Tarsands tailing ponds leaking; scientist muzzled

Federal study confirms oilsands tailings found in groundwater, river

The least surprising thing about this CP story on Environment Canada research indicating water from tarsands tailings ponds is leaching into groundwater and seeping into the Athabasca River is the by now depressingly familiar way the lead Environment Canada scientist was muzzled from speaking about it.

First : News of the study, published here in the Environmental Science and Technology journal in January, followed up by a good outline of the study from the CP reporter.

Second, muzzling of the lead scientist by an Environment Canada media relations guy who nonetheless provides the reporter with an opinion of his own :

"Environment Canada said it was unable to provide an interview with the report's main author, Richard Frank.
In an email, department spokesman Danny Kingsberry downplayed its findings.

despite the study's published conclusion that :

"These samples included two of upward flowing groundwater collected < 1 m beneath the Athabasca River, suggesting oil sands process-affected groundwater is reaching the river system."

This is apparently what EC spokesy Danny Kingsberry does for a living.

Third : No problem however getting interview quotes from the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers that "the quality of water in the Athabasca River remains good" and 

"While the research technique used in this study shows some potential, further detailed work is required to evaluate its accuracy and adequacy for tracking oil sands process water." 

All of which reminded me of that parliamentary Environment Committee that destroyed the results of its own 18 month study of the tarsands pollution and water three and a half years ago. 
Dr. David Schindler, founding director of the Experimental Lakes Area project, had just testified about his own damning research into airborne tarsands contaminants found in the snow pack along the Athabasca River. He explained his project was "set up to examine the claim of industry and the Alberta government that no pollution from the oil sands industry gets into the Athabasca River."  
He further offered his opinion that oil companies' reports on contaminants are duly submitted to Environment Canada but EC is being muzzled and prevented from making the findings public -- after which the Environment Committee went in camera for the next seven sessions before destroying their report to the public and agreeing to cease their study of the oil sands and Canada's water resources altogether. 

Most of the members of that committee are still sitting in the House, including Justin Trudeau who I hear is giving quite a lot of interviews lately. Maybe some enterprising journo/accredited blogger could ask him wtf happened there. 
.

Canadian farmland vs American hedge fund

Local farmers 120km northwest of Toronto have four days left to win their battle to keep farmland and fresh water headlands from disappearing into a US hedge fund's limestone mega-quarry.

If only 3% of  land in Ontario is suitable for agriculture, why should any of it be lost to an open pit mine deeper than Niagara Falls to benefit US investors who acquired the land by passing themselves off as farmers ?


.



Laura K provides action links and the history leading to the July 10 deadline for the project's approval.
.
Avaaz has a petition to Minister of Natural Resources Linda Jeffrey. Please sign and pass it on.

Locals resisting the quarry certainly have their work cut out for them.
A good local article : High Stakes in the High Country lays out the opposition

The public face of Highland Companies in Melancthon Township is Michael Daniher of the PR firm Special Situations Inc.

"Daniher’s business partner is Paul Curley, a former advisor to Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and other Progressive Conservative party leaders. He shares an office with two other agencies, Counsel Public Relations and Counsel Public Affairs. The latter’s president, Philip Dewan, previously the most senior political advisor to Premier Dalton McGuinty, is one of two lobbyists registered to work at Queen’s Park on behalf of The Highland Companies on issues of “agriculture, economic development and trade, energy, environment, transportation and natural resources.”

NDACT, a local group opposed to the quarry, lobbied to have the agricultural land protected as "specialty cropland".

"When the specialty crop designation somewhat curiously failed to win the support of the Ontario Potato Board, NDACT members noted that Bruce Wilson, Highland’s vice-president of farm operations, is one of the board’s directors."

Today's Orangeville Citizen : Highland remains confident in bid for new quarry

In spite of the Ministry of Environment’s (MoE) criticism of The Highland Companies quarry application, the company remains confident that the application will succeed.

and from Orangeville.com :

The company’s spokesperson, Lindsay Broadhead, [note : of Hill and Knowlton] said they are aware of the public’s concerns regarding the quarry’s impact on local culture .

“It is important to reiterate that this process is not over. We welcome public scrutiny and feedback on the company’s plan including suggestions about how cultural and heritage concerns can be addressed ...”

she said, without mentioning the 30 heritage homes and farms already bulldozed by her employer. That flattened expanse in the top video? That's them. 
 
h/t West End Bob

Monday update : media coverage ;
 Global : Thousands of Canadians rally to stop mega-quarry. Good article.
.

No science, please, we're the tar sands

Remember that two year Environment Committee study on the tarsands that was ultimately shredded because the four parties at the table couldn't agree on the wording of the witnesses' testimony? The Lib members of that committee have now released their own report on the testimony and as Andrew Nikiforuk reports at The Tyee, it is "scathing".

