Whitehorse Daily Star

Image title

Photo by Vince Fedoroff

A JOVIAL GATHERING – The multi-purpose room at the Kwanlin Dun Cultural Centre was filled Tuesday evening with people celebrating the Peel watershed decision from the Yukon Supreme Court.

Sneak Peel appeal announcement planned: NDP

The NDP said Tuesday it’s an “open secret” the government will appeal the Peel watershed court decision, a possibility the cabinet has not officially settled on.

By Christopher Reynolds on December 17, 2014

The NDP said Tuesday it’s an “open secret” the government will appeal the Peel watershed court decision, a possibility the cabinet has not officially settled on.

The Opposition insisted the government’s “misguided ideology would allow nothing else.”

The NDP speculated an announcement to appeal this month’s Yukon Supreme Court ruling will come down over the holidays “to avoid the public eye.

“It appears that this government is going to appeal the decision, even though they must realize how strongly opposed Yukoners are to its unilateral plan,” NDP Leader Liz Hanson said in the house.

“It is also clear that the government is waiting until the middle of a holiday season to appeal the decision, in the hope that the decision will fly under the radar.”

“We haven’t ruled out any option, contrary to what the member opposite is alluding to,” said Energy, Mines and Resources Minister Scott Kent.

“This is a very complicated decision and it will have far-reaching effects, as I mentioned, not only on future land use plans and how the government carries out that process, but also on the future economic status of the Yukon.”

Hanson shot back: “A sensible government would look at the Peel decision and realize that they should stop working against Yukon First Nation governments, against Yukon citizens and against the law, and accept the final recommended plan.”

Kent retorted: “It may come as a surprise to the leader of the Official Opposition, but there are those Yukoners who want those economic opportunities in the resource extraction industry.

“We also have to consider what their feelings are when we are making this decision,” he said.

The government has until Jan. 2 to file an appeal.

The back-and-forth over the Peel’s potentially litigious future occurred in the legislature hours before an evening celebration at the Kwanlin Dun Cultural Centre of Justice Ron Veale’s decision.

He ruled on Dec. 2 that the Peel watershed land use plan “does not enhance the goal of reconciliation and is inconsistent with the honour and integrity of the Crown.”

Veale stressed “a large and liberal interpretation” of the Umbrella Final Agreement and the consultation process it prescribes.

The Peel land use plan, which emerged out of that process, was unveiled by the government last January. It opened 71 per cent of the New Brunswick-sized region to resource development, mineral staking and industrial roads.

Two First Nations — the First Nation of Na-cho Nyak Dun and the Tr’ondek Hwech’in First Nation — as well as a pair of environmental groups — the Yukon Conservation Society and the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society Yukon — sued the government over the plan in January 2014.

Following a four-day trial last July, Veale sided almost entirely with the plaintiffs. He concluded the government violated the land use planning process laid out in the UFA during talks over the future of the pristine expanse.

The process will now return to the final round of consultation with First Nations and the public.

The government will be limited to the modifications it proposed at an early stage of the dialogue, but the question of the amount of land protected — now fixed at 80 per cent — and the question of access are off limits.

“We’re very pleased at this outcome,” Tom Berger, the pioneering aboriginal rights lawyer and head counsel to the plaintiffs, told the Star following the decision’s release.

“It is, of course, in keeping with the path the Supreme Court of Canada has laid out for dealing with these cases. And the result is, of course, that the land use planning process in the Yukon, which is community-based and collaborative, has been vindicated.

“The government can’t simply at the last minute, after years of work, years of hearings, trash the commission’s report and go ahead with its own plan,” said Berger, who also headed the famous Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Inquiry in the mid-1970s.

“I think it’s a victory for all Yukoners, and it’s a victory for legal process. Legal process isn’t just a technical thing; it’s a means by which land use planning in the Yukon is to involve.”

Comments (17)

Up 9 Down 0

NDP in BC support fracking on Dec 23, 2014 at 11:04 am

So does the Yukon NDP support fracking like the BC do? NDP are for development of their economy. You have the Yukon NDP standing for no development please.
You have the western provinces, NWT and Alaska all involved with fracking and taking advantage of its economic future. If the Yukon NDP don't want development than they are going to tax us heavily to pay for affordable housing, poor, social assistance, the very sick, seniors, disabilities, etc.
There is only two choices, continue with the Yukon Party or Liberals.
Merry Xmas to all the people of the Yukon. A new year is coming, let's make it a better year this year.

