The B.C. government is failing to protect drinking water from increased risks that include climate change and industrial activities such as logging, auditor general Carol Bellringer found in a report released on Tuesday.

Bellringer’s independent audit zeroed in on the leadership roles of the health ministry and provincial health officer, saying accountability measures for safeguarding drinking water are “of grave concern.”

“We found that health and the PHO [provincial health officer] are not sufficiently protecting drinking water for British Columbians,” Bellringer told reporters at a news conference.

The health ministry does not know which water systems are at risk and has no strategy to address those risks, the report concluded.

Risk of contamination increases in small water systems

The audit comes as communities around B.C. grapple with imminent plans for logging and other industrial activities in watersheds that supply their drinking, irrigation and, in some cases, fire-fighting water.

In the Regional District of Central Kootenay, at least seven communities face plans for logging in their watersheds.

They include the bucolic village of Glade, where residents have gone to court in an effort to protect their drinking water from logging on nearby mountain slopes that feed Glade Creek, which supplies much of the community of 300 with water.

In April, members of the Glade Watershed Protection Society were surprised and dismayed when B.C. Supreme Court Justice Mark McEwan said they had no legal right to clean water.

“Do you have a right to clean water?” McEwan said in court. “I’d suggest you don’t … there just is nowhere in the law where you can look and say, ‘there it is — there’s my right. I have a right to clean water.’ ”

‘You can’t drink money’: Kootenay communities fight logging to protect their drinking water

Heather McSwan, a spokesperson for the Glade Watershed Protection Society, said she hopes the auditor general’s report will raise awareness about the need to safeguard drinking water in B.C. 

“Maybe there’ll be some positive action on getting it protected,” McSwan told The Narwhal. 

McSwan said the report should catch the eye of people who aren’t involved in the type of struggles facing Glade and other communities.

“They might say, ‘Hey, I wasn’t aware that protecting our drinking water was so difficult and that there was even a need to protect drinking water, that it wasn’t already protected by the legislation we have in B.C.’ ” 

B.C. has 4,800 known drinking water systems to regulate — far more than other provinces — and 90 per cent of them are classified as small water systems, serving less than 500 people, Bellringer pointed out.

“The risks of contamination are intensified in small water systems, where some communities may be challenged to afford sufficient water protection systems or to attract and retain qualified water treatment staff,” she told reporters.

No drinking water protection plans developed in last 16 years

Sonia Furstenau, Green Party MLA for Cowichan Valley, said the report highlights the need to take immediate action to protect drinking water.

“Communities across the province are experiencing the impacts of climate change and industrial activity on their water sources,” Furstenau said in a statement. “This is especially true of small, rural and Indigenous communities.

Bellringer’s report singled out the Comox Valley as one example of the government’s failure to protect drinking water. The Comox Lake is the only viable drinking water source for a community of 45,000, the report noted.

“The lake, however, has no restrictions on access and the shores are owned by a variety of private and public entities,” the report said.

In keeping with current legislation, the provincial health officer asked the health minister to establish a drinking water protection plan for the Comox Valley in 2008, 2010, 2015 and 2018, Bellringer said.

“However, government still has not established a plan for the area,” she noted.

Bellringer’s audit found not a single drinking water protection plan has been established in the province over the past 16 years, since the B.C. government committed in 2002 to ensuring safe, reliable and accessible drinking water for all British Columbians.

Muddied waters: how clearcut logging is driving a water crisis in B.C.’s interior

Climate change affects water quality and quantity

Among the drinking water risk factors cited in the report are increasing demand from a growing population, recreation in source watersheds and the proximity of agriculture and livestock and range activities to drinking water sources.

“In rural and remote communities that are supplied by small water systems, these risks are amplified,” the report noted.

B.C.’s small drinking water systems serve approximately 480,000 British Columbians.

Yet actions to address risks in small water systems are “inadequate,” Bellringer concluded.

The report also found the quality and quantity of drinking water sources will be affected as climate change brings more wildfires along with more frequent and intense rainfall, flooding and severe droughts.

“The increase in frequency and intensity of these climatic events is expected to increase the need to upgrade drinking water treatment and distribution infrastructure,” it said.

“This is of particular concern in B.C., where most of the water infrastructure is over 50 years old, and aging equipment can be at risk of failure during climatic events.”

‘Constant vigilance’ of water systems necessary to protect public health

Bellringer told reporters the last known outbreak of waterborne illness in B.C. was in 2004.

“But a single event that contaminates the drinking water system can cause serious health impacts for numerous people. It’s estimated for every reported case of illness hundreds may go unreported,” she said.

“Constant vigilance of our drinking water is necessary to protect public health.”

The audit did not include drinking water systems on First Nations reserves because they fall under the jurisdiction of the First Nations Health Authority, Bellringer said.

The health ministry’s leadership role is “extremely complex and challenging” because 23 different pieces of water protection legislation are parcelled out among various ministries, the report noted.

But the health ministry did not effectively coordinate the involvement of all the ministries and agencies involved and lacked a strategy for providing clear direction for drinking water protection, the report concluded.

While the ministry has taken some action to mitigate risks to drinking water, “more needs to be done,” Bellringer said in a statement.

“Specifically, the ministry does not know which water systems are at risk and has not developed a strategy to address them.”

The audit found the health ministry did not follow through on a legislated mandate to provide updates about water protection in its annual service plans, while the provincial health officer did not demonstrate adequate oversight of drinking water protection officers.

Government not sufficiently informed about ongoing risks to drinking water

“We found that health and the PHO have not kept government sufficiently apprised of the ongoing risks to drinking water,” Bellringer said.

The audit also found that many of the committees formed to help protect drinking water have been disbanded. The health ministry failed to develop a strategic plan to provide clear direction on actions needed by the ministries and regional health authorities to improve drinking water protection, it concluded.

The ministry “has not been as vigilant about protecting our drinking water as it has been in the past,” Bellringer said, noting that the ministry’s leadership and coordination role has waned over time.

The provincial health officer was empowered to provide an annual report to the health ministry on actions taken to protect drinking water, “but this reporting has occurred infrequently,” the auditor general found.

Recommendations the provincial health officer made to various ministries and agencies in progress reports in 2007, 2008, 2011 and 2015 “have seen limited or no progress,” the audit concluded.

The report makes eight recommendations to identify risks, improve oversight and monitor progress and trends.

Recommendations include a review of drinking water protection legislation and regulations, led by the health ministry, to identify risks and legislative gaps that may affect the government’s commitment to safeguarding drinking water.

The audit also recommends the health ministry identify risks related to source water protection, drinking water treatment, distribution and small water systems.

The audit will now go to the public accounts committee of the B.C. legislature, and the committee will call witnesses. The health ministry will be required to provide an action plan for the committee.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Placer mining kills fish, damages streams, poses a risk to drinking water and jeopardizes Indigenous rights, but the activity is virtually unregulated and brings little money into government coffers, says a report urging B.C. Auditor General Carol Bellringer to conduct an audit of the province’s failure to adequately regulate placer operations.

“Placer mining — the practice of mining for gold in and near streams and riverbeds — is expanding across B.C.,” the report states. “The province allows prospectors to stake claims in private property, salmon watersheds and Indigenous lands, leaving local communities to cope with potential mercury contamination and other hazards.”

The report, written by the University of Victoria’s Environmental Law Centre on behalf of the Fair Mining Collaborative, concludes that B.C.’s current regulations cannot prevent or mitigate harm caused by unregulated miners.

“Placer mining offers little in economic return to offset the environmental damage,” the report says.

A spokeswoman for Bellringer’s office said the request will be considered along with numerous other audit suggestions, and added that, if accepted, audits can often take more than a year from the day they are started.

“We aim to make the best use of our resources and choose audits with the greatest value to government and the people of B.C.,” Colleen Rose wrote in an e-mailed response to questions from DeSmog Canada.

The report’s authors, Calvin Sandborn, Environmental Law Centre legal director, articled student Renata Colwell and law student Erin Linklater, believe the problems with placer mining are causing health and environmental problems and are hoping for quick action.

“We are saying it’s urgent,” Sandborn said.

“This is an expanding industry. The large machine operations have almost tripled since 2005 and so it can’t be ignored any longer. We have to figure out how we can regulate this. There are a lot of jurisdictions we can learn from — starting with the Yukon.”

While the Yukon has rigorous rules, in B.C., hand-panning or using hand tools with a sluicer or shaker box — an activity that has more than doubled since 2005 — has little government oversight or tracking.

Miners do not have to obtain Water Sustainability Act authorization to excavate waterways. Adequate setbacks from stream banks are not enforced and some placer mines discharge tailings directly into streams instead of settling ponds.

Miners that use machinery for the excavation have little more regulation, apart from a requirement to apply for a Notice of Work permit.