~ Athabasca River is being polluted
~12 barrels of freshwater required to produce one barrel of crude
~world's largest man-made dams contain 170 square kilometres of toxic mining waste and they're leaking
~steam plants could affect aquifers over an area the size of Florida, using 3½ to 6 barrels of groundwater to extract one barrel of bitumen

Most alarming is the report's contention that science-based policy has been replaced by "bureaucratic compromise", with the federal government entirely abrogatiing its responsibility to monitor and protect our water supplies. The Alberta government just flat out refused to appear before the committee at all.

You're shocked I'm sure.

Wait. Did I say our water supplies?
A year ago Alberta Energy spokesman Tim Markle said : "The Chinese takeover is good news for Alberta."

He was referring to tarsands in northern Alberta being developed by the Chinese state investment fund in partnership with Calgary-based Penn West Energy Trust. China National Petroleum Company obtained 11 oilsands leases and the Chinese Offshore Oil Corporation invested $150 million in Calgary-based Meg Energy. Sinopec has bought into Syncrude. PetroChina, also state-owned, holds a 60% majority stake in two oilsands projects, and has also signed a memorandum with Enbridge to take up to half the space on its proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline from Alberta to the port of Kitimat in BC.

In comments under Nikiforuk's Tyee article, commenter Ed Deak weighs in :

The opposition can jump up and down, they won't get anywhere, because they're attacking the effects and not the causes.
Attacking other political parties, this is also true for BC, and anywhere on Earth, is a waste of time, because politicians are nothing more than pimp/executioners of and for the criminal neoclassical market economic economic theory, being taught in our universities as a "science", that's destroying the Earth and humanity.
Unless our politicians will one day get enough gumption together to attack the causes
they're part of the problem, regardless of the hot air they're blowing.
The tar sands crime wave is part of the "growth" and the "GDP", without any deductions for damages and no politician would dare to question it, as it would bring panic to the almighty stockmarkets.
Then, when the Chinese bring back the money we're paying them for killing our manufacturing infrastructure, praised by economists and the WTO, to buy the country up from under our feet with our own money, it is called "wealth creating foreign investment" that helps to pay for the billions spent on "defence".

Afterthought : An Alberta Energy spokesdude says : "The Chinese takeover is good news for Alberta" and yet back in March we were all apparently shocked shocked shocked when CSIS head Richard Fadden casually mentioned China in his remarks about "foreign interference" on "possibly unwitting" Canadian public servants and politicians here in the West.

We pretty much behaved as if we were teenagers horrified to discover that our parents have sex. I mean obviously we know they must have but we don't much like to hear about it. And given the public pillorying Fadden received for it, I don't imagine it will be brought up again.
.

The late great Great Lakes

Bob alerts us to this CBC headline : Canada, U.S. will renegotiate Great Lakes water treaty

"Canada and the United States will renegotiate the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Saturday in Niagara Falls, Ont.
Clinton, who was joined by Foreign Minister Lawrence Cannon, crossed the border for celebrations marking 100 years of the Boundary Waters Treaty between the two countries.
"We have to update it to reflect new knowledge, new technologies and, unfortunately, new threats," Clinton said.
"The rivers, the lakes, the streams, the watersheds along our boundary do not belong to one nation, they belong to all of us," she said at celebrations overlooking the falls."

This sort of "all your water is belong to us" chat freaks us right out as we immediately imagine Canadian water being shipped south so that desert communities in the southern US can continue to hose down their driveways twice a day. And so it should.

But the US State Dept transcript, the DFAIT website, and tv news video have Clinton using the rather less alarming term "amend" rather than "renegotiate" to describe the new talks as needed to update bilateral action on "pollution, increased population and urbanization, land use practices, invasive species, new chemicals and the impacts of climate change."

Well it is the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement after all and certainly attention to these issues is long overdue. Obama has earmarked $475 million for Great Lakes rejuvenation, which is $475 million more than we have.
.
But we would have been a lot happier if Lawrence Cannon had not had to stop himself today from referring to Van Loan as the Minister of Homeland Security in a toadying speech that included the comment : "Our country’s prosperity and security are inseparable from those of the United States".

We also would have been happier if both his and Clinton's remarks on water quality did not segue mid-sentence into Canadian complaints about "Buy American" provisions - as if one were dependent on the other, as if "amending" the Great Lakes agreement was being offered up by Canada in exchange for a US rollback on "Buy American".
.
WATERLIFE - the NFB interactive site for an amazing film by Kevin McMahon
.

BC Election 2009 : Water pressure

First there were documents from the much-beleaguered BC Ministry of the Environment revealing that run-of-river power projects breach environmental regulations - cutting down old-growth forest, construction during bird breeding season, that sort of thing - with government officials involved saying "they can't discuss what they found until after next week's provincial election.".

