 |
|||||||||||||||
 |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||
 |
|
|
|
The TAY RIVER LEGAL DEFENCE FUND
Current Status and Future Prospects of the OMYA Tay Water Taking
The February 14th, 2003 decision of former Environment Minister Chris Stockwell in the Tay Case triggered a court challenge of broad interest to citizens all across Ontario. By granting a two-phased Permit To Take Water, the Minister's decision has set a significant and worrisome precedent for all future water takings. The Environmental Bill of Rights would only apply for the first phase of water taking. Apparently there are no provisions for public notice, comment or rights of appeal for the significant increases in water taking in phase two. The Stockwell Decision raises serious questions about the legality of a two-phase permit and the circumvention of citizens’ rights under the Environmental Bill of Rights for phase two. The Minister’s political decision to overturn the outcome of a government appointed Environmental Review Tribunal seriously challenges the validity of the Ontario Environmental Bill of Rights legislation and process. It also reduces the ability of citizens to have any public input into the conditions regulating the second phase of permits to take water in the future. The Canadian Environmental Law Association (CELA) has filed application, on behalf of Miss Ann K. German, for a judicial review. This application seeks to confirm the validity of the Environmental Bill of Rights and the ability of Ontario citizens to use this legislation and established process to ensure conservation, protection and sound management of their environment and natural resources without political interference. Since the intervention by the new Environment Minister the dynamics of the situation have changed. A summary of how events have unfolded can be found by referring to the chronology of events.
SOME BACKGROUND INFORMATION The Environmental Bill of Rights The Environmental Bill of Rights (EBR), one of the most significant environmental laws in the last 25 years, was enacted in February 1994. The EBR recognizes that the provincial government has the primary responsibility for protecting, conserving and restoring the natural environment. It also recognizes that the people of Ontario have the right to participate in decisions about the environment and the right to hold government officials accountable for those decisions. Under the auspices of the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario, the EBR provides for:
The Tay River appeal is the first time, in the eight year history of the EBR, that a group of citizens were able to carry the EBR process through to a conclusion and decision.
If the the Stockwell Decision is not overturned by the new Liberal Government as promised, the effect will be to deter citizens from exercising their theoretical rights. They will have learned that these do not exist in practice.
Statement of Environmental Values for the Ministry of the Environment
Ministry Mandate The mandate of the Ministry of Environment is to protect the quality of the natural environment so as to safeguard the ecosystem and human health and foster the efficient use and conservation of resources.
The Ecosystem Approach The Ministry will adopt an ecosystem approach to environmental protection and resource management. This approach views the ecosystem as composed of air, land, water and living organisms, including humans and the interactions among them. When making decisions, the Ministry will consider: Public Participation The Ministry is committed to public participation and will foster an open and consultative process in the implementation of the Statement of Environmental Values.
Ontario’s Environmental Bill of Rights and You http://www.ene.gov.on.ca
|
|
|
|
[Home] [About the Fund] [Watershed] [Press and Opinion] [Press Releases] [Links] [Archives] |
|
|
|
|
 |
|||