Jump to content
Fly Fusion Forums

Recommended Posts

Posted

Thanks for all the input. 

I normally find comments from Sparkplug very well informed but I've got to respectfully say I'm not with him  on this one.  While it is true that there would be a comprehensive AER/enviromental review of any development, the important point is the that without consultation with anyone (except I guess the coal industry)the UCP has made open pit coal mining possible on Category 2 lands all along the eastern slopes.  For most of my adult life that was completely forbidden by Lougheed's 76 policy.

My experience from participation in a number of proceedings before the AER and its predecessor is that most applications get approved. 

So the point Im making is that the fundamental policy was changed on  a Friday afternoon in the the middle of a pandemic without any consultation or notice.  The political /policy decision has already been made.  All of the progressive land stewardship work (much of it implemented by Conservatives) including the South Saskatchewan Regional Plan has been bypassed by a press release from Sonya Savage. The change is likely to enable at least some developments, even after environmental assessment.

The time oppose the policy change is now 

 

  • Like 1
Posted

 

Ginger, I see no harm whatsoever in voicing objection to the recent policy change.  IMHO it is unlikely that this gov't will reverse it, but raising an objection to it now might make them think twice in the future before making such changes without appropriate consultation or notice.  Or not.

One angle you may want to explore is whether this policy change stands to impact First Nations.  A big part of the fuss/delays/uncertainty over the TransMountain expansion was driven by inadequate consultation with FN's.

The good ol' Official Opposition may be another place to go to raise a stink over the policy change (particularly if through FN's or other stakeholders inadequate consultation can be clearly illustrated).  I don't recall hearing much (if anything) from Rachel and crew on the policy change, at least thus far.  Rachel is now on about the parks eliminations, so maybe there's some common ground there with them.

While taking a run at the policy change is fine, efforts should in parallel be made to organize effective opposition/intervention into the regulatory approval process of this particular mine, should the company proceed with making such an application.

  • Like 1
Posted

To answer a question from above, yes, ram river coal is still in the works too. Not hearing much locally yet but have been told it's not killed. Haven't seen any activity since exploration drilling a few years ago, but perhaps maybe thats why they're going HAM logging the area first.

 

We should not have any deviation or shortcuts for applications regardless of who is in power. But, this is Alberta after all, act first, get the dollars moving, and deal with consequences later.

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...