Now today we get this :
Environment ministry faces 'substantial pressure' from power producers, documents say

"Ministry of Environment officials sometimes face "substantial pressure" from IPP [Independent Power Project] proponents to exempt them from wildlife and habitat protection regulations that apply to the forestry sector -- and ministry staff are recommending that requests for exemptions be passed along to politicians rather than dealt with by civil servants"

MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT DECISION NOTE

"Recommended Option : If a Regional Manager does not wish to issue the exemption, it would elevate to the Minister."

Say what?
You mean the same Liberal politicians who have received $800,000 in political donations from that IPP industry and its supporters over the past 8 years would be making the call on whether specific IPPs are exempt from environmental regulation?
Good lord.
.
h/t Ivan in comments
.

Run-of-river power projects breach environment regulations

CBC :

"Inspection reports and emails obtained by CBC News show B.C. government officials have raised concerns about environmental infractions during the construction of the rapidly growing number of run-of-river private power projects in the province.

Last fall, inspectors from the Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of Forests and Range — who dubbed themselves "strike teams" — dropped in on the construction sites of several private run-of-river hydro projects."

Here is what they found:

• Sloppy construction that could damage streams.
• Overcutting old-growth forest.
• Inadequate sewage treatment at work camps.
• Construction during bird breeding season.
• Replanting with non-native species.

No one was charged or fined for the violations.

"Other email obtained by CBC News shows that at the time of the inspections, the company behind the projects complained in several emails that the scrutiny was redundant and interfered with construction.
When interviewed by CBC News, Jackie Hamilton, a vice-president with Cloudworks Energy, stood by her complaint.
"You're going to find the odd thing. I don't think they found serious issues, and of course any issues they found were immediately fixed," said Hamilton."

Yo, Jackie! As a former employee of the BC Government environmental assessment, perhaps you can enlighten us on exactly how you "immediately fixed" the "overcutting of old-growth forest" ?

But here's the kicker :

"Government officials involved in the strike teams say they can't discuss what they found until after next week's provincial election."

BC for Sale from Twyla Roscovich on Vimeo.

G&M : B.C. scientists urge strategic voting to protect watersheds.

.

Gordon Campbell's Big Jobs

"I think, Ms. James, you should understand — I know this is a big job, and it’s hard to get a handle on it," Gordon Campbell said condescendingly to Carole James in yesterday's second and final televised leader's debate before the May 12th election.
And later : "Thousands of jobs are at stake ... I think it’s important for us to have people with some business experience who can help deal with that."

A supplement in this month's Common Ground lists some of the helpers who have moved from key positions in Gordo's office and government ministries to the private power industry:
The List of Key Liberal Insiders Hired by Private Power Developers

• Patrick Kinsella, Co-chair of 2001 and 2005 BC Liberal provincial campaigns - has consulted for Alcan, Accenture and now Plutonic Power. Alleged to have worked for both CN and BC Rail as BC Rail was being sold to CN.
• Tom Syer, former deputy chief of staff to Gordon Campbell, now a director at Plutonic Power/GE.
• David Cyr, former Assistant to BC Liberal Minister Mike de Jong, now a director at Plutonic Power/GE.
• Robert Poore, recently worked under the Provincial Revenue Minister of the Province of BC, now a senior director at Plutonic Power/GE.
• Bill Irwin, after holding key positions in the BC Ministries of Land and Water, and Crown Lands, now a director at Plutonic Power/GE.
• Doug Bishop, formerly 32 years with BC Hydro and Powerex, now with Plutonic Power/GE.
• Bruce Ripley spent the last 2 of his 16 years at BC Hydro as VP Engineering, now President and COO of Plutonic Power/GE.
• Elisha McCallum (Moreno), after 7 years with BC Hydro as a media relations manager, moved to a directorship with ... [I know the suspense must be killing you] ... Plutonic Power/GE.

Plus 14 others in a list also left here in the comments on April 19 by Racheal11.
That's a whole lot of help.

In yesterday's Times Colonist, Raincoast Conservation explains the hazards presented by Plutonic Power/General Electric's plans for its run-of-river projects :

"The B.C. government ... pursues all manner of fossil fuel development, from offshore oil and gas to coalbed methane. The province is also supporting the construction of the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline that would carry some of the world's dirtiest oil from Alberta's tarsands to the B.C. coast for export to hydrocarbon-hungry markets abroad.

Within this context, the government is attempting to convince the public that the province is doing something substantive to address climate change by opening up our coast to widespread IPP development.

Five species of Pacific salmon, as well as winter and summer-run steelhead, spawn and rear in reaches or tributaries of the 17 rivers proposed for water extraction and diversion.
Plutonic is proposing to divert between 77% and 95% of the mean annual flow from the 17 rivers and tributaries, potentially influencing the temperature range and flow of water, two criteria that strongly influence the survival of eggs and fry."

Yup. It's a big job alright. A big Scampbell job.
.

BC For Sale - Election 2009

Angus Reid poll - April 29

Liberals - 42% ... NDP - 39% ... Green - 13% ... Con - 3%

.

