The following is an english translation by Johanne Dion of a commentary posted on the Friends of the Richelieu blog on April 11, 2011. It concerns the misperceived state about a moratorium of fracking operations in Quebec following a public review report released to the Quebec government on February 28, 2011. Why still insist on a moratorium?
Summary The BAPE submitted its report on February 28, 2011. Knowing that the BAPE is only an advisory body, in the end it will be the government that will make the political decisions. So we must reinstate our demand for a real moratorium. What are the reasons that make this necessary? We are being tricked! The positive reaction of some groups opposed to shale gas on the main recommendations of the BAPE report is understandable, especially when the worst scenario was feared and didn't come through. We must remind ourselves that it is the uprising of the people that made the BAPE happen. Thanks to their commitment, environmental and citizens' groups have forced the BAPE to go beyond its limited mandate doled by the government. Let's recall that the start of the fight initiated by the AQLPA and the Saint-Marc-sur-Richelieu citizens' group motivated other citizens to come together against our territory's invasion by the gas companies that had the Liberal Government's support. Let's not forget the half-truths, the concealment of information, the lack of answers from the industry and the many preoccupations of the people. Let's not forget the petitions against the development of this dirty and polluting industry. Let's not forget the papers presented to the BAPE from angry and disbelieving citizens. Let's not forget the protest marches at every BAPE session in St.Hyacinthe, in Bécancour, in Longueuil and in Montreal. Let's remember that key event that probably was a turning point in the way citizens reacted to the refusal of the Ministry of Transport to give a permit to the march in front of the drilling site of Canadian Forest Oil in St-Denis-sur-Richelieu and the threat to sue if the citizens kept it up. The people of St-Denis and Mont-St-Hilaire did not back down. More than 300 came to the march against another barbaric invasion of the Patriotes' country. Authorities knew that this peaceful refusal to obey to the restrictions imposed by the Ministry of Transport could be the start of a growing movement of opposition in all the St-Lawrence Lowlands. Up to then, the citizens had been very open, very nice, but this marvellous resistance was the start of an organized action against the quiet assurance of the government representatives and against the gas companies in our region. No doubt, the henchmen of the government and the industry heard about this. We're all sure that the commissioners of the BAPE understood that this movement could not be stopped. They then listened. Like Dominic Champagne said it so well, the commissioners of the BAPE dared to propose what we did not expect. But what would have happened if there would not have been this brave opposition in all the localities against shale gas production in Quebec? Of course, we have to salute the audacity of the commissioners, but we have to give the credit to the brave and determined people who live where the damage is done. All the citizens' actions have obviously influenced the perception and the conscience of the BAPE commissioners. This was a people's victory after days, weeks, months of struggle. Yes, it was an important step forward, but still but a step forward, not more. We must remain sharp on our toes, and especially avoid being too proud of the Liberal government's strategic and artificial retreat. Not wanting to be a killjoy, we citizens opposed to shale gas must remain guarded, because it is this same Government that will, or will not, enforce these recommendations of the BAPE report. Why must we remain guarded? When analyzing the government's strategic use of the BAPE report, we quickly perceive a possible stratagem. A question comes to mind: will the Government take from the report whatever could be useful to calm public outrage? A month ago, I said that the BAPE would suggest experimental exploration on a dozen of wells and meanwhile, Lucien Bouchard (President of the Association des Pétrolières et Gazières du Québec) would negotiate with the Government for compensations on the 21 wells that have been put temporarily on hold. Many have doubted my predictions. But what happened during Mr Arcand's press conference on March 8, 2011? Seven days after this conference, the March 15, 2011 newspaper Le Devoir reported that the "favourable reception by the gas industry did not prevent it's spokesman Lucien Bouchard from insisting that gas companies could demand some form of compensation because of the delays imposed by the scientific study." Also, Mr Bouchard says that the studies made by the strategic evaluation could then be fed by the readings made thanks to the experimental operations of fracking that would respect strict conditions of transparency, of scientific and technical monitoring, of inspections and supervising, and that after consulting with concerned parties. So! All the information gathered by the strategic environmental evaluation study (ÉES) paid by