Sandra Finley

2006-10-11 re Acid rain in Northern Saskatchewan (Alberta tar sands)

 Climate, Water  No Responses »
Oct 112006
 

I sent out:  (2006-10-11)   Where to go? & Alta, Sask officials discuss cross-boundary oilsands pollution (Sask lakes dying)

Which prompted:

—–Original Message—–

From: Herman Boerma

Sent: October 11, 2006 10:08 PM

To: Sandra Finley

Subject: acid rain in N sask

 

fyi — this was all predicted by saskatchewan scientists approx 25 years ago

 . . . . .  continued below

==================================

A short series of emails:

2006-07-10   Wow. Peter Lougheed speaks out, Tar Sands; plus LA Times & Globe & Mail on pipeline

2006-09-12   Response from Govt to Saskatchewan Lakes dying from tarsands emissions?

2006-09-13   continued re Tar Sands and SO2 emissions, Sask lakes dying

2006-10-11   Where to go?  &  Alta, Sask officials discuss cross-boundary oilsands pollution (Sask lakes dying)

2006-10-11   re Acid rain in Northern Saskatchewan (Alberta tar sands)

==================================

continuing ….

Sandra Finley wrote:

 

Thanks, Herman. I didn’t know.

There are other examples, too.

Good scientists and no one pays attention.

Sad.  Worse than sad – tragic, really.

Sandra

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

From: Herman Boerma  Sent: October 12, 2006   To: Sandra Finley Subject: Re: acid rain in N sask

 

Don’t despair.   Things will change.

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/green/story/0,,1921454,00.html

 

= = = = = = = = = = =

Government plans climate change law  (UK)

· Controls expected to tackle CO2 emissions
· Ministers acknowledge consensus for action

Tania Branigan, political correspondent

The government signalled yesterday that it is planning legislation to tackle climate change, with a bill possibly to appear in next month’s Queen’s Speech, as it acknowledges the formidable political consensus emerging over the need for action.

The new law, likely to introduce controls on carbon dioxide emissions and an independent system to gauge progress in reducing greenhouse gases, was welcomed by opposition parties and environmental groups, though it is not expected to include binding annual targets. The environment secretary, David Miliband, told the Commons yesterday that the issue for the government “is not whether to legislate, but what form legislation should take and how it could be organised”.

He said: “We are looking carefully at the merits of introducing a carbon budget as a means of helping to deliver our goals. The only issue for the government is whether the legislation would help in the battle against climate change, support the efforts to join individual activity with business and government leadership, and link domestic and international action.

“Legislating for targets is not the same as legislating the means to achieve them, and it is the means to achieve them on which we will all be judged.”

Mr Miliband said that the facts on climate change were “more alarming … than previously thought”.

Tony Juniper, director of Friends of the Earth, said it was delighted by the news. “Tony Blair must build on the political consensus that now exists for tackling this crisis, and ensure that the UK’s contribution to climate change falls every year.”

According to FoE, 397 MPs have backed their “Big Ask” campaign, which calls for the government to commit itself to cutting the UK’s carbon dioxide emissions by at least 3% year on year.

Nasa scientists said last month that the world was the warmest it had been in the last 12,000 years, due to rapid changes in the past three decades. Their report warned that pollution caused by humans was pushing the world towards dangerous levels of climate change.

Peter Ainsworth, the shadow environment secretary, welcomed the news, adding: “We need rolling annual carbon reduction targets … an independent body to assess the science and make recommendations as that science evolves; and an annual report to Parliament to ensure that ministers and civil servants are accountable.”

 

 

 

 

 

2006-10-11 Where to go? & Alta, Sask officials discuss cross-boundary oilsands pollution (Sask lakes dying)

 Climate, Green Party, Water  No Responses »
Oct 112006
 

Scroll down to

  • Alta, Sask officials discuss cross-boundary oilsands pollution
  • INTO THE HURRICANE,  Attacking a “NEW POLITICAL FORCE”   by John Boyko

 

As far as I can determine, our network started the news about the lakes and land in the north dying from the sulfur and nitrogen coming from tar sands development (June).

 

Others pitched in with public meetings and so on.

 

The Governments had to do something,  below:   News,  October 10, 2006

EDMONTON (CP) – Alberta and Saskatchewan have begun trying to figure out how to deal with increased pollution drifting over the boundary between them from rapidly expanding oilsands projects.

 

It seems to have worked!   The emissions appear to have been brought under control.

UPDATE (Good news)   from

2018-08-06   Comment on “Estimates of exceedances of critical loads for acidification”

The exceedances are not huge, and perhaps society will smarten up and scrap the oil sands before any significant damage is done.

==================================

In the second email of this series  (2006-09-12)  crazy serendipity placed information in my hands:  the lakes in northern Saskatchewan are dying from acidification caused by downwind drift of emissions from the Tar sands.  The series is:

2006-07-10   Wow. Peter Lougheed speaks out, Tar Sands; plus LA Times & Globe & Mail on pipeline

2006-09-12   Response from Govt to Saskatchewan Lakes dying from tarsands emissions?

2006-09-13   continued re Tar Sands and SO2 emissions, Sask lakes dying

2006-10-11   Where to go?  &  Alta, Sask officials discuss cross-boundary oilsands pollution (Sask lakes dying)

2006-10-11   re Acid rain in Northern Saskatchewan (Alberta tar sands)

==================================

(continuing)

Wow!  have we ever done a good job of getting the word circulated.  Thanks so much to everyone.  You never know where, how and when word travels after you hit the “send” button. … From the start we move to

 

MIDDLE:

See Bob Weber’s article below.  Nitrogen emissions will have gone from 50 tonnes of nitrogen oxides per day in 1990 to almost 400 tonnes per day by this December. The planned expansion will send the number to 538 tonnes of nitrogen oxides per day.  That’s TONNES, and PER DAY ~~~.

Saskatchewan is recipient of 70%.  Nice, eh?

John Ibbitson writes in the Globe and Mail today about our failure on air pollution.  As you may know, the Globe and Mail invites commentary on some of its articles.  I sent in an abbreviated version of what’s happening, from the Governments’ failures to regulate the developers.

Jeffrey Simpson writes about the air pollution issue, too.  (John and Jeffrey are both regular columnists and authors.) … Now comes the

 

END:

I actually reached “the end” before “the middle”.   The middle (Bob Weber’s article below) reinforces my decision and my resolve. Here it is:

in four days’ time (this Saturday) I will find out whether I become interim leader of the Green Party of Saskatchewan.  That is an end, of sorts.  “I have had it with the traditional parties”, as Kristine has put it.   The end is also a beginning.

Here’s how it happened. Following Elizabeth May’s election to the leadership of the Green Party of Canada, I phoned the Green Party of Saskatchewan to volunteer some time to help with organizing in Saskatchewan.

Only to discover that the current leader had to step down for family reasons.  I was asked if I would run to be interim leader.

As many of you know, I attended the Campaign School put on by the Canadian Women Voters Congress a few years ago – to test my belief that I can be more effective outside a political party, rather than inside. The School is excellent, but it reinforced my belief that I personally can do more from outside, IF I network with others who are also worried about where we, as a society are headed.

From getting to know Elizabeth May, observing and working with her some, I believe that she is the one political leader who can steer us onto a better course.  But in order to achieve that potential, she simply has to have committed support.  Even then it is going to be a rough go. Too many entrenched interests are threatened.  (See below, INTO THE HURRICANE.)

And so My Belief (remain outside political parties) is true, only until it is proven to be wrong!  Time to go inside.

 

It’s funny how things work out. You think you are doing one thing. But it leads inevitably to a place where you never dreamed of going.  Yes, the decision is still mine – whether to go.  But on the other hand, how do you NOT go, especially in this case, where I have actively compaigned to get better representation by women, in elected positions?  I sincerely believed that I could do more good helping to organize, and not by being a front-liner.

You need actors for the Play, but if you don’t have behind-the-scenes organizers, the show won’t go on.  Believe me.  A short digression to illustrate.  In the 1980’s, as an at-home Mother, I joined the Dartmouth Players (Nova Scotia).  It was a test to see whether my level of mental functioning would permit me to memorize lines.  I doubted I could.