An environmental assessment is triggered only if they have production capacity of more than 500,000 tonnes a year — a threshold so high that it excludes almost every placer mine in the province.

The Fair Mining Collaborative could not find a single record of a B.C. placer mine undergoing a federal or provincial environmental assessment since the mid-1990s although at least 50 environmental assessments a year are triggered in the Yukon.

“…it’s urgent.” https://t.co/avr4aueDXO

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) April 17, 2018

Tara Lamothe-Ammerlaan, Fair Mining Collaborative program manager, said about 550 open permits have been issued for placer mines in B.C. annually for the last three years and, while not all are active, they all have permission to mine.

“For the most part, they operate in or near riparian areas, which are arguably the most valuable ecosystems in a landscape. We need to have some kind of regional environmental assessments that set parametres around how much mining activity is compatible with First Nations plans for their territory and with healthy and resilient ecosystems,” she said.

Lamothe-Ammerlaan said another major problem is the free entry system that allows anyone to stake a claim for a minimal fee and miners then have rights — even if it is private property, an important ecosystem, an area important to First Nations or if land-use plans conflict with the mining plans.

Last year, Bev Sellars, chair of First Nations Women Advocating Responsible Mining, illustrated how easy it is to stake a claim by staking the Cranbrook property of then-energy and mines minister Bill Bennett.

The report says regulation of placer mining is rooted in hopelessly outdated 19th century gold rush laws and some damage is historical, such as the 58-million cubic metres of sediment added to the Fraser River between 1858 and 1909, but modern mining is now stirring up sediment and dangerous substances such as mercury.

Other major problems started more recently, such as the deregulation of creeks around the Atlin area in 1985, allowing direct discharge into streams, after placer miners successfully lobbied their MLA.

The lack of regulation has resulted in sky high levels of aluminum which jeopardises the health of Taku River Tlingit First Nation members and other Atlin residents who use Atlin lake as a drinking water source.

“It’s an environmental law-free zone,” Sandborn said.

“Someone should let the fish know.”

Placer mining can kill fish by introducing sediments and metals into the water and improper excavation destroys spawning grounds, says the report, which uses numerous studies to support its claims.

A 1992 study found that unmined streams “support a standing stock of fish 40 times that of placer-mined streams.”

While the environmental damage mounts, B.C. sees little economic return with the province collecting only $253,248 between 2008 and 2015 on more than $50 million in reported gold sales.

“Since operators are taxed per mine, individual operators may pay no tax, even if they are producing more than $50,000 of gold a year across multiple mines,” the report says.

Lamoth-Ammerlaan believes the report has built a strong case for an audit by documenting the lack of regulation and the high environmental stakes.

“The government collects very low royalties on the gold that placer mines extract from our rivers and streams,” she said.

“I think this industry, with its significant potential for environmental harm and recorded gold sales tanging between $2 million and $15 million per year over the past decade, is perfect for this kind of scrutiny.”

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Remember B.C.’s Clean Energy Act, championed by former Liberal Premier Gordon Campbell to position B.C. as a “world leader” in addressing climate change?

The act exempted hydro undertakings like the Site C dam from independent oversight by the watchdog B.C. Utilities Commission (BCUC), an independent body set up to ensure that projects proposed by the government are in the public interest, and not promoted for partisan political gain.

The act further set the legal stage for building the Site C dam, a pet project of the B.C. Liberals, by closing the door on energy sources such as the Burrard Thermal natural gas-fired plant and the power to which B.C. is entitled under the Columbia River Treaty.

On Thursday, B.C.’s Auditor General Carol Bellringer — the province’s public interest watchdog — issued a report nudging the NDP government to review and amend the Clean Energy Act’s objectives, which the report describes as “too diverse and in many cases contradictory with each other.”

Bellringer also found the act’s objectives are often in contradiction with the utility commission’s mandate.

“There is a risk that exempting the commission from reviewing large projects can undermine public confidence in those projects and in the regulator [the BCUC] itself,” says the report, noting that regulators are set up to provide a “transparent and evidence-based process.”

The report highlights the Site C dam project as a case in point. “Our office has received many requests to examine government’s decision to build the Site C dam, which government initially excluded from the review process,” the report notes.

“Government’s decisions to exclude the commission from overseeing certain BC Hydro projects is inconsistent with one of the original purposes of the commission — to fully regulate BC Hydro.”

Independence of BCUC a concern

In a teleconference Thursday, Bellringer said the government “already knows how it can make the BCUC more effective.”

Bellringer zeroed in on the commission’s independence as one area that needs attention.