the Government, and thus with public funds, could then be used freely by the industry with no charge. When Lucien Bouchard commented on the BAPE report, he said that the gas companies would cooperate with the study because the ÉES would be helpful to the industry, providing them with data needed to go on with the extraction of shale gas. What fine gift our government gave to the gas industry! How does the Minister make us accept the unacceptable? Mid-February, the Minister of Natural Resources, Nathalie Normandeau, had indicated that she was looking for a half way between a moratorium and other propositions. It is obvious that she does not want to give up her prejudice in favour of the gas industry and was trying to protect her government from the public's outrage. During the press conference of March 8 2011, Minister Arcand made the ÉES look like a necessary evil to better our scientific knowledge to pursue this energy file, even if we already know a lot by what has been done elsewhere (Alberta, Pennsylvania, New York, Colorado, etc...). We believe that there are enough drilling sites south of the border to do a serious and scientific study. Minister Arcand leaves it to the ÉES to steer us on the right track. At the same time, he brushes aside the impacts of daily stress on those that live near the drilling sites. Pavlov took better care of his test subjects than this government who will consequently have these men and women become experiment subjects in an on site laboratory. Shame! What lack of compassion! Citizens actively opposed to shale gas production share in spirit and wholeheartedly the burden of living near drilling sites. We understand their disappointment because they have been completely forgotten. Our verbal solidarity and our actions will have to be expressed and crystallized now more than ever. One does not have to be very bright to realize that this imitation of communication is but a diversion strategy from the government's part to buy social peace on the short term. It is an example of a systematic application of a gradation strategy to make the unacceptable acceptable: it is to be applied progressively for a more or less long period combined with a diversion whose objective is to buy social peace and calm citizen mobilization. This strategic tactic coming from the Liberal Government seems to us to be theatrics on a large scale in order to buy some time to think up new arguments to make shale gas production more acceptable. For example, Minister Arcand insisted that the ÉES would start around July and would take less than 2 years to be completed. Anyway, the gas industry did not plan its exploitation phase before 2014. We know that gas prices are too low right now to make it worth their while. Moreover, by proroguing the parliamentary session, the Government pushes back till later the upgrading of the Mining Laws and the passing of the law on hydrocarbons. Consequently, the government keeps the all powerful Mining Laws above all other laws. Scott McKay of the Quebecois Party said on RDI of Radio-Canada that the whole process of rewriting the law and its rules would have to be redone before passing it. The Charest Government has now then bought more time for its friends in the gas industry. In all his leniency, the Minister has used another subtle strategy. He uses emotions and seeks public approval, especially when he insists on correct exploitation procedures and on the security of the public. You can't object to that, right? Consequently, we are subjected to the typical technique to undermine rational analysis, thus diminishing the individual's critical reasoning. Mr Arcand told us "we are responding to your fears, to your concerns, we propose forming a committee that will do a strategic environmental evaluation, what more do you want?" He also accepted the BAPE suggestion to start a committee of experts made out of scientists, company representatives, elected officials from municipalities and the government. But who will represent environmental groups? Who will represent the citizens' groups of Quebec? Most of these scientists, environmental groups and especially these citizens that battle against shale gas production don't have any financial interests in this conflict, after all. Why this diversion? Is it to avoid a real collective debate? The words used by Mr. Arcand let us to believe that the ÉES is practically a moratorium in disguise, which is completely false; the industry will be able to continue drilling because the control regulations that the Ministry of the Environment will use on all drilling activities during the exploitation phase are not known nor enacted. Only fracking is not allowed except for the strategic evaluation to increase our scientific knowledge. So the drilling will go on! The Minister has added: "we have heard you and understand". But listen carefully to his words and you will notice that he uses verbs in the conditional tense. Is that a signal to his friends in the gas industry? No wonder we are suspicious when we know about the relationships between this government and the oil and gas companies. Among the 55 lobbyists, more than 22 come from the ranks of the Liberal Party that spend freely public funds to