A second former Progressive Conservative cabinet minister has levelled a scathing broadside at the Harper government, saying the reported plan to gut the Fisheries Act is "foolish" and shows the government isn't truly conservative.
John Fraser was responding to speculation that Ottawa is planning to remove any reference to habitat protection in the legislation, a move critics say is partly intended to help Calgary-based Enbridge Inc. get approval to build an oilsands pipeline to the B.C. coast.
"To take habitat out of the Fisheries Act is a very serious error because you can't save fish if you don't save habitat, and I say this as a lifelong conservative," Fraser said in an interview Tuesday. "People who want to eliminate the appropriate safeguards that should be made in the public interest, these people aren't conservatives at all. -
"They're ideological right-wingers with very, very limited understanding, intelligence or wisdom."
Fraser, fisheries minister from 1984 to 1985, is the second ex-B.C. minister under former prime minister Brian Mulroney to slam Ottawa on the issue.
Fraser's successor, Tom Sid-don, who served until 1990, said last week he hopes speculation of a possible rewriting of the act will trigger broad opposition from mainstream Canadians.
Last week, Otto Langer, a retired federal fisheries biologist, released a leaked internal information spelling out planned changes to the Fisheries Act.
A section that went into force in 1986, prohibiting any activities that could harm fish habitat, would be replaced by a ban on anything causing an "adverse effect" on "fish of economic, cultural or ecological value." The proposed wording includes a number of exemptions permitting activity that could hurt fish of value.
Langer said the move is likely intended to help Enbridge, since the proposed pipeline that is enthusiastically defended by the Harper government would cross hundreds of rivers and streams en route to Kitimat.
Fisheries Minister Keith Ash-field, peppered with questions on the matter all week, didn't deny the report, but said no decision had been made. He also cited examples to show the current legislation is causing unnecessary grief for landowners.
"The government is reviewing fish and fish habitat protection policies to ensure they do not go beyond their intended conservation goals," Ashfield said later in a news release.
He said speculation regarding the review is "inaccurate," but also made clear that changes are coming.
"The government has been clear that the existing policies do not reflect the priorities of Canadians," Ashfield said. "We want to focus our activities on protecting natural waterways that are home to the fish Canadians value most instead of on flooded fields and ditches."
Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver, meanwhile, said Tuesday that Canada's economy is at risk if action isn't taken to reduce the unnecessarily large number of environmental reviews stalling land use and resource development decisions.
The Fisheries Act, according to internal documents, is "one of the most frequent triggers" of such assessments.
"This is a huge disincentive to investment that can cost Canadians good, well-paying jobs and jeopardize the economic viability of major projects," Oliver said in a speech in Regina.
Fraser, 80, stressed that he's neither left-wing nor anti-development. He is the son of a lumberman and grew up in logging camps, and as a lawyer regularly represented natural resources firms.
Fraser said the Harper government should have consulted with Canadians who under-stand fisheries matters, including former Tory ministers. He also said the government appears to be listening only to corporate lobbyists.
"I don't know why they were foolish enough to get into a public discussion about this without having the brains to get a hold of some of us who could have given them some effective advice."
If fisheries officers are showing excessive zeal in enforcing the current act, Fraser said, the minister and his senior officials should be able to reign them in.
He said a true conservative would know better.
"A conservative is somebody whose view of human nature is that the human beast is capable of being a saint and also capable of being sons of bitches," he said. "And if you are going to protect the public interest you have to take that into account."
Original Article
Source: vancouver sun
Author: Peter O'Neil
John Fraser was responding to speculation that Ottawa is planning to remove any reference to habitat protection in the legislation, a move critics say is partly intended to help Calgary-based Enbridge Inc. get approval to build an oilsands pipeline to the B.C. coast.
"To take habitat out of the Fisheries Act is a very serious error because you can't save fish if you don't save habitat, and I say this as a lifelong conservative," Fraser said in an interview Tuesday. "People who want to eliminate the appropriate safeguards that should be made in the public interest, these people aren't conservatives at all. -
"They're ideological right-wingers with very, very limited understanding, intelligence or wisdom."
Fraser, fisheries minister from 1984 to 1985, is the second ex-B.C. minister under former prime minister Brian Mulroney to slam Ottawa on the issue.
Fraser's successor, Tom Sid-don, who served until 1990, said last week he hopes speculation of a possible rewriting of the act will trigger broad opposition from mainstream Canadians.
Last week, Otto Langer, a retired federal fisheries biologist, released a leaked internal information spelling out planned changes to the Fisheries Act.
A section that went into force in 1986, prohibiting any activities that could harm fish habitat, would be replaced by a ban on anything causing an "adverse effect" on "fish of economic, cultural or ecological value." The proposed wording includes a number of exemptions permitting activity that could hurt fish of value.
Langer said the move is likely intended to help Enbridge, since the proposed pipeline that is enthusiastically defended by the Harper government would cross hundreds of rivers and streams en route to Kitimat.
Fisheries Minister Keith Ash-field, peppered with questions on the matter all week, didn't deny the report, but said no decision had been made. He also cited examples to show the current legislation is causing unnecessary grief for landowners.
"The government is reviewing fish and fish habitat protection policies to ensure they do not go beyond their intended conservation goals," Ashfield said later in a news release.
He said speculation regarding the review is "inaccurate," but also made clear that changes are coming.
"The government has been clear that the existing policies do not reflect the priorities of Canadians," Ashfield said. "We want to focus our activities on protecting natural waterways that are home to the fish Canadians value most instead of on flooded fields and ditches."
Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver, meanwhile, said Tuesday that Canada's economy is at risk if action isn't taken to reduce the unnecessarily large number of environmental reviews stalling land use and resource development decisions.
The Fisheries Act, according to internal documents, is "one of the most frequent triggers" of such assessments.
"This is a huge disincentive to investment that can cost Canadians good, well-paying jobs and jeopardize the economic viability of major projects," Oliver said in a speech in Regina.
Fraser, 80, stressed that he's neither left-wing nor anti-development. He is the son of a lumberman and grew up in logging camps, and as a lawyer regularly represented natural resources firms.
Fraser said the Harper government should have consulted with Canadians who under-stand fisheries matters, including former Tory ministers. He also said the government appears to be listening only to corporate lobbyists.
"I don't know why they were foolish enough to get into a public discussion about this without having the brains to get a hold of some of us who could have given them some effective advice."
If fisheries officers are showing excessive zeal in enforcing the current act, Fraser said, the minister and his senior officials should be able to reign them in.
He said a true conservative would know better.
"A conservative is somebody whose view of human nature is that the human beast is capable of being a saint and also capable of being sons of bitches," he said. "And if you are going to protect the public interest you have to take that into account."
Original Article
Source: vancouver sun
Author: Peter O'Neil
No comments:
Post a Comment