 |
Donag - My Blog
Melancthon Quarry or Melancholy: Threats to Canadian Water and Farmland
|
In recent news regarding threats to water in Canada, I have been following the Melancthon quarry- an enormous open pit mine proposed in Melancthon township on Highway 124 just north of Shelburne, north of Orangeville. This would be the largest quarry in Ontario and the second largest in North America. Today, I received an alert from Avaaz.org warning that this mining project could poison a million people's drinking water and the headwaters for five major rivers, would create an open pit deeper than Niagara Falls and decimate thousands of acres of healthy farmland.
Highland Companies had posed as a potato farming company for past years and bought acres of land from local farmers. It was recently revealed that it is backed by a $14 billion hedge fund out of Boston called Baupost Group. It was also announced that the plot of farmland would be converted into a limestone quarry (2300 acre pit), so deep it would interfere with the ground water system in the region. Furthermore, the quarry would require over seven thousand trucks to transport limestone each day, increasing carbon emissions and requiring new roads to handle the exploding traffic, further destroying the natural habitat of many species of animals. It is also in the middle of farmland that Canada depends on for food production. But, in order to start digging, Highland must win approval from Minister of Natural Resources Linda Jeffrey. Jeffrey is taking 4 more days to consider public opinion on this quarry before making her decision. Avaaz.org is encouraging the interested public to sign a petition that can deliver a wave of opposition to the plan. The petition can be signed here: http://www.avaaz.org/en/stop_the_quarry/?vl | Ralph and Mary Lynne Armstrong on their farm near the proposed quarry. “Where’s the good food going to come from if you don’t have land to grow it on?” says Ralph, a cattle and pig farmer. (Sept. 24, 2009) ANDREW WALLACE/TORONTO STAR |
Residents and environmental activists are working hard to oppose the quarry's license. Ontario's Liberal government faces a tough re-election fight in October and Liberal Minister Linda Jeffrey is concerned about public opinion in these key months before votes are cast. A national call will put pressure on Jeffrey and her party to stand up for Canada's environment, its farmers and the fresh water many Canadians depend on for survival.
This information was provided by Emma, Ricken, Iain, Pascal and the rest of the Avaaz team.
Avaaz.org is a 9-million-person global campaign network that works to ensure that the views and values of the world's people shape global decision-making. ("Avaaz" means "voice" or "song" in many languages.) Avaaz members live in every nation of the world; our team is spread across 13 countries on 4 continents and operates in 14 languages. Learn about some of Avaaz's biggest campaigns here.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
The 2nd Annual Canadian Water Summit- Are We Heading in the Right Direction?
|
The Summit was a great forum and networking opportunity to get the conversation going among involved and critical multi-stakeholders on issues of the future of water quality and quantity, as well as governance in Canada. It was attended by business professionals and investors, water industry representatives, building and municipal stakeholders as well as government officials, water industry regulators, NGOs, academics and community representatives. As the snippet images from the Summit's site display, questions of significant importance were placed on the agenda for discussion.
 Setting aside the magnitude and relativity of these questions, the overall direction of the conversation carried solid undertones of market-driven solutions. I suppose the popular mindset is "if you can't change the system you need to work with it". I am still not so convinced that fighting shy of putting the critical question of "what is wrong with the system that led us to where we are today?" at the heart of these discussions - simply because "we've exhausted the conversation", "it's a thing of the past" or because "it unleashes a whole new can of worms and becomes too complex to tackle"- can lead us to sustainable sustainability (if I may).  With the tagline "let's work together to drive real progress in our world", IBM proposed that technology is the way to go. The technologies presented by their Smarter City/Smarter Planet program were certainly ingenious and a progressive contribution to tackling emerging water management problems (i.e advanced weather forecast systems determining amounts of rain and issuing signals to allow cities to prepare in advance to avoid sewerage system floods; an iphone app that allows users to report water leaks; households subscribing to receive instant messages from utilities about their water consumption levels). Presenter Michael Sullivan explained that 45% of water is lost due to leaks in an aging water infrastructure around the world, and some of the technologies they have devised can deal with that. Great advancements indeed! However, when a participant posed the question of why IBM's current and prospective deals are concentrated in Europe and North America and whether there is potential to share this technology with developing countries dealing with urgent water crises (as in Sub-Saharan Africa) who may not be able to afford it, the unsatisfying response was "We are a business, and we run as a business". This begs the question then: we are driving real progress in whose world?