“An effective regulator is in the interests of all the residents of British Columbia,” she said.

“Independence means that regulators are able to make objective decisions based on facts. Independence enables regulators to consider the short and long-term interests of ratepayers, regulated companies and the public.”

By excluding the BCUC from key decisions, Bellringer said the government “loses out on the value of an independent transparent review and expert advice.”

In a later telephone interview, Bellringer said her office continues to look into the $10.7 billion Site C dam project.

“We’re still planning to do an audit,” she told DeSmog Canada. “We’re still trying to figure out what aspect to look at. I know there’s quite a bit of pressure on us from all kinds of people who would like us to do that very quickly but as you know it’s a very large project, so not so easy to narrow down.”

The auditor general also said there is “no question” that on-going Site C oversight by the BCUC would “add to the strength” of the independent review it conducted last fall, which found that the project is behind schedule and over-budget, with a final price tag that could exceed $12.5 billion.

“I just don’t have a view on exactly what it would look like.”

“There is a risk that exempting the commission from reviewing large projects can undermine public confidence in those projects and in the regulator itself.” B.C. Auditor General, Carol Bellringer, on the exemption of the Site C dam from BCUC review https://t.co/Vmnij9jLDQ

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) March 16, 2018

Oversight lost with Clean Energy Act

Site C was far from the only energy project that the Clean Energy Act removed from independent BCUC review.

The Northwest Transmission Line, an over-budget project that brought power to remote mining operations, was also stripped of oversight, as were BC Hydro’s smart meters plan and power supply proposals from independent power producers, to which BC Hydro is now paying millions of dollars not to produce power because of an electricity surplus in the province.

The operation of Burrard Thermal, a natural gas-fired generating plant on the north shore of Port Moody in the Lower Mainland, was also removed from BCUC scrutiny.

Built in 1963, the plant was refurbished in the 1990s to become the cleanest standby natural-gas fired plant on the continent. It was capable of generating 950 megawatts of electricity, nearly as much as the Site C dam.

The district of Hudson’s Hope, the municipality hardest hit by the Site C dam, has pointed out that Burrard Thermal could have been refurbished for $1 billion to bring it into compliance with the Clean Energy Act, at a fraction of the cost of the Site C dam project.

The BCUC wanted Burrard Thermal to continue operating, to provide emergency backup power, but the BC Liberals shut down the plant in the spring of 2016.

What Is the Clean Energy Act?

Former Premier Gordon Campbell described the act as a legal chisel that would enable B.C. to chip away at its greenhouse gas emissions and invest in renewable energy.

“We want British Columbia to become a leading North American supplier of clean, reliable, low carbon energy,” the Campbell declared on the day the act was introduced.

Among other changes, the act positioned B.C. to become a bigger exporter of electricity, with the Site C dam as the cornerstone of new energy experts, although there were no committed buyers for the dam’s power.

There is still no confirmed buyer for the Site C’ dam’s electricity, and energy demand in B.C. has been flat for more than ten years even though the population has grown by 17 per cent.

The act also mandated that B.C. must be almost completely self-sufficient in electricity, shutting the window on electricity imports, including from clean energy sources.

It prohibited B.C. from accepting Columbia River electricity generated in the U.S. — about the same amount of power as Site C would produce — even though a provision for claiming that power is included in the Columbia River Treaty.

Although the Site C dam project received an expedited BCUC review last fall, the NDP government did not allow the BCUC to recommend whether or not the project should proceed, as the commission would have done before the Liberals removed its oversight.

Notably, the BCUC review revealed troubling geotechnical issues and on-going problems with Site C’s major contractors, who are suing BC Hydro for more money. It also determined that energy alternatives such as wind and geothermal could provide the same amount of energy at a lower or equal cost.

Bellringer said her office originally intended to conduct an audit of the BCUC to determine if it is exercising effective oversight of BC Hydro and other organizations it regulates, such as ICBC.

But preliminary planning work for the audit determined that many of the same risks to the BCUC’s effectiveness had already been identified in two task force reviews in 2013 and 2014, and that further audit work would not contribute to a better understanding of the issues.

“We felt that those important areas needed to get attention and so we decided to issue this report instead.”

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Almost 30 months after 25-million cubic metres of contaminated sludge and water swept into lakes and creeks around the Mount Polley Mine, near Williams Lake, MiningWatch Canada has filed a private prosecution against the provincial government and Mount Polley Mining Corporation.

