I love the proposed legislation in what is already “An act to enact the Canadian Environmental Bill of Rights.” What I am, however, having difficulty with is the human-centrism built into what should be an ecocentric amendment to the laws of Canada. Take note, Canadians will have a right to an “ecologically balanced environment” and such an ecological balance is linked to the “health of individuals, families and communities” and what is more this balance will further underpin our “economic, social and cultural security.” Who can argue with such an amendment and yet I must underscore that in order for the environment and the species therein to have rights, humans must first have the right to an ecologically balanced environment. How come the environment can’t come first? Why is it that we much protect the environment solely for our sake and not for the environment and its inhabitants’ sake?

The real answer to these questions is almost always environmental sustainability and the whole concept of environmental sustainability really takes us into the realm of economics which is key to not only “social and cultural security” but human social and cultural sustainability. To put the matter baldly, the legislation being proposed has more to do with sustaining humans than it does with sustaining the environment–the environment is a means to further our lives. This does not mean this it is bad legislation but the question of economics must be settled on the side of the environment as opposed to the side of humans for the legislation to really be of benefit to us.

They Youtube video, A Tale of Two Valleys makes this point for me in big bold letters. I have been to Sarnia and was awed by how large the refinery is that the video speaks of. Sarnia’s refinery is, of course, property of Imperial Oil’s. Imperial Oil is but one of several companies under Exxon’s umbrella. We often shoot science fiction prime time episodes and some of the Canadian made horror or science fiction films at Sarnia’s refinery and at Alberta’s Strathcona Refinery because the technology is advanced and almost looks space age. Monsters, bugs and even the Predator go hand and hand with these places. Of course, this technology is no longer space-age and Imperial Oil sold Strathcona several years ago because the refinery became out of date and handing the refinery over to a rival company is one of the ways oil companies update their technology. Did, I mention that Imperial Oil has provisionally bought back into Strathcona. They own some of their research and development divisions.  Sarnia can’t be sold, however. What Canada and Imperial Oil need to update this refinery is cutting edge technology and cutting edge engineering. Canada is only in process where this technology is concerned–we are not there yet. There was a proposal on the table at the University of Western Ontario over ten years ago to work with the university to update Sarnia and this would include training engineers while in school to be a part of the future team running and repairing the refinery. Exxon was willing to invest over 35 million into Western alone to make way for Sarnia’s renovation. Western, however, refused the investment and instead sold some of its interests to York University so that Western is now Western/York. This was a far better deal for Western but, of course, not for Sarnia. Today, as far as I know, Imperial Oil/Exxon is still moving forward with the refitting of Sarnia but not to the degree that they were. The University of Alberta is in fact one of the beneficiaries of the funding for research and renovation of Sarnia–yeah us!

With the rest of the tale being told, I will circle back to Bill C-438, and mention that with potentially new legislation this renovation will take place on the bases that we have a right to environmental balance. But are we really putting the environment ahead of economics where it will need to be if we are to create sustainability and balance for all generations to come.  There is contradiction in this legislation. With human-centrism at the helm of this legislation, economics will still play a decisive factor in how we handle Sarnia’s renovation. Sarnia is part of Canada’s security and security is almost always defined in financial terms. This is a tough fact to swallow, when we consider what toxic chemicals and polluted air can do to us let alone the surrounding environment(s). Should I remind people that we are still cleaning up Lake Ontario and that we have caused high levels of cancer incidents in humans and we have even managed to deform some of the lake life. Fish with two dorsal fins and five eyeballs really happen here. We discovered deformities in the 1960’s and here we are in 2020’s and we still can’t eat the fish from Lake Ontario. We affected the River Thames in London, Ontario as well. Because of the economic situation in south western Ontario, we have abandoned all projects to continue the river’s clean up. I have to remind you here that Sarnia is less that two hours away from London, Ontario and Lake Ontario is near Sarnia too. If we enact legislation to clean up the environment for the sake of humans and their inalienable rights, will this actually clean up these areas in the environment in Canada. After all, it is our sustainability that comes first here and funding the clean up comes second. What is more, as the funding situation at Western demonstrates, we will always side on the side of the best financial deal and not on the side of the environment.

For reasons of real environmental need, Canadians need a defined ethics from which to propose legislation like this. At some point, the environment must be treated as an entity that has inalienable rights too. How can we be secure without a healthy environment–that one is obvious–we won’t be. How can the environment be secure without real financial resources being committed over the long term to clean up places like Sarnia or Lake Ontario–that one is obvious–the environment won’t be. The question than is whose security takes precedence? This answer is obvious too–the environment’s security must take precedence. My question then is how does this happen when this Bill only amends human rights? Humans first and the environment second, right? I mean we are in the midst of COVID-19 quarantine and we just came out of a recession before this, and before that south western Ontario’s auto industry collapsed. When can Ontario generate an ecologically balanced environment and thus secure Ontarians and Canadians when the economy simply cannot as yet finance these clean ups on a provincial or national level? Did Western misrule or we have we have we simply failed to propose an adequate act for the rights of the environment?

Tammy/Juniper 8