favour oil and gas companies. Let's not forget that this BAPE enquiry cost us millions of dollars to come to the same conclusion that other knowledgeable people like Mrs Hogue from Hydro-Quebec's environment department and Mr André Beauchamp who was president of a previous BAPE that had said basically the same things as early as October 5, 2010! Why were they not listened to? Is it not legitimate to ask ourselves if the complicity between the government and the industry contributed to the planning of at least a part of this avoidance strategy and side-stepping the question? While berating the government, the BAPE also gave it a way out of the dead end it had painted itself in. We do not have to feel obligated to qualify the government's position and that of the Minister Arcand as courageous, because what they will do with the recommendations of the BAPE report will probably serve as smokescreens to put the people asleep. Right now, the government and the gas companies use the BAPE report as a tool to trick the population into letting them do what they want to do: calm down the public mobilization. They will dispute the recommendations they don't agree with. For example, when a Radio-Canada journalist asked the Prime Minister of Quebec his thoughts on what the BAPE said about royalties being compared between those in Quebec and elsewhere, as mentioned in the report on pages 200-201 and 202, Mr Charest was quick to qualify this information as "fantasizing". It was one of the first items of information that the press published on the report. The Prime Minister of the Liberal Government denied it without even checking if it was true. After this denial of the obvious, it is easy to assume that the rest of the recommendations of the report will be probably pushed aside to concentrate on the ÉES as possible operation tactic to distract our attention: the people's push for a real debate on energy choices in Quebec. Consequently, we have to keep on being mobilized and keep demanding that the just and relevant recommendations of the BAPE report that concern us directly be kept a priority and be prepared for a probable refusal from the government to implement them. Anything positive? Despite our massive opposition to fracking because of its irreversible impacts on the environment and the possible contamination of water wells, underground water tables and aquifers, we believe that the government will go ahead with this strategic environmental evaluation (ÉES). So if there has to be experiments, it would have to be in the wells already drilled and fractured, far from homes and populated areas, far from underground water and watersheds. The people living near already drilled sites must not become lab rats for experiments in outdoor laboratories. Water is essential to life, but gas is not. The declaration of Minister Arcand that a strategic environmental evaluation (ÉES) has to be done to increase our scientific knowledge could be received positively at first glance. But let's not forget that this study was well received by the government and the gas industry. Mr Binnion, CEO of Questerre, one of the most actively and openly against environmental and citizens' groups, says that the ÉES will be a second chance for the industry to convince the population that shale gas extraction is a good thing. Also, while this study (ÉES) is going on, the companies will be able to go on with the drilling for exploration purposes and determine the gas potential of the region, no matter the dangers these procedures expose us to. Isn't it enough to see the double disaster of the drilling sites in La Présentation and Leclercville to doubt that the industry is able to prevent and correct environmental accidents they cause? Consequently, there should not be any new drilling operations because the industry cannot seem to resolve the problems they already have to deal with. Let us not forget that 60% of the wells in Quebec have methane leaks that the companies and the Ministers tend to minimize their gravity. Let's remember that it is an industry in its learning stages of a new technology. Our lands must not become test areas where mistakes can happen in the care of sorcerers' apprentices that use techniques that are not mastered and dangerous to living things. We don't need an elaborate ÉES to know this and studies should concentrate on these wells and others that leak (18 out of 31). Considering the fact that the BAPE knew about the flaws of this technology, why didn't they have the courage to ask for a real moratorium instead of a ÉES, despite the limited mandate it was given by the government? We know that this government will go ahead with the strategic environmental evaluation (ÉES). We are confronted with a promise of Minister Arcand and facing the inevitable. Consequently, we have to demand certain measures so that the ÉES be as objective as possible. To obtain this, it has to be supervised and validated by representatives of environmental and citizens' groups that have stood their ground within their own communities against the menace of gas companies, otherwise social acceptability is not a given. The second question is about the necessity of identifying underground water sources and the different