The Harper Attack On The Environment - Part Three

H/t Michael Nabert

Never should one industry get to write Canada's environmental law. Never should one industry get to rewrite Canada's treaties. Never should one industry be listened to over the voice of tens of thousands of protesting citizens.

Yet that is exactly what has happened, according to Yan Roberts and others who have studied the systematic dismantling of tough environmental regulations under the Harper regime.

In this third part of a series exploring the devastation that the Harper regime has wrought on the environment, I am departing from Elizabeth May's book to examine the consequences of Bill C-45, one of the regime's infamous omnibus 'budget' bills that carried within its bulk all kinds of non-budgetary items.

One of the biggest of those non-budgetary targets was the Navigable Waters Protection Act, since changed to the Navigation Protection Act. The omission of waters in the act is a clue as to what happened as a result of lobbying by the Canadian Energy Pipeline Association which, some claim, in fact dictated the terms of the changes.

Two years ago The Toronto Star reported the following:

The Canadian Energy Pipeline Association met with senior government officials in the fall of 2011, urging them not just to streamline environmental assessments, but also to bring in “new regulations under (the) Navigable Waters Protection Act,” a CEPA slide presentation shows.

A copy of the Oct. 27 presentation made to then-deputy minister of trade Louis Levesque was obtained by Greenpeace Canada and shared with The Canadian Press.

These were their demands:

•Regulatory reform so that each project goes through just one environmental review;

•Bolster the Major Projects Management Office (tasked with steering resource projects efficiently through the bureaucracy);

•Speed up permitting for small projects;

•Make government expectations known early in the permitting process;

•Support an “8-1-1” phone line to encourage construction companies to “call before you dig”;

•Modify the National Energy Board Act so it can impose administrative penalties, in order to prevent pipeline damage;

•New regulations under the Navigable Waters Protection Act.

It seems the Harper enablers responded quickly to most of these 'troublesome' regulations:

The first budget omnibus bill [C-38] in June contained a replacement for the Environmental Assessment Act and also a provision to remove pipelines and power lines from provisions of the Navigable Waters Protection Act. [Emphasis mine.] Predictably, reaction from environmentalists was negative, while business and the natural resource sector reacted positively to the changes.

But the Harper wrecking crew was not yet finished:

...the government surprised many close observers by going even further in a second omnibus bill, C-45. The Navigable Waters Protection Act was changed to the Navigation Protection Act, significantly reducing its scope over Canada’s waters.

As Yan Roberts points out,

This new acts leaves 99.9 per cent of our rivers and 99.7 per cent of our lakes without basic protection.

And, as Fasken Marleau made clear in an environmental bulletin,

...the government will limit the application of the new law to the three oceans flanking the Canadian borders as well as 97 lakes and 62 rivers that have been qualified as important commercial and recreational water courses. The building of works on any body of water not mentioned in Schedule 2 of the new legislation will no longer be governed by federal law.

Perhaps the clearest sense of the potential consequences of this legislation is imparted by Vancouver - West Coast Environmental Law Executive Director and Senior Counsel Jessica Clogg:

Bill C-45 transforms the Navigable Waters Protection Act into the Navigation Protection Act. Historically, the Navigable Waters Protection Act protected the right to navigate without interference from logging operations, bridges, pipelines, dams, and other forms of industrial development. In this manner it provided an indirect tool to protect water and the environment.

Now only water bodies specifically listed in a schedule to the act are protected. The Navigation Protection Act excludes 99.7% of Canada’s lakes and over 99.9% of Canada’s rivers from federal oversight. Pipelines are also specifically exempted...

How did we come to this terrible state of affairs, where the gutting of environmental regulation is directed by oil lobbyists whose activities are largely hidden from public view? It would certainly be easy to blame it solely on the Harper regime's unethical use of omnibus bills. It would be easy to blame a regime that is so ideologically driven that it recognizes value not in our natural capital, but only the capital that accrues from destroying that heritage.

