On October 21, 2003 the BC government passed its Bill 57, the Environmental Management Act. Bill 57 replaces BC’s main pollution law, the Waste Management Act, with a new regime that is part of the BC government’s deregulation initiative. It is expected that Bill 57 will eliminate about 80% or more of existing waste permits. However, the Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection is currently requesting comments on the proposed Waste Discharge Regulation-a regulation which would be created under the new Act. This Regulation provides a higher level of detail about what can be expected in BC as a result of the new Act, and this backgrounder is intended both to inform the public on the implications of the Regulation, and to provide recommendations to Government on how the Regulation could be improved.

This Guide’s purpose is to increase green building uptake in BC, by providing a central resource to the suite of regulatory and policy tools currently available to BC local governments to support and promote green building design and practices. The Guide’s aim is to provide targeted guidance. The Guide is therefore neither a law reform report nor a comprehensive discussion of the many benefits of green buildings. It assumes that the reader is already familiar with the what, is convinced of the merits, and is seeking knowledge on how to move forward at the cutting edge.

A colouring book aimed at teaching ecological values to children. Reissued as an online publication in 2005.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. West Coast Environmental Law Association applauds the federal government's proposed constitutional commitment to protection of the environment, and the Minister of Constitutional Affairs' statement that the government's intention is not to weaken the federal role in protecting the environment. A strong federal role in protecting the environment is of critical importance.

2. The proposals in this brief for strengthening the ability of the Constitution of Canada to foster protection of the environment are predicated on the recognition that the Canadian Constitution will not be complete until the legal relationship between Canada and Native peoples is resolved on a basis of mutual trust and respect.

3. This brief is offered in a spirit of cooperation with people from Quebec, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, the Yukon and the Northwest Territories. We know they all want essentially the same as we do: satisfactory constitutional arrangements and protection of the environment we all love.

4. The proposals' failure to link a prosperous economy and human health with a sustainable environment is a glaring betrayal of Canada's Green Plan and must be rectified throughout the constitutional package.

5. The constitutional package should explicitly acknowledge the fundamental importance of maintaining and enhancing biodiversity, including the survival of threatened species, subspecies and their ecosystems.

6. The proposed recognition of a commitment to environmental protection should be bolstered by the inclusion of key environmental principles:

the obligation to act to protect the environment,
the precautionary principle,
the polluter pays principle,
prior environmental assessment, and
opportunities for public participation.

7. Canadians want strong federal leadership in protecting the environment.

8. The federal government's constitutional authority to implement Canada's international environmental commitments should be explicitly entrenched in a modernized constitution.

9. Federal jurisdiction over the environmental aspects of tourism, forestry, mining, recreation, housing and municipal/urban affairs should not be diminished.

10. Federal-provincial cooperation is highly desirable, but any delegation of federal environmental authority to the provinces should be subject to strong federal leadership, accountability and opportunities for public participation.

11. The government's declaration that the environment is held in trust is highly significant and should be made legally enforceable.

12. Correspondingly, environmental rights should be enshrined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

13. The proposed entrenchment of private property rights in the Charter would inhibit measures by government to protect the environment and should not be pursued.

Press relations are one of the most important tools at the disposal of community groups today. The news media reaches audiences that are beyond the range of traditional grassroots organizing techniques.

Corporations and government agencies know this and act accordingly. They employ highly-paid professional press relations officers. These are usually well-trained journalists who have been enlisted to `work the other side of the street' because of their knowledge of the business and contacts in it.

Few community groups can afford the services of professional media officers. They must therefore enlist and train their own. Although most groups understand the importance of press relations, they too often assign press liaison tasks to officers who have other duties, which are often perceived as being more important. So long as the development of media work is left at the bottom of the community group's list of priorities, its full public potential will remain unexploited.
This manual is designed as an aid to novice media officers for public interest groups. It is by no means an all-encompassing guide to the field, but it will impart a basic understanding of the tasks associated with the job.

The question of how your group intends to use this guide has been left open. The reasons for, and the nature of the press relations you wish to establish, should be defined by each organization to address its particular set of needs.

Overall, we believe that the ERD must be strengthened in order for it to meaningfully reflect the EDC's commitment to ensuring its activities are conducted in an environmentally responsible manner. