Am I Paranoid?
Issues I fight for never seem to be 'news.' Wonder why?
Private power project construction on Ashlu River. Photo courtesy Western Wilderness Committee.
Tell me I'm not paranoid when I conclude that the corporate media in Vancouver will not cover any issue I'm deeply involved with.
But, as they say, "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean someone isn't following you."
During the Meech Lake/Charlottetown Accord issue of the late 1980s and early 1990s, I was in determined opposition to what I saw as terrible constitutional amendments that would work against my province. The Vancouver Sun and the Vancouver Province assumed that B.C. would be delighted to support the Mulroney government and were overwhelmed with disbelief when British Columbians voted almost 70 per cent No! The editor of the Sun at the time felt obliged to apologize to the readers for so misconstruing the mood of the public.
In the mid '90s, I was heavily involved in fighting the Kemano Completion Project. For the mainstream media, the fighting just wasn't happening! Yet, this billion dollar plus project was killed by the B.C. government.
Again in the '90s, I vocally and vigorously allied myself with an environmental group called PRAWN who wanted to prevent the development of a gravel pit on the Pitt River. The corporate media were silent on the matter and once again the efforts were successful when the government stepped in and settled the matter.
Starting in 2001, I've been consistently involved in the fish farm issue and have, based on the courageous work of Alexandra Morton supported by a host of scientists, demonstrated beyond any doubt that pink salmon smolts are being slaughtered by sea lice from Atlantic salmon fish farms. While Mark Hume (the Globe and Mail) and his brother Stephen (The Sun) have written occasional articles, where is the investigative reporting we saw when Vaughn Palmer was attacking the Glen Clark government over the "fast ferries" issue?
Where are the muckrakers (an honourable term) so necessary to holding the establishment's feet to the fire on the fish farms sea lice issue?
I'll tell you, in The Tyee and just a few other independent publications, including Opinion 250 and the Georgia Straight.
Ignored yet again
Now I am official spokesperson for the Save Our Rivers Society fighting the calamitous energy policy of the Campbell government.
The corporate media don't even rate this as an issue.
I'll let you decide how important this is.
First, BC Hydro, because of the government's policy of having all power generated privately, is terminally ill and here is why.
1. Its bureaucracy has been "contracted out" out to Accenture, an American Company.
2. It has been forbidden by Mr. Neufeld's government to bring on new sources of energy with that privilege now given exclusively to the private sector.
3. Its transmission lines have been taken from them and given to a new Crown corporation, British Columbia Transmission Corporation (BCTC). In view of the Campbell government's policy that power will be created and sold through the private sector, I predict that as sure as God made little green apples, the government will, if re-elected, sell it to a private corporation.
4. This leaves BC Hydro with its present dams and Burrard Thermal, all of which must be maintained, from which it must pay the juicy new contracts negotiated by the Campbell government with their friends, the General Electric et al., as well as service nearly $7 billion dollars capital debt, most of which is held or guaranteed by the taxpayers of B.C.
Can BC Hydro survive this? We don't think so and we are supported by expert opinion provided by Dr. John Calvert and Dr. Marvin Shaffer, both professors at Simon Fraser University. I urge you to read Dr. Shaffer's response to Dr. Mark Jaccard's support of the B.C. government's position. It can be found on the website of PublicPowerBC.ca or here.
Neufeld's dam notions
The minister, Richard Neufeld, makes the amazing statement that BC Hydro is protected by legislation "in perpetuity!" Gadfrey Daniel! Doesn't Neufeld know that there is no such thing as perpetual legislation and that parliament (the legislature) is supreme? If he doesn't understand the elementary workings of parliamentary democracy any better than this, he ought not to be an MLA much less a minister.
One might ask Neufeld this. If damming and diverting the rivers and streams in British Columbia is such a good idea (and it isn't) why isn't BC Hydro doing it so British Columbians make the money instead of giving it all to shareholders in large corporations like Ledcor and General Electric?