Up 6 Down 1

Zelmo on Dec 22, 2014 at 7:48 pm

Hey uncommon sense, it's called legal process, not mob rule.

Up 14 Down 0

Joel on Dec 22, 2014 at 5:12 pm

Of course they will appeal, just the same as the other side would appeal if they lost.
This is not directly about the Peel but more about the process of land planning and how the government has gone about doing such planning.

Up 46 Down 21

common sense on Dec 20, 2014 at 8:07 pm

Darrell do you hear us, we a majority are saying something Darrell. No to developing the Peel, hello Darrell, can you hear what we are saying?

Up 16 Down 5

ProScience Greenie on Dec 20, 2014 at 4:11 pm

No big park in the Peel means no real protection. Why the NDP and the ecotourism and outfitting industries oppose a big park in the Peel is very odd.

Up 22 Down 2

Economic Development on Dec 19, 2014 at 1:26 pm

If you want to talk about economic development in the Yukon I can remember from 1982 on also. The issue of economic development there is no strategy or no integrated public body to implement the strategy. Parts of the economic strategy for Yukon:
> hydro and other energy for export.
> joint partnership between Alaska, Yukon, BC, NWT and Alberta on energy.
> mining
> specialized tourism.
> specialized Argo and Acura foods that grow in cold climates
> specialized forest industry products
> specialized IT projects
> specialized climate change projects

We don't have to reinvent the wheel but there is information out there that the Yukon could use to grow our economy in a much broader way which is balanced. We just don't have the economic development structure to do that. Gov't officials are trained or experienced in economic development and managing government systems to encourage or engage research and development of new businesses opportunities in the Yukon.
I can remember an individual in Alberta back in the 1980's who sat in an office of three people and Western D gave them $15 million dollars to work in Agriculture to work with companies to develop new food products. In three years they assisted companies to develop 275 new products such as it 'looks like butter'. Commercial value of over $600 million dollars and 16,000 new jobs and 20 news businesses and expansionism of 90 businesses. The largest success story in Alberta history and it got almost no media attention. One of the big success story's was a new process and pasta plant in Edmonton. We need the right economic development structure to facilitate economic growth and the Yukon does have it.

Up 16 Down 6

June Jackson on Dec 18, 2014 at 9:41 pm

Mr. McGee. Thank you very much for replying. I see where you are coming from, and although I think your view is misguided, it is your view and I am glad you voiced it.

I was here in the 90's. (in fact, since the early 60's) Faro mines shut down and yes, people fled the territory abandoning their homes. Most of the mines had imported their workers and they went home. Many stayed and Yukon turned around again. And it still wasn't as bad as 1982, mines come and go and leave millions, close to a billion dollars in clean up for our government. The Yukoner's who wanted jobs got them, and that is true today. No one is going to get off welfare because we mine the wilderness. Yukon has 2nd and 3rd generation welfare families. Social Assistance IS their career. People are still using empty houses as crack/drug joints.

We are, what, 23-25k adults in the Yukon and you think we will ever be free of Ottawa? Look at how they are pressuring Alberta and Alberta with 4.083 million people is pretty powerful with 150k a people a year moving there. How many mines do you think we have to open to play in that ballgame?

I believe.. stand for something or fall for anything. I appreciate your stand.

Again, Merry Christmas

June

Up 17 Down 12

Atom on Dec 18, 2014 at 5:08 pm

No Bud....

There is no economic incentive to bring business to the Yukon....precious metals are down, like in the 90's....the Yukon has a bunch of strikes against it for large industry due to the fact it is so far from markets, and the infrastructure too expensive to build to transport south due to low markets and their ongoing variability.

Think sustainable. Think smaller and local....it's a very real economical angle.
Federal transfers aren't going to stop anytime soon....if you aren't employed by one of the dozen or so governments up here, then figure out a niche....or move.

Up 14 Down 10

B. Foster on Dec 18, 2014 at 5:01 pm

@bud

Look around Bud. People are slowly but surely becoming aware that the resources available to us are finite and need to be handled and viewed from a different standpoint; one that recognizes that the resources comprise a global commons that are being pillaged for profit. Not for need per se, but profit as the driving factor.

The longer we can hang on to the resources the better the chances are that they will be there when we "need" them as opposed to being sold out from under us to feed a blindly consumerist melee.

As long as it's about money it's not about the need.