For our first show we had more people on-stage than in the audience!  After a couple of shows, and going from murderess to seducer, I became the producer in the Dartmouth Players for a few years. That was better than having someone coming to tell you that the lighting person didn’t show up, just as you were about to “enter stage left”.  It made it hard to stay focused on your lines!

I went beind-the-scenes and discovered a rich and rewarding world, working with people.  Still today I am amazed by the talent of so-called “ordinary” people, those who aren’t necessarily “credentialled” or “professional”.  If you just take the time and have the curiosity to get to know the people who cross your path, you are rewarded and delighted.

 

I join the fray in this new capacity (political party), to help organize people.  Collectively we can help to make things right, in the interests of our health and that of our grandchildren.  It doesn’t matter with which party we are affiliated.

There needs to be some of us in all the political parties if we are to achieve the spirit of working together that is required.

 

I would like to continue with “our network”, working as we have on issues of common interest.  Hopefully I can keep it separate from “Green Party” work.

My plan was to take on the leadership to help organize, and get that done before an election, at which time a more suitable candidate could be attracted. I am not good “sound-byte” material for the media!

But right now “The Plan” looks naive. The last Provincial Election was in 2003 and the governing NDP are struggling with a tenuous, maybe-one-seat majority after Kevin Yates stepped out of Cabinet.  Federally, who knows?

And we have a provincial by-election in February (MLA Ben Heppner, Martensville, passed away.)

From my viewpoint, although there are some good people in the provincial NDP and opposition (conservative) SaskParty, I cannot bring myself to vote for either party.  The Parties, their direction and leadership, are indistinguishable one from the other.

Cripes! the words sound so strange – “the Party”.   Hanging a sign around my neck that says “politician”?!  Outrageious.

But yes, I think it will be a party!  Life is certainly one big adventure.

Hold on!

=======================

BEN WEBER, CANADIAN PRESS WRITES:

 

Alta, Sask officials discuss cross-boundary oilsands pollution

Bob Weber

Canadian Press

Tuesday, October 10, 2006

 

EDMONTON (CP) – Alberta and Saskatchewan have begun trying to figure out how to deal with increased pollution drifting over the boundary between them from rapidly expanding oilsands projects.

 

“We already know that the oilsands do have quite a bit of emissions associated with the projects,” said Paul James of Saskatchewan’s environment department.

“We are receiving some acidic deposition.”

Consequently, bureaucrats from both provinces have blown the dust off a 2002 agreement on managing transboundary environmental effects, meeting several times this year after a long period of quiet.

 

“I think Alberta’s announcements with respect to the oilsands kind of re-energized things,” said James. “With the proposed expansions, we agreed it needed a more serious look.”

 

Figures released last month showed that acid rain, once considered a problem only in the eastern provinces, has begun damaging soils and lakes in Manitoba and Saskatchewan.

 

Already, two per cent of the land tested in Saskatchewan has absorbed acid precipitation exceeding its critical load, the maximum amount of acid a given area of land can tolerate before plant and animal life begins to suffer. Most of that land was in the northern forested section of the province, directly east and in the path of prevailing winds blowing from the oilsands region.

With $94 billion of oilsands expansion projects on the books, officials in both provinces are concerned about increasing emissions of acid rain-causing chemicals.

 

“The environment doesn’t end at the border,” said Randall Barrett of Alberta Environment.

Acid rain is formed primarily by emissions of suphur dioxide and various nitrogen oxides. Sulphur dioxide is increasingly being controlled through smokestack scrubbers.

 

But nitrogen oxides, which come from many smaller emitters such as trucks, are harder to clean up. They are also expected to increase faster because new projects use giant trucks in their mining process.

 

Oilsands mines emitted 50 tonnes of nitrogen oxides per day in 1990. That level had grown to 150 tonnes per day by 2003 and was expected to reach 398 tonnes per day by the end of this year.

If all planned projects are built, the oilsands could be spewing 538 tonnes of nitrogen oxides per day in the future.

 

About 70 per cent of such emissions eventually blow into Saskatchewan, says James.

“It has the potential to be quite serious in terms of acidifying lakes and ecosystems associated with lakes.”

 

It could also affect the productivity of forests in Saskatchewan’s logging industry, he said.

Companies are now being asked to consider Saskatchewan in their environmental assessments. As well, monitoring of acid deposition is expected to increase in Saskatchewan, with Alberta officials providing expertise.

 

Each province, however, will remain responsible for industrial activities in its own jurisdiction.

 

© The Canadian Press 2006

================================

 

The following is with thanks to Peter Garden (Turning the Tide Bookstore).

INTO THE HURRICANE

Attacking a “NEW POLITICAL FORCE”

by John Boyko

 

Into the Hurricane invites Canadians to consider how their political opinions and options are manipulated today by considering how they were manipulated yesterday. As Canadians fight for the future of health care, public education, and social programs that have become woven into the fabric of our political culture, when “NEW POLITICAL FORCE” leader Tommy Douglas is lauded as the Greatest Canadian, Into the Hurricane asks Canadians to consider the hurricane that destroyed the party that was attempting to bring forward the ideas that so many now consider our birthright.

Born in the Prairies, from the ravages of the depression and the horrors of the Second World War, the “NEW POLITICAL FORCE” offered a “NEW” vision and idealistic belief that Canada could rebuild itself to become better and fairer than ever before.

“THE NEW POLITICAL FORCE” grew to the point that by 1943 a national poll found that it was Canada’s most popular party.

The party had its greatest success on the provincial level. In 1943 the Ontario “NEW POLITICAL FORCE” became the official opposition and the Saskatchewan “NEW POLITICAL FORCE” actually formed the first “NEW POLITICAL FORCE” government in North America with Tommy Douglas as premier. Douglas introduced universal healthcare to Saskatchewan, a policy that was adopted by other provinces and implanted nationally by the Liberals under Lester B. Pearson.

But the success of the “NEW POLITICAL FORCE” bred fear among those on the political right including Big Business, the Progressive Conservative Party, and religious leaders who created an anti-“NEW POLITICAL FORCE” campaign that ruthlessly sought to destroy the idea and the party. In fact, at one point the Roman Catholic Church read a letter from every Catholic pulpit in Quebec that basically said that one could not be a good Catholic and a “NEW POLITICAL FORCE” at the same time.

The Communist and Liberal Parties also attacked the “NEW POLITICAL FORCE” from the left. Faced with a left-wing challenge to its power, the Liberals sought to integrate popular “NEW POLITICAL FORCE” proposals into their own political platforms.

This political flexibility allowed the Liberal Party to appear as the “safe” alternative to the perceived radicalism of the “NEW POLITICAL FORCE”, while capitalizing on the popularity of the latter party’s proposed programs by copying them.

The “NEW POLITICAL FORCE” was besieged on all sides. The attacks created a hurricane, which by 1949 had damaged the “NEW POLITICAL FORCE” to the point where prospects for electoral success seemed impossible.

 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Currently, John Boyko is working on a new non-fiction work that will explore Canadian political leadership. John is the History and Social Sciences Curriculum leader at Lakefield College School (best known as the private school attended by Prince Andrew). He has earned a Masters of Arts degree in history, was elected to municipal council, has served on a number of community boards, and lives in the small village of Lakefield, Ontario.

 

Contact: Patti McCabe, Publicist

Phone: 416-763-2133

 

2006-10-11 Iraq’s ‘Excess’ Death Toll Has Reached 655,000, Washington Post

 Lockheed Martin, War Economy (includes Cdn Census & Trials)  No Responses »
Oct 112006
 

By David Brown

Washington Post Staff Writer

Wednesday, October 11, 2006; A12 

A team of American and Iraqi epidemiologists estimates that 655,000 more people have died in Iraq since coalition forces arrived in March 2003 than would have died if the invasion had not occurred.

The estimate, produced by interviewing residents during a random sampling of households throughout the country, is far higher than ones produced by other groups, including Iraq’s government.

It is more than 20 times the estimate of 30,000 civilian deaths that President Bush gave in a speech in December. It is more than 10 times the estimate of roughly 50,000 civilian deaths made by the British-based Iraq Body Count research group.