MiningWatch, supported by a coalition of environmental, First Nations and social justice organizations from Canada and Alaska, was forced to take action because the Crown has failed to lay charges and enforce the Fisheries Act despite ample evidence, said Ugo Lapointe, MiningWatch national program coordinator.

“We are all concerned that, almost 30 months later, despite clear evidence of impacts on waters, fish and fish habitat, no sanctions and no penalties have been brought forwards by any level of government,” Lapointe said.

“This sends the wrong signal to the industry across the country and undermines public confidence in the capacity of our regulatory system to work effectively to protect our environment.”

The collapse of the Mount Polley tailings pond dam destroyed or permanently affected more than 2.6 million square metres of aquatic and riparian habitat, according to MiningWatch.

Mount Polley is a gold and copper mine operated by Mount Polley Mining Corporation, a subsidiary of Vancouver-based Imperial Metals. The company also owns Red Chris Mine near the B.C. border with Southeast Alaska and is exploring the possibility of opening two mines in Clayoquot Sound.

Mount Polley closed after the 2014 dam breach, but started full production again last year when it was given a clean bill of health by the province.

The MiningWatch charges were filed in Provincial Court in Williams Lake Tuesday, using a provision of the Criminal Code that allows citizens to start a private prosecution if they believe someone has committed an indictable offence.

The legislation is a valuable constitutional safeguard that provides for citizens to enforce federal laws, such as the Fisheries Act, to protect public resources, said MiningWatch lawyer Lilina Lisenko.

The same legislation was used by salmon farm activist Alexandra Morton in a case against Marine Harvest Canada, when the company pleaded guilty to illegal possession of wild salmon, and for an ongoing lawsuit by Marilyn Burgoon against Executive Fuel Flight Services after 33,000 litres of jet fuel spilled into Lemon Creek.

“The next step is to go through the process hearing and, if the court accepts the evidence, then they set up a trial date,” Lapointe said in an interview.

However, looking at the massive expense of taking the province and a mining corporation to court, Lapointe is hoping the case will be picked up by the Federal Crown.

“They can decide whether to take over the case or not,” he said.

#MtPolley & BC Gov't Target of Criminal Charges Brought by Watchdog @MiningWatch Canada https://t.co/eOiRNGj9Cz #bcpoli #bcmining #cdnpoli

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) October 19, 2016

MiningWatch lawyers will be arguing that Mount Polley Mining Corporation and the province failed to implement minimum safeguards, which led to the largest mine-waste spill in Canadian history and to violations of the Fisheries Act.

The province was aware that the tailings pond and dam were not constructed according to design, but the Ministry of Energy and Mines did not enforce the law or apply its own policies, says a MiningWatch background paper.

Last December B.C. Chief Inspector of Mines, Al Hoffman decided not to forward charges to Crown counsel over the collapse of the tailings pond dam.

At that time Hoffman said that the company had poor practices, but he could not find evidence of non-compliance with mining regulations.

Hoffman found a major cause of the dam failure was a weak glacial soil layer beneath the foundation of the dam and other factors included the slope of the pond’s embankment, inadequate water management and insufficient beaches.

Imperial Metals is suing two engineering firms for damages over the dam failure.

B.C.’s Auditor General Carol Bellringer found in a report released in May that provincial monitoring and inspections of mines were inadequate to ensure mine operators complied with requirements.

Another investigation into the Mount Polley disaster is being led by B.C.’s Conservation Officer Service with assistance from Environment Canada, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and RCMP, but there is no indication whether charges will be laid.

Than investigation is ongoing, a spokesman for the B.C. Ministry of Environment said Tuesday.

A letter to MiningWatch lawyer Lilina Lysenko, written last month by Thomas Hlavac of Fisheries and Oceans, said investigators have served a number of search warrants to obtain evidence.

“That evidence is under examination by the investigators. Any charges supported (by) the evidence will be recommended to the Public Prosecution Service of Canada for their consideration and action,” Hlavac wrote.

Tara Scurr of Amnesty International Canada, one of the organizations supporting MiningWatch, said it is concerning that the mine has been granted a license to resume full operations when the Conservation Officer Service’s criminal investigation has not yet finished.

“While there is evidence of some impact on fish and fish habitat, many questions remain to be answered about long-term impacts and what role people affected by the spill will have in determining any remedies that are required,” Scurr said.

Bev Sellars, chair of the group First Nations Women Advocating for Responsible Mining and a councillor with the Xat’sull First Nation in Williams Lake, said there is no point in having laws if governments and industry are not held accountable when they are violated.