Up 68 Down 26

Bud McGee on Dec 18, 2014 at 4:15 pm

@ June
Stagnation is what we had in the 1990s when thousands of people left the territory and no new services and businesses opened in the Yukon. Houses in communities like Watson Lake were abandoned and used as crack houses.
Economic self-determination is the Yukon bringing in enough revenues to cease being wards of the state. We are free to chart our own destiny and free of southern interference.
Someone "sticking it to the rich" is someone who crusades against anybody or entity making money through development, because of envy and regret over the state of their own sorry lives.

"Developing a far flung desolate wilderness" is positive because people have opportunities to get good paying jobs and get off welfare. People with jobs and more people coming to the territory means more businesses want to open here, which means more competition, variety, and better pricing. How many of us hate that Loblaws owns most of the groceries stores here? It's because there's not enough happening here economically to entice a competitor like Save-on-Foods.

Does that answer your questions?

Up 16 Down 27

Atom on Dec 18, 2014 at 1:28 pm

Mining too fickle to hold over everyone that no peel means economic doom....look at oil! The world will continue to turn but large oil is not pursuing projects due to market prices......not funding community initiatives it only took on to gain favour.....its all economics.....
Look at what an inflated expectation in mineral development has done to the Yukon....housing driven out of reach.....and mineral prices aren't rising anytime soon.

Up 35 Down 20

NDP No Development Please on Dec 18, 2014 at 1:27 pm

The NDP are against development so the Yukon can raise its own revenues to support affordable housing, assistance for disadvantaged, poorer people in our society, social services, education, health care, homeless, single parents, the very sick with terminal health conditions, new families the list go on and on. Don't support the NDP because they are not working to support you because it takes money that will not come from thin air but revenues from development.

Up 15 Down 14

June Jackson on Dec 18, 2014 at 12:49 pm

Mr. McGee: Would you please enlarge on your opinion for me? I am trying to understand where you are coming from:

What do you see as decay and stagnation when you say "Development versus stagnation and subsequent decay is an important issue"
What do you see as our "economic self-determination"
How do you envision someone "Sticking it to the rich?"
How do you see developing "some far flung desolate wilderness' as a positive?
I am not being sarcastic or judgmental. We are all entitled to our opinion. I would like to understand yours.

(Merry Christmas)

June

Up 22 Down 11

Mark Southerland on Dec 18, 2014 at 11:53 am

The Yukon Party will appeal because they think land claims are settled and mining and gas development should not be restrained by land claims, public protests, or environmental legislation.

This was the message on their fundraising cruise,
There have been some setbacks but there will be legal appeals. The Yukon is open for business and all Minister's doors are open for companies who want to work mining or oil and gas claims here. And thanks for all the campaign contributions and we have recently saved a golf course- lets book a T-off time when you have time to relax in Whitehorse.

Up 25 Down 56

June Jackson on Dec 17, 2014 at 8:57 pm

This government just doesn't get it.. Yukoner's just don't want the Peel destroyed with mining and industry. Give it up.

There are also a few Yukoner's who think that opening the Peel to mining is like a doorway to the land of plenty...they're not getting hired for local jobs now.. why would they think there will be jobs for them later? Tax money? Hardly.. big business pays so little tax in Canada that probably 2 cashiers at Walmarts pay more taxes at the end of the year than Chevron Oil..(its to encourage big business to hire more people and expand etc. but they bring in FWs..they still don't hire Canadians). The individual has nothing, absolutely nothing to gain from selling out the Peel..and much to lose.. and BTW New York state banned fracking today due to proven health issues and earthquake concerns.

Up 30 Down 8

wolfe on Dec 17, 2014 at 6:35 pm

This is a pretty bold assertion by Liz. I wonder if she is prepared to put her future
on this.

Up 64 Down 28

Bud McGee on Dec 17, 2014 at 4:43 pm

Yes. Please appeal. Development versus stagnation and subsequent decay is an important issue and it is worth fighting for. Even if the Yukon loses the battle for its economic self-determination, we will be able to look at our children and tell them that we fought our hardest for their economic well-being. What exactly are the people referenced in this article celebrating exactly? Is it the advancement of their planned socialist utopia? Sticking it to the rich? Preventing economic development is some far flung desolate wilderness, which most have never and will never see? I really do not understand the mentality at play.

Add your comments or reply via Twitter @whitehorsestar

In order to encourage thoughtful and responsible discussion, website comments will not be visible until a moderator approves them. Please add comments judiciously and refrain from maligning any individual or institution. Read about our user comment and privacy policies.

Your name and email address are required before your comment is posted. Otherwise, your comment will not be posted.