We’re slowly but surely coming into the election campaign for Election Day, May 12, 2009 and things are starting to happen. For me this is especially exciting as I will be travelling around the province telling the truth about the Campbell government’s policy of giving private companies a monopoly on creating power while devastating our environment.
 
I’ve said for some months now that the private power issue is a political issue and have used the rather good pun, I think, that we face a watershed election. Moreover, it’s my nature to be frank and I’ve been up front with you about my own vote, which will be NDP...
 
Over 30 years ago when I became politically active it was with the BC Social Credit Party under Bill Bennett. This was a long time ago when some of you weren’t even born yet. The Socreds, as they were called, were a “centre-right” party that allowed me as a minister over a five year period to deal with social issues, environmental issues and health issues. The NDP of that day were considerably more “left” than now.
 
A lot has happened in 30 years. The governing Liberals have moved dramatically to the “right” having as their inspirations the policies of Ronald Reagan, Milton Friedman, and the Fraser Institute while at the same time the NDP have moved substantially towards the centre. Indeed I would say that while the NDP contains within it people who one would call traditional left wingers they would tell you that many of their views have been marginalized by the new directions the party has taken.
 
I come to this election appalled at the Liberal government on almost all fronts including their disastrous financial policies but especially appalled by their utter disregard for our precious environment. Their policies of encouraging the fish farm industry and the private production of power have gone right to the root of what, in my view, British Columbia is all about.
 
I see the coming election as a test of wills – the will of the government to privatize the province and smash the environment while doing so, and the will of the people to preserve and protect our heritage for generations to come.
 
Everyone knows that development and the environment are often incompatible but that doesn’t justify destruction of the environment, especially when it’s done needlessly.
 
We don’t need the fish farm industry and we don’t need private power yet these two industries are doing irreparable harm to the things we hold dear – our rivers and streams and our fish, especially our salmon.
 
Isn’t the Green Party then the way to go?
 
I wish I could say yes but the hard fact is that they will elect no one and will, by dividing the vote, help the Liberals. I support the Greens but as long as we have a “first past the post” electoral system they are doomed to be a fringe party.
 
There is only one option: the NDP. I say that even though they are supposedly fiscally incapable while the Liberals are supposedly sound in such matters. To that I say four things:

1.   This is a new NDP that has learned from past experience
2.   Looking at the Liberals' fiscal record – the overruns on the convention center are double what Glen Clark’s ferry catastrophe cost; the Olympics have become a fiscal embarrassment and remember that the Campbell Liberals committed the Province to swallow the entire Olympics overrun.
3.   Even if the NDP were as bad as its worst enemies portray them, any mess they make can be cleared up by a new government
4.   If the Liberals are re-elected they will so ravage our environment that it can never ever be repaired and BC Hydro once lost, can never be revived.
 
We at Save Our Rivers Society put it simply – If the government won’t change, we’ll have to change the government.
 
I put the future of my province ahead of any short term fiscal concerns thus I have no trouble saying that this time I will vote NDP to save my province from environmental destruction and the loss of control over our water and energy.

Comments (3) | Add as favourites (82) | Quote this article on your site | Views: 778

In an astonishing move last week, BC Hydro, a Crown Corporation, contradicted its boss, Gordon Campbell, saying that BC’s power requirements had lessened and therefore significantly cut back its recent "clean power call"; indeed, apparently we only need 60% of what the government alleged we needed as it embarked on its disastrous energy policy. We at Save Our Rivers Society know the story goes much deeper than this.
 
This message is astonishing and truly takes the breath away, especially when you realize its true import. BC Hydro has, since the 1960s, been the power prognosticator. It was Hydro that crunched the numbers and advised the government of the day how much power would be needed in the longer term – erring on the generous side - backed up with figures and complete with recommendations. We must assume, then, that even BC Hydro’s recent figures contain an exaggeration factor lest they err on the short side (indeed, according to SFU energy expert Dr. John Calvert, BC Hydro has been forced by government policy to include unwieldily and unnecessary "insurance" buffers in its calculations for our power needs). If we accept Hydro’s latest figures (and why shouldn’t they be more reliable than figures prepared by Campbell bedding down with Alcan and private power producers?) the Campbell government’s entire energy policy rests on an erroneous calculation of our needs.

But Gordon Campbell doesn’t care about this and is indifferent to energy calculations. Why?
 
Because his energy policy isn’t about BC’s needs but is a commitment to private power producers to create power for export - while dangerously handing over control of our water resources to foreign companies - and as long as that’s large enough to look after BC as well, there’s no problem. To put it bluntly, this government is committed to an ever-increasing development of private power for export which will always have enough left over to look after BC – at exorbitant prices, of course.
 
