How Can an Election Today Get Us Ahead Tomorrow?
With it all but certain now that Canadians are heading into a federal election this fall, it will be critical for every voter to ask themselves - “with my vote today, what will we achieve in environmental security tomorrow?”
Our report “Tomorrow Today: How Canada can make a world of difference” www.tomorrowtodaycanada.ca outlines concrete actions the new government could focus on to ensure we significantly reduce our greenhouse gas pollution, produce and use energy more wisely, protect our wild spaces, fresh water and oceans, and reduce our exposure toxic substances.All of these actions will result in a much better tomorrow.
The question is, will NDP’s Jack Layton, the Conservatives’ Steven Harper, the Liberals’ Stephane Dion, the Bloc’s Gilles Duceppe and the Green’s Elizabeth May step up to make real and meaningful commitments during the election campaign that will address the major environmental challenges we face in Canada?
We have made it as easy as possible for all parties to incorporate the recommended actions in “Tomorrow Today” first into their platforms and then in action when they are sitting in the House. With eleven major environmental organizations representing thousands and thousands of members across Canada, and decades of experience in analyzing and finding solutions to environmental problems, we are very confident these are the right actions for Canada now.
There is no excuse. Every party in this election should have a robust platform on environmental action, and Tomorrow Today makes it that much easier.
Marlo Raynolds
Executive Director, Pembina Institute
September 18th, 2008 at 3:21 pm
CANADIAN ELECTION 2008: Failure to follow environmental guidelines results in a NANAIMO VISITOR BOYCOTT call.
Recent responses derived through a formal environmental petition (#225) to the Office of the Auditor General of Canada have showcased the failure of the Harper government to follow its own environmental guidelines designed to protect the environment at the local level. A controversial development was made possible through the issuance of Fisheries Act S. 35(2) Authorization after a Canadian Environmental Assessment Act screening process (CEAA) was conducted. Conflicting opinions after the fact by the responsible ministers proves Canadians’ have to deal with flawed CEAA screening process.
The environmental petition focused on the placement of a berm with an asphalt Trans Canada Trail and page-wire fencing across a registered sensitive ecosystem inventory. Environment Minister John Baird acknowledged that environmental guidelines were not followed by the City of Nanaimo and responded: “The existing paved trail through the wetland poses a potential risk to wildlife and may impede movement of wildlife, including species at risk. As a general approach, Environment Canada prefers that travel corridors are available for wildlife.” and further wrote, “fencing may impede movement of the low-flying Virginia rail. Environment Canada would have preferred that there be no fencing.” To date, none of the harmful fencing has been removed as stated in DFO Minister response #10.
Both Canada and the Province of BC co-produce conservation manuals and guidelines that discourage inappropriate developments into sensitive ecosystems. An asphalt trail across a marsh is highly inappropriate. Community stewards follow these environmental guidelines and find themselves in conflict with a municipality (Nanaimo) that did not want to be constrained by such environmental protection measures. In identifying the real problem, Minister Baird responded, “However, these guidelines are not supported by legislative or regulatory powers, and cannot be enforced unless a local government chooses to enact and follow by-law legislation based on the guidelines.”
When the City of Nanaimo and the federal government allowed the asphalt trail to be built, they in effect thumbed their noises at the government environmental guidelines. Since then, Local environmental stewards have been fighting a losing battle to have the asphalt removed and have it replaced with the wooden boardwalk that was promised in a Land Use Plan that was develop by the community. Corrective measures to the asphalt trial by local community stewards have been dismissed by Nanaimo City Council. It is also clear that the governments’ stewardship model that we are working under is not effectively protecting the environment at the local level, and volunteer stewards have to go to great lengths to fulfill their stewardship role. It now has become necessary to criticize the conduct of our local municipal government in a larger public forum such as a website that can be easily found through search engines.
This is to inform you that I have deciding to express my views and advance my protest through the construction of a new website called: http://www.nanaimo-visitor-boycott.com. Running a website and overseeing a visitor boycott is not a preferred activity for an awarding winning steward, but a last resort. A visitor boycott call is a sad, but necessary tool to let Nanaimo City Council and DFO know that their decision to ignore environmental guidelines must end, and that they must approach our environmental issues conservatively and with the utmost care. I prefer to sit down with decision makers to find solution and compromises to the environmental issues they created. Until then, this Nanaimo visitor boycott website will remain a direct consequence of the poor decision making by Nanaimo City Council.
In summary, the boycott website will be designed to communicate to people throughout the world the environmental concerns that have been expressed regarding the harmful effects of building an asphalt trail across an ecologically sensitive area and placing sports fields next to Jingle Pot Marsh Nature Park. Wildlife continues to be harassed by those city-supported developments. I believe the pattern of decision making by Nanaimo City Council regarding the development at the Third Street/Jingle Pot Marsh has been profoundly wrong. Unenforceable guidelines and having ineffective environmental regulations are equally wrong. We need our federal government to created new legislative or regulatory powers to make our federal environmental guideline meaningful and effective.
Please make this local story known. Thank you!
Sincerely,
Rory Rickwood
Nanaimo Environmental Steward
For further information, I can be contacted through this email or by Cell: 250.797-2116.
Background Information:
http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/esd_pet_225_e_30320.html “Auditor General of Canada website” (See Environment Minister response #13 and DFO Minister response #10)
http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_central/nanaimonewsbulletin/news/19802589.html “Nanaimo News Bulletin front page”
http://www.myccr.com/SectionForums/viewtopic.php?p=194289&sid=b66b217dc73f337aa204631fa81dd4b6
“Blog/Globe and Mail News Report”
http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/news/story.html?id=9ebd9841-5a41-4391-9a82-67ba6e4e5861&k=44493
“Times- Colonist News Report”
http://www.fpnnews.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=55&Itemid=79 “Website Article”
http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlifeactreview/feedback/5.html “Click Rory Rickwood to read submission to government website”
http://www.sierraclub.ca/pipermail/syc-sustainable_campuses/attachments/20050922/006048ee/SLDFMediaRelease-0001.pdf “for Sierra Legal Defence Fund Media Release”