But that would be only part of the truth. The other part resides with all of us, too busy 'getting and spending' to take note of or care that the ephemeral is no replacement for the deep natural riches our country has been bestowed with, riches that are being systematically destroyed by the philistines among us.

For Further Reading:

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/yan-roberts/omnibus-harper-oil_b_2474752.html

http://davidsuzuki.org/media/news/2012/11/how-bill-c-45-weakens-our-environmental-laws-and-democracy/

http://www.macleans.ca/tag/c-45/

http://www.fasken.com/en/omnibus-bill-c-45-amendments-to-the-navigable-waters-protection-act/

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2013/02/20/pipeline_industry_drove_changes_to_navigable_waters_protection_act_documents_show.html

The Harper Attack On The Environment - Part Two

Continuing the series I started the other day, here is another excerpt from Science Under Attack, a chapter in Elizabeth May's memoir Who We Are.

Much of that chapter is devoted to the science of climate change, a science that, although constantly under attack by the ignorant and the well-funded climate-change denial industry, is essentially irrefutable. The foundation of its credibility, of course, is research. It is that research that the Harper regime has been systematically hobbling since it came to office:

March 2012 marked the end of all funding for the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences (now the Canadian Climate Forum). The funds put in place in 2000, $110 million over ten years for autonomous research funding in Canada's major universities, had been spend expanding our understanding of the climate crisis in its multi-faceted disciplines of inquiry.

As reported in The Star at the time of its closure,

the Harper government promised a new program to replace the foundation. It committed itself to delivering $35 million to the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada over five years...

But, for reasons that were never explained, that funding never materialized. The result?

The ensuing funding gap has caused many university-based climate and atmospheric science activities to collapse. With scientists already reeling from draconian cuts to Environment Canada, widespread layoff notices have resulted in a brain drain the like of which has not been seen for a generation. Rather than “attracting world-leading talent,” Canada is quickly divesting itself of its best and brightest.

Stay tuned for the next installment on the Harper wrecking crew.

The Harper Attack On The Environment - Part One

I am currently reading Elizabeth May's Who We Are: Reflection On My Life And Canada, a political memoir in which her love for her adopted country, Canada, is apparent on each page.

Since we are now in an election year, I believe it incumbent upon all of us to remind as many as possible of the terrible record of the Harper rule these past nine years, a record that should alarm everyone for so many, many reasons. To this end I plan to regularly post small excerpts from May's chapter entitled Science Under Attack. Although most of what I will use is likely well-known to progressives, the abuses of the regime are so numerous that it is sometimes hard to recall all of them. Hence, this ready reference. As well, each post will include some relevant links.

The Attack Begins In Earnest

The position of science advisor to the prime minister was eliminated in 2008. By 2012, the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy (NRTEE) was also eliminated...it was the last governmental advisory body on science, nature, or sustainable economics. Ironically, after Brian Mulroney established the NRTEE, its existence was used as an excuse to eliminate the Science Council, the Canadian Environmental Advisory Council, and the Economic Council. When Harper killed the NRTEE, his environment minister, Peter Kent, said it had been rendered unnecessary by the advent of the internet.

There is, of course, much, much more to come.

A Motivational Video

If Stephen Harper's contempt for the things we hold dear as Canadians isn't reason enough to vote, what is?

A Stinging Indictment Of Joe Oliver And The Harper Mentality

It would seem that Chad Beharriell of Windsor has Natural Resource Minister Joe Oliver's number:

Make transition to a green economy

Like a dinosaur that can see the comet coming, Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver is now reaching for the public relations panic button as he sees growing resistance across the globe to unchecked fossil fuel development.

Oliver, a former investment banker who leads the Conservative charge to monetize everything in the ground regardless of environmental and health costs, realizes that Canadians, North Americans and the world-at-large are waking up to the very real effects of climate change and global warming brought on by continued fossil fuel consumption.

