...and turbines. Read through, many things to consider as energy committee member resigns
By Kaimi Rose Lum
GateHouse News Service
Posted Jan 15, 2010 @ 11:49 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WELLFLEET — A tempest is brewing over the proposed wind turbine at White Crest Beach.
Last week, vandals absconded with the stakes used to mark the site of the turbine. This week, a large group of Outer Cape homeowners gathered at National Seashore headquarters to voice their objections to the project.
And it appears that the vice-chair of the Wellfleet Energy Committee, which spearheaded the project, has resigned.
The plan, as described by energy committee member Jim Sexton, is to erect a 400-foot wind turbine off Ocean View Drive — on town-owned land within the National Seashore — and divvy up the 5,300 megawatts it produces each year between Wellfleet and nearby communities that could purchase the electricity from the town.
The proposal isn’t official yet, Sexton told the Seashore’s Advisory Commission on Monday; his committee is in the process of completing a study of the noise the turbine is expected to generate as well as a study of its impacts on wildlife as required by the Massachusetts Endangered Species Act. And other questions, such as whether the town will be able to use “net metering” to transport and sell the electricity, must be answered before the turbine is a done deal.
But members of Save Our Seashore, a recently organized coalition of home owners in the area, disagree with it in principle. They told the Advisory Commission and Seashore Supt. George Price on Monday that they could not understand why a national park would even consider allowing a 400-foot turbine to be constructed within its boundaries.
“We are completely baffled that this wouldn’t be rejected outright,” said Eric Bibler, a part-time Wellfleet resident who has inundated park authorities with studies and newspaper articles about the detrimental effects of turbines put up in places like Vinalhaven, Maine and Oakfield, Wis. Bibler and others in his group said the turbine plan cannot be reconciled with the inherent mission of the Seashore.
Reading from the Seashore’s charter, Phil Hesse, of North Eastham and Wellfleet, pointed out that that mission “‘is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wildlife therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for future generations.’”
Hesse said, “I have a problem with how that is compatible or congruent with industrial development in the park.”
Francie Williamson, an Eastham homeowner, said the push for wind energy is misguided if it fails to recognize that conservation is still essential. “I would like to implore the Advisory Commission to take your charge very seriously. This is a very tiny area of land,” she said of the Outer Cape, with “hardly anything left” for the flora and fauna. “I think the Seashore has a role to play in protecting whatever open space is left.”
Supt. Price noted that the Seashore must manage both conservation and use of its land. “We have to utilize these parks,” he said. He added that a wind turbine in the park “is looked as a utility,” falling into the same category that a water tower built in the Seashore might fall.
Price did not downplay the “very sincere, heartfelt testimonies by people who really care about the area” that he has read or heard. Although such testimonies should be directed to the town of Wellfleet at this point, he said, “Certainly as an advisory commission and a national park we have to take these issues seriously as well.”
“The park service’s position is that the project ought to be reviewed, and as material comes out on the project it will be our responsibility to evaluate the issues,” Price said. Seashore staff have already completed research on the effect the turbine will have on the northern harrier population, and the park’s “noise people” are doing an analysis of the turbine’s acoustical impacts.
That emotions are escalating over the project was apparent not only at Monday’s meeting but when the Wellfleet Police Dept. reported Thursday that someone has been destroying or removing the stakes used to survey the area for the turbine.
In an interview on Tuesday, Wellfleet Board of Selectmen chair Dale Donovan said he thought the opposition is jumping the gun. He pointed out that “a lot of variables” exist and that there is no official proposal at this time to build a wind turbine.
“I think the selectmen and the energy committee think it is a very good idea to pursue the possibility [of a turbine],” he said, “but I don’t think anyone has made a final decision on whether or not it’s a good idea to go ahead and build one because we don’t have the information yet.”
Donovan said he thinks the opposition is “unfairly going after the Seashore, because, yes, they may have a role in this but it is a town project for municipal purposes on municipally owned land.” And unlike wilderness parks that are less integrated with their adjacent communities, such as Yellowstone, the Seashore “exists to some extent because of the arrangements that were made with private owners ... and one of those agreements was that the town would retain significant chunks of land,” he said.
Donovan added that the energy committee has gone to great lengths to respond to the opponents’ concerns, “way beyond the normal kind of response that a volunteer committee like the energy committee would engage in.”
The challenges related to the turbine plan may have been a factor in the resignation of one member of the energy committee. Former vice-chair Griswold “Gooz” Draz stepped down on Jan. 1.
