Today Michael rose in the House to speak to the government motion to harmonize the environmental review processes fro the provincial and federal government.
In light of how the issue of fish farms has been handled, Michael voiced, rather passionately his skepticism about this motion.
The official Hansard is now posted below.
2010 Legislative Session: Second Session, 39th Parliament
HANSARD
The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.
The printed version remains the official version.
Official Report of
DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY
(Hansard)
MONDAY, MARCH 22, 2010
Morning Sitting
Volume 11, Number 8
M. Sather: It’s my pleasure to speak to the motion today about harmonizing the environmental assessment process federally and provincially. The problem is, as has been already mentioned by one of my colleagues, the trust factor. Who can trust this government around environmental issues? And the previous speakers from the government side are hardly mentioning the environment, by the way. They’re talking about development.
Let’s look at one thing. Let’s look at protection of our wild salmon and how that’s not happening and how this government is not doing due diligence at all. I mean, Alexandra Morton has done fantastic work on this. Everybody knows about it.
The issue of drug resistance to SLICE, the drug that is typically applied to salmon…. She has pointed it out — using government data, Ministry of Agriculture and Lands data, and data from the fish farms themselves that shows that this is a problem that affects our wild salmon. What does this government do? Obfuscate, ignore or pretend it’s not there.
You know, she sent material to Dr. Mark Sheppard and Trevor Rhodes from the aquaculture operations. At least they’ve answered, which puts your career at risk these days with this government when you’re a civil servant. But they’re not giving any biological, scientific refutation of what she’s saying. Nothing. In fact, what did they say? “Go to the fish farms to get the information.”
That’s the status of environmental protection in this province under this government, and they want us, I guess…. They’re calling upon us in this motion, I assume, to support the idea. But yet there is no…. How can there be any trust?
It’s a travesty that we, the public of British Columbia, have to go to the fish farms to get information on public water. This whole issue is in the waters that belong to the public, but you wouldn’t think so. I don’t even know if the minister gets the information. I think the minister is a sincere fellow, and he works hard, but this is a travesty, and this is the kind of thing that we’re seeing more and more.
It gives me little faith at all that this government is going to in any way enhance protection of the environment through this process. Then we’ve got the minister of gravel over from Abbotsford-Mission who is, on and on, talking about dredging gravel out of the Fraser River, damaging the white sturgeon.
His own scientist, Ross Neuman, has pointed that out — the damage that this is doing. But no. He goes on promoting these kinds of damaging environmental practices. How can we have any faith, any trust that this government’s process is going to lead to a better outcome for the environment? I don’t think so.
[ Page 3451 ]
All the time while this is going on, everything that’s going on, what have we got? We’ve got Sergeant Schultz there for a Minister of Environment. “I know nothing. I see nothing.” We can’t have any trust in him. We can’t have any trust in this government. We can’t have any trust that the Premier, despite talk about….
Deputy Speaker: Member, I would ask you to bring some courtesy to your remarks.
M. Sather: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I certainly will afford some courtesy to the government, but I will say this, fully and completely — that I do not trust this process that this government has embarked upon because of their record, and their record stands to be seen everywhere you look.
You look at the Minister of Forests recently saying, “Well, you know what? Our staff” — of which there are very few now in the field, I might add, thanks to them — “are going to be shifted away from checking paperwork prepared by industry foresters,” citing that a lot of the work being done is duplication, because “professional foresters have a responsibility to ensure that documents they sign are in full compliance.” Well, isn’t that great? “Trust us.” That’s what they’re saying. “Trust industry. Trust us.”
But we can’t trust this government, and I don’t trust this government. I’ll look at what they have to offer, but I’ll tell you that I’ll be looking with a very jaundiced eye at it.
This is a nice web site. Good fresh interface and nice informative blogs. I will be coming back soon, thanks for the great blog.