The Editor,
Okay. So the VAFFC has requested a second suspension of the environmental assessment of it's proposed supertanker port/holding tanks/pipeline project.
And it was granted. That's the surprising part.
The consortium wants to make more changes, I'd presume, to their application. But how are they allowed to hijack a legitimate, joint federal/provincial environmental review of their "best" proposal?
And they've done it twice, now.
Adrian Pollard (spokesperson for VAFFC) has often repeated their proposal was the best option of the 12 or 14 options the consortium considered.
Okay, Adrian. This is how you play the game. You get your BEST proposal together and you present it to the appropriate government agency for assessment and then you wait for approval or rejection.
You don't get to make any changes after your submission, just like how the government can't change the rules after your legitimate submission.
Most people just call that fair play.
That uranium mining debacle/defeat/ payoff/payout with Boss Power has hopefully puckered the B.C. Liberals' stupidity in such matters, but you never know.
After they moved the goal posts in that deal, the Liberals had to pay Boss Power $30 million in fines and penalties. They paid it with taxpayers' money.
Why has this been allowed?!
The VAFFC is on their second revision of their best proposal while it was already under environmental assessment by the provincial authority - the BC Environmental Assessment (BCEAO) - which will ultimately grant the approval or denial to this project.
Who's interest is the BCEAO looking out for? They are the ones who are allowing these suspensions of the legal process and allowing revisions to be made to the applicant's submission after the fact - and whenever they ask for it, apparently.
VAFFC: Our answer is yes.
BCEAO: Yes is the wrong answer.
VAFFC: Okay, we'll try, umm.... How about maybe?
BCEAO: Maybe is also an incorrect answer.
VAFFC: Well then, we'll change our answer to no.
BCEAO: We'll take your response under consideration.
If the government had suggested that the review process should be put on hold, pending some tweaking of the regulations, the VAFFC business lawyers would scream bloody murder and start swarming around a lawsuit honey pot for not bargaining in good faith or some such thing.
Can an average citizen sue a consortium for not bargaining in good faith?
Geoffrey Filtness Richmond