geological formations and faults. The BAPE report mentions that this identification phase is far from completed and this presents important risk evaluation problems. The BAPE reminds us that the actual study on our knowledge of the underground water resource that should be completed only in 2013 would cover only 50% of the areas where shale gas exploration and extraction will take place. Despite this, the $6 million over 3 years in the Bachand budget will only go to the inspections of the drilling sites, not to the mapping of underground water. The BAPE report recommends our government that the water used by the gas industry should be surface water and water unfit for human consumption. We have to remain watchful and insist that the government supports financially the mapping study of the underground water resource to speed it up and enacts the BAPE recommendation of using only surface water. We must also remember the injection of chemicals and the heavy metals of the wastewater that will only partially recuperated and treated by unproven technology. Yes, water is everywhere in this file and it's not very clean! The third aspect of this question is the fact that the burden of proof of this problematic shale gas should lie with the industry rather than the citizens. Will the government change its policy to include this recommendation of the BAPE report? The fourth aspect would be this artificial pause that forces environmental and citizens groups to explain and prove and propose alternative energy replacement options to shale gas. To do this, information sessions for the public should be organized in the different communities in the St.-Lawrence Valley. Thus, citizens will at last get answers to the ever repeated question: "You're against shale gas, so what do you propose instead, then?" These information sessions would be one of the ways that would help the people's mobilization to demand the replacement of dirty and polluting energy sources by those that are more people and environment friendly. Many public voices decry the lack of any mobilizing project in the province. A project to develop renewable energy sources that are less polluting would mostly fill this void by integrating social, economical and environmental values. And now, what shall we do? We now that the gas companies already have exploration permits that they purchased at a ridiculous price. We also know that the exploration phase will probably be done at minimal expense for the companies because of lack of legislation and that it will bring them considerable profits without having to take into account social, sanitary and environmental costs that come with this industry. We also know that company representatives and lobbyists will expect the government to limit legislative constraints in order to facilitate the expansion of the domestic market, supposedly to reduce our dependence on imported oil and gas from Alberta and British Columbia. We may admit that this objective could sound interesting, but what does it really mean? Who will benefit from this dirty and polluting industry? The answer is quite obvious: the commissioner of sustainable development of Quebec said it well: "the actions of the Ministry (of Natural Resources) do not assure that the State will get the annuities it expects". In the newspaper Le Devoir, the government was kind to the industry by including in it's last budget a royalty regime that, in certain cases, will let the industry pay as less as 2% of royalties besides cashing in on credits to reimburse exploration expenses. It is the citizen taxpayer that will pay before, while and after shale gas extraction for the tax reliefs, the royalty free 5 years, the subsidies, the noise, the dust, the polluted water, the damaged community, the degradation of public structures, the restoration of the drilling sites (if at all doable!), the wastewater and drilling waste treatment, water wells and underground water contamination, road repairs and eventually, chronic sickness. Consequently, we have to reject seeing the people of Quebec and it's natural heritage become victims of the more and more obvious principle that "we privatize the profits and socialize the damages and the losses". Confronted with all the possible consequences ahead, we must react. 1 - We have to take back control of our country: - by repeating our demand for a real moratorium, so that no experiments on site will take place as the ÉES requires. We believe that there are already enough wells that have been drilled south of the border to be able to gather data and draw required conclusions. - by doing some door to door, visiting farmers and land owners to gather their written adhesion on the "vous n'entrerez pas chez nous" form - "you're not welcome here". - by continuing protest marches against shale gas in Quebec, especially on existing well sites and those that are planned. - by demanding that the ÉES committee includes representatives of environmental and citizens' groups of Quebec. - by finding a Parti Quebecois and Quebec Solidaire MP to present a law that will protect the territory of Quebec by banning shale gas production and by repealing all exploration permits already given out. - by demanding that this