“Unfortunately, I now believe this particular proposal for a municipal wind turbine cannot be accomplished without causing disruption to ourselves here, individually and collectively, as a thoughtful and caring community; one that makes us desirable to visit and live in, as well as volunteer to serve on town boards,” Draz wrote in his resignation letter.
“I can now only hope that this proposal and investigation is concluded in a reasonable way, rather than in a way that unnecessarily divides us.”
Provincetown Banner
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Turbines On the Antarctic
From NZ Herald.co
McCully opens Antarctic wind farm
2:28 PM Saturday Jan 16, 2010 Facebook
A new joint-venture wind farm at the bottom of the world is expected to cut diesel use by nearly 500,000 litres a year at Scott Base and McMurdo Station.
The wind farm on Ross Island in Antarctica was to have been opened remotely in Auckland by Hillary Clinton, the United States Secretary of State, during her visit to New Zealand. However, she abandoned her visit to return to Washington to co-ordinate the American aid effort for earthquake-devastated Haiti.
Today foreign minister Murray McCully stepped in and in a live link with Antarctica, formally declared the wind farm open.
The three turbines were completed last year and have been providing limited power to New Zealand's Scott Base and the American McMurdo Station during monitoring before being built up to full power output.
Each of the towers sits on a foundation of eight 13-tonne pre-cast concrete blocks arranged in a circle in a pit and was designed to withstand wind gusts of up to 205 km/h.
The three 333Kw towers were built by Meridian Energy with Antarctica New Zealand and the United States Antarctic Program.
% In the Northern Club in Auckland today Mr McCully noted that almost a century ago Roald Amundsen, the first man to reach the South Pole, "recounted his Antarctic exploits here in this beautiful old building."
He said in Amundsen's day instant communication with Antarctica was undreamed of and news from expeditions, whether of triumph or tragedy, travelled back slowly to the outside world with the newsmakers themselves or the survivors of their parties.
He said now the wind farm was to be commissioned from Auckland in a live link to Ross Island.
He told the gathering at the club that when he first formally met Hillary Clinton last year in Washington they discussed the prospect of significant cooperation between New Zealand and the United States in the area of renewable energy provision for smaller pacific island states.
"She responded very positively to the suggestion and since that time we have been working to give shape and substance to this proposal.
"Already significant progress is being made in relation to projects in both Tonga and the Tokelau islands.
"So it is fitting we have worked so hard together to get this wind farm up and running in Antarctica - one of the world's most pristine and fragile environments."
He said the three wind turbines would provide clean, renewable energy, cut diesel use at Scott Base and McMurdo Station by 11 per cent.
- NZPA
McCully opens Antarctic wind farm
2:28 PM Saturday Jan 16, 2010 Facebook
A new joint-venture wind farm at the bottom of the world is expected to cut diesel use by nearly 500,000 litres a year at Scott Base and McMurdo Station.
The wind farm on Ross Island in Antarctica was to have been opened remotely in Auckland by Hillary Clinton, the United States Secretary of State, during her visit to New Zealand. However, she abandoned her visit to return to Washington to co-ordinate the American aid effort for earthquake-devastated Haiti.
Today foreign minister Murray McCully stepped in and in a live link with Antarctica, formally declared the wind farm open.
The three turbines were completed last year and have been providing limited power to New Zealand's Scott Base and the American McMurdo Station during monitoring before being built up to full power output.
Each of the towers sits on a foundation of eight 13-tonne pre-cast concrete blocks arranged in a circle in a pit and was designed to withstand wind gusts of up to 205 km/h.
The three 333Kw towers were built by Meridian Energy with Antarctica New Zealand and the United States Antarctic Program.
% In the Northern Club in Auckland today Mr McCully noted that almost a century ago Roald Amundsen, the first man to reach the South Pole, "recounted his Antarctic exploits here in this beautiful old building."
He said in Amundsen's day instant communication with Antarctica was undreamed of and news from expeditions, whether of triumph or tragedy, travelled back slowly to the outside world with the newsmakers themselves or the survivors of their parties.
He said now the wind farm was to be commissioned from Auckland in a live link to Ross Island.
He told the gathering at the club that when he first formally met Hillary Clinton last year in Washington they discussed the prospect of significant cooperation between New Zealand and the United States in the area of renewable energy provision for smaller pacific island states.
"She responded very positively to the suggestion and since that time we have been working to give shape and substance to this proposal.
"Already significant progress is being made in relation to projects in both Tonga and the Tokelau islands.
