Better to spend on park than pipeline

Hypocrisy: Virtually all of us know what it means, most of us abhor it, and yet we see it on the political scene and, even more directly, in the actions of our governments, on a far too regular basis.

One dictionary defines it as the false assumption or appearance of virtue. On our streets Canadians more commonly know it as deception and misrepresentation.

The most recent example we are trying to deal with is Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s decision to spend almost $5 billion on what amounts to a promise of a pipeline that would facilitate an increase in Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions.

The deception comes when this decision is compared to the federal government’s claim it will limit national GHG emissions, that pipelines are a private sector responsibility, and that hearings by the National Energy Board into the validity and necessity of another pipeline were objective, fair, and technically sound; and consequently should stand on their own merits.

I find this takeover deal domineering, destructive and distasteful, but something else bothers me just as much; that is the prevailing federal ideology that spending more taxpayer money on the oil and gas and pipeline industry is fundamentally essential to the best interests of Canadians.

Contrast this with the secrecy surrounding and, as far as we know yet, failure of the same Trudeau government to establish a national park in the South Okanagan that would truly be in the best interest of all Canadians.

A national park managed on the principles of ecological integrity and landscape and biodiversity conservation by a professional public service accountable to Canadians would reduce greenhouse gas emissions below levels presently emanating from agricultural and industrial use of the area.

Where is Trudeau, and our money, when something obviously good for Canadians is on the line? Why are Canadians not involved in public hearings about this “national interest” issue? î

An economic perspective not controlled by Trudeau or Kinder Morgan estimates taxpayers will cough up nearer to $20 billion for this pipeline intervention, yet perhaps $200 million would buy out all the ranching operations in the proposed Okanagan park area, pay out the First Nations that are blocking Canadians aspirations for national parks, and even pay off a thankfully receptive B.C. government, if need be. So what’s the hold up?

Environment Minister Catherine McKenna proclaimed less than a month ago national parks would be emphasizing ecological integrity in management.

This is in stark contrast with rumors about grazing, “traditional” off-road vehicle use by livestock operators, quite possibly First Nations “harvesting,” and race-based religious cultural “management” of what Canadians thought would be an authentic national park.

Canadians haven’t been asked their views of this national park scheme, and so far we’ve not gotten even a “whiff” of public hearings.

We’re dealing with a federal government that only trusts Canadians and other levels of government when it thinks it can engineer the outcome. It thought the KM pipeline was a “no brainerî as a former PM might have said.

In today’s world, an authentic, not “fake,” Okanagan national park, would actually be widely accepted and endorsed by Canadians. I suspect most Canadians would willingly choose spending our money on a park before a pipeline.