Why the rush to PowerUp?

A map of proposed and existing run-of-river licences via IPP Watch:
Blue - generating; green - granted; red - application
Large Google map of sites here.
I wonder what the salmon think of it?

So given that we generally generate more power than we need in BC, what are all these for again?
Oh yeah - exporting power to the US :

"A key adviser to California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said yesterday that B.C. run-of-river power may yet qualify as green power.
Utilities in California are nearly all struggling to meet a requirement that 20% of their electricity come from renewable sources by 2010.
They have only months to meet the target or face financial penalties, and private-sector power producers in B.C., along with the provincial government, are urging California to expand its definition of renewable power to encompass run-of-river projects with up to 50 megawatts of capacity as part of the solution."

Which is interesting because projects of less than 50 megawatts do not require environmental reviews.

Over at Plutonic Power, home of the $4-billion Bute Inlet run-of-17-rivers Project in partnership with US General Electric, environmentalist and executive director of PowerUp Canada "citizens initiative" Tzeporah Berman gave us another reason :

"We're in a recession and calling for a moratorium of the private sector of renewable energy companies would send the signal to the business community that this is not a place for them to invest in."

Certainly Gordo is invested in IPPs. In response to Squamish’s strenuous objections to a run-of-river development on Ashlu River, Gordo passed Bill 30, retroactively removing the right of local municipalities to stop such developments.

And Plutonic Power has in turn invested in Gordo's Liberals :

"CEO Donald McInnes said his company did not donate to the Liberal Party, in response to a caller on CKNW's Bill Good show this morning, but Elections BC records prove otherwise.
When asked why he made that claim, McInnes responded, "I don't consider that to be donations, that's buying a seat at a table."

Quite.

In comments in the post below - BC's Watershed Election - commenter Racheal11 left some handy info and links to Liberal party insiders and BC Hydro execs who have recently shifted over to the extremely lucrative IPP industy : Insiders move to IPP industry

So we're good with all this, are we?
Gordo's government, former BC Hydro execs, private industry, and prominent environmentalists all pulling together ... to export power to California.
The mind boggles.
And if we decide we want our rivers back before the 25 to 50 year leases are up, are we looking at a NAFTA Chapter 11 challenge?
.

BC's Watershed Election

"Environmental blah blah" is how retiring NDP MLA Corky Evans describes the privatization of BC's waterways under the guise of addressing climate change. So-called "green" run of river hydro projects, also known as independent power projects or IPPs, divert water into a pipe several kilometres long and then into a turbine before returning it to the same watercourse downstream.

Among the over 500 streams and rivers staked by private companies so far, the Plutonic Power and General Electric Bute Inlet Project plans to divert and dam 17 streams and rivers, while constructing 445 kilometres of transmission lines, 314 kilometres of roads, and 104 bridges. Across the inlet from me, the Sea-to-Sky corridor has stakes for 110 streams and rivers.

How did this happen? The 2002 B.C. Energy Plan forbade our formerly very profitable Crown corporation B.C. Hydro from producing new sources of hydroelectricity. Further, BC Hydro will now be forced to buy energy from the new private producers at $120 megawatts per hour for which they will receive $60 in the market. Well, you know Gordo and privatization : BC Rail, BC Ferries, healthcare,

What about local opposition? Silenced in June 2006 when Campbell passed Bill 30 to retroactively abolish local zoning authority over them.

Who supports the run of river projects? You mean apart from speculators and Liberal-led astroturf orgs like BC Citizens For Green Energy? Well, there's David Suzuki, economist Mark Jaccard, and environmental activist Tzeporah Berman who started the foundation PowerUp Canada just to promote them.

And why are we doing this again? To sell our "green" energy to the US. says Berman, through what Gordo referred to at the last PNWER summit as "electric transmission corridors".

Coincidentally, Suzuki, Jaccard, and Berman all made media headlines in the last few days criticizing the NDP for not supporting Gordo's "gas tax". Not that they support Gordo, they say, just "his environmental leadership". That would be the Gordo who gutted the BC Environment ministry and supports fish farms, the Gordo of Gateway Pacific and twin Enbridge pipelines from the Alberta tar sands to Kitimat, the Gordo of expanding the oil and gas indutry in the north and building more roads and bridges instead of light rail and public transit, the Gordo of offshore drilling and renewed tanker routes ... that Gordo.

.

"SPP : Kill it, recast it, or rebrand it"

is the recommendation of Sarah Ladislaw, member of the North American SPP Energy Working Group and fellow at CSIS - the Center For Strategic and International Studies. She was speaking at a CSIS book promo/discussion group in Washington DC last week for The Future of North America 2025 : Outlook and Recommendations, edited by Armand Peschard-Sverdrup.