"So it is fitting we have worked so hard together to get this wind farm up and running in Antarctica - one of the world's most pristine and fragile environments."
He said the three wind turbines would provide clean, renewable energy, cut diesel use at Scott Base and McMurdo Station by 11 per cent.
- NZPA
Labels:
Antarctic Auckland Ross Island
Blowin' In the Wind...
The Chronicle Herald
Saturday, Jan. 16,2010
All
OPINION
There's trouble blowing in the wind
IG wind farms in fi-
nancial or deadline trou-
ble, sometimes being
bailed out by Nova Sco-
tia Power, are almost daily fare
on the business pages these
days. Like much of the rest of
the world, we've cast wind as
the saviour in our quest for
green energy. Here's stuff we
should know while we still have
time to reset our options.
In Spain, Italy, the U.S. and
elsewhere, big wind power
scams have erupted, the result
of hundreds of billions of dol-
lars in subsidies being pumped
into wind with little control.
Some politicians and entrepre-
neurs are already in jail.
"It's the same mentality as a
Texas oil strike," a crusading
lawyer in the Spanish Canary
Islands, chasing down a major
scandal, told the New York
Times a few weeks ago. "This is
a gold rush, and everybody
wants a wind park at whatever
price."
Plus, there are questions
about whether big wind is do-
ing what it's supposed to do -
reduce carbon emissions.
Spain's carbon emissions have
gone up dramatically (30 per
RALPH SUREnE
cent over the last 10 years)
despite being one of the world's
leading wind power countries.
Major analyses have questioned
to what extent wind has con-
tributed to Demark and Germa-
ny's relatively better carbon
performances.
And there are battles against
wind farms wherever people
are too close, and health and
property values are at stake. A
defining study entitled "Wind
Turbine Syndrome" has been
written by a Dr. Nina Pierpont
of New York, as the scientific
literature mounts on the prob-
lematic effects of noise and
subsonic waves. Denials and
cover-ups are increasingly re-
ported. Recently there was an
uproar in Britain as the govern-
ment was caught doctoring a
report on decibel levels at wind
farms.
VOICE OF THE PEOPLE
In Nova Scotia, there's citizen
opposition in places too, nota-
bly at Digby Neck and back of
Bailey's Brook on the hill range
between New Glasgow and
Antigonish, where the com-
plaint is that citizen participa-
tion has been shunted aside.
This project, called Glen Dhu,
to be built by Shear Wind Inc. of
Bedford (recently bailed out by
a Spanish billionaire who took
a big chunk of the company)
promoted the project as being
two kilometres away from the
nearest homes, upped that to
three kilometres, but when the
application was filed, according
to the citizen group opposing
the project, it was 640 metres.
And the number of turbines
started as between 30 and 60,
but rose to 130.
The group, the Eco Aware-
ness Society, also filed a com-
plaint with the Nova Scotia
Environment Department ac-
cusing Shear Wind of providing
false or misleading informa-
tion, mainly on noise effects, in
its environmental assessment
application. The Environment
Department investigated and
found no offence.
There is a risk that when the
Admirable attributes
,
It concerns me to read about the
possible demolition of the CBC
Radio building on South Park
Street in Halifax. I have _been here
We hear our politicians saying
that we need private-sector in-
vestment in this province to pro-
vide jobs and pay taxes.
Well, I am sure that falls on deaf
ears in thp nrivAi-c.-Q~+""- ..... _-_ •.•
Our Immigration Department
should take a hard approach to
such persons who are living in
Canada. We all have the right to
our opinions but when it oorrrea to
.•.. ---_... -
big policy rig is rolling with
tens of millions of dollars
aboard, the small stuff, includ-
ing truth and transparency, gets
flattened. That's the time to ask
questions about where the con-
traption is going.
The issue isn't the value of
wind power as such. It's part of
the solution. It's just that, as
with ethanol or biomass, any
idea that sounds good goes to
extremes immediately on the
fantasy that these alternatives
can replace existing energy
sources seamlessly and we
won't have to change our ways.
Neal Livingston of Mabou,
who has been struggling to
make it in the alternate energy
field for 30 years - and just got
a contract with Nova Scotia
Power for a six megawatt pro-
ject involving three to four
turbines - says it might not be
a bad thing if some of these
huge wind projects collapsed.
Since the energy issue is not
just that, but also an issue of
economics and what kind of
society we want for the future
as conventional energy gets
squeezed, it might inject some
realism into the policy picture.
What we need, he says, are
community-sized wind projects,
owned by local people, that are
part of a mix of solar, conserva-
tion and others -and the pol-
icies to make that happen. "The
problems with wind you've
described to me are mostly
problems with big capitalism."