The answer is ideology. Following the preachings of the ultra-conservative Fraser Institute, the Campbell government believes that there is no place in our economy for Crown Corporations because he believes that private companies can always do the job better. BC Hydro, which has been in the power business for 40 years, providing either the cheapest or second cheapest power in North America must therefore be replaced by private companies. This means huge increases in the power bills for consumers and industry alike, with all the profits going into the pockets of mom and pop operations like Ledcor and General Electric!
Why give it all away?
What is the essence of the Campbell government's policy?
BC Hydro is forbidden to bring on new power. All new power will be created by private companies. This will create huge environmental damage as one can easily see by going to www.saveourrivers.ca and looking at the award winning Damien Gillis' Powerplay videos.
Until this insane policy, we the people of B.C. have owned our system of public power so that all profits (often approaching $1 billion a year) go into the B.C. treasury for schools and hospitals; under the Campbell government policy, all profits will go to the shareholders of large U.S. corporations.
To use a phrase the government will understand, the bottom line is this: henceforth we will be exporting our environment, our power, our water and all profits out of province!
600 project applications
Is this is how we want our resources managed?
There are, at present, more than 600 applications to dam and otherwise divert the water from our rivers and streams. The minister of energy disingenuously says that these applications must meet a host of standards. This is eyewash.
The only thing standing between an application and a license is a woeful environmental assessment exercise which need not take place at all if the Campbell government doesn't want it to. As every British Columbian who cares about fisheries knows, federal Fisheries and Oceans is a bad joke, and one only has to look at their record on fish farms to know what a pathetic watchdog they are.
Readers should note with horror that Mr. Neufeld doesn't even deal with the implications of NAFTA! Here's what Wendy R. Holm, one of Canada's leading agrologists has to say: "Private sector firms issued water licenses by government -- be it for hydroelectric generation or for snowmaking -- hold NAFTA rights far superior to any rights held by Canadians if those firms are American or have American investors."
"Investor rights -- which trump conflicting provincial legislation -- include the right to national treatment and compensation for losses to investment, profits, markets and goodwill if those rights are expropriated by the Government of Canada or any province."
A left wing cabal?
Finally, Neufeld is on record claiming that opposition is all left wing, NDP, trade unions flap, flap, flap. He evidently thinks that the public must reject ideas and philosophies that don't spring from the BC Liberal party or the Fraser Institute and that if an idea comes from his notion of "the left" that it must therefore be rejected.
The minister is hung in a political time warp of long ago. This debate is not a left/right debate but rather about what sort of a province we will have.
I, too, was a B.C. cabinet minister. I considered that my obligation was to the people of British Columbia and the assets that are their birthright, not large out-of-province corporations that wished to exploit those assets for the benefit of their shareholders.
I leave the matter with our readers with two questions. Have we raised a serious issue of public policy and, if so, where the hell is the "mainstream" media?
Not for the first time have I been involved in issues our papers and TV have ignored, and I'm bold enough to say that after election day, May 12, 2009, they'll learn just how important this issue is to British Columbians.
Related Tyee stories:
- A 'Green' Threat to B.C.'s Rivers?
Tyee was among the very first to report on critics of run-of-river projects. - Private River Power Draws Diverse Foes
'Green' claims disputed. - Another Side to Private Power
First Nations, municipalities explore controversial energy source.
![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
Wilfred Laurier
23-11-2008
Rafe....
Is this journalism? Or are you on a soap box? Can a reader assume that you are not biased? Can this article be construed as "reporting?"
Just wondering.
OilbertaRedTory
23-11-2008
Grit in the Eye of the Beholder ...
... fogs the "Views" for Laurier.
Rafe must've been a Tory and therefore used to understand the meaning of 'noblesse oblige' and 'commonwealth'.
Tragically, the PCs lost the way in the neo-liberal thickets and emerged to send us all to the ReformaTory Con job.
Luke Skywalker
23-11-2008
Not To Be Repetitive But...
Rafe, as the facts have been previously stated again and again...