“The disaster that was the Mount Polley tailings pond collapse is not over for those of us who live and depend on the lands and waters and particularly on the salmon that have always sustained us,” she said.

“Nor is it over for those living in the shadows of other existing and planned mines across B.C. who are acutely aware of the government’s own panel of experts who reported we can expect to see two more such failures every decade,” she said.

Mount Polley Mining Corporation referred questions to Steve Robertson, Imperial Metals vice-president of corporate affairs, who did not respond to calls from DeSmog Canada Tuesday.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

British Columbians will not find out before next spring’s provincial election if the province has adequate programs in place to adapt to climate change.

Earlier this month Auditor General Carol Bellringer released a list of projects her office intends to investigate in the next three years and, among the hot button issues — ranging from grizzly bear management to the Site C dam — is whether government is adequately managing risks posed by climate change.

In the wake of heavy criticism of Premier Christy Clark’s August release of the province’s “Climate Leadership Plan” — which does not include carbon tax increases or set emission targets for 2030 — some were hoping that Bellringer would release the report early next year.

“It is a question I am being asked, but the timing is not going to work,” Bellringer said in an interview with DeSmog Canada.

“We are probably going to have finished our field work by spring, but we won’t be able to issue it before the election,” she said.

It is likely the report will be completed by fall of 2017 and will then be tabled in the Legislature, Bellringer said.

Audits of provincial management of climate change risks are being conducted simultaneously across the country and individual reports will then be wrapped into Canada’s first comprehensive national audit of climate policies.

It is the first time provincial and federal auditors have worked together to compile a common audit on any issue, indicating the importance of the issue, Bellringer said.

The federal report, likely to be completed late 2017, will look at how provinces are coping with climate change, both through restricting emissions and adapting to the new reality.

Some provinces will take a look at both mitigation and adaptation while others will delve deeper into one of the areas. The B.C. report will take an in-depth look at adaptation, Bellringer said.

“There’s quite a bit of information about mitigation. It’s easier to find out what emission targets are. It’s harder to pull together the various programs that may be in place around adaptation, so we decided it was going to be a more useful thing for us to work on,” said Bellringer, who, until the report is tabled, cannot discuss information collected or speculate on how B.C. measures up against other provinces.

Sybil Seitzinger, executive director of the B.C.-based Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions, applauded the decision to look at adaptation.

“Many areas of B.C. are already being impacted by the changing climate. A comprehensive adaptation plan will be important in the next phase of the B.C climate leadership plan,” she said.

“Attention to B.C.’s communities and businesses in the coastal and northern regions will be particularly important.”

The auditor general’s office is not given access to confidential cabinet documents, but uses analyses, experts and government documents to come up with base information, so B.C.’s Climate Leadership Plan will be one of the documents under scrutiny.

B.C. Climate Change Audit Won’t Be Released Until After Election: Auditor General https://t.co/2u9xzXv0XI #bcpoli #BCelxn2017

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) September 27, 2016

Lack of substance in the misnamed plan should give the auditor general’s office plenty of food for thought, according to George Heyman, NDP environment critic.

“I would like to see the auditor general look at the reality of the B.C. government’s and Christy Clark’s inaction on the climate file since she took office. . . .I think the auditor general should assess the premier’s rhetoric against the facts, ” Heyman told DeSmog Canada.

“Her climate procrastination plan skips over the 2020 targets and ignores the 2030 targets. . .  The premier claims to be on track to reduce emissions, but people can see that emissions have been rising steadily since she took office.”

After the plan was launched, Seitzinger said in a speech that it would not take B.C. even halfway towards its legislated 13-million tonne 2050 emissions target.

Environment Minister Mary Polak did not respond to interview requests from DeSmog, but told the CBC that a more comprehensive plan will be developed after meeting with the federal and other provincial governments.

B.C. is missing out on the opportunity to grow the economy through green jobs and, instead, provincial policies are geared to supporting the fossil fuel industry, Heyman said.

New Democrats are holding consultations and will probably be ready to release their climate action plan this fall, said Heyman, who would not speculate on whether an NDP government would increase the carbon tax but said the tax should be restructured to support green initiatives and transit, rather than subsidizing tax cuts for rich British Columbians.

B.C., Alberta, Ontario and Quebec have either carbon taxes or cap-and-trade laws to limit emissions, but federal Environment Minister Catherine McKenna said during an interview on CTV’s Question Period that the federal government is ready to impose a carbon price regime on provinces that don’t adequately regulate their own emissions.