Meanwhile, Bill Phillips, a
retired electrical engineer with
NSP and its predecessors,
phoned to thank me for suggest-
ing we connect to Hydro-Que-
bec to sidestep our big wind
policy muddle, as I did last
week.
Wind, he said, "has a place,
but not as significant a place as
it's made out to be." But it was
"as an NSPI investor" that he
was really bothered. The utility
was spending "$100 million on
Nuttby Mountain alone" - a
wind farm it took over from a
failed private operator.
Indeed, along with citizen
protests, fraud, a subsidy-dri-
ven bubble and so on, we have
the question of how much big
wind is going to cost and who's
going to pay if it doesn't add up.
Ralph Surette is a veteran freelance
journalist living in Yarmouth County.
(rsurette@herald.caJ
Saturday, Jan. 16,2010
All
OPINION
There's trouble blowing in the wind
IG wind farms in fi-
nancial or deadline trou-
ble, sometimes being
bailed out by Nova Sco-
tia Power, are almost daily fare
on the business pages these
days. Like much of the rest of
the world, we've cast wind as
the saviour in our quest for
green energy. Here's stuff we
should know while we still have
time to reset our options.
In Spain, Italy, the U.S. and
elsewhere, big wind power
scams have erupted, the result
of hundreds of billions of dol-
lars in subsidies being pumped
into wind with little control.
Some politicians and entrepre-
neurs are already in jail.
"It's the same mentality as a
Texas oil strike," a crusading
lawyer in the Spanish Canary
Islands, chasing down a major
scandal, told the New York
Times a few weeks ago. "This is
a gold rush, and everybody
wants a wind park at whatever
price."
Plus, there are questions
about whether big wind is do-
ing what it's supposed to do -
reduce carbon emissions.
Spain's carbon emissions have
gone up dramatically (30 per
RALPH SUREnE
cent over the last 10 years)
despite being one of the world's
leading wind power countries.
Major analyses have questioned
to what extent wind has con-
tributed to Demark and Germa-
ny's relatively better carbon
performances.
And there are battles against
wind farms wherever people
are too close, and health and
property values are at stake. A
defining study entitled "Wind
Turbine Syndrome" has been
written by a Dr. Nina Pierpont
of New York, as the scientific
literature mounts on the prob-
lematic effects of noise and
subsonic waves. Denials and
cover-ups are increasingly re-
ported. Recently there was an
uproar in Britain as the govern-
ment was caught doctoring a
report on decibel levels at wind
farms.
VOICE OF THE PEOPLE
In Nova Scotia, there's citizen
opposition in places too, nota-
bly at Digby Neck and back of
Bailey's Brook on the hill range
between New Glasgow and
Antigonish, where the com-
plaint is that citizen participa-
tion has been shunted aside.
This project, called Glen Dhu,
to be built by Shear Wind Inc. of
Bedford (recently bailed out by
a Spanish billionaire who took
a big chunk of the company)
promoted the project as being
two kilometres away from the
nearest homes, upped that to
three kilometres, but when the
application was filed, according
to the citizen group opposing
the project, it was 640 metres.
And the number of turbines
started as between 30 and 60,
but rose to 130.
The group, the Eco Aware-
ness Society, also filed a com-
plaint with the Nova Scotia
Environment Department ac-
cusing Shear Wind of providing
false or misleading informa-
tion, mainly on noise effects, in
its environmental assessment
application. The Environment
Department investigated and
found no offence.
There is a risk that when the
Admirable attributes
,
It concerns me to read about the
possible demolition of the CBC
Radio building on South Park
Street in Halifax. I have _been here
We hear our politicians saying
that we need private-sector in-
vestment in this province to pro-
vide jobs and pay taxes.
Well, I am sure that falls on deaf
ears in thp nrivAi-c.-Q~+""- ..... _-_ •.•
Our Immigration Department
should take a hard approach to
such persons who are living in
Canada. We all have the right to
our opinions but when it oorrrea to
.•.. ---_... -
big policy rig is rolling with
tens of millions of dollars
aboard, the small stuff, includ-
ing truth and transparency, gets
flattened. That's the time to ask
questions about where the con-
traption is going.
The issue isn't the value of
wind power as such. It's part of
the solution. It's just that, as
with ethanol or biomass, any
idea that sounds good goes to
extremes immediately on the
fantasy that these alternatives
can replace existing energy
sources seamlessly and we
won't have to change our ways.