1. Mica Dam - another 1,000 MW (new generating stations 5 and 6);
2. Revelstoke Dam - another 1,000 MW (new generating stations 5 and 6);
3. Site C - another 900 MW;
4. Waneta Dam Expansion - another 435 MW;
http://www2.news.gov.bc.ca/news_releases_2005-2009/2007ENV0124-001452.htm
Rafe, with all due respect, I just simply cannot see how you can make your aforementioned statement with a straight face. :)
But Rafe, BC Hydro, circa 1999, under NDP management, provided private IPP's with a list of 600 BC rivers for micro hydro development. BC Hydro back then even provided these private IPP's with a road map on how to develop these sites.
So what gives?
Again Rafe, what about the other factual side of the story?
http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/news/comment/story.html?id=8c231838-2913-4831-a2ba-9e59df0a9868
Where have I heard that before? :)
egmont rapids
23-11-2008
As for what Luke is spewing
Site c --Will never happen,there is not even a push from anyone to do-it,even if it was to proceed it would be more than a decade away.
Mica and Revelstoke, these are upgrades to existing facilities,it only makes sense to get as much as you can out of an existing dam.
Waneta dan expansion,again the same thing,but of course Luke fails to mention that BC Hydro has been banned,barred, from producing any NEW POWER AT NEW LOCATIONS.
Now why would a goverment write a LAW TO BAN A CROWN CORPORATION FROM PRODUCING NEW POWER FROM NEW LOCATIONS!
A very interesting question indeed,another note on site c--The fact that there is so many IPPs coming on line that there will never be a justification to build site c
The other argument LUKE and other spin doctors and the IPP club are going to make is--BC Hydro doesn`t have the know how!--Again,a laughable statement,run of river is very old,simple technology that BC Hydro has down for 40 years.
Run Of river is in fact,--A dam,you hold back water to turn turbines,or in some cases you don`t hold back water,but still the water gets diverted to turn turbines.
The case for private companies to make big profits on MY WATER and Future generations water has to be thrown out,in this global meltdown only a fool(or Gordon Campbell)would relinquish this permanent revenue stream from BCers.
By the way Luke,Rafe hasn`t written anything new here,like me and many others Rafe has a pulse on the mood of the BC voter.
Rafe has merely made a very wise and astute prediction!
CAN YOU NOW FIGURE IT OUT LUKE!
Jeffrey J.
23-11-2008
Social Control: A Time Honoured Tradition
No, Rafe, you're not paranoid. But you will still be accused of such. North Americans who eschew scholastic research have embraced the new gobbledgook religion that states that all sociological analysis is simply a "conspiracy theory". But Europeans and early US intellectuals understood very well that the financial and political elites of a society still seek to directly influence public behavior.
In non-democracies, control is direct and forceful. But in the west, new methods have been developed giving citizens the appearance of "choice" while a minority imposes unilateral decisions upon the public.
Canada's elite have mimicked the techniques perfected by the right wing institutes in the US, such as the American Enterprise Institute (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Enterprise_Institute_for_Public_Policy_Research), and the Heritage Foundation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritage_foundation), which is why there is so little discussion in Canada of this well documented process. It also serves to keep dissent and activists like yourself off the front pages. We can't have that, you know,
As Linda McQuaig eloquently describes in her book Holding the Bully's Coat, Canadian right wing elites have latched onto the power of US imperialism, and are helping to deliver Canada's resources to those who will pay the highest price.
Both Campbell and Harper are unable to see Canada as a sovereign nation capable of making its own way in the world. Instead, they bask in the shadow of our neighbour, drawing strength from the bully, all the while, afraid of their own shadow.
How we can move past these limited men and their grip on a great country is the challenge.
Thanks Rafe for your ongoing courage to stand up for what's right.
seth
23-11-2008
luky in the sky again
Site C a pipe dream - handed out by Neocons to give talking points to Vaughn Palmer. Never will happen and will be blamed on environmentalists.
Other BC Hydro projects - really only there to provide Vaughn with more talking points - budget cutbacks will shut those down as well. Even assuming they all happen a pittance compared to tens of billions in neocon power commitments at 9 to 12 cent a kwh.
NDP in 1999- these were potential sites ie have a look see- tell us what you can do - we'll do lunch. Nothing like the 30 billion or so in committed buys at 2 to 3 times the going rate, Gordo and gang have shafted us with.
