With all the stray dogs wandering around the pages of the June 18 issue, here's something else that got lost in the shuffle. It's a news brief I wrote that didn't get run, and considering the fast one Wall & Co. seem to be intent on pulling with the UDP report and the public consultations currently underway it deserves airing. Dan Perrins isn't supposed to submit his report until the end of August, yet the Globe & Mail story cited in two posts yesterday on Wall floating the idea of building a nuclear reactor in Saskatoon states that a decision could come as soon as August. Assuming the government is actually interested in reading the report, those timelines don't exactly match up. Yet when it comes to the ability of Saskatchewan citizens to proactively protect the environment, as the below report demonstrates, we don't have a lot of leverage.
Saskatchewan Receives Failing Grade
Environmental report cards are nothing new. Green activists have been releasing them for years as a way of evaluating the sensitivity of different jurisdictions, from provinces in Canada to countries around the world, to environmental issues.
On the eve of World Environment Day on June 5, Friends of the Earth Canada released its first annual report card on environmental rights available in law to Canadians (see http://www.foecanada.org/ ).
Ten criteria were examined, including the ability of individuals and organizations to initiate investigations and law suits related to suspected environmental misconduct, whistleblower protection for people who reveal instances of misconduct, measures to compel governments to respond to complaints, and so-called SLAPP protection which would prevent polluters from launching strategic lawsuits to dissuade individuals and groups from bringing forward their concerns.
Of the 13 jurisdictions examined, Yukon received the highest grade (B+). Ontario (B), Canada (C+) and Quebec (C+) also received passing grades. Every other jurisdiction was assigned a failing grade, with Saskatchewan, Alberta and Prince Edward Island all receiving Ds.
“What actions individuals and groups can take is largely dependent on what the government allows for in legislation,” says report author Jody Lownds. “We also need to keep in mind that our report doesn’t factor in any implementation gaps between what people can do in theory and how government processes actually work. Typically, there’s big gaps between what governments are supposed to be doing to allow their citizens to get involved and what’s actually happening on the ground.”
When it comes to environmental stewardship, says Lowds, traditional notions of property rights and legal standing are inadequate to address the dynamic nature of our eco-system. “In Alberta, for example, there’s an Environmental Appeal Board, where people who aren’t necessarily directly involved in a permit or environmental assessment can appeal a decision. But the test for standing is so strict that it’s not enough to simply be someone who’s concerned about the quality of your water and air. Unless your property interests are involved, you’re usually not able to [participate].
On the eve of World Environment Day on June 5, Friends of the Earth Canada released its first annual report card on environmental rights available in law to Canadians (see http://www.foecanada.org/ ).
Ten criteria were examined, including the ability of individuals and organizations to initiate investigations and law suits related to suspected environmental misconduct, whistleblower protection for people who reveal instances of misconduct, measures to compel governments to respond to complaints, and so-called SLAPP protection which would prevent polluters from launching strategic lawsuits to dissuade individuals and groups from bringing forward their concerns.
Of the 13 jurisdictions examined, Yukon received the highest grade (B+). Ontario (B), Canada (C+) and Quebec (C+) also received passing grades. Every other jurisdiction was assigned a failing grade, with Saskatchewan, Alberta and Prince Edward Island all receiving Ds.
“What actions individuals and groups can take is largely dependent on what the government allows for in legislation,” says report author Jody Lownds. “We also need to keep in mind that our report doesn’t factor in any implementation gaps between what people can do in theory and how government processes actually work. Typically, there’s big gaps between what governments are supposed to be doing to allow their citizens to get involved and what’s actually happening on the ground.”
When it comes to environmental stewardship, says Lowds, traditional notions of property rights and legal standing are inadequate to address the dynamic nature of our eco-system. “In Alberta, for example, there’s an Environmental Appeal Board, where people who aren’t necessarily directly involved in a permit or environmental assessment can appeal a decision. But the test for standing is so strict that it’s not enough to simply be someone who’s concerned about the quality of your water and air. Unless your property interests are involved, you’re usually not able to [participate].
“One of the outcomes of this report, we hope, is that individuals and groups will start to lobby governments for better environmental rights,” says Lownds. “At the federal level, Friends of the Earth, along with Eco-Justice and Sierra Club of Canada, did put forward a draft Canadian Environmental Bill of Rights. Given the current political climate, though, it’s been difficult to make any headway.”
.jpg)
.jpg)
