Home page

Text size

E-mail this page

SOMBA K'E/YELLOWKNIFE
The Mackenzie Valley Environmental Impact Review Board has some decisions to make now that public hearings on the cleanup of the Giant Mine Remediation are over.

There are concerns, however, that the decision will merely be a rubber stamp for the project because the federal minister tasked with approving the board's decision, John Duncan, minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development (AANDC), is also ultimately responsible for the remediation project itself.

Public hearings for the Giant Mine Remediation Project ended Friday and many different community groups shared their thoughts and concerns. Among them a perceived conflict of interest with Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada. - NNSL file photo

"Having the same department who proposes the project getting the recommendations that come back from the review board does cause us some concern," said Kevin O'Reilly, spokesperson for Alternatives North, one of the intervenors during last week's public hearings.

"It's not just (Alternatives North) saying there are conflicting roles in responsibilities, the developer themselves identified (them as well)."

Dettah Chief Ed Sangris expressed his hope that the board would take a close look at the relationship when it files its environmental assessment report.

"Yellowknives Dene First Nation has stressed the importance of setting clear measures in the board's recommendations on the project," stated Sangris in an e-mail to Yellowknifer.

"The Yellowknives Dene First Nation want these measures to include clear delineation among AANDC divisions and decision-makers."

Alan Ehrlich, senior environmental assessment officer with the Mackenzie Valley Environmental Impact Review Board, said the board is aware of the department's multiple roles and the situation will be factored into its final decision.

"It certainly occurred to me that the public and parties took advantage of the real opportunities they had to make sure the board knows what they're thinking," Ehrlich said.

"Partners have put a lot of evidence on the record about the multiple roles that the developer has and that's one of the things the board has to consider when it's looking at the evidence and making a decision."

After a period of deliberation, the board may recommend to the minister that the project either proceed to the next step of licensing and permitting, proceed to licensing and permitting with legally binding measures in place, or be rejected.

The board or minister can also send the project to another more detailed environmental review process called an environmental impact review.

Both O'Reilly and Sangris said they felt the board had adequate opportunity to hear the community's concerns during last week's hearings and are hoping to see some strong recommendations come out of the process.

"After the hearings, we feel confident that the board has heard our concerns about the site's impacts on our traditional way of life and its potential impacts on future generations," stated Sangris.

"I think that our organization, we tried to bring forward ideas and perspectives, examples, best practices, lessons learned, to make a helpful contribution and we tried to do that in a respectful manner," O'Reilly said. "We'll see where the review board goes with all of this."

Parties have until Oct. 5 to file their closing comments, at which point the board has allotted four months for deliberation. A decision is expected to be reach in January or February.

Adrian Paradis, acting manager for the Giant Mine Remediation Project, stated in an e-mail Thursday to Yellowknifer that the board's environmental assessment report, which will contain its recommendations, will also be reviewed by ministers from Fisheries and Oceans Canada, and GNWT Department of Environment and Natural Resources. He also stated the Giant Mine team will have "no input whatsoever in that review process."

According to the review board's website, the AANDC minister leads this consultation process with these ministers and the process is not complete until all ministers accept the board's report or the project is referred to an environmental impact review.

We welcome your opinions. Click here to e-mail a letter to the editor.