The world’s atmosphere now contains 400 parts-per-million of carbon dioxide — the last time carbon dioxide was in such high amounts was approximately four million years ago when the planet was very different and humans did not exist. Humans are recreating a climate that normally wouldn’t exist within the natural cycles of the planet.

The current Canadian government and Oliver are lazy. Rather than take on the adventure to transition to clean energy and a green economy that will create thousands of jobs during that transition, Oliver and company wilfully damage the atmosphere and life-sources of water to squeeze black money from the tar sands.

Oliver recently said that Canadians, in terms of expanded fossil fuel development, must act quickly to “decide whether to take that opportunity or let it pass us by.” Oliver, your time has passed; the coming generations want a different planet.

A Reminder Of Our Place

As our Cuban friends' visit continues, we are trying to give them a sampling of life in Canada. Yesterday we went to the Royal Ontario Museum in Toronto; the first exhibition hall we entered there was the one devoted to Canada's aboriginal peoples, where we came upon a work by Norval Morriseau entitled Migration, depicted above.

As the human race continues its ruthless and relentless exploitation of earth's resources to the point of exhaustion, as our heedless behaviour warms the earth to the point of profound and probably irreversible, disastrous change, Migration offers us a succinct reminder of how everyone and everything is interconnected and interdependent.

It is a simple and profound truth, the implications of which far too many choose to be willfully ignorant.

Pensée Du La Jour

For Those Who Don't Mind Gov't Surveillance Because They Have Nothing To Hide

You might want to take a moment to read Rick Salutin's thoughts on the implications of living in a country where environmentalists and others who oppose the government's corporate agenda are regarded as terrorists.

As well, this Canadian Dimension piece might also give you pause.

Harper 'Stunned' By Magnitude of Alberta Flooding

I expect that climate-change denier Harper will be stunned with alarming regularity soon:

Let's All Be Good, Quiescent Citizens, Eh?

It is no secret that this country, under the 'leadership' of the Harper cabal, has suffered a significant loss of democratic freedoms reflected in the abuse of and contempt for parliamentary procedure, the subversion of senate inquiries, the muzzling of civil servants, and the extollment of opacity in place of transparency (anyone made a freedom of information request lately?) to name but four 'crimes' of the government. A new threat, of which I have already briefly written twice, is the new law, Bill C-309, which makes it a crime punishable by up to ten years in prison to wear a mask during a riot (cue the misdirection here) or an 'unlawful assembly'. It is the latter stipulation that should be of concern to all of us.

First, what constitutes an unlawful assembly? It would seem that it is in the eye of the beholder. The Criminal Code defines it this way:

"An unlawful assembly is an assembly of three or more persons who, with intent to carry out any common purpose, assemble in such a manner or so conduct themselves when they are assembled as to cause persons in the neighbourhood of the assembly to fear, on reasonable grounds, that they will disturb the peace tumultuously; or will by that assembly needlessly and without reasonable cause provoke other persons to disturb the peace tumultuously."

You can see that one of the problems here is the rather subjective nature of an unlawful assembly, the determination of which would ultimately fall to the authoriteis on site to make. For example, if a group of people, without a permit, assemble to loudly and very publically protest, for example, environmental degradation, and one of them, because he/she fears retaliation from an employer, dons a disguise, if the authorities call it an ulawfual assembly, that person is potentially facing a very protracted period of incarceration.

Are people who might be present at a current protest in Westover over Enbridge plans to pump tar sand crude to Montreal but don't want to run afoul of employers thereby deterred from this 'unlawful assembly'? Those who embrace the corporate agenda would doubless be hearted by such deterrence; those who can think beyond the bottom line, not so much.

While the author of the bill, Conservative M.P. Blake Richards has insisted that the law is necessary for dealing with protesters "pre-emptively,", Osgoode Hall Law School Professor James Stribopoulos [has] pointed to the possible "chilling effects" posed by making it unlawful to disguise one’s identity at a protest, say to prevent against reprisals from your boss or coworkers, or to avoid facial recognition software.