Glen Clark was in charge of the NDP in 1999. Who is he working for now and when did he start?
Our Civil Engineer friend who comments on these issues has pointed out that Pirate Power needs a 15% rate of return on their projects whereas BC Hydro sells 30 year bonds at 5%. Nuefeld and his gang have no problem handing out these lucrative deals as long as the campaign donation lolly keeps flowing.
You might take at look Hyperion Nuclear plants to get an idea of what future power commitments are worth. Works out to 3 cents a kwh and 50 plants have been sold so far for 2011 delivery.
Jaccard is simply a another Neocon mouthpiece with a BA from SFU. Couldn't find an alternator in a car engine. He thinks "Fish Farm and Drill Now" Campbell is a great environmentalist because he took 3 cents a gallon from the taxpayer and gave it to his big campaign donators at Humongous bank. Talk about Junior high level thinking?
Speaking of experts why is it do you think that Neufeld who might well nobody knows for sure but might have a high school diploma is handing out all the big contracts to Pirate Power, while Ralph Sultan P.Eng formerly Professor, Harvard Business School and Chief Economist, The Royal Bank of Canada sits on the back bench. Hmmm.
Luke Skywalker
23-11-2008
Marc Jaccard...
In the early 1990's, Harcourt's New Democrats gained control of the BC government. In their initial objective to put a new centrist face on government, they recruited some centrist professionals versed in public policy. One of those was Marc Jaccard:
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/business/story.html?id=f05ec0bd-f3a8-4bfd-abe5-a06e09f13053&p=1
In any event, Jaccard, a Nobel Peace Prize recipient, certainly must have some credibility in terms of his work such as:
http://www.greenenergybc.ca/Assets/Jaccard.pdf
Now regarding IPP's, the province of Manitoba has a population of less than 1/4 that of BC.
Yet, Manitoba Hydro is also actively engaged in the pursuit of IPP power and the operating/proposed IPP MW generating capacity as a percentage/per capita of Manitoba apparently now exceeds that of BC.
Go figure!
You have the 99 MW St. Leon wind farm IPP.
And other Manitoba Hydro IPP's:
http://www.hydro.mb.ca/projects/wind_300mw_proposal.shtml
Based upon some of the previous posters' logic and reasoning, one can only conclude that Manitoba premier Gary Doer and the Manitoba New Democrats have now turned into neo-cons. ;)
northernspirits
23-11-2008
in response to Luke
You are saying Rafe is wrong in stating BC Hydro's mandate for no new energy sources by listing the Mica Dam, Revelstoke Dam, site C, and the Waneta Dam expansion??
But Luke... these aren't new sources of energy. BC Hydro's mandate includes maintenance and expansion of existing projects which is what these are.
And site c won't be happening... they have to demonstrate a real need for the power which is hard to do when they are currently a net exporter as shown in their 2008 annual report.
People want 'green' renewable energies and conservation not an unnecessary destruction of a river valley with prime agricultural land and wildlife habitat. It seems wrong to me that BC Hydro can't have a hand in developing those 'green' renewable energies and that it has to be through IPPs who may not necessarily be keeping them 'green'.
Frank
23-11-2008
Luke
Leyne also said
"Jaccard himself said peer reviews are an important part of academic publishing. But he acknowledges they're usually done anonymously, prior to publication.
This one kicked off with a big news conference at a Vancouver hotel. And he was hired by outside interests to write it.
It reads more like a drive-by shooting than an academic review."
Jaccard is nothing more than a Liberal attack dog.
Luke Skywalker
23-11-2008
northernspirits...
Here is what Rafe said:
That certainly flies in the face of the facts.
IPP production was already prevalent during the NDP government and was even encouraged in 1999 with the signing of new IPP Run of the River generating capacity.
As for BC Hydro, there was a period of time where it ran roughshod over any other stakeholder's interests... be it the environment or whatever:
http://www.greenenergybc.ca/Assets/Jaccard.pdf
BC Hydro has never been a saint within BC, albeit I support its crown corp. status in terms of public policy.
