Richard Gleeson
Northern News Services

Yellowknife (Nov 07/01) - The northern public is being short-changed on environmental assessments, says a local environmentalist.

Unlike the federal environmental law it replaced, the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act makes no provision for funding for public participation in environmental reviews.

"Access to participant funding seems to depend on where you live in the country and whether its (the Department of Indian Affairs) or Environment Canada making the decision," said Kevin O'Reilly of the Canadian Arctic Resources Committee.

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Act requires that the government provide money for public participation in reviews. The money is used to cover such things as travel expenses and hiring of technical experts.

While there is no specific provision for intervenor funding in the MVRMA, it does not prohibit it, said Will Dunlop, one of the DIAND officials who helped draft the act.

"Nobody's trying to duck it," said Dunlop. He said when a panel review is conducted under the act a budget is submitted to the DIAND minister's review. Dunlop said he would "fully expect" the budget to include a request for intervenor funding.

Public involvement needed

Under CEAA participant funding is available only for panel reviews, the most comprehensive form of review under CEAA. An amendment now before the House of Commons would extend that to the next level down, comprehensive study.

"The involvement of the public is critical," said Bruce Young of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. "And the feeling was that to encourage the public to get involved, funding had to be made available."

One of the first things the agency does when a panel review is initiated is establish an independent committee. The committee is responsible for assessing applications and distributing intervenor funding.

Under the act, the environment minister establishes a budget for participant funding for each panel review. For public involvement in the assessment of a proposed undersea pipeline to Vancouver Island, $100,000 was made available. A budget of $400,000 was set for public participation in the review of the proposed Voisey Bay Mine in Labrador.

O'Reilly said there is also no provision for public participation funding in legislation that governs how environmental assessments are done in Nunavut.

He said a coalition of environmental groups was offered $48,000 to fund participation in the review of the Diavik project.

CARC obtained $30,000 for participation in the review of BHP's Ekati mine. O'Reilly said if staff time and in-kind contributions are taken into account, the organization spent $250,000 on that review.

"This is something that is characterized as a money-grab by environmental organizations," said O'Reilly. "But this is about public participation in regulatory processes."

Dunlop said intervenor funding does not necessarily make for a more rigorous review. "It makes for a longer one," he said.