Hey All!
For those concerned about the proposed expansion of the Pitt Quarry or the regulations around mining in general, this blustery exchange is a must read.
Enjoy!
Official Report of
DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY
(Hansard)
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 2009
Afternoon Sitting
Volume 8, Number 5
M. Sather: I’d like to ask the Minister of State for Mining some questions about the Pitt River Quarries operation in Pitt Meadows, which is an operation that’s been going since the 1960s.
Although there have been complaints from time to time from residents of Sheridan Hill, they have been minimal compared to most recently, because in recent years the mine has expanded greatly. They’re looking at a further expansion proposal now that would leave…. Mind you, we’re taking a recognized land form, a geographical feature, in Maple Ridge and levelling it to sea level here, so there’s a lot of concern from residents about what effect this is going to have not only on them but the viewscapes in the area, the effects on tourism and so on.
I just want to start by asking the minister about the materials that Pitt River Quarries presented to Pitt Meadows council. They had a very outdated map on there, in terms of the extent of their operation to date. Is there any requirement that they produce a current map, or is it up to local government to figure that out?
Hon. R. Hawes: They would be required to provide updated maps. Certainly, the chief mines inspector would be looking for that material from them.
M. Sather: I hope they do provide those soon, because even on Google now, 2008 is their last satellite photo, and it’s quite out of date.
There’s a gentleman named Brent Richards who will have contacted the minister of state and who has sort of been a spokesperson for our residents around this issue. One of the things he was told by a ministry official was that as soon as the ministry received a reclamation bond, they could grant the extension approval in as little as a week. Can the minister comment on that?
Hon. R. Hawes: I’m not sure where that information came from, but that is not accurate. Full public input is received and considered. The chief mines inspector takes many factors into consideration. It’s not just a matter of making a submission, and in a week you have a permit. It doesn’t work like that.
M. Sather: Well, Pitt River Quarries actually had written a letter to me saying that they’re going to have a public process in four to six weeks, which would be right around Christmas — not a very opportune time for the public. In any event, can the minister of state confirm that that means there wouldn’t be any action taken, that there wouldn’t be any extension granted, before that period of time?
Hon. R. Hawes: First and foremost, there can’t be a public consultation over the Christmas period. That would have to take place not during the Christmas period, so I’m assuming it would be sometime afterwards.
The chief mines inspector, though, will gather all of the information from the public input. He will also consider all of the other factors, including safety and other things. When he makes his decision, it will be after all of those things. A permit will not be issued until he has made that full consideration.
M. Sather: Well, Mr. Richards has told us that in an e-mail he received from the minister of state, the minister of state said that this process of expansion could conceivably be stopped by an environmental assessment. Can the minister of state comment on that?
Hon. R. Hawes: If the proponent was trying to pass the threshold of 250,000 tonnes — which he’s not — that would trigger a full environmental assessment. But if he’s under that, then a mine development review panel is struck. They review pretty much all aspects, including the environmental aspects. So there is an environmental scan taken prior to any permit being issued. The information that they compile, I think, goes to the chief mines inspector and also forms part of the information he uses to form his decision.
M. Sather: Well, the minister is quoted in the local press as saying that the chief inspector of mines makes the decision on this. “There can be no political interference,” I believe was the phrase that he used. Can the minister of state tell me, then: can the minister not have any involvement in this process?
[ Page 2523 ]
Hon. R. Hawes: The chief mines inspector is a statutory officer. He’s a statutory decision-maker. Across government, all statutory decision-makers make decisions free from political interference. I think the member, if you sat down and thought about why that should be…. It’s pretty clear to me that you don’t want political interference in the types of decisions that these statutory decision-makers are charged with making.
Frankly, I have absolute confidence in not just the staff within the ministry and the information they gather but also in the chief mines inspector.
M. Sather: I’m not sure what the minister of state means by “political interference.” Section 11 of the Mines Act under “Permits – powers of minister,” says: “If the minister considers it to be necessary in the public interest, the minister, in respect of the issuing of permits, has and may exercise all the powers that the chief inspector may exercise under this Act.” How, then, could the minister not be involved if he chose to be?