Photo: Province of British Columbia

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Costs associated with the closure and reclamation of 84 abandoned industrial sites, mostly from mining, in B.C. have increased to $508 million, according to new information released from the Crown Contaminated Sites Program.

Responsibility for the sites has fallen to the province because the owners or operators of the projects “no longer exist,” according to a provincial press release.

The estimated cleanup costs have grown by $231 million since 2014, representing an increase of 83.4 per cent, watchdog group MiningWatch notes.

According to the province, a number of the mines, like the Britannia Mine near Squamish, or the Bralorne-Takla Mine in northern B.C., that now present a risk to human and enviornmental health, operated before 1969 when modern environmental legislation was created.

Although the province is quick to highlight work done over the past two years to clean up contaminated sites, Ugo Lapointe from MiningWatch says the significant growth in overall liability signals an urgent need for reform in the mining sector.

“Almost two years after the Mount Polley mine disaster, multiple cases of environmental mismanagement, and exponentially growing costs to clean up contaminated mine sites at taxpayers’ expense, it’s about time the B.C. government starts ‘walking the talk’ on desperately needed reforms in the province’s mining sector,” Lapointe said.

“This is only the tip of the iceberg, as yesterday’s report indicates that only 18 of 84 identified sites have been remediated to date, 16 are still under investigation, and 48 more are categorized as ‘lower priority’ and have yet to cleaned up. About 90 per cent of these sites are mining sites.”

Lapointe said at current rates it will take B.C. 64 years to clean up the remaining sites.

Polluter-Pays System a Failure in B.C.

In May B.C. Auditor General Carol Bellringer issued a scathing report that criticized B.C.’s weak mining liability regime. Bellringer estimated the province’s mining operations carried a $1 billion liability shortfall that ultimately falls onto taxpayer shoulders.

Economist Robyn Allan followed up on that report with a new analysis that showed, when combined with underfunded mining reclamation costs, the liability ballooned to $1.5 billion.

B.C. claims a polluter-pays system is in place for mines: “The Environmental Management Act ensures that those that pollute are held responsible under a polluter pay principle so the taxpayer does not have to assume these clean-up costs.”

Although, according to Robyn Allan, that claim is misleading.

“This statement is not true from the perspective of protecting human health and the environment, nor is it true that polluters are paying for the damage they cause,” Allan told DeSmog Canada. “The polluter pay principle is not working in B.C. For the polluter pay principle to work, polluters must pay for the damage they create. Instead, we find time and again, that it is taxpayers who are paying, or else much of the damage mining companies have caused is going unaddressed.”

Allan’s recent report detailed “decades of neglect in compliance and enforcement activities” within the B.C. Ministry of Mines and the Ministry of Environment.

“The regulators are not protecting the environment from substantial harm or protecting taxpayers from bearing extensive financial cost to fix it,” Allan told DeSmog Canada.

She added the province has standards in place, but doesn’t do enough to ensure the protection of human health or the environment. Both the Snipgold Johnny Mine and Chieftan Metal’s Tulsequah Chief Mine are prime examples of a failed compliance and regulatory system in B.C.

Allan added financial failure in the mining sector, especially in relation to coal, increases these concerns. The collapse of Walter Energy, which Allan outlines in her report, will likely lead to water contamination at the company’s coal mine in northern B.C., Allan said, “because the company was not required to post full financial security” and “is now under bankruptcy protection.”

Allan added a similar situation could unfold with Teck Resources that could see “taxpayers picking up billions of dollars of reclamation and water treatment costs in the Elk Valley in the future.”

“The polluter doesn’t pay if the polluter becomes unable or unwilling,” Allan said. “This is why it is imperative that a fully secured financial assurances system with accurate estimates of reclamation costs and responsibilities be introduced as soon as possible.”

Underfunded Liability Concerns Alaskans Downstream of B.C. Mines

B.C. has at least 10 new mines planed or proposed for northwest B.C., many located above salmon-spawning rivers that travel directly into Southeast Alaska.

Weak regulations, limited liability and a lack of mining oversight has Alaskans living downstream of the mine sites worried another Mount Polley-style disaster will negatively affect local tourism operations and salmon populations.

Concerns over the recent increase in mining activity in northwest B.C. were heightened with the approval of the Red Chris Mine, located in the Iskut and Stikine watersheds. The Red Chris Mine is owned and operated by Imperial Metals, the same company responsible for the Mount Polley mine disaster which sent an estimated 25 million cubic metres of mining waste into the pristine waters of Quesnel Lake nearly two years ago.

