volume. The 42-page speech, delivered by Lt.-Gov. Steven Point, included a laundry list of ongoing projects and a few new promises, much of it focussed on the inter-related issues of climate change, forestry and the environment. There was little, however, that could be construed as a plan.

The Tyee actively requests that its material not be reproduced for public use. The full text of this article article is, of course, available at the Tyee, right here.

---

'Progress' on native concerns rings hollow with the leaders

Vaughn Palmer
Vancouver Sun
Thursday, February 14, 2008

The B.C. government's 2008 speech from the throne commenced with the promise of additional progress in the budding new relationship with aboriginal people.

"History has taught us that we all move forward by moving beyond positions that have held us back," said the text, written in the premier's office and read by the first lieutenant-governor of aboriginal heritage, Steven Point. "Working together, we are opening new doors for progress."

But that passage must have been greeted with a sense of irony by many of the province's aboriginal leaders, given the lack of progress on a key concern of theirs.

Native leaders have been pressing the provincial government to adopt what they call the Recognition Act, formally recognizing aboriginal rights and title.

As well, the act would set out the legal framework for "consultation and accommodation," two key concepts to emerge from a 2004 decision by the Supreme Court of Canada.

Essentially, the high court said the provincial government must consult natives and accommodate their interests whenever decisions would significantly affect their rights and title.

In effect, the law would set out the guidelines for those consultations -- when they would kick in, what form they would take -- and the mechanisms for accommodating interests. It would bind all provincial government ministries, agencies and Crown corporations to the same set of rules, attempting to bring order and certainty to the process.

Native leaders began pressing for the legislation in the wake of the generally upbeat mood surrounding the announcement of the new relationship in 2005 and early progress toward reconciliation in 2006.

The Liberals had already recognized rights and title in the speech from the throne. They also issued general directives to government agencies to consult and accommodate.

So the government agreed to discuss the proposed legislation in face-to-face negotiations, believing it might offer an alternative to endless litigation around the meaning of rights and title, consultation and accommodation.

But privately some members of the government worried that, far from ending litigation, the legislation might open the way to more action in the courts.

Natives would use the bill as leverage to wring concessions from the Crown on land use, development and other decisions.

If they didn't get what they wanted through the legislative process, they could still go to court and ask for more -- since provincial law could not possibly limit their rights and prerogatives under the Constitution.

There were growing concerns, too, about the scope of the legislation.

It would apply to hundreds of government departments and agencies, thousands of decisions, uncounted legislative and regulatory powers.

Could a single bill cover all that without generating myriad unintended consequences?

While the government representatives agonized over the very idea of the legislation, the natives submitted a draft text -- their version of the Recognition Act.

I've not seen the text, but I gather it increased the anxieties on the government side. The Liberals decided the concept needed a lot more work before it could make the grade as government legislation.

Premier Gordon Campbell and Aboriginal Relations Minister Mike de Jong delivered the word in a meeting with native leaders late last week.

They relayed the concerns about the scope and powers of the proposed legislation. They indicated the bill was unlikely to see the light of day in the spring session of the legislature; indeed, there was no mention of it in the speech from the throne.

At the same time, the premier and the minister expressed a willingness to continue working on some sort of legislative framework for consultation and accommodation, if only natives would be patient.

I'm not aware of any formal response from native leaders to the rebuff from the Liberals.

But the informal response was evident in their absence from the legislature on throne speech day.

Two native leaders, Chief Joe Hall of the Tzeachten First Nation and Chief Frank Malloway of the Yakweakwioose First Nation, were present on the floor of the house.

But they came because the provincial government had finally responded favourably to their persistent entreaties to help fund a native healing centre in their traditional territory.

The promised Stehiyaq Healing and Wellness Centre would be located in the valley of the Chilliwack River.

Otherwise, none of the major first nations leaders -- including those who've attended Liberal budgets and throne speeches in the past -- accepted invitations to be in the house to hear this year's throne speech.

Not intended as a show of disrespect to the new lieutenant-governor, I would think. Rather, a comment on the way the new relationship with the Liberals is increasingly under strain.

vpalmer@direct.ca

© The Vancouver Sun 2008

---

The new Throne speech energy corridor proposal turns rumblings from a pipeline giant into a real threat of oil spills.

Charles Campbell
Dogwood Initiative
Thursday, February 14, 2008

Announcements by energy giant Enbridge and the BC government look to clear First Nation and environmental obstacles to tanker traffic along BC’s coast. But public opinion remains firmly against tankers on our coast.

Two events in the past week have made those concerned about the possibility of oil spills along BC’s coast stand up and take notice. The first was Enbridge’s February 9th announcement that it had secured “third party funding” to push its Gateway pipeline project through the regulatory process. The Gateway Project is a pipeline proposal to export up to 1,000,000 barrels of tar sands crude per day to China via a tanker port in Kitimat. The project has met strong resistance from First Nations and environmental groups concerned about the likelihood of oil spills in Queen Charlotte sound, near Haida Gwaii and along the coast of the Great Bear Rainforest.

A year and a half ago, after numerous delays to the project largely due to the efforts of First Nations and environmental groups, the money for Gateway particularly Chinese financing began to dry up and Enbridge shelved their proposal. The rumoured new money behind the push indicates that wheels are once again turning.

The second event was a single line in a press release accompanying this year’s Throne speech. It said the government would be “pursuing creation of a new northern energy corridor from Prince Rupert to Prince George.” For ‘energy corridor’ read ‘pipelines and transmission lines’. This seemingly innocuous language means that the government is willing to do the heavy lifting with First Nations negotiations and environmental assessment for energy projects in the north, “streamlining” the process for companies like Enbridge.

To date the greatest obstacle to tanker traffic and oil spills on our coast has been determined First Nations opposition. Enbridge initially shelved its Gateway Project after the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council filed a law suit to halt Enbridge’s joint National Energy Board/Environmental Assessment. In a move that echoed a successful First Nation suit involving the McKenzie Gas Pipeline, they claimed the crown had failed in its obligations to consult the First Nation. That lawsuit hasn’t been resolved.
An ‘energy corridor’ would significantly undermine First Nations ability to have input into individual projects. The government is looking to grant a general right of way for energy transmission – be that oil, gas or condensate pipelines or power-lines. Good news for energy companies, not such good news for the rest of us.

There are currently oil and gas proposals on the table that, if approved, would see up to 320 tankers per year plying our northern coastal waters. At that rate industry averages suggest we would see a major oil spill every 6-7 years. For those of us who love our coast and are aware of the long term impact of the Exxon Valdez spill that’s just not acceptable.

Despite the rhetoric about aggressive action on climate change, the BC government is now trying to undermine the ability of First Nations to ensure the continued health of our coast. Now it is up to the people of BC to say no to tanker traffic. With polls showing 75% of British Columbians oppose oil tanker traffic we have the numbers on our side. Now it’s time to raise our voices.

http://www.dogwoodinitiative.org/bulletins/energycorridor/

Posted by Arthur Caldicott on 14 Feb 2008