Given that existing law already makes it an offence to wear a mask during the commission of a crime, some are suggesting the new law will not withstand a constitutional challenge. Writes the Huffington Post's Marni Soupcoff:

The problem with the new law is that it threatens to chill the political and social activities of completely innocent people -- or to land them in jail for doing nothing more serious than trying to stay anonymous. What if a .... particularly creative environmentalist wanted to make a point at an anti-oil sands demonstration by wearing a handmade sludge-covered duck mask?

Can the government really get away with this level of intimidation, dampening, and punishment of public demonstrations... Not if the Charter's protections of freedom of expression and peaceful assembly mean anything. Which is why I hope the new law will be challenged in court -- and soon. It deserves more serious constitutional scrutiny than it has been afforded, and it deserves more outrage too. Canada should not feel comfortable joining the ranks of Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia -- countries (none of them exactly known for their respect of civil liberties) that have ... recently banned Guy Fawkes masks.

So the choice becomes a very basic one: Will we play the role of the quiescent citizen that coroporate/governmental interests are so avidly casting for? Or do we think that democracy is something well-worth vigourously fighting for and defending?

A New Transparency For Harper?

Sometimes the truth can be ugly indeed.




H/t Canadians Rallying To Unseat Harper

Guest Commentary From The Salamander On Pierre Poilievre And The Company He Keeps

Because he doesn't maintain his own blog yet offers blistering commentary that lacerates the pretensions of his subjects, I am once more placing as a guest post the searing analysis The Salmander offered in response to my post on the hypocrisy of that old young man, Pierre Poilievre, currently one of Harper's favorite poodles.

Enjoy:

.. hypocrite .. yes .. that captures the shallow ethics of this preening vain and glib political insectivore that hatched in Calgary, and who deserves careful examination under bright light and a magnifying glass.. by honest and objective political scientists.. or forensic anthropologists.

His pasty white cretin pedigreed shell may have evolved or metastasized from radiation/toxin poisoning that leached from Tom Flanagan, Stephen Harper & the rest of those flawed supremacist trogs that tend to lurch from the tailings ponds and the Calgary School for young Harper wannabe's.

Look who is right behind primped up poutine Pierre in the image from the video !... Why there is Michelle Rempel ! Cut from the very same cloth .. tho she is the staunch defender of Peter Kent.. our great boreal forest slayer along with Joe Oliver.. and Queen Stephen from Toronto.

Ah yes, oily Pierre .. former amour of political operative Jenni Byrne.. who of course worked hand in hand as deputy campaign manager on the 'in-out' 2006 election fraud and plea deal with the late immigrant and 'Reformer' Senator Finley.. Byrne was the lead hand campaign manager of the 2011 election fraud, live & robo calling, shadow MP's, data mining - and later data base and call record erasures & sanitizing etc.. denials and defender against baseless smears.

The tete a tete's of Pierre & Jenni would likely be delightful to those who enjoy the hissing of serpents and garbled maudlin moralistic pontifications.. vote moving & suppression strategies and pretending to be Canadian.

Let's be clear .. this Poilievre specimen is seen as potential cream of the Harper Party fungus crop. A soon to be Minister. Lesser lights have withered, flailed, retired or landed on the Harper dung heap a la Helen Guergis, Del Mastro, Sona etc.. or suddenly migrated to Abu Dhabi. Or gone to suddenly spend more time with their family .. or altruistically feel compelled to assist the BC Liberal Party, or the Alberta Wild Rose tea party..

The ascendant evangelists though.. like Poilievre, Kelly Leitch, Van Loan and Michelle Rempel.. screech the Harper Message, massage or lie to the mainstream media and communicate with or receive PMO marching orders and talking points via private email, smoke signals or agreed upon secret hissing and handshakes.. all outside, offside, out of sight of legal & required procedure.