You'll recall the public outcry up here in April last year when the CSIS NA2025 panel convened in Calgary and director Armand B. Peschard-Sverdrup was quoted as saying :

"It's no secret that the U.S. is going to need water. ...
It's no secret that Canada is going to have an overabundance of water.
At the end of the day, there may have to be arrangements."

According to comments they made last week, the panel has not changed its position on that.
"Canadians have no water management, " said Bill Nitze, adding that while "North America is water-rich, southern California and Mexico are not." He recommended setting up "water markets and water banking", plus expanding the powers and budgets of the International Water Commission(US/Mexico) and the International Joint Commission (US/Canada) to "manage water in all three countries".

Noting that "the SPP has gotten a bad name on the centre-left in Canada" where it is "seen as a vehicle for business interests to exploit resources, including bulk water exports from Canada" he further advocated the importance of "a game changer" and "giving it a different flavour" by "getting people to talk differently". In a recommendation from the floor, Diana Negroponte of the Brookings Institution suggested adopting the word "coordination" in place of "integration" and panel members duly noted her advice to "avoid the word integration".

Answering a question about the current stagnation of the SPP, Ladislaw advised expanding the focus from the federal to the state/provincial level, a tactic we have already seen in groups like PNWER and Atlantica.

"Based on the EPA experience," said Bill Nitze, "if you provide money, lots and lots of money, for local needs, then you can get co-operation. Federal governments have enough money to make this happen".

This was easily up there as the most boring hour and a half I have ever spent so you guys out there owe me big time. Conjure up, if you will, a high level discussion of Germany's annexation of Austria in 1938 discussed entirely from the point of view of making the trains run more efficiently.

Con Convention '08 : Running with scissors

BigCityLib says Winnipeg may just become the most hilarious city in Canada next week when the Cons hold their big ConConvention and publicly air their C.R.A.P. :

"A Conservative Government will support legislation defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman."

Yeah but not this Consevative Government - what else you got?

"The Conservative Party supports investing significantly in increasing our scientific knowledge base and in making firm and fair decisions based on facts ..."

Um .. yeah. Well, ok, I get it, CRAP, baby steps and all that ...

"Food. Food is one of the basic necessities of life, and a Conservative Government places high priority on assuring that Canada’s food supply is safe, secure, and sustainable."

OK, that's good - keep it mind-numbingly obvious. No need to mention your recent policy forays into having the food industry police itself into listeriosis ...

"... an investigation into the security of our long term freshwater resources as they pertain to exportation as a commodity."

Mentioning water exports as a commodity is pushing your luck a bit though, isn't it?
I also notice the original proposal was "protection and security of" but "protection" got crossed off somehow ...

"... recognizing the need for improving security and improved relations with the United States and establish a study of the feasibility of a North American perimeter."

Whoa! CRAP! What happened to not looking scary? Now is hardly the time to be rediscovering your Reform roots.
But wait! What's this? Antonia Z at Broadsides :

"Protecting Pregnant Women
The Conservative Party supports legislation to ensure that individuals who commit violence against a pregnant woman would face additional charges if her unborn child was killed or injured during the commission of a crime against the mother."

Not the anti-abortion C-484 thingey again? Seriously?
You guys may as well all go get fitted for new muzzles right now before Big Daddy gets home.

Cellucci suggests huge aqueducts to carry Canadian water to US

Embassy Mag :

"Pointing out the imminent droughts in the southwestern United States caused by climate change, [former US Ambassador to Canada] Paul Cellucci raised the idea of constructing huge aqueducts to carry Canadian water south of the border.
He added that "to some extent, fresh water is a renewable resource," and that this opinion is shared by a recent report by the Montreal Economic Institute."

Yes, we already covered that Montreal Economic Institute report back here, Paul :

The chairman of the board of the Montreal Economic Institute, the 'independent non-profit' so keen on privatizing and exporting Canadian water, is Helene Desmarais. Helene Desmarais is married to Paul Desmarais Jr., co-CEO of Power Corporation of Canada and board member of GDF Suez, a multinational corporation that is a world leader in water privatization.

So. Not entirely arm's length then.

GDF Suez recently spun off its water equities into Suez Environnement Company, now Europe's 2nd largest private water management corp, in which it maintains a 35% controlling interest.

Meanwhile, we learn Paris is the latest city to take action to put water back into public hands, in Is the Water Privatization Trend Ending?, an interesting article about Suez, "corruption, fraudulent accounting practices, and high prices", and the EU's attempt "to impose the worldwide privatisation of water and other public services through the WTO".

Oh yeah, by all means bring on that Canada-EU Free Trade Agreement with its "deep economic integration negotiations", so enthusistically touted by French President Sarkozy, currently also president of the EU, as he awarded France's highest honour to Paul Desmarais Sr. ten days ago.

In 2006, Mr. Cellucci suggested "that water should be included in the same category as other natural resources exported as Canadian commodities on the open market," an opinion also shared by the Montreal Economic Institute.