The surveyors said they found a steady increase in mortality since the invasion, with a steeper rise in the last year that appears to reflect a worsening of violence as reported by the U.S. military, the news media and civilian groups. In the year ending in June, the team calculated Iraq’s mortality rate to be roughly four times what it was the year before the war. 

Of the total 655,000 estimated “excess deaths,” 601,000 resulted from violence and the rest from disease and other causes, according to the study.

This is about 500 unexpected violent deaths per day throughout the country.

The survey was done by Iraqi physicians and overseen by epidemiologists at Johns Hopkins University’s Bloomberg School of Public Health. The findings are being published online today by the British medical journal the Lancet.

The same group in 2004 published an estimate of roughly 100,000 deaths in the first 18 months after the invasion. That figure was much higher than expected, and was controversial. The new study estimates that about 500,000 more Iraqis, both civilian and military, have died since then — a finding likely to be equally controversial.

Both this and the earlier study are the only ones to estimate mortality in Iraq using scientific methods. The technique, called “cluster sampling,” is used to estimate mortality in famines and after natural disasters.

While acknowledging that the estimate is large, the researchers believe it is sound for numerous reasons. The recent survey got the same estimate for immediate post-invasion deaths as the early survey, which gives the researchers confidence in the methods. The great majority of deaths were also substantiated by death certificates.

“We’re very confident with the results,” said Gilbert Burnham, a Johns Hopkins physician and epidemiologist.

A Defense Department spokesman did not comment directly on the estimate.

“The Department of Defense always regrets the loss of any innocent life in Iraq or anywhere else,” said Lt. Col. Mark Ballesteros. “The coalition takes enormous precautions to prevent civilian deaths and injuries.”

He added that “it would be difficult for the U.S. to precisely determine the number of civilian deaths in Iraq as a result of insurgent activity. The Iraqi Ministry of Health would be in a better position, with all of its records, to provide more accurate information on deaths in Iraq.”

Ronald Waldman, an epidemiologist at Columbia University who worked at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for many years, called the survey method “tried and true,” and added that “this is the best estimate of mortality we have.”

This viewed was echoed by Sarah Leah Whitson, an official of Human Rights Watch in New York, who said, “We have no reason to question the findings or the accuracy” of the survey.

“I expect that people will be surprised by these figures,” she said. “I think it is very important that, rather than questioning them, people realize there is very, very little reliable data coming out of Iraq.”

The survey was conducted between May 20 and July 10 by eight Iraqi physicians organized through Mustansiriya University in Baghdad. They visited 1,849 randomly selected households that had an average of seven members each. One person in each household was asked about deaths in the 14 months before the invasion and in the period after.

The interviewers asked for death certificates 87 percent of the time; when they did, more than 90 percent of households produced certificates.

According to the survey results, Iraq’s mortality rate in the year before the invasion was 5.5 deaths per 1,000 people; in the post-invasion period it was 13.3 deaths per 1,000 people per year. The difference between these rates was used to calculate “excess deaths.”

Of the 629 deaths reported, 87 percent occurred after the invasion. A little more than 75 percent of the dead were men, with a greater male preponderance after the invasion. For violent post-invasion deaths, the male-to-female ratio was 10-to-1, with most victims between 15 and 44 years old.

Gunshot wounds caused 56 percent of violent deaths, with car bombs and other explosions causing 14 percent, according to the survey results. Of the violent deaths that occurred after the invasion, 31 percent were caused by coalition forces or airstrikes, the respondents said.

Burnham said that the estimate of Iraq’s pre-invasion death rate — 5.5 deaths per 1,000 people — found in both of the Hopkins surveys was roughly the same estimate used by the CIA and the U.S. Census Bureau. He said he believes that attests to the accuracy of his team’s results.

He thinks further evidence of the survey’s robustness is that the steepness of the upward trend it found in excess deaths in the last two years is roughly the same tendency found by other groups — even though the actual numbers differ greatly.

An independent group of researchers and biostatisticians based in England produces the Iraq Body Count. It estimates that there have been 44,000 to 49,000 civilian deaths since the invasion. An Iraqi nongovernmental organization estimated 128,000 deaths between the invasion and July 2005.

The survey cost about $50,000 and was paid for by Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Center for International Studies.

Staff researcher Madonna Lebling contributed to this report.

© 2006 The Washington Post Company

2006-09-13 Maclean’s Magazine interview, President of the Americas for Lockheed Martin Ron Covais, Meet NAFTA 2.0

 Freedom of Speech. (Remove some wrong postings from category), Lockheed Martin, War Economy (includes Cdn Census & Trials), Trade Deals, PPPs, Integration Canada-U.S.  No Responses »
Sep 132006
 

The interview with the Lockheed Martin CEO spells out how the corporations will, and do circumvent democracy.  It is important for Canadians to understand, if they are to successfully reclaim their democracy.

We’ve decided not to recommend any things that would require legislative changes because we won’t get anywhere .. The guidance from the ministers was “Tell us what we need to do and we’ll make it happen”, recalls Covais who chairs the U.S. section of the Council.. the future of North America.. not in a sweeping trade agreement on which elections will turn, but by the accretion of hundreds of incremental changes implemented by executive agencies, bureaucrats, and regulators ..

StatsCan is an “agency” of the Government, just like the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) that are under the corporate sway of the chem-biotech corporations.

Maclean’s Magazine
Sep 13, 2006
Meet NAFTA 2.0   

(I am very happy I copied the article (below).  Dec 2014,  link no longer valid:     http://www.macleans.ca/canada/national/article.jsp?content=20060911_133202_133202)

Forget sweeping trade deals.
CEOs have a new approach to integration with a long, long list of incremental changes.

LUIZA CH. SAVAGE | Sep 13, 2006

Ron Covais is in a hurry. The president of the Americas for defence giant Lockheed Martin, and a former Pentagon adviser to Dick Cheney, he’s one of a cherry-picked group of executives who were whisked to Cancún in March by the leaders of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico, and asked to come up with a plan for taking North American integration beyond NAFTA. Covais figures they’ve got less than two years of political will to make it happen. That’s when the Bush administration exits, and “The clock will stop if the Harper minority government falls or a new government is elected.” In Cancún, the executives gathered behind closed doors in a luxury hotel and vented about slow borders, duplicate regulations and the competitive threat from the European Union and Asia. “It was an intimate discussion. It was a lot of fun, there were no reporters, just a freewheeling discussion on the things that drive you crazy,” recalls Annette Verschuren, the president of Home Depot Canada, who flew in on Harper’s jet and said the PM was “very engaged.

The leaders organized the CEOs into a formal advisory body, the North American Competitiveness Council. In June, they met in Washington, with U.S. Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez, Mexican Economy Minister Sergio Garcia de Alba, and Canada’s Industry Minister Maxime Bernier, who asked for help in solving the “bottlenecks” created by laws and regulations. “The guidance from the ministers was, ‘tell us what we need to do and we’ll make it happen,’ ” recalls Covais, who chairs the U.S. section of the council, which includes 10 CEOs of big companies like Wal-Mart, General Motors and Merck. The Canadian section, chaired by Linda Hasenfratz, CEO of Guelph-based autoparts maker Linamar Corp., includes executives from such heavyweights as Bell Canada, Suncor, CN, Power Corp., and Scotiabank.

The executives have boiled their priorities down to three: the Canadian CEOs are focusing on “border crossing facilitation,” the Americans have taken on “regulatory convergence,” and the Mexicans are looking at “energy integration” in everything from electrical grids to the locating of liquid natural gas terminals. They plan to present recommendations to the ministers in October.

This is how the future of North America now promises to be written: not in a sweeping trade agreement on which elections will turn, but by the accretion of hundreds of incremental changes implemented by executive agencies, bureaucracies and regulators. “We’ve decided not to recommend any things that would require legislative changes,” says Covais. “Because we won’t get anywhere.”

In his Crystal City, Va., office, Covais keeps a black binder of proposals from American business. Some are specific: the adoption of American container sizes for baby food; a common list of “hazardous substances”; continental standards for food labelling. Others are sweeping: everyone should follow the U.S. lead of requiring federal regulators to base their regulations on the voluntary standards of private industry.