government, that sells off so easily our natural resources, passes a retro-active law decreeing the buying back of the contracts with the companies at the same price they bought them, and that would be at 10 to 11 cents per hectare, and so reclaiming our territory in its entirety. Let's not forget that shale gas development was planned and decided behind closed doors between the Liberal Government and the gas industry without the people of Quebec knowing about it. The government is but the trustee, not the owner, of natural resources that belong to the people of Quebec. In the newspaper Le Devoir dated September 28, 2010, Alexander Schields, the author, wrote that 74% of people think that the government puts the interests of the gas industry before those of the population. On October 14, a Léger Marketing survey done for Équiterre showed that 76% of Quebecers believe that the government should stop all exploration activities until the studies on impacts of this type of extraction be done. On November 25, 2010, a survey published in the paper Le Soleil showed that 80% of the people surveyed don't trust the government and don't believe it is impartial. More than 40% of Quebecers don't trust the gas industry and this figure is still rising. Lucien Bouchard and gas industry representatives may continue doing public sorties, they are less and less trusted. The survey of Sénergie-Le Devoir done on February 15, 2011 says that more than 55% of Quebecers say that they are unfavourable to shale gas extraction from deep in the St-Lawrence Lowlands. It is clearly an increase of opponents for the past few months, since 37% were against it in September 2010. Will the Government do as it pleases and push aside the report, which would only prove it's amateurism and improvisation in managing it's exploration and exploitation project for shale gas in Quebec? Since his press conference, Minister Arcand went back to his office and Mrs Normandeau went back on the road. The commissioner of sustainable development, Mr Cinq-Mars, did not mince his words in his report, blaming the Ministry of Natural Resources under Mrs Nathalie Normandeau of badly managing this controversial file. He reproached her of not doing any kind of social-economic analysis for the long term, but declaring anyway that this energy file could bring $450 million per year in government coffers. Plus, the commissioner went on blaming the government for the many failures and improper management, further feeding public scepticism. He mentions the unproven connection between action priorities and territorial plans, government mechanisms for citizen participation coming after the facts, the insufficient demonstration of benefits for Quebec society, legislation that minimizes company expenses, practically nonexistent controls from the Ministry of Natural Resources on statutory works and insufficient ministries controls. We can no longer trust government representatives that have continually told us half-truths and twisted facts regarding shale gas development. Consequently: 2 - We must look at the conclusions and opinions of the BAPE report and see how the government will or will not enact on them in its legislation and regulations. It seems illogical and unreasonable to us that the government is pushing for fossil fuels at the expense of essential development of renewable sources of energy that create economic advantages in making energy conservation attractive and necessary. Biogas and biomass technologies would help eliminate domestic and industrial trash that end up right now in landfills while they could be a source of energy instead of shale gas. Consequently: 3 - We must inform the population on the potential and feasibility of alternative energy development that are cleaner, less polluting and renewable instead of fossil fuels that are dirty, polluting and non-renewable like shale gas. - by demanding not only energy conservation, but that the ÉES evaluates the advantages and inconveniences of shale gas compared to clean energy sources and renewable like bio-methane, biogas, biomass, wind, wave and photovoltaic, excluding nuclear, looking at the economic, environmental and social sides of each energy sources. - by participating or organizing an information tour on energy conservation and alternative sources of energy through all the main centres in the St-Lawrence Lowlands. We believe that it is unacceptable that no collective debate has been done on what energy choices should be part of our plans for our future. Right now, they endanger our natural resources and the adoption of sustainable energy sources. Since the BAPE report has come out, we have been hearing government representatives and gas spokespeople self-congratulating themselves. What the Bachand budget plans for the exploitation of our natural resources force us to follow very closely what this government will do in order to stop the selling off of our natural resources. We must remain critical and watchful, and reassert our demand for a real moratorium and a public debate on our energy choices for the Quebec of tomorrow, because this country is ours. This, we can only achieve together. Pierre Brazeau and Louise Langevin Citizens of Mont-Saint-Hilaire |