But Ashfield rejected opposition allegations that the federal government's plan for a "more sensible and practical" Fisheries Act was a result of corporate pressure from the energy and mining sectors.
"It certainly hasn't influenced me in any way shape or form. I have never sat down with (or) had any discussions with Enbridge," he said in an interview.
Enbridge has long complained, according to internal government documents, that its proposed Northern Gateway oilsands pipeline to the B.C. Coast faces excessively "onerous" requirements under the Fisheries Act.
But Ashfield said there is broad support from farmers, municipalities, and even some conservation groups for government's new plan that shifts regulatory enforcement focus away from general fish habitat and towards specific fish and fish habitat that are of "vital" importance to the recreational, commercial and aboriginal fisheries.
Ashfield drew attention to groups outside the mining and energy sectors backing the changes, including the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters, Ducks Unlimited Canada, and the Canadian Federation of Municipalities.
He said farmers have been prevented from cleaning out their irrigation channels and municipalities have faced delays in repairing bridge supports and maintaining drainage ditches.
"We want to adopt a sensible and practical approach to managing real and significant threats to fisheries and the habitat that supports them while minimizing the restrictions on routine, everyday activities that have little to no impact on the productivity of Canada's fisheries."
But Ashfield acknowledged that his proposals could reduce Enbridge's requirements under Fisheries Act habitat protection rules relating to the estimated 1,000 waterways the pipeline will cross en route from Alberta to the B.C. coast.
"It could be determined that some of these waterways may not necessarily be vital waterways," Ashfield said in the interview.
The government announcement stressed that the current fisheries law, which bans activity that results in the "harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat," has been too broadly enforced.
Ashfield's confirmation of long-rumoured plans to rewrite the legislation follows last week's sweeping government proposal to overhaul Canada's environmental assessment review system to speed up federal approval of major projects and give provincial governments greater say over decisions.
Critics say Ashfield's vaguely-worded proposed changes - which still haven't been put into legislation before Parliament - are all about accommodating energy and mining firms like Enbridge.
"They're using farmers and rural folks and their concerns as a guise for the real agenda - their pipeline projects," said New Democratic Party fisheries critic Fin Donnelly, MP for New Westminster-Coquitlam.
The NDP pointed out in the House of Commons that two former Progressive Conservative federal fisheries ministers, British Columbians John Fraser and Tom Siddon, have urged Ottawa to resist industry pressure to water down the legislation.
The NDP's Donnelly said the changes will have a huge impact on major energy and mining processes, because it will be a lot tougher for enforcement officers to prove that a company is harming a specific fishery than it would be to prove damage to a fish habitat.
Green Party leader Elizabeth May said Ottawa seems intent on engineering a "fundamental weakening" of the legislation.
She pointed out that many important waterways contain fish eaten by seabirds, bears and other animals that don't directly benefit the recreational, commercial or aboriginal fisheries.
Enbridge spokesman Todd Nogier said it's "unclear" whether the proposed changes will impact Northern Gateway.
Enbridge, according to internal briefing notes obtained under the Access to Information Act, has complained that Fisheries Act requirements to build its proposed Northern Gateway pipeline that crosses approximately 1,000 waterways between Alberta and the B.C. coast are "too onerous."
One Fisheries and Oceans Canada internal document obtained through the Access to Information Act described Northern Gateway as "unique" due to the "span of climatic, geographic, sociographic and biographic zones that it crosses and has the potential to impact."
A senior federal habitat biologist, in a February, 2011 email to department colleagues, noted that he flew over the Northern Gateway route with Enbridge officials and pointed out "many crossings" of concern.
But the Enbridge officials "seemed to brush off" those concerns "as low-issue."
Original Article
Source: vancouver sun
Author: Peter O'Neil
No comments:
Post a Comment