Regulatory harmonization has long been championed by the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, and was endorsed by a task force co-chaired by former Liberal industry minister John Manley in 2005. But critics fear the current approach will mean lowest-common-denominator regulations, a process dominated by U.S. interests, and an enlargement of NAFTA by stealth. “These are issues that need to be discussed, but not resolved behind closed doors with input only from big business,” says Jean-Yves Lefort, trade campaigner for the Council of Canadians.

Bernier told Maclean’s he’s pleased so far. “We have many of Canada’s key business leaders at the table. They are working hard to represent the interests of Canadian business and all Canadians.” Their recommendations will be considered along with “other advice and input,” he said, as the three governments move forward on the “Security and Prosperity Partnership” launched in 2005.

Still others complain the approach is too timid. Robert Pastor, director of the Center for North American Studies at American University in Washington, said the leaders should launch broad consultations on major moves, like a common external tariff and a continental transportation network. “None of these big issues are being discussed. Instead we have a CEO council that is looking at the issue one regulation at a time,” he said. But the CEOs say they have a strategy. “Let’s get some low-hanging fruit to give the thing some momentum,” says Hasenfratz. “But let’s not lose sight of bigger-ticket items.”

Read Luiza Ch. Savage’s weblog,  (Link no longer valid)    Savage Washington

2006-09-13 Water: continued re Tar Sands and SO2 emissions, Sask lakes dying

 Climate, Water  No Responses »
Sep 132006
 

Yesterday (Sept 12) you received email,   Response from Govt to Saskatchewan Lakes dying from tarsands emissions?  (2006-09-12)

CBC Radio (Saskatchewan) is breaking the story today.   I’ve sent it to other media as well.

The full text of the Acid Rain report is at (Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment) http://www.ccme.ca/assets/pdf/critical_loads_mb_sk_1372_web.pdf    

“This year (2006) the Acid Rain Task Group (ARTG), a joint federal multi stakeholder working group received a contracted report “Calculating Critical Loads …” It indicates that certain areas of the province (Saskatchewan) are presently receiving acidifying emissions that exceed the critial loads; …”.

==================================

This is third in a short series:

2006-07-10   Wow. Peter Lougheed speaks out, Tar Sands; plus LA Times & Globe & Mail on pipeline

2006-09-12   Response from Govt to Saskatchewan Lakes dying from tarsands emissions?

2006-09-13   continued re Tar Sands and SO2 emissions, Sask lakes dying

2006-10-11   Where to go?  &  Alta, Sask officials discuss cross-boundary oilsands pollution (Sask lakes dying)

2006-10-11   re Acid rain in Northern Saskatchewan (Alberta tar sands)

==================================

MORE, that can easily be done by us:

 

(1) Circulate notice of the Public Meetings in Alberta, on the Tar Sands.

They start today. Written submissions are accepted, too. Detailed information below.

(2) If you know someone who owns a cottage at a lake in northern Saskatchewan, let them know. Acid rain is invisible. Lakes die slowly and imperceptibly. They, and their Cottage Owners Association should be aware of this information. (You will be astounded by the number of Albertans who own property on Saskatchewan’s northern lakes).

(3) More important than cottage owners are the native people and others who live in northern Saskatchewan. Many are dependent upon the lakes and rivers. Much of their groceries come from the land, not from the grocery store. They should be aware that acidifying emissions from the Tar Sands exceed the critial loads.

(4) I would think that people in Ft McMurray might also like to know? Acid rain (sulphur dioxide and nitrous oxide) affects more than lakes. It affects forest growth and human health.

(5) Media people in Alberta should be informed.

(6) You will have ideas of your own.

===============================

PUBLIC MEETINGS IN ALBERTA START TODAY, SEPT 13, UNTIL OCT 4

Thanks to Susan Howatt from the Council of Canadians:

Sent: Friday, September 01, 2006 2:29 PM

Subject: Alberta Oil Sands Consultation Hearings

While these hearings are about the oil sands, it is well known that the oil sands are a very thirsty operation. The petrochemical industry freely depletes water at an astonishing rate and/or returns it in a polluted state to the environment.

The Alberta Government has released the dates and times of the Oil Sands Consultation Hearings. They are at:

Bonnyville Agriplex Sept. 13 11:00 am – 9:00 pm

Peace River Travellers Motor Hotel Sept. 14 11:00 am – 9:00 pm

Fort McMurray MacDonald Island Pavillion Sept. 18-19 11:00 am – 9:00 pm

Edmonton Holiday Inn Express Sept. 25-26 11:00 am – 9:00 pm

Calgary MacEwan Conference Centre Sept. 27-28 11:00 am – 9:00 pm

Wabasca TBA Oct. 2 TBA

Fort Chipewyan TBA Oct. 4 TBA

You can go to:  http://www.gov.ab.ca/acn/200608/2043864FA271E-F909-56EC-AA0C44163E40056E.html  for the news release and links to the Oilsands Consultations website.

If you wish to sumbit a document in writing, you can mail it to:

Oil Sands Consultations

Alberta Department of Energy

North Petroleum Plaza

7th Floor, 9945-108 Street

Edmonton, Alberta

T5K 2G6

Or you can e-mail it to: oilsandsconsultations@gov.ab.ca

 

All written submissions must be in by October 4, 2006.

I have registered to speak in Edmonton on Sept. 26 at 3:00 PM. Oral presentations can be no longer than 15 minutes. The format is as follows:

 

Open house from 11:00 am to 1:00 pm – hearings from 1:00 pm – 5:00 pm;

5:00 – 7:00 is a break and open house, 7:00 – 8:00 PM are presentations and an open house from 8:00 – 9:00 PM.

 

2006-09-12 Water: Response from Govt to “Saskatchewan Lakes dying from tarsands emissions? “

 Climate, Resource depletion (water in USA), Water  No Responses »
Sep 122006
 

 

“This year (2006) the Acid Rain Task Group (ARTG), a joint federal multi stakeholder working group received a contracted report “Calculating Critical Loads …” It indicates that certain areas of the province (Saskatchewan) are presently receiving acidifying emissions that exceed the critial loads; …”

 ———————-

UPDATE (Good news!).  Please go to:

2018-08-06   Comment on “Estimates of exceedances of critical loads for acidification”, includes connection tar sands – nuclear – university.

The exceedances are not huge, and perhaps society will smarten up and scrap the oil sands before any significant damage is done.

 ———————-

I came to know of the acid rain effects from the Athabasca Tar Sands from a scientist who sat at the same table as myself, at the FSIN (Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations) Water Summit in June. The scientist (Stan Shewchuk) works at the Saskatchewan Research Council (SRC).  I like to converse – questions.  He tells me (Lord, why not someone else?!) that the lakes on the Saskatchewan side of the border are dying from the emissions from Tar Sands development. He told me calmly, matter-of-factly.  Good Gawd.   (Sulfur and nitrogen emissions are carried by the prevailing winds from the northwest and fall on northern Saskatchewan.  Think of acid rain.)   Northern Saskatchewan is Canadian Shield, boreal forest, rocks, lakes, rivers, . . .

This is news to me. I didn’t say much.  Too stunned and confused.  And by the way, the lakes were pristine when he began monitoring in the early 1980s.

 

The next evening I stopped in at the Water Conference put on by the Partners for the Sask River Basin. And entered into an enjoyable conversation with a Sask Government official from the Water Authority (Murray Bryck). Turns out we both have a connection through … and so on.   And on until, guess what, the lakes in northern Saskatchewan are suffering from acid rain from the Tar Sands.  (I asked him whether he happened to know anything about this thing I’d been told;  he said (again quite calmly),  “Oh yes.  That’s the case.”   . . .   What is this?!  Two reliable sources. . . .  What to do?        (continued below)

==================================

This is second in a  series:

2006-07-10   Wow. Peter Lougheed (former Premier of Alberta)  speaks out, Tar Sands; plus LA Times & Globe & Mail on pipeline

***  2006-09-12   Response from Govt to Saskatchewan Lakes dying from tarsands emissions?

2006-09-13   continued re Tar Sands and SO2 emissions, Sask lakes dying

2006-10-11   Alta, Sask officials discuss cross-boundary oilsands pollution (Sask lakes dying)

2006-10-11   re Acid rain in Northern Saskatchewan (Alberta tar sands)

= = = = = = = = = = = = =  =

THE PROBLEM  is that “regulation”, such as it is, is done at the level of the individual smokestack.   CUMULATIVE impact is not considered.  So effectively, there is no regulation to protect against acidification;  the Acid Rain treaties with the U.S.A. to reverse the acidification (destruction) of the Great Lakes do not apply on Indian lands (northern Saskatchewan).