Other recurrent approaches seemed to be international collaboration and alliances to regulate industries and companies on a voluntary basis (i.e Water Disclosure Project- part of Carbon Disclosure Project; Blue Economy Initiative, Aqueduct, Global Water Roundtable etc.). Again, these initiatives are a great start, but more than anything they are an indication for a need for REGULATION. Their pitfall in my opinion, is that a voluntary approach and "incentives" are insufficient to exert enough pressure on companies to acknowledge their footprint and contribution to escalating the water crisis (i.e mining companies in developing communities) and although such measures may provoke some action, it is questionable to what extent this action will be bold, organic and of magnitude, setting the bar high for regulatory progress and for preventing future recourse for loss in profit (as in the case of Metalclad among many other examples). On the grassroots level, municipality and provincial representatives shared their endless plight to address local water management and its dynamic challenges. It was shocking to learn that despite Ontario being a leader in innovative technology in the water sector - currently working on a technology transfer program with other countries- an estimate of only 1% of this technology is actually used nationally. Minister of Research and Innovation, Glen Murray, brought this to our attention, and he ended with quite a striking and reverberating comment: "if you don't understand that the economy is a subset of the environment, then you just don't get it!" Seldom do we make this link, and often do we think that the environment is a subset of the economy.  A final note on the event and one that is most humanizing in my opinion, is a contrasting perspective presented by Native environmentalist of Turtle Clan Mohawk, Danny Beaton, who reminded everyone that what is of urgency is our acknowledgment as a human race that we are stewards of this earth and that water is the sacred blood of mother earth. We have for long abused our relationship with mother earth and are today paying the price for it. We need to relearn to appreciate the sun, the earth, water, life. Perhaps a return to the basics is really all it takes. Technology is a solution, but with every invention we invent its problems. Perhaps the question of "what is wrong with the system?" is not so complex afterall. It is easy. The system is not sustainable. Hypercapitalism is not sustainable. How can we speak of sustainability in an unsustainable system? Minor or major tweaks and fiscal resurgence of management solutions and regulation does not lead to sustainability. It simply delays the problem, it does not solve it. A return to the basics is simple- I'll let your imagination interpret the possibilities of this concept...

|
|
|
|
 |
Connecting the dots ...
|
I would like to share some brief reflections on my recent experience in a graduate summer school at York University IPEESS (International Political Economy and Ecology Summer School 2011), followed by a conference and SSRCH funded workshop on the future of global governance. The title for the course was New Constitutionalism and Global Political Economy. "What we need is more 'demos-prudence' instead of jurisprudence"- Upendra Baxi
I was fortunate enough to have the opportunity to interact with a roster of leading lawyers and political economists and theorists, most notably Stephen Gill, Richard Falk, Upendra Baxi, Claire Cutler, Isabella Bakker, Ran Hirschl, Saskia Sassen, Janine Brodie and a few others regarding the developments in the recent past of our global political economy (particularly since the 80's) which have been labeled as a form of new constitutionalism; one which "locks-in" through legal (politico-juridical) mechanisms, specific frameworks and regulations that insulate neoliberal capitalism from democratic power. A particular session was on the topic of "enclosure of the commons", during which water was a field of contestation. The interesting dialectic between water as a fundamental human right and the ongoing process of its commodification, which I have discussed in earlier blogs, and the ensuing discussions revealed the key to a missing link in my analysis for my future research project.  The process of commodification of water (and the environment- i.e the creation of "weather derivatives" to commodify the risks involved with climate change) is not only adopted as a market mechanism for greater capital accumulation, but in fact has also been constitutionalised, in a sense, through international, national and otherwise neo-forms of agreements and binding treaties, very much in tandem with neoliberal trade and investment frameworks. This has been severely affecting ecological practices and social reproduction, and has in fact reshaped our normative understandings of water.
It is now my goal to further research what elements of new constitutionalism have been adopted (in other words the trends) in various geographical and social spaces and points of contact where neoliberal reforms in water policies have been employed and in instances met resistance. I believe the locations of resistance will unveil the cause of contestation. The "what" that is being contested, I speculate will be evidence of a similar pattern through which neoliberal capitalism has further infiltrated into areas of the environment and basic human needs (ie water) and is deeply infringing on and threatening local livelihoods. I hope as my research unfolds, I will better connect the dots...
On this note, "Abuela Grillo" is a very symbolic and short clip- shared with me by a friend from Brazil- on the water wars in Bolivia. It really encompasses the dialectical relationship between locals as stewards of water resources, their lack of appreciation of this resource at a certain point, and the process of exploitation by capitalism- and tells the story through the personification of water by the wonderful character of Abuela Grillo.
|
|
Water Changes Everything
|
Comprehensive yet strikingly simple video created by Charity:Water, narrating the importance of water to every facet of life. <iframe width="560" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/BCHhwxvQqxg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
|
|
|
Latest Posts
Monthly Archive
Change Language
713 views
|
 |