Sunday, October 7, 2007

To all Residents:

FLASH UPDATE:

1. OMB Rules in Eastern’s favour.  For details, click here

2. Next week’s Election:

     a. Which Parties? Click here

     b. Which Candidates?

                                                   i.     Etobicoke Centre: Vote Cansfield.  Why?

                                                  ii.     Etobicoke Lakeshore: Vote Barlow. Why?

                                                iii.     Mississauga East: Vote Fonseca. Why?

                                               iv.     Mississauga South: Vote Sousa. Why?

3. What can you do?  Click here

4. CHIP’s Next Steps: Click here

1. OMB HEARINGS AND DECISION

Background 

The City of Mississauga has a “Holding” provision on the zoning of the power plant site.  The City agrees with our position that the site is not appropriate for a generating facility.  The City declined to lift the holding provision, thus preventing EPL from proceeding.  EPL appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board (“OMB”), which is a judicial tribunal that hears appeals on land use disputes.

Some residents wanted CHIP to participate in the OMB process.  We considered it carefully and decided not to because:

0. The OMB’s jurisdiction is over legal issues regarding land use (i.e. zoning).  Our objection to EPL’s project is based on the many falsehoods in its Environmental Screening Report, and on associated environmental and technical issues (for details, click here).  We have no expertise in zoning matters.

0. The City, however, is expert in such matters, and was a party in the OMB hearings.  We were very well represented by the City.

0. We were advised by experts close to the issue that our participation would not help.

0. Environmental issues were also well covered by Dr. Boyd Upper of the Clear The Air Coalition.  Both CTAC and Dr. Upper have been very helpful to us over the past two and a half years.

While that was CHIP’s decision, some residents participated in a personal capacity, as was their right, and we thank them for their time and efforts.

OMB Decision

After months of delay and pre-hearings, the OMB has ruled in EPL’s favour, according to a report in the Toronto Star yesterday (Saturday, October 6) .  Details of the decision are not available yet.  They will be published once the parties (City and EPL) and participants (others) have received OMB’s notice in writing.

Without knowing the details, we are outraged at the decision, given the issues at stake and the public risks.  However, from a purely legal and historical standpoint we are not entirely surprised by it.  The OMB has a long history of favouring the interests of developers over the general public good.

Next Steps 

We understand the City intends to appeal this scandalous decision.  We will be consulting with the City to see what support we can offer, and what collective action may achieve.

But in case you feel discouraged, let me just say:

This is only a setback.  It is not the end of the road!  We have plenty of other options, and reason to believe the plant will not be built.

2. NEXT WEEK’S ELECTION

Overview

Voting is of course an individual decision.

Still, we as an organization have a responsibility to tell you how we see things, especially with regard to the environmental issues in the election.  These have largely been ignored because of all the “noise” on another issue.

The provincial ridings most affected by EPL and their Greenfield South Project (“GSP”) are: 

• Etobicoke Lakeshore

• Etobicoke Centre

• Mississauga East

• Mississauga South

Which Parties?
In the two Etobicoke ridings we have as Liberal candidates the current Minister of the Environment and the former Minister of Energy.  They haven’t served us well in the past.  However, we will recommend re-electing one of them.  (See more below)

For the Conservatives we have, on the Lakeshore, Tom Barlow and, in the Centre, Andrew Pringle.

In Mississauga South for the Liberals we have Charles Sousa, a newcomer, and for the Conservatives Tim Peterson, whom we know quite well.  In Mississauga East for the Liberals we have Peter Fonseca and, for the Conservatives, Zoran Churchin.

You’ll note that we’ve omitted any mention of either the NDP or the Green Party.  This is not an accident.  Given that both these parties claim to occupy the “social responsibility” space, and the Greens especially with regard to the environment, the fact that none of us at CHIP (apparently) has heard from any of them tells us that they are not as in touch with local issues as they should be.
 
Until we hear otherwise, we have to assume that we need to focus on the Liberals and PC’s because 

0. No-one else is likely to form a government

0. They, at least some of them, appear to be aware of the issues, though less well-informed than they could be

0. Some of them have expressed support for our position (though none have produced any results)

Which Candidates?
Here’s our take, riding by riding:

Etobicoke Centre

Cansfield over Pringle.  

Why?   

0. We have excellent access to and relationship with her, via one of our board members.

0. Choice of EPL was not her fault, and once it was done there was nothing she could do about it anyway.  It just has to play out.

0. However, now she’s on a different portfolio she has the freedom to strongly oppose EPL and GSP, and has offered to support us in doing so. In writing.

0. Enjoys the respect of her colleagues and opponents alike.

0. Can be expected to have some pull in the government if Liberals are re-elected.

Etobicoke Lakeshore

Barlow over Broten.  

Why? 

