|
|
The
following political representatives have been individually contacted and
a request for written statements, explaining their position with respect to benefits
and risks of an LNG Storage Facility in Howe Sound, has been made: Gordon
Wilson |
* Patricia Baldwin | * Eric Cardinal |
| * Lyle Forbes | * Peter Peach | * Elise Rudland |
| Tucker
Forsyth |
Ron
Girard |
Barry
Janyk |
| John
McNevin |
Kenan
MacKenzie |
Bruce
Milne |
|
The author would like to thank the politicians who did respond. Many said they would but then never found the time. The author appreciates all responses.
20 April 1999 There is a process in place for this facility that includes three levels of approval. The Environment Assessment Board has given its approval for an LNG tank to be built at McNab Creek. The Sunshine Coast Regional District also has a veto in the form of zoning, and locally elected officials have the choice to rezone or not. If they choose not to rezone that will effectively act as a veto. In addition, the Public Utilities Commission has a process with respect to the general public interest on the construction of this particular facility versus the southern pipeline crossing. All of these processes should provide sufficient input for local residents, including both those who support the project as well as those who oppose it, in order for a proper decision to be made. I expect all those processes will be properly adhered to.
Patricia Baldwin was contacted personally by phone 08 April 99. When asked for a statement, she was not happy with the request and hung up the phone. The author has not experienced this with any other representative. Patricia Baldwin will not be contacted again, but the author welcomes Ms Baldwin to present a written statement clarifying her position at anytime.
12 April 1999 Contacted by phone Mr Cardinal said that he could not make a statement. He referred the author to Bruce Milne, the Chair of The Regional Board.
09 April 1999 The Board appreciates the importance of this issue to the residents of the Sunshine Coast, and we wish to reserve final judgment on the rezoning application until we have had the opportunity to receive and fully consider all of the oral and written submissions that have been provided to date, and yet to be submitted to the SCRD by all parties.
Note: In the 19 April 1999 issue of The Reporter, Al MacLachlan did an interview with Mr. Forsyth and his comments are reprinted below. A.M.: Do you favour Westcoast Gas putting their LNG tank at McNab Creek? T.Forsyth: Our council is on record as having no objection. We understand there are environmental and safety issues. The safety part of it has been looked at, given the distance from any community. A.M.: What are the benefits? T.Forsyth: I guess there are no benefits outside of short-term construction benefits, and I'm not even sure of that. It's actually closer to get there from Horseshoe Bay. The SCRD will get a tax benefit. The previous Chair of the SCRD has negotiated a few benefits from the company. There's a benefit to the community for a continued supply of gas.
12th April, 1999 I have been asked by Jayun McDowell for my opinion on Westcoast Energy Inc.'s proposal for their 52 x 74 metre LNG storage facility in McNab Creek in Howe Sound. I preface my comments by stating that this matter is in the 'Public Hearing' phase &, although I have no direct vote at the Sunshine Coast Regional District Board, my Council provides direction to our representative at the Regional District - either Mayor Forsyth, or his alternate Councillor John McNevin. I have reviewed the data provided to me by the responsible agencies and by Westcoast, as well as the information I have sought out over the past 16 months or so, and attended a number of public meetings to listen to the general feelings and position of the community & have asked the project proponents what I believed were pertinent questions. My file for this project is massive - several inches thick in fact. The Town of Gibsons was given an in depth briefing by staff of Westcoast Energy in 1998 and adopted the following resolution with regard to the SCRD's zoning Bylaw for this facility at the regular Council meeting of March 16th, 1999: "the Town of Gibsons supports Bylaw no. 310.66 in principle, subject to the applicant meeting all health, environmental, geological and safety issues". As an individual I cannot provide a categorical 'yea' or 'nay' until all relevant data is provided and valid arguments address the matters contained in the resolution. In addition to the points Council mentioned, I have also stated there are other aspects that must be considered & those issues are in respect to: the visual aesthetics of such a facility - its effects on the view scape, the facility's potential impact on our growing tourism & ecotourism businesses, and direction from the Squamish Nation. When all these questions are fully addressed I will be able to provide a personal and absolute opinion on the issue. Until then, I can only state I am not opposed to the idea - the concept is generally not the problem. To equate a facility of this type in terms of banal pros & cons - i.e. employment, taxation revenues, any local economic stimulus during construction, etc. vs. risks - real or perceived - could be an oversimplification of the matter. Factions on either side will use their statistics and 'experts' to best represent their cases often obscuring the 'truth'. As a society, prior to establishment of industrial infrastructure we always assess socio-economic costs & benefits. We have no toxic waste disposal sites, battery recycling centres, or tire salvage facilities, for example, on the Sunshine Coast (and for a number of very good reasons!), but the production and use of these products continues. Someone disposes of them, somewhere… Although, we, as increasingly responsible consumers and humans, may seek to curtail their use and encourage more 'environmentally friendly' alternatives, are we not evading our societal responsibilities by placing these byproducts of consumerism on others? Now, I'm not suggesting here that 'two wrongs make a right' nor endorsing the proposal on some other basis. I am saying that our community is a consumer of Natural Gas from our expansive reserves in the northeastern part of our province and Alberta. The product is a relatively clean innocuous source of energy when compared to others. It is also a benefit to many communities in our region. To shuck the onus of responsibility from our community and suggest that the risks - as have been purported - should be assumed by some other jurisdiction, I find, quite frankly, selfish and repugnant. We are all responsible for this planet. In my mind responsibility incurs liability. Rather than project pure opposition, I seek plausible alternatives… I have confidence in the protracted LNG application process, which must yet pass rezoning by the SCRD, meet the intense scrutiny of the B.C. Utilities Commission, receive assent from the Squamish Nation, & finally begin construction (the ultimate business decision by Westcoast gauged on the proper timing for such infrastructure to come 'on stream'). I believe responsible and diligent decision making is being undertaken. Will this lead to the industrialisation of Howe Sound? Just what will a structure of this size look like from a vessel in the water, a vehicle on the Sea to Sky Highway, or a resident of the eastern shore of the Sound? What could be done to lessen all impacts? All these are excellent questions that, in many cases, supercede the context of this particular issue. The long-term ramifications of this decision are crucial. Folks may suggest my position is one of noncommittment - perhaps… I have found that often there are no immediate, conclusive answers to these questions - only more questions. I would ask those interested parties to again ask for my thoughts following closure of the Public Hearing process, ask for their patience, and ask them to research the protocol around elected representatives and direct decision makers' legal responsibilities during this period and why that protocol exists, so they come to an improved understanding of the process and our respective roles in that process in the interim. Thank you. I apologise for the verbosity. Sometimes it takes me a lot to say a little! Barry J. Janyk
14 April 1999 I certainly appreciate the importance of this issue to all residents of the Sunshine Coast; however, it is important to reserve final judgment of any rezoning application until the Board has had the opportunity to receive and fully consider all of the oral and written submissions that have been provided to date, and those yet to be submitted to the SCRD, by all parties. Canadian case law has reinforced the importance of elected officials refraining from making any statements that might bring into question whether they had an open mind on a particular rezoning application. In accordance with this jurisprudence, I am advising directors to refrain from making definitive or categorical statements that may raise the question of whether they have a closed mind on the rezoning matter. Personally, I think it is important for the chair of the SCRD to remain neutral of this issue so that directors are not inappropriately influenced by my position. I am confident that the directors voting on this issue will consider the issue carefully and with the utmost seriousness as to the implications of their decision.
|
||
|
|
||
