COMMENTARY — Feds should stay course

The mining industry has awarded the federal government a passing, but lackluster, grade for its progress in keeping promises regarding environmental regulatory reform.

The federal government was given an average grade of C in the Report Card on Environmental Regulatory Reform, published by Keep Mining in Canada (KMIC).

According to the Mining Association of Canada, the mediocre grade stems from the fact that some of the government’s key commitments to improving the environmental approval process are either stalled or absent.

The government received only one A, for its implementation of the Federal Co-ordination Regulation.

The government scored a B in developing environmental assessment timeframes for the federal environmental review process, as well for implementing recommendations as outlined in the final report of the Assessment of the Aquatic Effects of Mining in Canada (AQUAMIN). Included in that report were revisions to the federal Metal Mining Liquid Effluent Regulations.

The government received two Cs from KMIC. The group judged as mixed the government’s progress in creating “an environmental regulatory regime that promotes a proper investment climate and achieves the highest level of environmental quality.”

The group was also less than enthusiastic about the Department of Fisheries and Oceans’ progress in reviewing the “no net loss” aspect of the Fish Habitat Policy. On this front, the government agrees with the principle that the policy should take into account other legitimate users of water resources whose interest may conflict with those of habitat managers.

The government’s progress on two of its commitments was deemed barely acceptable by KMIC. The industry is concerned with the ratification of a single, nation-wide environmental assessment process with standards agreeable to all provinces. Two agreements — the Canada-wide Accord on Environmental Harmonization and a sub-agreement on environmental assessment — have been negotiated, but neither has been ratified. The government received a D on this front.

The government was given an identical grade with respect to its poor progress in amending the Fisheries Act to clarify fish habitat management arrangements, as well as provide a single set of nation-wide minimum standards.

The government received one failing grade, for its promise to amend the Navigable Waters Protection Act in order to define what constitutes such a body of water. The government received an F in that area, since no mention has been made of amending the act since a proposal to do so was made earlier this year.