Neal Livingston of Mabou,
who has been struggling to
make it in the alternate energy
field for 30 years - and just got
a contract with Nova Scotia
Power for a six megawatt pro-
ject involving three to four
turbines - says it might not be
a bad thing if some of these
huge wind projects collapsed.
Since the energy issue is not
just that, but also an issue of
economics and what kind of
society we want for the future
as conventional energy gets
squeezed, it might inject some
realism into the policy picture.
What we need, he says, are
community-sized wind projects,
owned by local people, that are
part of a mix of solar, conserva-
tion and others -and the pol-
icies to make that happen. "The
problems with wind you've
described to me are mostly
problems with big capitalism."
Meanwhile, Bill Phillips, a
retired electrical engineer with
NSP and its predecessors,
phoned to thank me for suggest-
ing we connect to Hydro-Que-
bec to sidestep our big wind
policy muddle, as I did last
week.
Wind, he said, "has a place,
but not as significant a place as
it's made out to be." But it was
"as an NSPI investor" that he
was really bothered. The utility
was spending "$100 million on
Nuttby Mountain alone" - a
wind farm it took over from a
failed private operator.
Indeed, along with citizen
protests, fraud, a subsidy-dri-
ven bubble and so on, we have
the question of how much big
wind is going to cost and who's
going to pay if it doesn't add up.
Ralph Surette is a veteran freelance
journalist living in Yarmouth County.
(rsurette@herald.caJ
Is Canada Progressive?
Canada's reputation as a progressive middle power is gone.
Dateline: Monday, January 11, 2010
by Maude Barlow
As Canadians enter a new year and a new decade, it is time to accept an unpleasant reality: Canada's international reputation as a progressive middle power is gone. Instead, our country is increasingly seen as a human rights denying eco-outlaw that has lost its way and its special status as a standard bearer for a better world. This change is largely the doing of Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the ideology that has motivated him and his mentors for decades.
Let's start with the fact that while Canadians were resting over the holiday, Stephen Harper prorogued Parliament, thus canceling the committee hearings into his government's handling of the Afghan detainee scandal.
Under Stephen Harper, Canada has also abandoned its traditional support of human rights initiatives at the United Nations.
This move allowed the Prime Minister to duck serious allegations both about Canadian troops turning over innocent Afghan civilians for torture at the hands of Afghan authorities as well as his government's shameful treatment of Canadian intelligence officer Richard Colvin whose sworn testimony before a House of Commons committee in November blew the issue into an international story and embarrassed Harper on the eve of his important first trip to China.
There are growing calls in Canada and internationally for an investigation into whether Canada has violated the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court by knowingly turning over civilians to sure torture, a call now that the government hopes will get lost in the post Olympic euphoria when Parliament resumes.
Proroguing Parliament also puts time and distance between the Prime Minister and his shameful performance at the summit on climate change held in December in Copenhagen, where Canada was universally held up as an international example of worst practices. Not only is Canada among the top ten greenhouse gas emitters in the world, but the only country to ratify and then abandon the Kyoto Protocol, announcing weeks before the summit that it would be a failure.
Stephen Harper's government continues to promote unlimited growth in the Alberta tar sands — Canada's Mordor — the fastest growing source of pollution emissions in the country, and this fact was repeatedly cited by delegates from the global South as a barrier to their commitment to reducing their own emissions.
George Monbiot called Canada a "corrupt petrostate" in The Guardian and said that Canada's failure in Copenhagen outweighs all the good the country has done in a century. During the summit, climate change activists in London England took down the flag at the Canadian High Commission and drenched it in oil, an action that received widespread attention there but not in Canada.
Under Stephen Harper, Canada has also abandoned its traditional support of human rights initiatives at the United Nations.
In 2007, Canada was one of a handful of countries to vote against the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples', which sets out global human rights standards for indigenous communities and was supported by the vast majority of UN member nations. Human rights and First Nations groups pointed to a well-funded campaign of the Harper government to derail the accord at the UN and charged it with giving in to big business demands for access to the lucrative energy and mineral wealth on native lands.
Similarly, Canada has refused to support the call for the human right to water at the UN in spite of the fact that billions of people are suffering from the inability to access clean water simply because it has a price on it that they cannot meet. A powerful international movement is calling for a covenant to ensure equitable access to the dwindling global supplies of fresh water. To the bafflement of the international community, Canada is not among the growing list of nations on side.
And let's not forget the disgraceful human rights and environmental violations of many Canadian mining companies operating in the global South with the full blessing and financial support of the Harper government.
