Mr. Tredger: Mr. Speaker, in his budget address, the premier revealed his government’s true agenda on the Peel watershed. The premier is promoting the Crest iron ore deposit based on a financially speculative project analysis as the basis for his vision of economic development in the Peel. According to a report by Hatch Associates on the proposed development of the Crest iron ore deposit, the heart of the Peel River watershed would contain one of the world’s largest strip mines and a steel mill for the extraction of low-grade iron ore.
The premier’s budget address and the planning process his government participated in for over seven years paint very different visions for the Peel watershed. How does the premier reconcile this contradiction?
Hon. Mr. Cathers: What I would point out to the member for Mayo-Tatchun, first of all, is that the budget address referenced work that was done jointly by staff of Energy, Mines and Resources and staff of Economic Development in identifying the known ore within the Crest iron ore deposit, identifying tha just 15 per cent of that had been test drilled and identified in the conceptual pit design that was done years ago — that is 1.68 billion tonnes. Based on the five-year average price of iron ore, this fraction of the deposit would have a market value of $139.7 billion and represents only 15 percent of that total deposit.
What the member needs to understand is if the Yukon government were to take action that directly or indirectly expropriated that, we would lose a court case and be faced with paying compensation. It’s not all flowers, sunshine, roses, theories, fairies and Marxism. The members need to open up their eyes and realize that economics and case law will define what would occur within litigation, which the Yukon government would lose. Our vision, as we stated very clearly, is in fact to protect the environment within the Peel area, including capping the maximum footprint of all activity to ensure that 99.8 percent of restricted-use wilderness areas remain pristine at all times.
Mr. Tredger: The Crest plan calls for a second strip mine as part of the planned iron ore strip mine project. This second strip mine would be at the Bonnet Plume coal deposits 80 kilometres from the iron ore strip mine. The premier’s economic vision for the Peel includes a coal strip mine for a coal-fired plant that will produce the energy needed for the massive iron ore strip mine and steel mill. Then there are upward of 80 kilometres of transmission lines. Besides reducing another portion of this pristine wilderness watershed into dust, the premier is touting a coal-burning power plant, one of the world’s dirtiest energy sources on the planet.
How does the premier reconcile the recommended Peel land use plan as developed by the land use planning commission with his support for one of the proposed world’s largest industrial developments in the heart of the Peel?
Hon. Mr. Cathers: Quite simply, the Member for Mayo-Tatchun is absolutely, unequivocally wrong. The member has invented and completely mischaracterized what government is actually presenting.
In fact, if the member were to read the energy strategy he would realize that it is this government, and I as then minister of Energy, Mines and Resources, that identified that we would not support the development of energy sources, including coal and nuclear power based on what we had heard from Yukon citizens. The member completely and consistently fails to reflect the facts in this manner.
Our vision for the Peel area is taking an approach that protects the environment and respects all sectors of the economy. Our proposed creation of restricted use wilderness areas in the Peel region allows for potential economic activity while capping the maximum footprint of all activity at significantly less than one percent. Doing this would ensure that 99.8 percent of the areas remain pristine wilderness, while allowing for the potential of responsible uses that provide significant economic benefits to Yukoners and preserving both pristine wilderness and economic opportunities for future generations.
We have also - which the member has failed to acknowledge - proposed in all of the concepts put forward by government, the protection of the viewscapes from rivers to ensure that there is no staking or surface dispositions within the landscape visible from the rivers in recognition of the importance of those river corridors to wilderness tourism operators.
Mr. Tredger: The feasibility of the project depends on a strip coal mine, according to the Hatch report. The Hatch report also states that there would be hundreds of kilometres of high-quality all-weather highway from Mayo deep into the heart of the Peel River watershed - a highway. The report projects upward of 100 40-tonne capacity tractor-trailer units per day would travel the highway. That’s every day. The impact of the construction of hundreds of kilometres of a new highway and the reconstruction of the existing Wind River winter road is enormous.
The government talks about balance and how its proposed Peel plan would protect the environment. Does the premier really expect anyone to believe that we can develop one of the world’s largest industrial projects in the heart of pristine wilderness and protect the environment, including its tourism, hunting, recreational or —
Hon. Mr. Cathers: Does the NDP really believe that the Crest iron ore deposit, which was staked over 50 years ago and has been kept current - at a cost - by companies since that time, is something they would simply walk away from when case law would demonstrate very clearly that if the Yukon government were to deny access to the even potential development of the Crest iron ore deposit, we would, quite simply, lose in court to Chevron, which has a lot deeper pockets and a lot better lawyers than the Yukon government does?
Quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, the NDP’s vision absolutely does not acknowledge the facts. There is a significant economic value to this area. As we have noted, the estimated value of just 15 percent of that deposit is in excess of $139 billion. If the Yukon government were forced to pay even a small fraction of that in court costs, it would come at a very drastic cost to our territory and future.
What we have proposed is a balanced approach that does not promote any project. What it does is provide for a framework that ensures that the vast majority of the Peel region remains pristine wilderness, including 99.8 percent of all restricted-use wilderness areas, and all areas visible from rivers would be protected from new claim staking and new dispositions. The members need to realize that they can’t just imagine the facts.
No comments:
Post a Comment