LETTER TO THE EDITOR In defense of Environmental Bill

The Northern Miner recently published an article by George Miller, president of the Mining Association of Canada, entitled “Environmental `Bill of Rights’ — a dangerous precedent” (Nov. 26/90). In it, Mr. Miller was critical of both the process through which the Bill was enacted and of the contents of the legislation. Mr. Miller’s article contains a number of errors of fact and misapprehensions about both the process which led to the enactment of the Environmental Rights Act and the substance of the legislation.

Mr. Miller characterizes the enactment of the Bill as a “cloak and dagger process,” that it was introduced without notice and received first, second and third reading on Nov. 5, and Royal assent on Nov. 6, 1990. He goes on to suggest that this represented “unconscionable haste” and “left no time for reflection or consultation.”

The Bill was in fact advanced by a private member, Brian Lewis. First indications of its development and possible contents were published in a local newspaper, The Yellowknifer, on Jan. 17, 1990. Mr. Lewis consulted with a number of parties during the process of the drafting of the Bill. Subsequently, the Bill was reviewed by our legislature’s standing committee on legislation and was tabled for discussion and consultation purposes in the legislative assembly on April 3, 1990, seven months before its passage.

Over the course of the summer, the standing committee circulated the Bill to 119 organizations in the Northwest Territories and other parts of Canada. Unfortunately, the N.W.T. Chamber of Mines was not one of the organizations to which the draft was circulated for comment.

However, given this wide circulation and the fact that the Bill was tabled over seven months before its introduction for first reading, mining and industrial interests should have had ample opportunity to review and comment on the Bill.

Mr. Miller also said that the Bill was marked “Confidential: not for release before first reading” and that it was introduced without formal notice on Nov. 5. All Bills from any legislature anywhere in Canada are confidential until they are released for first reading. Secondly, the rules of our legislative assembly require that formal notice be given before any Bill is introduced for first reading.

Mr. Miller makes his final comment on the legislative process as follows: “Essentially undemocratic, the process leaves the territories’ legislative assembly open to charges of immaturity and manipulation.” There were no departures with respect to this Bill in the normal procedures by which our legislative assembly operates. Mr. Miller’s conclusion is thus unfounded and patronizing.

Mr. Miller moves on to a discussion of the substantive provisions of the Environmental Rights Act. He concludes that the Act exposes those companies operating in the Northwest Territories to a new set of rules.

This is not accurate. Existing federal legislation allows for much broader access to information than the Environmental Rights Act. The federal Access to Information Act has been in place since 1982. Investigations are currently possible under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA). In the two years that CEPA has been in force, there have been only 10 investigations requested in all of Canada.

Even before the Environmental Rights Act was passed, any person, whether resident in the Northwest Territories or not, had the right to bring a private prosecution. With few exceptions, this is part of the general law of Canada, the provinces and territories, subject always to the intervention of the Attorney General who may continue or end the prosecution as appropriate. The provisions in our Act do not alter or extend this right. Only section six, which changes the rules of standing with regard to civil actions in public nuisance, extends the current rights of northern residents. It must be pointed out, however, that section six lawsuits can only be brought if a contaminant has been or is likely to be released. More importantly, subsection six provides a defence of statutory authorization which would protect any mining company operating within the limits of its licences or permits.

It is our view that the Environmental Rights Act is a cautious and balanced step toward providing greater information to and involvement by private citizens in the process of northern environmental protection. Geoffrey M. Bickert Deputy Minister Government of the Northwest Territories