We have participated in the stories – – ALL of these are of indigenous people whose health and means of livelihood have been tragically destroyed by the oil and gas (petroleum) industry.  The acidification of northern Saskatchewan, with a deliberately-broken regulatory system, in service to Suncor et al, is just another chapter in the making:

 

 

 

 

==================================

(What to do?   continued)

Elaine Hughes sent an enquiry to the Government.  Part of the response is in the pdf file,  (today, June 10, 2015.  Having trouble getting the PDF to upload).

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

The following sets things out.

Update on email,   2006-07-10  Wow. Peter Lougheed speaks out, Tar Sands; plus LA Times & Globe & Mail on pipeline

EXCERPT

“If you look at the Tar Sands example, the Government of Alberta is collecting royalties of ONE percent versus typical royalty rates of up to 30 percent. With no costing of “external costs”. The Athabasca River is being depleted, contaminated water is going into vast holding lakes; the corporations AREN’T PAYING A CENT FOR THE WATER. The lakes across the border in Saskatchewan are dying because of the acid rain created by the sulfur and nitrgen emissions.”

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

The next day,  SENT SEPT 11: (I was not feeling too diplomatic)

To: Ambrose, R. Min. Envir; Min@dfo-mpo.gc.ca; Adele Hurley; Elaine Hughes

Cc: Sask Environmental Society; Sask Eco Network; Nature Sask; Nature Canada; Forbes,D. Min. Water; Ducks Unlimited Canada; Dr. David Schindler; Peter Prebble, MLA; Borgerson, L. MLA; Cdn. Wildlife Federation; Council of Canadians; Cline,E.Min.IR; Nilson,J. Min.Env.

 

I would like to draw to attention:

The last of the pdf attachments (514 kb) on the original email from John Nilson, Minister of Environment, states:

“This year (2006) the Acid Rain Task Group (ARTG), a joint federal multi stakeholder working group received a contracted report “Calculating Critical Loads …” It indicates that certain areas of the province (Saskatchewan) are presently receiving acidifying emissions that exceed the critical loads; …” (from the Tar Sands). 

Shall once again a Government in Canada be taken to court for its failure to enforce regulations?

Also from the pdf file:   “Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting has drafted the … study design.”    I guess we really don’t need the Government.

Have we not learned enough about the deleterious effects of acid rain from the experience of Ontario, N.S. and N.B.?  Why must it be repeated in Saskatchewan?   While everyone sits on their hands?

Canada wishes to put pressure on the U.S. to reduce its so2 emissions.  How hypocritical can we get?

 

http://www.ec.gc.ca/acidrain/towards_e.html

III   “Keeping clean areas clean” policy 

Ministers should endorse the “keeping clean areas clean” policy, which states:

In areas where an environmental cushion exists because pollution (i.e., ambient air levels or deposition) is below environmental limits, the consumption of this cushion will be minimized and opportunities for improvement will be sought. 

Each province should develop the most appropriate approach to formally implement the policy in its jurisdiction by 2000. “

 

The reason for keeping the air clean is because it has been found that the acidified lakes are “stubborn“;  it has proven to be difficult to return them to health. It is not only the lakes, but also the forests (and human health) that are affected by these emissions.

The failure to enforce regulations is criminal behaviour, in my opinion.

Sandra Finley

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

—–Original Message—–

From: Elaine Hughes

Sent: September 11, 2006

To: Ambrose, R. Min. Envir; Min@dfo-mpo.gc.ca

Cc: Sask Environmental Society; Sask Eco Network; Nature Sask; Nature Canada; Forbes,D. Min. Water; Ducks Unlimited Canada; Dr. David Schindler; Peter Prebble, MLA; Borgerson, L. MLA; Cdn. Wildlife Federation; Council of Canadians; Cline,E.Min.IR; Nilson,J. Min.Env.

 

Subject: Saskatchewan Lakes dying from tarsands emissions?

 

The Honourable Loyola Hearn, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans

Rona Ambrose, Minister of the Environment

 

Attached is Saskatchewan Environment Minister Nilson’s reply to my query of June 29, 2006, pdf files 01 through 04 regarding Alberta’s tarsands.

It’s very unfortunate (and dangerous) that 1981 information is used as credible data…everything about our environment has changed enormously in 25 years!!!

Pollution doesn’t recognize borders; polluters (all of which have names and addresses) must be held accountable for the damage they cause other natural systems and people. Monitoring isn’t good enough …this issue needs urgent attention and action.

….then there are Saskatchewan’s own tarsands in the beautiful Clearwater River Provincial Park, waiting to join the frenzy!

 

Elaine Hughes

Archerwill, SK

===========================================

—– Original Message —–

From: Elaine Hughes

To: Nilson,J. Min.Env.

Cc: Dale Hjertaas ; Sask Environmental Society ; Sask Eco Network ; Peter Prebble, MLA ; Forbes,D. Min. Water ; Ducks Unlimited Canada ; Dr. David Schindler ; Nature Sask

Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 12:10 PM

Subject: Saskatchewan Lakes dying from tarsands emissions?

 

Hello, Mr. Nilson:

Would you send me any info the Saskatchewan Watershed Authority has on the extent of the damage being done to our lakes in northern Saskatchewan from the sulphur dioxide emissions from Fort McMurray’s tarsands, please.

Elaine

===========================

—–Original Message—–

From: Sandra Finley

Sent: 29-Jun-06 17:58

To: pfalvo@sierralegal.org

Cc: Elaine. CWVC Hughes

Subject: Saskatchewan Lakes dying from tarsands emissions

 

Hi Paul,

In case it might be of use to you:

from casual conversation with top Policy man in the Sask Watershed Authority, and reinforced through another casual conversation with a research scientist from the Sask Research Council:

there is enough chemical drift (sulphur and nitrogen) from the Tar Sands coming into Saskatchewan that the northern lakes on this side of the border are, quote, “dying” from acid rain.

I don’t think that people in Sask, in general, are being told.

And there are billion dollar expansions of the Tar Sands, as you know, in the works.

It was explained that the effect of the acid rain isn’t felt on the Alberta side because the Canadian Shield (Sask side) diagonals across Sask. When it is approximately at the border with Alta, it runs almost straight north.

So, on this side lake bottoms are rock. On Alta side they are dirt. In the dirt-bottomed lakes, the acid rain is neutralized by the carbonate layer at the bottom of the lake. Nothing in the rock bottom lakes (sask) to perform that function, hence the “dying”.

Elaine Hughes has requested documentation from the Govt. (Appended)

I am sure that Elaine will forward the Govt response to you, in case it might be of benefit.

Sierra Legal is my favorite organization.

Congratulations to you, on the great work that you do.

Sandra Finley

Saskatoon

 

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

THE SERIES:

2006-07-10   Wow. Peter Lougheed speaks out, Tar Sands; plus LA Times & Globe & Mail on pipeline

2006-09-12   Response from Govt to Saskatchewan Lakes dying from tarsands emissions?

2006-09-13   continued re Tar Sands and SO2 emissions, Sask lakes dying

2006-10-11   Where to go?  &  Alta, Sask officials discuss cross-boundary oilsands pollution (Sask lakes dying)

2006-10-11   re Acid rain in Northern Saskatchewan (Alberta tar sands)

2006-08-29 Ex-Lockheed Worker Takes Concerns Over Coast Guard Ships to the Web

 Lockheed Martin, War Economy (includes Cdn Census & Trials)  No Responses »
Aug 292006
 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/28/AR2006082801293.html

washingtonpost.com > Business

On YouTube, Charges of Security Flaws

Ex-Lockheed Worker Takes Concerns Over Coast Guard Ships to the Web

 

The 41-year-old Lockheed Martin engineer had complained to his bosses. He had told his story to government investigators. He had called congressmen.

