Punish polluters with jail time if necessary: B.C. poll
British Columbians see nature, environment and climate as key to quality of life
British Columbians are almost unanimous in their disdain for polluters, even among industries that enrich us economically, according to a poll released Monday.
More than 80 per cent support strong penalties — including jail time — for people and companies that damage our natural environment, according to a poll of 1,658 British Columbians conducted by McAllister Opinion Research.
The poll was commissioned by the Real Estate Foundation of B.C., a philanthropic group directed by appointees from the real estate industry and government. The margin of error is plus or minus 2.41 per cent, 19 times out of 20.
Similarly, 81 per cent want to see large companies finance a pool of funds that would pay for the full cost of restoration after logging, mining and oil and gas extraction.
It appears we no longer trust resource companies to pony up after the fact.
“People want accountability and they want polluters and people who take advantage of the natural environment to feel that accountability,” foundation CEO Jack Wong said.
Three in four respondents said they would choose environmental protection over economic growth, while half see a “sustainable” economy as key to their economic well-being.
“People see climate change as a major concern,” he said.
About two-thirds of respondents say that sustainable land use matters “a lot” when defined as “taking care of and using the land in a way that does not harm the ability of the next generation of people living in your community to meet their needs.”
More than 60 per cent of British Columbians support A) habitat for birds, fish and animals, B) local food security and C) large-scale wind, solar and geothermal power as provincial priorities.
But we aren’t necessarily in love with serving the greater good when it conflicts with local interests. At least 84 per cent of respondents rated “local needs for food, energy and water” as more important than federal, international and corporate interests.
Nearly half agreed that “land-use management decisions should place the most emphasis on providing for the wants and needs of local communities.”
Good thing, too, because the priorities in the Lower Mainland — housing affordability and climate change — are less important in the northern Interior, where they tend to be more concerned with mismanagement of natural resources, government mismanagement and conflicts over land, water and resources.
Just over half of respondents rate their quality of life as good or excellent, a number that appears to be tempered by concerns about the cost of living, the cost of housing and an increasing population.