Close to two thirds of the world's mining companies are registered in Canada. The Export Development Corporation provides loans, insurance and credit to them in the absence of standards, regulations and disclosure.
Global expansion of Canadian mining operations has been accompanied by environmental disaster, displacement of Indigenous Peoples and numerous human rights abuses. In many communities in the global South, the name Canada is connected with injustice. Yet Prime Minister Harper refuses to support calls to set even the most basic standards for these mining emissaries abroad.
I am personally ashamed of my country as I travel internationally. In a world calling out for new models of justice, conflict resolution and environmental stewardship, Canada could be playing such a powerful role as it has done in the past. Stephen Harper with a majority frightens me.
Maude Barlow is the National Chairperson of the Council of Canadians.
Dateline: Monday, January 11, 2010
by Maude Barlow
As Canadians enter a new year and a new decade, it is time to accept an unpleasant reality: Canada's international reputation as a progressive middle power is gone. Instead, our country is increasingly seen as a human rights denying eco-outlaw that has lost its way and its special status as a standard bearer for a better world. This change is largely the doing of Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the ideology that has motivated him and his mentors for decades.
Let's start with the fact that while Canadians were resting over the holiday, Stephen Harper prorogued Parliament, thus canceling the committee hearings into his government's handling of the Afghan detainee scandal.
Under Stephen Harper, Canada has also abandoned its traditional support of human rights initiatives at the United Nations.
This move allowed the Prime Minister to duck serious allegations both about Canadian troops turning over innocent Afghan civilians for torture at the hands of Afghan authorities as well as his government's shameful treatment of Canadian intelligence officer Richard Colvin whose sworn testimony before a House of Commons committee in November blew the issue into an international story and embarrassed Harper on the eve of his important first trip to China.
There are growing calls in Canada and internationally for an investigation into whether Canada has violated the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court by knowingly turning over civilians to sure torture, a call now that the government hopes will get lost in the post Olympic euphoria when Parliament resumes.
Proroguing Parliament also puts time and distance between the Prime Minister and his shameful performance at the summit on climate change held in December in Copenhagen, where Canada was universally held up as an international example of worst practices. Not only is Canada among the top ten greenhouse gas emitters in the world, but the only country to ratify and then abandon the Kyoto Protocol, announcing weeks before the summit that it would be a failure.
Stephen Harper's government continues to promote unlimited growth in the Alberta tar sands — Canada's Mordor — the fastest growing source of pollution emissions in the country, and this fact was repeatedly cited by delegates from the global South as a barrier to their commitment to reducing their own emissions.
George Monbiot called Canada a "corrupt petrostate" in The Guardian and said that Canada's failure in Copenhagen outweighs all the good the country has done in a century. During the summit, climate change activists in London England took down the flag at the Canadian High Commission and drenched it in oil, an action that received widespread attention there but not in Canada.
Under Stephen Harper, Canada has also abandoned its traditional support of human rights initiatives at the United Nations.
In 2007, Canada was one of a handful of countries to vote against the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples', which sets out global human rights standards for indigenous communities and was supported by the vast majority of UN member nations. Human rights and First Nations groups pointed to a well-funded campaign of the Harper government to derail the accord at the UN and charged it with giving in to big business demands for access to the lucrative energy and mineral wealth on native lands.
Similarly, Canada has refused to support the call for the human right to water at the UN in spite of the fact that billions of people are suffering from the inability to access clean water simply because it has a price on it that they cannot meet. A powerful international movement is calling for a covenant to ensure equitable access to the dwindling global supplies of fresh water. To the bafflement of the international community, Canada is not among the growing list of nations on side.
And let's not forget the disgraceful human rights and environmental violations of many Canadian mining companies operating in the global South with the full blessing and financial support of the Harper government.
Close to two thirds of the world's mining companies are registered in Canada. The Export Development Corporation provides loans, insurance and credit to them in the absence of standards, regulations and disclosure.
Global expansion of Canadian mining operations has been accompanied by environmental disaster, displacement of Indigenous Peoples and numerous human rights abuses. In many communities in the global South, the name Canada is connected with injustice. Yet Prime Minister Harper refuses to support calls to set even the most basic standards for these mining emissaries abroad.
I am personally ashamed of my country as I travel internationally. In a world calling out for new models of justice, conflict resolution and environmental stewardship, Canada could be playing such a powerful role as it has done in the past. Stephen Harper with a majority frightens me.
Maude Barlow is the National Chairperson of the Council of Canadians.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