By Griff Witte

Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, August 29, 2006�
 
Michael De Kort was frustrated.

But when no one seemed to be stepping up to correct what he saw as critical security flaws in a fleet of refurbished Coast Guard patrol boats, De Kort did just about the only thing left he could think of to get action: He made a video and posted it on YouTube.com.

“What I am going to tell you is going to seem preposterous,” De Kort solemnly tells viewers near the outset of the 10-minute clip. Posted three weeks ago, the video describes what De Kort says are blind spots in the ship’s security cameras, equipment that malfunctions in cold weather and other problems. “It may be very hard for you to believe that our government and the largest defense contractor in the world [are] capable of such alarming incompetence and can make ethical compromises as glaring as what I am going to describe.” In response to De Kort’s charges, a Coast Guard spokeswoman said the service has “taken the appropriate level of action.” A spokeswoman for the contractors said the allegations were without merit.

A Web site normally reserved for goofy home-movie outtakes and Paris Hilton parodies may seem an odd place to blow the whistle on potential national security lapses that require complex technical explanations. But receiving millions of hits a day and carrying the intimacy of video, YouTube.com and other sites have become an alluring venue for insiders like De Kort who want to go directly to the public when they think no one within the system is listening.

“This is an excellent example of the democratization of the media, where everyone has access to the printing press of the 21st century,” said Dina Kaplan, co-founder of Blip.tv, a site that hosts grass-roots television programming.

Kaplan, like others, was hard-pressed to think of another video like De Kort’s. “We have some people that come to mind that like to complain about government conspiracies,” she said. “But in terms of something truly substantive and credible, nothing springs to mind.”

De Kort knew his strategy for raising concerns about communications and surveillance systems on a 123-foot Coast Guard patrol boat was unorthodox. That was the point.

“My thought was, ‘What could I do that would be novel enough that it draws attention to itself, and through drawing attention to itself, something gets done?’ ” De Kort said in an interview from his home in Colorado. He is unemployed after being laid off by Lockheed Martin days after he posted the video. Lockheed said that the video did not influence the decision to lay off De Kort and that he had had been notified earlier this year that he would be out of a job.

As of late yesterday, his video had been viewed more than 8,000 times. That is low by YouTube standards, where a 42-second clip of a cat on a wheel received more than 800,000 views. But it is higher than might be expected for a video that features nothing more than a bearded, middle-age engineer talking into a camera and periodically glancing down at his prepared text.

The video also has caught the eye of people in high places. De Kort’s video has been covered by defense trade magazines, and yesterday, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), ranking Democrat on the Homeland Security Committee, wrote a letter to the Coast Guard asking for an answer to De Kort’s “extremely distressing” allegations.

“I want to make sure that the product we paid for is a product that does not jeopardize our men and women in service,” Thompson said.

The Department of Homeland Security’s inspector general’s office had launched an investigation into De Kort’s allegations before the video was released, and spokeswoman Tamara Faulkner said that inquiry should be completed in the next few months. Although De Kort said he believed the Coast Guard was not cooperating, Faulkner said she did not know of any problems.

Both Lockheed Martin and the Coast Guard have said the ship is safe. Eight of the cutters are now in use, and all were converted from obsolete ships as part of the Coast Guard’s $24 billion Deepwater program to rehabilitate ships.

“We’ve been aware of [De Kort’s] concerns for some time,” said Mary Elder, spokeswoman for the program. “In each case we’ve reviewed them and taken the appropriate level of action. The Coast Guard takes seriously any concerns related to safety and national security.”

Margaret Mitchell-Jones, spokeswoman for the consortium between Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman that runs Deepwater, said Lockheed Martin had investigated and “found the accusations to be without merit.”

“Anybody with a webcam and something to say, regardless of whether it’s true or not, can say it on YouTube,” she said, adding that the company would not ask the site to take the video down.

Another Lockheed Martin spokeswoman confirmed that De Kort had worked for the company and had been an engineer on the Deepwater project.

De Kort said he realized within about a month of beginning work on the ship that the project had serious flaws. Among them, he said, was that the ship’s surveillance system had blind spots that exposed crew members to the possibility of attack. He also said that the ship’s supposedly secure communications system was susceptible to eavesdropping and that some of its equipment will not work in extreme cold despite a requirement that everything function at minus 40 degrees.

De Kort said he tried to alert the chain of command at the Coast Guard and at Lockheed about the problems but was rebuffed by supervisors who told him to keep quiet because the program was behind schedule and over budget. De Kort was eventually transferred off the project, and he was laid off earlier this month. A company spokeswoman said he was laid off for financial reasons, but De Kort insists it was in retaliation for his complaints.

“The formal systems that whistle-blowers are expected to use have failed. That’s why you’re seeing people be creative like this,” said Danielle Brian, executive director of the Project on Government Oversight. “This is a tremendous way for someone brave enough to do it to say something directly and not have to go through a filter.”

Other watchdog groups were less impressed.

Patrick Burns, spokesman for Taxpayers Against Fraud, said suing for fraud is ultimately a lot more effective than being “the serious guy in a room full of clowns.”

“I recommend buttoning up your lip, Xeroxing paper and filing a case,” Burns said.

2006-08-31 USA has knowingly been shipping banned GM rice to Great Britain. US rice farmers sue Bayer CropScience over GM rice.

 Food, Genetically Modified  No Responses »
Aug 272006
 

(UPDATE:  the outcome of the court case reported below:

“In December 2009 Bayer was sentenced to pay about $2 million for losses sustained by two US farmers. The verdict of the federal court in St. Louis is seen as a test run for up to 3000 cases brought by other rice farmers in the US.”)

CONTENTS

(1)  27 AUGUST, USA HAS KNOWINGLY BEEN SHIPPING BANNED RICE TO GREAT BRITAIN

(2)  28 AUGUST, US RICE FARMERS SUE BAYER CROPSCIENCE OVER GM RICE

========================

(1)  27 AUGUST, USA HAS KNOWINGLY BEEN SHIPPING BANNED RICE TO GREAT BRITAIN

Rice contaminated by GM has been on sale for months.  US has been knowingly shipping banned food here all year. But only now do they tell us

By Geoffrey Lean, Environment Editor

Independent on Sunday, 27 August 2006

(Link no longer valid)

Britons have unwittingly been eating banned GM rice imported from the United States for months, if not years, food safety experts fear.

Imports of the rice were stopped by the European Commission (EC) on Thursday. But investigations in the US show that it has long been “wide-spread” in grain destined to be shipped overseas.

It was first discovered in January that the banned crop, which has never received safety clearance, was contaminating export stocks of long-grain rice. But it was not until nine days ago that the US government informed importing countries.

European governments are furious that the Bush administration delayed warning them. And the row threatens ministers’ plans for growing GM crops in Britain.

The unauthorised rice, codenamed LLRICE601, was developed by Bayer CropScience to tolerate weedkiller. It was tested on US farms between 1998 and 2001, but the company decided not to market it and never submitted it for official approval.

In January, it was found to have contaminated rice from Arkansas-based Riceland, the world’s largest miller and marketer, which is responsible for one-third of the entire US crop.

In May, Riceland tested samples from “several storage locations”, finding the contamination in a “significant” number. It concluded, in an official statement, that it was “geographically dispersed and random” throughout its rice-growing area.

Bayer officially notified the US government on 31 July. But it was a further 18 days before the Bush administration told importers, informing EU countries such as Britain just an hour before holding a press conference to make details of the contamination public.

On Thursday, the EC prohibited any shipments from the US unless they could be proved to be free of the banned rice. But it remains concerned that Britons and other Europeans may have been eating it for months, possibly years.

Britain has imported more than 42,000 tons of long-grain rice from the US since January, when the problem was first discovered. No one knows how much of this was contaminated, but the Food Standards Agency is planning to carry out tests on rice that has yet to be sold to the public.