The majority of that mining waste, which contains mercury and arsenic, remains on the bottom of Quesnel Lake. No charges or fines were issued in response to the Mount Polley incident.

Recently Alaska’s Congressional Delegation asked Secretary of State John Kerry to step in to protect Alaskan interests from B.C.’s mining boom.

In a letter to Kerry, the delegation wrote, “Alaskans need to have every confidence that mining activity in Canada is carried out just as safely as it is in our state. Yet, today, that confidence does not exist.”

“Should there be an impact to the transboundary waters that flow from Canada to Alaska, our state’s fisheries, tourism and native peoples could all be hurt.”

“Clearly, this program has not been a priority for the B.C. government and nothing in the report indicates that this will change in the future. Nor is there anything to indicate that the B.C. government will seriously enforce the ‘polluter-pays’ principle so that the industry pays for the mess it created,” Lapointe said.

“That’s a shame, because at the end of the day, it’s B.C. taxpayers who will be left with a bigger hole in their pocket to clean up the mess.”

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

According to British Columbia’s auditor general, the province has handed out $1.25 billion in financial incentives to the oil and gas sector since 2009 to encourage production.

Auditor General Carol Bellringer outlined the incentives in her 2013-2014 summary of the province’s financial statements.

“To encourage production of oil and natural gas in B.C., the province provides financial incentives to oil and gas producers,” she said in the report.

“Producers have incurred expenditures that will qualify for $1.25 billion in incentive credits,” she said, “but have not yet produced enough oil or natural gas to claim these amounts.”

That means as producers generate revenue, they can simply claim their incentive credits, reducing how much money the B.C. government collects on the resource.

“In this case,” she notes in the report, “this represents a reduction of $1.25 billion in revenue in future years if all the incentives are used.”

B.C. LNG not the economic saviour premier promises

B.C Premier Christy Clark has portrayed liquefied natural gas, or LNG, as an economic saviour for the province, although her government has consistently made financial and environmental concessions to the natural gas industry to attract business to the province.

In a recent interview with Global News, Clark said: “I will do everything in my power to make LNG work.”

“LNG will transform our economy, pay off debt, and create a better future for our children,” she said.

Clark’s promise of a debt-free future for B.C. rests almost solely on the creation of an LNG export industry. But to date, that industry remains almost entirely speculative in nature. Although several companies have invested large amounts of money for the prospect of exporting B.C.'s natural gas, none have made any final investment commitments.

This summer, major gas developer Apache backed out of a partnership with Chevron to construct an LNG plant in Kitimat, citing a weak gas market. Malaysian gas giant Petronas also recently threatened to back out of its proposed $10-billion LNG plant near Prince Rupert — and perhaps would have had the Clark government not dropped income tax rates for the industry by 50 per cent.

B.C.’s questionable accounting

In her report, Bellringer also noted B.C. has some questionable accounting methods.

“The bottom line is certainly an important element of looking at a set of financial statements, but there’s a huge amount of rich information that can be taken out of the financial statements,” she told The Canada Press.

“I hope that the report does show that, you know, there are lots of things that need to be very carefully looked at in a set of financial statements.”

Bellringer added that the incentives paid to the oil and gas industry “tell an interesting story.”

Since 2009 the province has paid industry, in the form of credits, a total of $1.25 billion with $587 million of that handed out to industry last year alone.

Screen shot of the auditor general report, outlining oil and gas incentives for 2013-2014 fiscal year. Click here for report.

“Of interest,” Bellringer noted in the report, “is how government records the royalty revenues and the incentive expenses. The incentive expenses are deducted from the royalty revenues, and only the net amount is shown in the statement of operations.”

“The incentives claimed are quite large,” she added, “almost 30 per cent of the gross royalty revenue received by government in fiscal 2014.”

“When these producers claim their incentive credits, that money will be deducted from the royalties that they owe, thereby reducing the amount of money government will generate,” Bellringer said in her report.

A 2012 report released by Blue Green Canada, a coalition of environmental and labour groups, noted that Canada’s existing tax incentives for the oil and gas sector frustrates the creation of new jobs in the emerging clean energy sector.

The report, called More Bang for our Buck: How Canada Can Create More Energy Jobs and Less Pollution, stated oil and gas incentives are “the wrong direction if we hope to tap into a growing share of the jobs and opportunity of the global transition towards renewable energy.”

Image Credit: Christy Clark during Encana tour summer 2014 via Flickr

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.