At times I wonder how thrilling it must be to be paid by the people of Canada to screw them over, lie through your teeth to them.. and kiss Harper Party ass, suck & blow simultaneously, obstruct truth & justice, litigate against military veterans, First Nations, senior citizens, unions, women.. conspire to trash the environment & Charter of Rights and Freedoms on behalf of foreign energy consortiums and bow towards Israel and Calgary .. all at the same time.

It must be possible, but only if you're are a smug, forked tongue, entitled, two faced, purely unadulterated sanctimonious, and ethically bankrupt, ambitious paid public servant ..

This Makes Too Much Sense

...for anyone within the Conservative cabal to heed its words. Nonetheless, enjoy this well-considered editorial from today's edition of The Star:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his hyper-aggressive natural resources minister Joe Oliver are rapidly turning doubt about Canada’s bitumen into bitter opposition.

Oliver, who travelled to Europe this past week to promote Alberta’s heavy oil, ended up alienating his hosts and provoking a trade spat by vowing to take the European Union to court if imposes an import tax on Canada’s “dirty oil.”

Harper http://www.pm.gc.ca/eng/media.asp?category=1&pageId=26&id=5468 this week to defend TransCanada’s embattled Keystone XL pipeline from climate change activists in the United States.

Back home, the two men have stirred up so much ill-will in British Columbia by demonizing “radical environmental groups” and cutting short public hearings that they have all but killed the chances of getting Alberta’s oil to the Pacific.

In Edmonton, Premier Alison Redford, struggling to find a market for her province’s landlocked oil, has resorted to a level of deficit spending that has shocked Albertans and sent her public support plummeting.

Watching Canada’s descent from “energy superpower” to a stubborn peddler of environmentally damaging fossil fuel has been like witnessing a slow-motion train wreck. Yet the government refuses to recognize the damage it has done, much less change its strategy. It has become clear to everyone — except the prime minister, apparently — that lecturing potential buyers while spewing increasing amounts of carbon into the atmosphere is not going to work.

What Canada needs to do is provide wary buyers proof that it has a credible plan to clean up the oilsands, that it is working with scientists and environmentalists to extract the oil without using vast amounts of water and gas and that it respects its trading partners’ desire for sustainable forms of energy.

The makings of such a policy already exist. Oilsands producers have made modest progress in reducing the intensity of their emissions. Alberta has just levied a serious tax on carbon production. And an increasing number of eastern Canadians who once regarded the oilsands as a blight on the ecosystem are open to developing them if it can be done responsibly.

But the Harper government’s refusal to ratchet down its rhetoric has overshadowed these promising developments.

It is clear Canada cannot sell its bitumen to a wary world without an attitude change and a course shift. The longer the prime minister and his senior ministers remain in denial, the more difficult it will be for Alberta to export its bitumen and become a source of national economic strength. This is no longer an ideological issue. It is a simple matter of common sense.

Is Pierre Poilivre Related To Joe Oliver?

They certainly seem to be singing from the same hymn book.

Orwellian and hypocritical are inadequate descriptors of this little twit:

And speaking of Orwellian, how else might one describe the “Working Families Flexibility Act?”

The Harperites must be salivating.

The World We Are Destroying

My friend LeDaro often posts videos that depict the world around us, poignant reminders of what we are so blithely destroying through our heedless consumerism and governments that know the price of everything but the value of nothing. In this, the slavish promotion of the tarsands by the Harper regime and its henchmen (Joe Oliver, Peter Kent, et al.) are leading exemplars.

I hope you can spare about six minutes to be dazzled by the energy, vitality and mystery of a world that will not be with us much longer if we maintain our present course.

Stephen Harper - He's Not Here For You

But of course I state the obvious here, don't I? Nonetheless, for those who like regular and ongoing illustrations of the fact that the Prime Minister and his acolytes are in the thrall of 'special interests,' one need look no further than a report in today's Toronto Star.