The Arkansas government suspects that the crisis began when pollen from the rice tested on US farms spread to contaminate conventional crops. This would mean that it has been present – and presumably been exported – at least since 2001, when the trials stopped.

Richard Bell, the state’s agriculture secretary, admits that the contamination is “widespread” and predicts it will show up again in this year’s crop when it is harvested.

The Bush administration says that “there are no human health, food safety or environmental concerns associated with this rice”. But the EC’s Health and Consumer Protection Commissioner, Markos Kyprianou, says it must not be allowed to enter the food chain.

Bayer, which had no part in exporting the contaminated rice, says it is “co-operating closely” with the US authorities. But it says that while the matter is being investigated, it cannot say when it first knew of the problem.

===================================

(2)  28 AUGUST, US RICE FARMERS SUE BAYER CROPSCIENCE OVER GM RICE

US rice farmers sue Bayer CropScience over GM rice

REUTERS, 28 Aug 2006

http://today.reuters.com/News/CrisesArticle.aspx?storyId=N8S372113

edited

Rice farmers in Arkansas, Missouri, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas and California have sued Bayer CropScience, alleging its genetically modified rice has contaminated their crop, attorneys for the farmers said Monday.

The lawsuit was filed Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas in Little Rock, law firm Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll said in a statement.

The farmers alleged that the unit of Germany’s Bayer AG failed to prevent its genetically modified rice, which has not been approved for human consumption, from entering the food chain.

As a result, they said, Japan and the European Union have placed strict limits on U.S. rice imports and U.S. rice prices have dropped dramatically.

The genetically engineered long grain rice has a protein known as LibertyLink, which allows the crop to withstand applications of an herbicide used to kill weeds.

2006-08-16 Complaint, rebuttal to dismissal by Sask Human Rights Commission (Malcolm, psychotropic drugs)

 Freedom of Speech. (Remove some wrong postings from category), Health, Take back the University  No Responses »
Aug 162006
 

August 16, 2006 

TO:

Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal

P.O. Box 24005

Saskatoon, SK

S7K 8B4

 CC:

(1)    Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission

Chief Commissioner

8th Floor, Sturdy Stone Bldg

122 – 3rd Avenue North

Saskatoon, SK  S7K 2H6

 (2)    Donna Malcolm

Room 122 Ellis Hall

Royal University Hospital

103 Hospital Dr

Saskatoon, SK  S7N 0W8

FROM:

Sandra Finley

656 Saskatchewan Crescent East

Saskatoon, SK S7N 0L1

306 373  8078

sabest1_AT_sasktel.net                                                                        Reference:         Your file # 85-168

Dear Members of the Tribunal,

 Further in my appeal of the decision by the Human Rights Commission to dismiss my case: 

As I understand, the SHRC ascertained, under item 27.1 of The Saskatchewan Human Rights Code, page 15, (2) (f)  “There is no reasonable likelihood that an investigation will reveal evidence of a contravention of this Act “.  The dismissal is stated in their letter of July 12th.

You received full documentation of the case in my letter to you, June 6th, following verbal dismissal by the SHRC.   For the information of the parties:  I used the same documentation as submitted to the College of Physicians and Surgeons.  It includes the input from Donna Malcolm and my response.

You will have on file my letter of August 10th, which enclosed a copy of the July 12th letter of dismissal from the SHRC, because I did not receive confirmation from them that they had forwarded their letter to you. 

I appeal to you under The Saskatchewan Human Rights Code, page 14.  There it says

  1. S-24.1

Duties of commission 

25    The commission shall:

 (a)   forward the principle that every person is free and equal in dignity and rights without regard to . . . disability

 (g)   forward the principle that cultural diversity is a basic human right and fundamental value. 

The doctor, Donna Malcolm, deemed that I was disabled (manic, incapable of making decisions that were in my best interests).  She saw only one culture, the drug culture, and imposed that on me.  I was forcibly confined from Saturday until Friday – 7 days.   Drugs were put into my body forcibly and without my consent.  One of the drugs caused complete memory loss of things I was doing and saying, and of things that were being done to me.  It was an unjustified violation of my person and my civil rights.

 “Disability” is defined by the Act, page 3, item 2 (1), (d.1)  as 

“  any degree of physical disability, infirmity, …”

It includes:

(ii)              (C)  “a mental disorder”.

 (i.1) defines “mental disorder” as “a disorder of thought, perception, feelings, or behaviour that impairs a person’s:                                   

(i)               judgment;

(ii)              capacity to recognize reality;

(iii)            ability to associate with others;

(iv)            ability to meet the ordinary demands of life.

In order to legally drug and lock me up, Donna Malcolm has to show that those 4 conditions were present.

 The documentation I submitted makes it clear that I exhibited the 4 traits and was not therefore disabled by a mental disorder. 

I do not see anywhere in the Act where it states that medical personnel have an exemption whereby the Act does not apply to them.   Hence I challenge the decision of the SHRC to dismiss my case on the basis –  “… it is not within the jurisdiction of the Code to interfere with diagnostic and treatment decisions made by medical personnel.”

I understand that the possibility exists that the evolution of common law might have provided this interpretation to the Code.   But even then there will be limits. 

 In my communication of June 6th I explained the difficulty in finding a lawyer who would touch a case that involves questioning of the medical profession, given the costs that would be incurred and the time (years) it would take.

 I would familiarize myself with the common law prior to a hearing by the Human Rights Tribunal, in order to know whether it is actually outside the jurisdiction of the Code to deal with matters where abuse by medical personnel is the question.

 Thank-you for your consideration.

 Yours truly,

 Sandra Finley

2006-08-11 Public input to Health District

 Health  No Responses »
Aug 112006
 

Darn! that I didn’t get this to you earlier.  Sorry it’s not edited down.  Although Saskatoon-based, the issues are national.

TAKE ADVANTAGE OF REQUEST FOR PUBLIC INPUT

BACKGROUND:

–  CEO’s of the largest Health Districts in Saskatchewan are paid in excess of $250,000 plus perks.  (About 5 years ago the Regina Health District paid $256,000.)  Deputy Ministers in the Provincial Govt are paid less than half this amount, an indication that the Health District salaries are …. (you fill in the blank).

–  A change to the Health Boards got rid of all the elected positions.  The Boards are made up entirely of Government appointees.

–  The CEO of the Saskatoon Health District announced on a Friday that he was leaving to pursue independent work.

–  On the Monday it was announced that he was under contract to the Saskatoon Health District to help the new, Acting-CEO (his replacement).
We paid him $160,000 for the contract; and simultaneously pay the new CEO.

There was a subsequent newspaper report that his wife got a job at the Saskatoon NDP Caucus office (the NDP is in power), at a salary of $95,000.

–  A year ago Maura Davies was hired, the new CEO of the Saskatoon Health District.  (She replaced the Acting-CEO.) I don’t know her salary.

–  On July 14th, 2006 I sent an email to Maura (it was circulated in our network – see below)  “Re: re-structuring and re-staffing plans for the Saskatoon Health Region, … There is no mention of participation from the citizens who are served by the Health Region.”

–  PLEASE READ MAURA’S INPUT.  She writes:  “I hope that you (INSERT: the public) will take the time to share your views …”

–  Last month 3 vice-presidents were gotten rid of.

–  This week I inquired:  “Dear Maura,

In what salary range are the new vice-presidents being recruited?”.  She’s on holidays and I haven’t received a call-back from the VP of Human Resources (Brian Morgan 655-3309) who would know the answer.  So I can’t tell the salary range to you right now.

–  I encourage everyone who is concerned about the Medicare System, for whatever reason, to provide input to Maura.

(Link no longer valid http://www.saskatoonhealthregion.ca/about_us/strategic_home.htm)

Many people from around the Province come to Saskatoon for treatment.  This is for you, too.  Taxes will continue upward for everyone.

–  excerpt from newspaper:  “Davies is eager to forge relationships with other facilities on the university campus, such as the  Canadian Light Source (Synchrotron) and Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization.” (VIDO)

(Old-timers in our network may remember mention of the movie “The Constant Gardener”.  It is based on a novel by le Carre about the scrupulous quest by the drug companies to develop the next treatment for tuberculosis (not fiction). TB strains resistant to the existing drugs are proliferating and TB is on the rise, especially in native communities. I know it all too well, because I contracted TB last year (as old-timers in our network know).