0. On Broten’s watch, the environment in Ontario has dramatically worsened.

0. She and her husband have a larger carbon footprint than anyone we know.  (Massive house, multiple fossil-fuel-burning toys, massive garage to house them, etc.)  So much for the environment. 

0. She has been utterly unresponsive - both to the issues, despite it being her job, and to our requests for direct consultation with her. She appears to be a publicity-seeker rather than an effective, issues-based public representative.  

0. She could have overturned her Director’s egregious decision to give EPL environmental approval, and has not done so.

0. She is now appears to be ducking the issue.  We understand she has deferred to the OMB, even though they are entirely separate processes and she has, as far as we can tell, complete freedom of movement.  We believe she could order an Individual Environmental Assessment without incurring any legal risk for the government – our arguments and facts are strong enough.

0. If she gets kicked out, and Liberals still form the government, they will have to appoint a new Minister of the Environment. This person will have no baggage and may be expected, given the right info and influence, to do what Broten should have done.

0. If Liberals do not form the government, then Broten is off the case anyway, and the new Conservative Minister of the Environment can do what she did not.

0. We need to spank politicians that do not do what they were hired for.  She was hired to protect the environment and has not – has simply chosen to take the credit for measures taken or started by others.  She needs to be on a Child and Family Services portfolio (see her high-profile ex-portfolio activities), or back in private practice as a lawyer.

0. Barlow, although an unknown quantity, could hardly be worse. He has experience in municipal affairs (e.g. OMB) and can be expected to be influential if PC’s win.  If they don’t, we could expect him to make life very awkward for the MOE with his legal knowledge.

Mississauga East

Fonseca over Churchin.

Why?

This is tricky, because:

0. Peter Fonseca has been sympathetic and has gone on record in our favour.  However,

0. As of the end of September his website makes no mention of the environment.  

0. We know nothing about Zoran Churchin and whether or not he knows about the issues or where he stands.  His website is similarly devoid of references to the environment.

On balance, we’re inclined to say Fonseca over Churchin, if only on the basis of “Better the devil you know than the devil you don’t”.

Mississauga South

Sousa over Peterson.  

Why? 

0. Despite plenty of hot air, Peterson has shown less and less ability to listen and has become argumentative.

0. At a recent meeting, he went visibly soft on full Iindiidual Environmental Assessments for future power plants.

0. Despite two and a half years of opportunity, he shows a woefully weak grasp of the facts and principles, and has asked for things we’ve already sent him.  On several occasions he has promised to do things and then failed to follow through.  

0. He is disorganized, both in his thinking and his actions.  Not effective.  We see him as the “good fella” type of politician – someone with whom you might enjoy having a beer, but not able to deliver results.

0. He was not effective when a member of the governing party; any access CHIP had to his colleagues in power came from board member Steve Thompson, not from Tim Peterson.

0. He makes much of having crossed the floor and taking a political risk over his support for our issue.  There are others who might see it as an opportunistic move to get him a portfolio.  These things seldom happen without a lot of pre-negotiation.

0. Worst of all: his attendance record at Queen’s Park is one of the worst in the house.  You can’t help your constituents if you’re not on the job.

0. Sousa has come up the learning curve very quickly.  He shows an interest in listening and being responsive. He endorses (on his website) Lakeview Ratepayers’ Association petition to get a full IEA on the Lakeview site.

There you have it.  Despite many of us on your board being lifelong “conservatives by nature”, we’re recommending three Liberals and one Conservative.

Weird, isn’t it?  

3. What can you do? 

0. If you agree with our rationale above, then

0. Forward this link to a few friends in the affected areas, particularly in Lakeview (Mississauga South) and Alderwood (Etobicoke Lakeshore)… both the sitting politicians in those ridings deserve to lose their seats, in our view;

0. Vote the CHIP-favouring candidate on October 10.

0. If you disagree, then

0. Write and tell us why – feedback@intelligent-power.org;

0. Vote your favored candidate.

4. CHIP’s NEXT STEPS 

We’re continuing to hear from reliable and influential inside sources that EPL’s project is very unlikely to go ahead for a number of excellent reasons.  The issue now is almost purely “political” and “economic” – who blinks first?

Still, we’re not going to take anything for granted, and those of you who have driven by the site can see that EPL has started cutting trees, leveling, putting up fencing, etc.

We believe that this is brinkmanship on their part and that they would implode financially if they actually tried to build and run the generating plant as contracted.  What we’re concerned about is having another operator buy it out of receivership.

We plan to continue to liaise closely with the City and the Province, and we have a number of legal and tactical options which it wouldn’t be wise to disclose here, as Eastern Power reads this website regularly.

We’d like to keep you posted more often than we have, but we’re all only volunteer with full-time jobs, so sometimes it’s hard… we’ll do our best, as always.

Thanks for your continued support.  We welcome your ideas; and if any of you would like to lend a hand, we’d like to have you!

Again – a Happy Thanksgiving to you all!