Stick it, Paul.

"Stephen Harper's Big Thing"

John Ibbitson at the G&M has a "New Big Idea", which he also proposes to call "Stephen Harper's Big Thing" :

"a revolutionary new agreement that would transform both Canada and the U.S., truly launching the continent into the 21st century."

Good for you for finally coming out, John.
After years of pissing about, defending the very jelly bean-ness of the Security and Prosperity Partnership - It's not about deep integration; it's just about efficiency! It's not scary! Oh noes, it's dead now because of those whiny nationalists - you finally get down to it :

"This is the perfect time to do something big. This is the time for a North American environmental, security and economic accord."

And what a great name you have chosen for it - The Big Idea.
The "Big Idea" was also the name coined by the C.D. Howe Institute in 2002 for their Shaping the Future of the North American Economic Space: A Framework for Action, but I'm sure they'll be happy to hear you want to revive it. As I recall, that report suggested that Canada could woo the US into deeper integration with us by joining the war on terra and offering them free access to our water and oil.

Oh, that is what you mean :

"Canada should propose a harmonized, universal, continental market, coupled with massive joint investment aimed at reducing the environmental impact of the oil sands, in exchange for guarantees that the U.S. gets all the oil."

All the oil?

"Let's not stop there. Let's propose a joint security agreement to prescreen goods and people coming into the continent. Let's set a joint tariff. Let's remove national protections on cultural and financial services."

Because I ask you what could be better for Canada right now than hitching our wagon to US security agreements and US finances? But let's not stop there, John. How about US medicare too?

Congratulations, John. As the only journalist invited to the SPP leaders' meet-ups, you have finally proven your worth to them. And a big idea shout-out to the G&M too, for having the guts to go public with this. We always knew you had it in you.

SPP : "We're getting better all the time."

Stockwell Day, the RCMP, Bell Canada and Microsoft will be partnering on "a national cyber-security strategy that will seek to protect key infrastructure as well as Canadians' identities".
"A high-level security conference being hosted by the Conference Board of Canada" will take place on Nov 5 and 6th.
The Conference Board of Canada, you may recall, partnered with the U.S. Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) to launch the North American Future 2025 Project , "to help guide the ongoing Security and Prosperity Partnership". At their conference in Calgary last April their agenda noted : "the overriding future goal of North America is to achieve joint optimum utilization of the available water."

So you'll excuse me if I cast a jaundiced eye on whatever new plan to protect my "Canadian identity" they might be hosting this time round. One of the original objectives of the SPP was "improving the coordination of intelligence-sharing, cross-border law enforcement".

At least Canada's Privacy Commissioner, Jennifer Stoddart, has been invited this time and will be addressing the conference on "Balancing Privacy with Cyber Security".
In May there was a "Server in the Sky" meet-up in San Francisco to discuss the FBI's proposed shared database of biometric information - our fingerprints, palm prints, and iris scan data to be exchanged among the International Information Consortium of US, Canada, UK, Australia, New Zealand, and eventually the EU. Ms Stoddart first heard about the conference by reading about it in the British press.

As Ms Stoddart said on CBC in response to that meeting in May : "Canada has a very weak 25 year old Privacy Act with no human rights standards built in to our agreements with other countries." Additionally she was alarmed by "the conflating of criminals and suspected terrorists", the lack of oversight of the biometric info once it passes to other countries, and the rise of "a surveillance society".

One of our partners in the International Information Consortium is already well on the way to becoming a surveillance society:
The Daily Mail via Statism Watch :

"Every person in Britain could have their internet history, email records and telephone calls tracked under a proposed £12 billion plan by ministers.
The system would see hundreds of hidden devices planted to tap into communications on the internet and via mobile phone providers.
And a national database would be created to store the information which officials say would help in the fight against terrorism and organised crime."

I thought we already had Facebook for that.

From the blog of the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada :

"In terms of Canadian participation [in Server in the Sky], our citizens rightfully expect that their personal information remains safeguarded and understandably, could be reluctant to see that information freely shared with two countries that were ranked near the bottom of Privacy International’s ratings of privacy protection around the world."

David Black, manager of the RCMP's cyber infrastructure protection section, says of the Bell/Microsoft/RCMP plan for "the protection of critical cyber infrastructure and the convergence of technological and physical security", presumably to be shared in due course with the other members of the FBI's International Information Consortium :

"We're getting better all the time."

16 lakes to be "reclassified" as toxic dump sites

CBC : 16 Canadian lakes are slated to be officially but quietly "reclassified" as toxic dump sites for mines. The lakes include prime wilderness fishing lakes from B.C. to Newfoundland.

Environmentalists say the process amounts to a "hidden subsidy" to mining companies, allowing them to get around laws against the destruction of fish habitat.