I get a little testy when I read about vaccines and infections.  We in Canada continue to undermine the health of people around the world through our excessive consumerism.  Corporations move their operations to other countries where labour is cheap and environmental regulation is worse than it is here.  The pollutants weaken immune systems, opening people up to disease.  And then we (the Saskatoon Health District?) put our money into the development of vaccines (which the drug companies “partner” with us to develop?).  We know that those vaccines will never be  affordable to children in countries made “poor” by our buying behaviours, by our economic system.

And can we ever develop a vaccine for every disease (weakened immune system) that is associated with the poisons we put into the environment?  We can export the pollution by putting the manufacturing plants in other countries, or so we think.  But take just one poison that comes out of some industrial activity:   mercury.  It remains air-borne for over a year before coming down in rainwater and into the food chain – long enough to come from China to Canada.

Exactly who is the “Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization” and what are the terms of the relationship with them to be?

Anyway – you get the gist:  the dollars need to go into active “remove the causes” of disease.  Take a stand on transfatty acids.  Take a stand on the removal of pesticides.  Take a stand: get the coca-cola and junk foods out of the hospitals.  Take a stand: be creative.

We spend more and more money on Medicare.  Things continue to get worse instead of better, which is an indication to me that the money isn’t being spent where it is needed.  It is a sign that CHANGE is required.

–  I haven’t taken a sufficiently thorough look at the Saskatoon Health District “Vision” to be able to say “there is nothing about prevention, or “remove the cause” versus the “pop a pill” approach.  If it’s an issue, it’s up to us to make it known.

I hope to get a couple of submissions written up, one to do with ” But I keep thinking of CEO’s of little old health districts in Sask getting $256,000 plus perks.  And the City Manager for Regina getting, in the early 1990’s, $160,000 plus perks when the City Manager for the Hfx-Dartmouth Metropolitan Area was receiving less than that, for a much more challenging and larger responsibilty (amalgamation of and integration of services for 4 different municipal governments).

This society is supposed to be built on the premise of equality.  I don’t think you can have equality when you start paying salaries at a level that creates an elite.  And I don’t doubt for a minute but that we can get extremely good people for less than the inflated figures.  We’re brain-washed into thinking we can’t.”.

I think of “Hayes and Associates”, a company that comes in and studies remuneration packages for “the management team” and then makes recommendations that go to the Board for approval.  They came to the company I worked at, in the 1970’s.  Inevitably the executives receive more money after Hayes has been in.  I went through the Calgary airport in 1999.  The front page article announced that the CEO of the Calgary Health District is paid $750,000 plus perks (7 years ago).

The way that the salaries for CEO’s in Saskatchewan become inflated, to the point where we are creating elites, is that a “management consulting company” like Hayes will be hired to come in and make recommendations.  They will use the Calgary CEO’s salary in the formula, among other factors.  If we don’t like what the Board (all appointed by the Govt) is doing with the Health District, which is ours and our responsibility) then it is up to us to tell them so.  The way we are going is not sustainable.  Medicare is eating up budgets that should be used for education.

I have to laugh. People in Saskatchewan think we have this egalitarian society.  Meanwhile WE OURSELVES actively participate in the creation of a moneyed elite in our institutions, in healthcare no less, through our failure to ask questions.  Someplace along the line we lost our backbone.

Deputy Ministers of entire departments of the Provincial Government earn less than HALF of what the CEO’s of some Health Districts are paid.  But now, of course, if the CEO’s of the Health Districts are being paid that much, the salaries of Deputy Ministers will have to increase.  Or so the reasoning goes.

As we found out earlier, when trying to get the Regina Health District to speak up about the need to stop the use of pesticides (for non-essential purposes), the Health Districts (whose Boards are appointed by the Government) will do the minimum possible, and offer “It is the responsibility of the Provincial Government.”.  The Provincial Government said, on one hand “It is the responsibility of the Federal Government” and “It is the responsibility of the Health District”.

My interpretation is that large salaries further entrench the status quo.

We can’t get change where we need it because big houses, travel, life-style, and mortgages go along with large salaries.  The recipients are too dependent on their pay-cheques to speak out and take a stand on anything.

We all have dependencies.
So I can understand to some extent.
However, the system (institution) as presently constructed,  is creating more and more healthcare problems because it seeks technological, instead of human and remove-the-cause-of-the-disease kind of answers.

The open invitation to us, to provide our input to the Health District, to tell the stories of what has happened under the current regime, is a huge opportunity to exert pressure for change.

Cheers!

===========================

thanks, Maura.

Appreciated.

/Sandra

—–Original Message—–

From: Davies, Maura SktnHR

[mailto:Maura.Davies  AT  saskatoonhealthregion.ca]

Sent: July 14, 2006 5:40 PM

To: Sandra Finley

Subject: RE: The public

Thank you for your message. The restructuring that I have done to date only deals with the structure of my senior team. This is clearly the prerogative of a CEO although I chose to do it in consultation with members of my staff and medical staff, as well as selected other individuals.

I strongly agree that we need to consult with the public regarding changes to our programs and services. The Saskatoon Health Region is in the midst of developing its first strategic plan. As part of this process, we held focus groups with members of the public across the health region. We
consulted with patients, CEOs and Authority chairs from the northern regions, and many others. We also used the Intranet to solicit input from the
public.  You may wish to check out our Intranet site  (Link no longer valid  http://www.saskatoonhealthregion.ca/about_us/strategic_home.htm) which has a great deal of information on our planning process.

By the end of next week we will be posting our draft plan, with invitations to the public to provide us with feedback. I hope that you will take the time to share your views on the draft plan with us.

Maura Davies

President and Chief Executive Officer

Saskatoon Health Region

3rd Floor, Saskatoon Square

410 – 22nd Street East

Saskatoon, SK  S7K
5T6

Ph: (306) 655-3320 / Fax: (306) 655-3394

email: maura.davies  AT saskatoonhealthregion.ca

—–Original Message—–

From: Sandra Finley [mailto:sabest1  AT  sasktel.net]

Sent: July 14, 2006 3:26 PM

To: Davies, Maura SktnHR

Subject: The public

Dear Maura,

Re re-structuring and re-staffing plans for the Saskatoon Health Region, excerpts from the Saskatoon Star Phoenix, July 1st, follow.

There is no mention of participation from the citizens who are served by the Health Region.

From my experience of public input in Saskatchewan, I would say that you, and consequently we citizens, will be well served by presentations from the public into the process.

As I understand, every member of the Health Region Board is appointed by the Government.  There are no members who come to the Board through true democratic process.  The necessity for public input is thus greater than might otherwise be the case.

The Saskatoon Health Region serves northern Saskatchewan.

The usual public process:

–  written submissions

–  public meetings for the purpose of collecting input

–  the writing of a draft proposal

–  draft proposal goes back to the community for response

–  public input is considered and the proposal is then ready for finalization.

I would propose that the public consultations take place in:

–  Saskatoon (urban)

–  Watrous (rural and to the far east of the Region)

–  Macklin (west of province, representative of a community that sends patients to Saskatoon) (I just pull these out of a hat).

Through email networks notice of public process and meetings can be quickly disseminated.

I look forward to your response.

Best wishes,

Sandra Finley

(contact info)

================================

EXCERPTS FROM NEWSPAPER:

Under Davies’ leadership, vice-presidents will “work closely with physician leaders, directors, managers and other staff to fine-tune the structures within their portfolios.”

Full details of the new structure are available to staff on the internal intranet website. The priorities noted by Davies include an enhanced quality of care, patient safety, access to treatment and reduced waiting times, as well as a greater clarity of roles and accountability of staff.

She has also created a new position for a vice-president of research and innovation (to be recruited jointly with the University of Saskatchewan) to improve the region’s educational component and dormant opportunities “the current structure doesn’t support.”   Davies is eager to forge relationships with other facilities on the university campus, such as the Canadian Light Source and Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization.

 Older Entries  Newer Entries