What is also remarkable is that BC Hydro, which has been doing power predictions for decades, also sees that BC can handle its own long term requirements by conservation, upgrading and building new generators on existing dams and taking back the power we’re entitled to under the Columbia River Treaty. In short, there’s no need for any private power projects.
 
We now have, in graphic terms, the Campbell energy policy which says to private power producers “Come one, come all - build as many dams and diversions on our rivers and streams as you can and sell the power to places which wouldn’t dare do to their rivers and streams what we’re doing for ours. All we ask is that you make sure that BC gets power at the grossly extravagant price we’ve forced Hydro to pay you.”
 
The truth from BC Hydro has served to expose the devastating ideology of the Gordon Campbell energy policy, a policy for private pockets not the public’s need.

Comments (0) | Add as favourites (74) | Quote this article on your site | Views: 669

I think we should all give some thought as to why W.A.C. Bennett bought The BC Electric Company and set up BC Hydro and Power Authority as the only source of power save those “grandfathered” like the West Kootenay Power and Light Company incorporated in 1897.
 
This was not Mr. Bennett’s only foray into the field of public expropriations. Back in the sixties he also bought Black Ball Ferries (now BC Ferries) and the Pacific Great Eastern Railway (rebranded as BC Rail).
 
Mr. Bennett saw a province that needed to open up. He knew that Black Ball Ferries would not take on unprofitable runs meaning that important communities would not be serviced. If the government ran the ferry system it could take losses on some runs justifying them in the name of expansion. Similarly, the Premier understood that no private railway company would put in unprofitable lines, so for the same reasons he bought Black Ball he bought out the PGE. Mr. Bennett knew that for a ferry company or a railway the bottom line every year was critical while the government could take the longer view knowing that losses up front would be offset by tax and other revenues in the places subsidized.
 
Premier Bennett had the same motives for creating BC Hydro. He knew that relying on the private sector would throttle development and result in very high rates. The result has been that BC Hydro has brought us a plentiful supply of cheap power.

The Campbell government has semi-privatized BC Ferries and only the lack of a willing buyer has kept it in the limbo it’s in; he got rid of BC Rail to CN; he sold off Terasen (formerly BC Gas) to the former president of Enron, Richard Kinder' s KinderMorgan; and now he has laid the groundwork for the destruction of BC Hydro.

Comments (1) | Add as favourites (67) | Quote this article on your site | Views: 679

When evaluating the government's policy of private power plants on hundreds of our rivers and streams there are a number of issues raised.  Just one of those – but a hugely important one – is what happens to the environment when a plant is built on a river. To answer that one must understand what a river is.
 
It’s a hell of a lot more than just running water. It is, in fact, an ecosystem all of its own. The fish it contains, even though they may be resident fish such as Bull Trout, Dolly Varden (a close relative), resident Rainbow Trout or Cutthroat, they play a vital role in the health of that ecosystem. Birds such as eagles and ospreys prey upon them; bears depend upon them; the insect life and surrounding plant life depend upon a healthy fish population. One need only look at the pitiable plight of Grizzly Bears who, because fish farms are wiping out their vital pre-hibernation food, are pawing the shores looking for small crustaceans. This process causes the loss of carbon sequestration formerly provided by the trees, thus increasing greenhouse gases and climate change.
 
The power plant hits in a number of ways. During construction there is a lot of silt in the river. Fish don’t breathe well, to say the least, in silty waters. Then there is the loss of up to 90% of the water to damming or a diversion. This diversion can be close to 20 kms and the water may or may not be sent back into the river bed. In one large project in the Kootenays they propose to divert five rivers and dump the water into the Duncan Lake below!  Fish are not noted for an ability to walk or survive losses of water.

But the environmental impact doesn’t end there. There must be many roads built into and throughout the site and they must be big enough to handle large diesel machinery, which itself creates major greenhouse gases for several years throughout construction. Obviously these roads not only have an impact on wildlife, they open up previously wild country, wild country that is part of Supernatural British Columbia!  Then there are the transmission lines which may run a 100 km or more which require clear cutting again, with a deleterious effect on wild life.

Comments (0) | Add as favourites (69) | Quote this article on your site | Views: 400

The startling thing about the government’s rivers policy is that there is not a thing good to be said about them. This explains, no doubt, why the government is not dealing with the issues but uses inaccurate generalizations and slogans. The companies have their PR specialists going full blast doing the same. Save Our Rivers Society, on the other hand, is doing open forums to which all are invited and at the same time answering questions from anyone who asks them.
 
What the government doesn’t tell you is that this hugely destructive policy came from the government consulting with industry alone. In fact it’s not too long a bow to say that it mirrors the position taken by Alcan which is in the private power business big time.
 