Under the Fisheries Act, it's illegal to put harmful substances into fish-bearing waters. But, under a little-known subsection known as Schedule Two of the mining effluent regulations, federal bureaucrats can redefine lakes as "tailings impoundment areas."
That means mining companies don't need to build containment ponds for toxic mine tailings.

Catherine Coumans, spokeswoman for the environmental group Mining Watch : "Something that used to be a lake — or a river, in fact, they can use rivers — by being put on this section two of this regulation is no longer a river or a lake," she said. "It's a tailings impoundment area. It's a waste disposal site. It's an industrial waste dump."

Steve Robertson, exploration manager for Imperial Metals : "This is a project that can bring a lot of good jobs, long-term jobs, well-paying jobs ..."

When was the public review process that okayed subverting the Fisheries Act to allow public lands to be used as toxic dump sites for private interests?
I'll bet you're not at all surprised to learn that Sacred Headwaters is on that list.

CBC link archived on the Wayback Machine :
https://web.archive.org/web/20080705134857/http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/06/16/condemned-lakes.html?ref=rss
.

Behold a Pale hobbyhorse

Steve's mission statement for the Canada First Defence Strategy

Monday - $30 billion

Jay Paxton, Peter MacKay's press secretary : "As such, the speeches are the strategy."

Dan Dugas, MacKay's senior spokesman : "The strategy is what they unveiled,"

Wednesday - upon further reconsideration - $50 billion

Peter MacKay's office : "There's a very detailed cabinet document that lays this down and more."

Defence Department senior military official who apparently cannot be named : "There is a very solid, detailed document in existence. It's not just stuff pulled out of the air."

Ok, so not just something Steve pulled out of his ass which he can stuff right back in again when it suits him (h/t Boris)

There is a plan - they just don't know what it is yet.

"One senior officer used an expletive to express his dissatisfaction with how, in his view, the most proactive spending plan the Forces have ever seen was being communicated to the public."

"Military planners said they took a comprehensive modern approach to predict what global security risks or "conflict drivers" such as terrorism, climate change or population migration would drive up demand for the services of the Forces.

"Food is one, oil is another one, water is one," said another military official."

Pale at A Creative Revolution asks:

Is this finally Steve's military plan to "battle" the climate crisis?

and provides this handy reference drawing for clarification :

Note : I made a very small addition to Pale's drawing which I hope she will not mind.

Great Lakes Danger Zones

The Center For Public Integrity has released pages from a government-suppressed report on environmental toxicity in the air, land, and water surrounding the Great Lakes. Nine million people in 26 "areas of concern" show elevated health rates of infant mortality and cancer - ten of these "areas of concern" are in Canada. They are exposed to dioxin, PCBs, pesticides, lead, mercury, or six other hazardous pollutants.

The report, Public Health Implications of Hazardous Substances in the Twenty-Six U.S. Great Lakes Areas of Concern, was commissioned in 2001 by the International Joint Commission, an independent bilateral organization consisting of six board members appointed by the U.S. and Canadian governments (three from each country with the current US members appointed by Bush) to advise on the use and quality of boundary waters between the two countries. The study was carried out by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Note : and Prevention

Christopher De Rosa, then the director of the ATSDR's division of toxicology and environmental medicine, who oversaw the study and has since been demoted for pushing for its release, has written that blocking publication of the report has "the appearance of censorship of science and distribution of factual information regarding the health status of vulnerable communities."

De Rosa was also the whistle blower on the formaldehyde found in trailers supplied by the Federal Emergency Management Agency to victims of hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

"Canadian biologist Michael Gilbertson, a former IJC staffer and another of the three peer reviewers, told the Center For Public Integrity that the study has been suppressed because it suggests that vulnerable populations have been harmed by industrial pollutants.
Gilbertson : "The whole problem with all this kind of work is wrapped up in that word ‘injury.’ If you have injury, that implies liability. Liability, of course, implies damages, legal processes, and costs of remedial action. The governments, frankly, in both countries are so heavily aligned with, particularly, the chemical industry, that the word amongst the bureaucracies is that they really do not want any evidence of effect or injury to be allowed out there."

Water truckin'

You may remember Michael Byers as the UBC International Law prof who asked prior to the last election why extraordinary rendition wasn't an election issue and who also red-flagged our Afghan detainee transfer deal in the national press over a whole freakin year ago.

Byers has a book out - "Intent for a Nation : What is Canada for?" - and The Tyee has an excerpt :

"In 2004, the Canadian actor Paul Gross starred in a made-for-TV drama entitled H2O. Gross plays Tom McLaughlin, the charismatic son of a murdered Canadian prime minister, who takes over Canada at the behest of a group of international financiers eager to sell our fresh water to an increasingly thirsty United States."