Frank
24-11-2008
Socialists everywhere
"one can only conclude that Manitoba premier Gary Doer and the Manitoba New Democrats have now turned into neo-cons"
We have a Liberal government, we have medicare, ergo, Liberals are socialists.
Campbell supports a regressive carbon tax. So does the Green Party, ergo, Campbell is both a socialist and a Green.
The governor of California is a Republican. The premier of BC is a big fan of him and his policies, ergo, Campbell is a socialist, a Green and a Republican.
China calls itself communist, Campbell likes to fly there on a private jet and talk about what a great place it is, especially to do business, ergo, Campbell is a socialist, Green, Republican and communist.
jimmy_laroux
24-11-2008
Luke Skywalker
Wrong. Again. You did not quote any of Jaccard's argument, just a bunch of Jaccard's ad hominem verbal attacks from the Times Colonist article. Have you forgotten what you've written already? If you have, the post is still up the thread for you to refresh your memory.
And Shaffer and Calvert are also respected SFU economists.
You state that
Oh give me a break. Him and how many hundreds of others, no matter the size or quality of their contribution?
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/press-ar4/ipcc-flyer-low.pdf
He's not even a climate change scientist. In fact, he's not a scientist at all, rather an economist.
And neither was there a peer review of Jaccard's very public, very antagonistic "review". And he was the only one to "review".
Haha! Right... Looks like IPPBC made a great investment! :)
Hughes
24-11-2008
Where is the salvo of
Where is the salvo of investigative reporting the likes of which sank the fast ferries? It's not like there's a lack of targets off the starboard bow:
Raid on the legistature
Convention centre $
Les' real estate scam
Olympic $
IPPs
PPPs
ALR
expansion of fish farming
expansion of gambling
Gateway (an environmental disaster in the making)
Liberal advertizing
to rattle off a few. Care to add any more?
seth
24-11-2008
BCHydro's Pirate Power losses hit 100 billion
Future headlines but entirely possible with a last minute pre-election sell-off in an effort to cement the BC Cabinet's post election promotion to the private sector. Bill Clinton was almost broke in 2000 now he's worth 100's of millions all through big favors from the Pirate sector - lucrative consulting contracts, board of directors positions, speaking engagements. Could the same happen here?
Looking at Egmont Rapids' Vancouver Sun link, we see in July 2007 Gordo inked contracts adding $15 billion to the existing $13 billion in Pirate Power contracts. Presumably he added another 15 by July this year, and who knows another $15 billion by election time next year? Or Could the pre election employment blitz add another 50 billion? Unlikely but possible.
Thanks to Professor Shaffer we see that the new Pirate Power contracts are coming in now starting at 9 cents/kwh. These contract obligations grow to 12 cents over the life of the contracts. Professor Shaffer makes the point that because Pirate wind and run of the river power peaks at the wrong times and is inconsistent that power is worth much less than steady state sources. Some reports discount this type of power at 50% ie 18 to 24 cent a kwh. Nuclear is now coming in at projected costs (Hyperion) of less than 3 cents a kwh (1 cent when used as cogen). Also capital intensive Pirate Power projects need a 15 percent return on investment in order to raise money from hedge funds. BC Hydro with its 5 percent bond rate could do the projects at less than half the cost. Professor Shaffer also points out that these projects have short lead times so there is no rush to meet uncertain power demands. Hyperion nuclear plants are projected at 2 year leads.
It appears that Gordo and thugs will have committed the BC Taxpayer to spend in the order of 50 billion dollars when 10 billion some time maybe in the future would do. 100 times the money lost on fast ferries. Future historians will view this government as Joey Smallwood on steriods, the most incompetent in Canadian history.
Name
24-11-2008
Join the club
No Rafe, you're not paranoid - I feel exactly the same way, as I'm sure do most others.
Part of the problem I see is our fractured society - it's pretty impossible for our media to reflect us all if we're all over the map.