Let me tell you a true story about Alcan. Damien Gillis, my colleague who does our marvelous videos, and I went to the Northwest a few weeks ago and before leaving I was interviewed by a woman from a Terrace radio station. It was a thorough interview lasting perhaps 20 minutes and it touched all the bases. When we arrived at the hall in Terrace where our meeting was taking place the reporter came up to me and apologized profusely because the interview hadn’t run on the station and wasn’t going to because the management feared it would offend Alcan!
 
This is not uncommon. The CanWest people own both Vancouver newspapers and the #1 TV channel as well as a large number of community papers. If you are forced to use these people as a source of information you’ll scarcely hear a discouraging word about fish farms or private power plants. Most of the rest of the community papers are owned by the Black chain (no relation to Conrad) and they fired me from one of their papers because the fish farms in the community wanted to shut me down.

It is this situation that has us traveling around the province taking the truth to the people while making it abundantly clear that anyone who opposes our position is welcome to state their case fully.

Comments (1) | Add as favourites (69) | Quote this article on your site | Views: 700

What is interesting – and frustrating – about the Campbell government’s energy policy is the absence of proof justifying any of it.

Let’s look at the perceived need for more power. This should be at the root of the policy but isn’t proved. Surely, before you embark upon a multi-billion dollar scheme to meet energy needs you must first justify that need. In fact, according to BC Hydro’s own 2007 report, we're not in an energy crisis.  With a modicum of conservation, upgrading current dams, and taking back our power under the Columbia River Treaty, we can meet all our growing energy needs well into the future.

The proponents of private power simply refuse to deal with such matters as the environment except to say “you’re wrong”; no comments upon the private monopolies they become and no comments upon the sweetheart price deal they’ve received from BC Hydro on the orders of Campbell & Co.

The one area I would expect an explanation from the government is this: hitherto the profits from BC Hydro have gone in large sums to the BC treasury for schools and hospitals, and now they will go to shareholders like Warren Buffett, who now has a big stake in General Electric, the main player in the “gold rush” for private power projects.

This puts the onus of informing the public on us, the Save Our Rivers Society. I hereby inform the government and the private power companies that we will discharge them of that onus in the days ahead.

Comments (3) | Add as favourites (64) | Quote this article on your site | Views: 649

Damien and I have just returned from a great speaking tour of the West Kootenays with meetings in Nelson, Nakusp, Meadow Creek, Kaslo and Rossland all to full houses. Damien and I spoke to two high school classes. Both wanted to get involved which was heartening. We also, at their request, met for an hour with the Castlegar Mayor and Council. The reception was astonishing.

The Kootenays paid an enormous environmental price when the Columbia River was dammed back in the 60s and people have a keen awareness of the environment they have left. It’s not surprising to note that citizens don’t want private power – or anyone else for that matter – ravishing what’s left of their environment. This was reflected over and over by questions and statements from those who came to our meetings.

There was one concern, raised in Meadow Creek. They have been promised jobs and repair of the town’s infrastructure. As Damien told them so well, the construction jobs are temporary and past experience demonstrates that most of these jobs are brought in from elsewhere. Once the plant is built only a handful are needed as the projects are highly computerized. I put it to the people whether or not the perpetual ruined environment was worth short term gain and that seemed to put paid to the employment argument.

In summary, it was a great trip where Damien and I could hear directly from those to be affected by these private power initiatives and we heard loud and clear that they don’t want them.

Comments (1) | Add as favourites (79) | Quote this article on your site | Views: 650

The Campbell government’s energy policy, better termed a giveaway policy, contains a poison pill we haven’t really dealt with – The North American Free Trade Agreement. One of the reasons we haven’t dealt with this more thoroughly is because it’s complicated and none of us have sufficient knowledge of the matter. We have fixed that by having, as one of our Board of Advisors, Wendy Holm P.Ag. - one of Canada’s foremost agrologists and one who has studied the NAFTA agreement in detail over the past 20 years.

There is one thing for certain – to the extent this Campbell energy policy involves the export of power (and this energy “plan” certainly does that) it’s under federal jurisdiction. In fact one could argue that it all is in the federal sphere but Ottawa is in a mood of torpor when it comes to environmental matters. The important point here is that the Federal government has signed NAFTA as a treaty meaning that provincial legislation is “trumped” by provisions of NAFTA.

 Does this mean, as Ms. Holm states, that an American company given water rights, can do with that water as it pleases including exporting it?
 
Does it mean that any attempt by the province to limit, say, General Electric’s tenure under its water license will be met by rights given it under NAFTA?

There will be more as we move along.
 
What is truly mind boggling is that the Campbell government hasn’t even mentioned NAFTA, a gross, unacceptable and bewildering abdication of their responsibility to the public of British Columbia.

Comments (0) | Add as favourites (76) | Quote this article on your site | Views: 649