Did you see this movie? I hadn't so I looked it up at IMDb. Some of the user comments about the unlikelihood of the plot's basic premise were kind of sad. At the time this movie aired, the GATT agricultural provisions regarding water were two decades old, and NAFTA, including the dreaded Annex Tariff Item 22.01: water: all natural water other than sea water, whether or not clarified or purified, had already passed its tenth birthday. Five years before this movie was even a twinkle in CBC's eye, the NDP were standing on the floor of the HoC demanding a clarification on water sovereignty under NAFTA - and it was denied.

While conceding that Canada's legal position on control of her water is at the very least muddy, Byer warns against setting any bulk water trading precedents:

"A single act of trading water on a bulk basis would arguably transform the resource into a tradable good that was legally indistinguishable from softwood lumber, potash or oil, rendering subsequent attempts to prevent or limit further exports illegal. For this reason, it is imperative that Canada takes water off the free trade table, quickly and decisively -- now, before it's too late."

Well another attempt was made two weeks ago, this time in the form of a motion asking the Cons to request a clarification from Mexico and the US on their position on Canada's water, and it was again denied.

Byers' excerpt concludes:

"On water, as on so many other issues, our conciliatory, don't-rock-the-boat approach to Canada-U.S. relations has failed. Unless we stand up for our own interests, Canadian fresh water could soon be irrigating crops, watering golf courses and filling backyard swimming pools in the south western United States.
It's time to dissuade Americans of the notion that we're going to rescue them from the consequences of their short-sighted, profligate ways by allowing them to mess with our environment, too. It's time to make it absolutely clear that bulk water exports are not covered by NAFTA."

In the meantime someone please let me know how that H2O movie turned out.

Tyee link from Jennifer at Runesmith's Canadian Content

.

Water wars

No, not with the US ; apparently we're still duking this one out with the Cons.

You remember those International Trade Committee hearings last month on Canada's water and energy security under NAFTA and the SPP? The one in which chairperson Leon Benoit stomped out with the three other Con members because he didn't like Prof. Gordon Laxer's testimony on just how vulnerable Canada is?
Yes? Then you'll remember how the rest of the committee continued to do their job.

Today the following motion was brought from that Int Trade Committee to the House of Commons for debate :

"Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), and the motion adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 15, 2007 your Committee recommends:

Whereas Canada’s water resources must be protected;

Whereas NAFTA covers all services and all goods, except those that are expressly excluded and water is not excluded;

Whereas this situation puts the provincial and federal laws concerning the protection of water including the prohibition of bulk water exports at risk;

Whereas a simple agreement by exchange of letters among the governments of Canada, the United States and Mexico specifying that water is not covered by NAFTA must be respected by international tribunals as if it were an integral part of NAFTA;

That the Standing Committee recommend that the government quickly begin talks with its American and Mexican counterparts to exclude water from the scope of NAFTA."

Yes! Thank you Bloc and NDP committee members, and particularly NDP Trade critic Peter Julian who has worked so hard to expose the whole SPP betrayal in parliament.

The Con members on the committee dissented of course.
And I'm sure, given their previous behavior on the committee and the outing of the Con's dirty tricks manual on how to shut down committees on subjects they don't like, you're not exactly reeling with surprise about it.

Down at the bottom :

"Dissenting opinion from the Conservative Party
The Government members of the Standing Committee on International Trade, for reasons previously stated by our members which appear in the evidence, [snip], choose to dissent respectfully from the Ninth Report."

Dissent away, ReformACons! Da motherfuckin motion is in da House!

SATURDAY UPDATE: From the Ottawa Citizen :

"A motion to open NAFTA talks to make sure bulk-water exports are excluded from the deal sparked an acrimonious three-hour debate in the House yesterday, with all three Opposition parties lined up against the Tories.

The Tories say a 1993 letter signed by the three governments specifically says "water in its natural state" is exempt from the provisions of NAFTA.
But water will not be considered to be "in its natural state" once it has been loaded into a pipeline, or onto a tanker, critics fear.

NDP MP Peter Julian says that in 1998, California-based Sun Belt Water Inc. launched a $10.5-billion lawsuit under NAFTA against British Columbia when a provincial ban scuttled its plans to ship water by tanker to the U.S. (The case is still pending.)

"As a foreign investor, all you need to do is apply for a permit.
You'll either get to export water, or you can sue for compensation, which taxpayers will have to pay. Either way, the investor wins, and Canada loses."

Water is protected not only by the 1993 NAFTA letter, but also by a federal-provincial pact and an amendment to the Canada-U.S. Boundary Waters Treaty, which protects the Great Lakes and other shared waters, he [Ted Menzies, Con from the Int Trade committee] argues.

But the Council of Canadians, an Ottawa-based advocacy group, says the U.S. never signed that amendment and notes that it doesn't cover water sources that are not shared with the U.S."

The quisling Cons are terrified to ask the fucking question : Under NAFTA, does Canada control her own water, or, as Peter Julian puts it, is it a choice between 1)exporting water or 2)paying compensation to each and every foreign company who applies for a permit to do so.

May 31 Hansard account of debate between all parties in the House..
.