How public consultation on coal should look
Let Albertans determine the future of the Eastern Slopes, Ian Urquhart says.
“Committing to consult on a modernized policy” — that was the second shoe Energy Minister Sonya Savage dropped when she announced she was reinstating Alberta's 1976 Coal Policy. The public's demand to be consulted about coal mining was the accelerant for the firestorm of criticism the Kenney government endured after it quietly rescinded that policy last year.
What should the minister's consultation commitment offer Albertans? Nothing less than the opportunity to determine the future of Alberta's iconic Eastern Slopes. Public consultation should ask this question: “Should new coal surface mines be allowed anywhere in Alberta's Rockies and foothills?”
It's no secret that public trust in the Kenney government has suffered badly. Rescinding the Coal Policy, like the Christmas holiday travel scandal, has damaged the popularity of the Kenney team. To try to rebuild trust, the coal consultations must not be led by the Ministry of Energy. Instead, they must be entrusted to a panel of independent, third-party experts.
Experts on subjects such as water, climate change, natural resource economics and traditional use of the Eastern Slopes by First Nations should commission studies. They should invite briefs from the public. They should hold public hearings.
The United Conservative Party should appreciate there are good conservative precedents for this approach. One is Premier Ed Stelmach's 2007 Royalty Review Panel.
Stelmach, like all the Progressive Conservative party leadership candidates in 2006, promised to review Alberta's petroleum royalty system. Almost immediately after his victory, Stelmach kept that promise. An overwhelming majority of Albertans, 79 per cent, supported what he initiated, a royalty review with public consultation.
Stelmach's independent, expert review panel researched royalty systems, held public hearings and delivered its report and recommendations to the government seven months later. That review panel was the most transparent, inclusive exercise in policy-making Alberta had seen since the first days of the Lougheed dynasty in the early 1970s.
In its final report, that panel said: “There is an absence of accountability from the government to the owners of the resource.” Better language can't be found to capture what drove Albertans to condemn what Minister Savage admitted was a mistake — rescinding the Coal Policy. That phrase from 2007 should remind us that the public owns the Eastern Slopes. As the owners or caretakers of that landscape, the people of Alberta should determine its future. An independent review panel would enable that.
Social Credit Premier
Harry Strom set another conservative precedent for this public consultation model in 1970. Voters were turning their backs on Strom. Environmental concerns animated some of the disaffected. To try to win them back, Strom gave Alberta the Environment Conservation Authority. It operated independently of government departments and had a sweeping conservation mandate. The authority was able to hold public hearings, receive briefs and submissions and make policy recommendations to cabinet.
With an ongoing mandate, the authority created public advisory committees that boasted broad representation from interest groups.
The Lougheed government used the Environment Conservation Authority to deliver the transparency and inclusiveness mentioned above. The ECA studied and held public hearings on the environmental impact of strip mining. It studied and held public hearings on land use and resource development in the Eastern Slopes.
The ECA'S 1974 report on the Eastern Slopes did exactly what the Kenney government must do now. It considered the cases for resource extraction and landscape preservation in the foothills of the Rocky Mountains. In fact, the 1976 Coal Policy was a child of the Environment Conservation Authority's hearings and investigations.
The creation and use of the Environment Conservation Authority were unprecedented in Canada. Reviving the authority would be an excellent option for improving provincial policy-making. It might also restore some of the public trust the Kenney government has lost.
As Minister Savage searches for a “modernized policy,” she should recognize that some of the best approaches to making good policy live in our past.