Currently, non-financial businesses are sitting on over $600 billion in cash reserves, thanks to a very favourable tax regime from the Harperites and similarly obeisant and compliant provincial governments. At the same time, however, these 'masters of the universe,' reluctant to spend their largess on research and development, new equipment purchases, or just about anything else, have gotten new incentive to hoard and count their cash:

The Conservative government says the National Research Council is now “open for business” and will refocus on large-scale projects “directed by and for” Canadian industry — a change some scientists call a mistake.

Part of the mandate of the NRC is to work with and help support industry, but what is new here is the fact that it appears this will now essentially be its exclusive mandate, dictated by the 'needs' of industry.

While one understands that it is difficult for the current government regime, looking as it does with grave suspicion upon critical and nuanced thinking, to comprehend, the words of Nobel laureate John Polanyi, who says that steering the NRC away from basic research is misguided, need to be heard:

“One should structure things so (scientists) have the freedom and responsibility to provide ideas to industry, not just receive commands,” ...

Queen’s University professor and Canada Research Chair in Environmental Change, John Smol, explains it this way:

“I look at science as a pyramid. At the bottom you have all this basic fundamental research and at the top you have the applied. But you can’t have the applied without the basic,” he said.

Smol goes so far as to see something quite sinister in the Harper decision to make the NRC the handmaiden of the corporate agenda:

Smol, a lakes ecosystem expert, believes the decision to recast the NRC is part of a Conservative pattern of cutting funding for basic science in favour of applied research that will generate a profit.

“What you find in environmental research are things that will cost industry money,” he says. In a recent study, Smol showed that lakes near Alberta’s oil sands are filled with contaminants.

One assumes that with its new orders, the National Research Council will not anytime soon be conducting such embarrassing studies that could hamper the ever-stronger march of corporate dominance.

Another victory for the Harperites. Another loss for the non-corporate citizens of Canada.

Much Deserved Mockery - Part 3

A bit of a busy morning ahead, so for now something more from our friends at Canadians Rallying To Unseat Harper that amply attests to the fact that the spirit of resistance and dissent is alive and well in Canada:

Some Thoughts From An Ontario Perspective - UPDATED

While acknowledging that Ontario politics is likely of little interest to those living outside the province, I think there is much wisdom in former U.S. Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill's observation that "All politics is local." If it affects a constituent 'where he or she lives,' either in the physical or the mental/philosophical sense, I regard much of what occurs in our country politically as local.

For example, it was local politics when, in his ongoing attempt to hobble scientific study and muzzle voices of reason and expertise that demonstrate his policies to be fraudulent, retrograde and dangerous, Stephen Harper ended federal funding for the Experimental Lakes Area. A world-renowned facility conducting peerless research on global threats to the environment and to ecosystems, its defunding/closure affects all of us due to its negative impact on most people's values and the pervasive nature of environmental degradation.

And it is here that the Ontario connection becomes relevant. This week, Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne announced that Ontario will provide funding to keep the research facility open for the rest of this year, and is reaching out to Manitoba and others to try to ensure its long-term viability.

With this context in mind, I am taking the liberty of reproducing a letter from a Star reader found in today's edition that I think speaks for many across the country:

Premier Kathleen Wynne cautions NDP, Tories against ‘unnecessary’ election, April 24

I was moved to write for the first time to Premier Kathleen Wynne on Thursday. I wished to congratulate and thank her for her intention to spearhead the saving of the Experimental Lakes Area research facility from death by federal funding cuts. I’m sure there are many thousands of people across the country who, like me, are greatly relieved to hear this news.

Stephen Harper’s decision to cut off funds to this invaluable research facility has been widely denounced in Canada and abroad. The federal government’s foolish (and dangerous) move comes as no surprise, following as it does upon the heels of a lengthy list of examples of the wilful gouging of Canada’s environmental protections. The apparent reason for shedding responsibility for any part of the ELA research facility is so the Conservatives can save money to be returned to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and Environment Canada, both of which have been robbed by the Conservatives in the first place. But in this decision our Prime Minister’s motive is transparent. We all know that he will not allow successful scientific projects, especially those connected to the study of effects of climate change, to carry on with any kind of government support.