The other part is the MSM. News is reported, edited and managed by folks who are mostly 50+ white "Liberal" parents of grown kids, who are also homeowners living in upscale neighbourhoods with mortgages and significant stock/RRSP portfolios, just hanging on for retirement and too comfortable or tired of bad news issues to really bother making waves about anything, so they sit around poking fun at Harper and Layton to convince themselves they're still holding the objective Liberal middle ground, without realizing how out-of-touch and anachronism their 30-year old "objective Liberal middle ground" has become.
I look forward to all the exceptions to my appalling MSM stereotype stepping forward to defend their unique individuality, so that we can talk more about problem #3, which is that the MSM's preoccupation with mindless trivia prevents their ever dealing with the forest for the trees.
dave49
24-11-2008
My theory
It's my theory that Gordo & Co. would have sold off BCH if they could have done it. However, their in-house polling crew got such a negative reaction to the idea that they had to be more clever. Thus, about a third of BCH's function has been contracted out to Accenture and the transmission function split off.
Given the failures and scandals of free-market electricity trading it is odd that the Liberals decided to split off BCTC when they did.
Our MSM is disappointing indeed. They never really reported what was happening with Kyoto. Yes, Chretien and subsequently Martin made strong commitments. So we Canadians wrapped ourselves in the maple leaf and denounced the USA. While Bush & Co. at the federal level of the USA rejected Kyoto, many states enacted various legislation and programs to reduce GHG output. As a result, GHG emissions from the USA decreased while they *increased* from Canada. THe MSM has allowed us this think we took the high road and behaved the 'right way', when in fact we deluded ourselves and continued to spout ever-increasing quantities of GHGs.
alda
24-11-2008
political paranoia
No, Rafe, you're not paranoid, you're finally seeing things as they are:
1. You're waking up to the reality that if you're not the party in power you HAVE NO POWER
#2. You now understand that the right wing, previously centrist-right, has moved to the far corporate right, moving left parties to center. Issues of common good that in previous decades would receive some semblance of lip service and the toss of a few coins here and there to give the appearance that the government cares, no longer matter, AT ALL.
Jeffrey J's says it best:
"But in the west, new methods have been developed giving citizens the APPEARANCE of "choice" while a minority imposes unilateral decisions upon the public."
That sentence puts things in a nutshell; you need know no other information to understand how our society works, except that those unilateral decisions are made by the minority FOR the minority, and no one else, and issues of the public good won't get the time of day by the corporate owned media. Frustrating, isn't it?
leem
24-11-2008
Am I paranoid?
Rafe, you're not paranoid. You just know your topic ;) When the mainstream news "outlets" present more AP 'stories' than locally written ones, we have a problem with our information system. When our government officials sit back and quote the quotes they read in the newspaper, without ever getting into the issues themselves, then we are being governed by puppets. When the corporate elite are allowed to buy up other country's resources, and those countries will even pay out compensation (!) if said corporations run into any red tape, then that is the mark of a fascist governing system. Campbell may as well be wearing a brown shirt with the red armband, because that's what our country has become. And unfortunately, I'm guessing Luke Skywalker won't be coming to our assistance- he's too busy playing with his light sabre.
SharingIsGood
24-11-2008
Not paranoid
Rafe, as Aldo, Name and Jeffery have stated, you are NOT paranoid.
You are not delusional nor is your fear irrational.
I might add to Aldo's statement that not only must you be the party in power, your party must adher to objectivism and the Chicago School of Economics. The media is, now more than ever, BIG BUSINESS. Your lawsuit with one particular corporation, though not lost by you, most likely served to have you blacklisted - at the very least, given a small platform on a back page somewhere. After all, they looked for oportunities to use the "Shock Jock" moniker for you.*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivism_(Ayn_Rand)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_School_(economics)
There is little more fantasticly poetic in nature than the return of ocean-going salmonids to spawn in the fresh water of their birth. Further, it brings vast quantities of nutrients to nutrient starved rainforests and sun-parched interior lands. Rafe, you are a great hero for wildlife and humans alike.
Illegitimi Non Carborundum
*(I hope to see that label removed from the court record. That label gives the court the appearance of being bought and paid for by the media even though it ruled the right way for you.)
Best wishes, SIG