So thank you, Premier Wynne.

As reported Wednesday morning in the Vancouver Sun, the founding director of the Experimental Lakes Area facility, David Schindler, expressed his thanks by saying “the premier’s intervention is ‘like a ray of sunshine in the Dark Ages.’ ” How true.

Patricia Morris, Toronto

UPDATE: This morning's Toronto Star has an interesting editorial on the situation, which you can read by clicking here.

More On Harper's Dereliction of Environmental Responsibilites

As is so often the case, Star readers eloquently speak on issues close to the hearts of many. Reproduced below are two from this morning's edition that address the Harper regime's wholesale abandonment of environmental responsibility.

As well, here is a link to an Al Jazeera video report of our country's shameful closing of the Experimental Lakes Area in Northwestern Ontario. Intended for an international audience, it further solidifies our country's rapid decline into environmental infamy.

Canada quits anti-drought UN group, March 28

A recent study commissioned by 20 governments concluded that almost 400,000 people are dying each year from the effects of climate change. A disproportionate number of those are in the regions suffering most from drought and desertification.

Canada has just become the only country to withdraw from UN efforts to relieve this problem. Effectively, the present government is saying let them die: we have a deficit that is more important than human life.

This just adds to the contempt that Canada is earning in the world after its repeated sabotaging of international conferences to address the issue of climate change, and to being the only country in the world to withdraw from Kyoto.

Action on climate within Canada is a farce federally. If it were not for the concern of a few provinces, Canada would by actual measurement be the worst performing country in the world in mitigation efforts.

John Peate, Oshawa

The Canadian government seems to be preoccupied on so many fronts with cutting, withdrawing, obstructing and otherwise inhibiting concerted international action to help the world's environment. Since Stephen Harper formed a government, Canada is nothing but consistent in pursuing retrograde policies and misguided actions. This is further exemplified by its announced intention of unilaterally withdrawing from the 1994 United Nations convention to combat droughts.

Having been a full-fledged member for the past 18 years, this policy u-turn if implemented will leave Canada as being the only UN member not a party to the convention. Consequently, Canada will lose prestige and influence as it becomes further isolated in the world on matters concerning safeguarding the planet’s endangered environment. Is this really where we want to be?

Dorian M. Young, Minden

More on Drilling for Oil in the Gulf of St. Lawrence

As noted recently, the Harper regime, in its bottomless contempt and disregard for the environment, recently opened up the possibility of drilling for oil in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, another unpleasant fact hidden deep within the arcana of Omnibus Bill C-38. Happily, this fact was brought to the public's attention by the Toronto Star, whose readers invariably offer some insights worth preserving and spreading through the blogosphere.

Here are two from today's edition:

Re: Drilling for oil without a clue, Editorial Aug. 6

Thanks for drawing our attention to yet another major concern about the current federal government’s budget bill: highlighting the potential for oil exploration in the Gulf of St. Lawrence and amendments to the Coasting Trade Act that give oil companies greater access to exploration.

An oil spill in the Gulf of St. Lawrence would be disastrous as Green Party Leader Elizabeth May warns. The spill would not only affect the five eastern provinces of Canada but also the eastern U.S. states.

And it would become an additional potential threat to the Great Lakes ecosystem on which all of us on both sides of the border depend for water, for fish and for recreation. If citizens on both sides of the border were to unite around this concern, would Stephen Harper listen?

Anne Mitchell, Toronto

Once again, more surprises are oozing out of the federal omnibus bill. This time, it’s the potential for ecological and economic disasters as a result of drilling for oil in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

Through amendments to the Coasting Trade Act and the removal of the requirements for environmental assessments for experimental offshore drilling, this backdoor approval of the federal budget bill has left Canadians astonished, bewildered and decidedly uneasy.

One can only imagine what other surprises are lurking down the road.

Bill Wensley, Cobourg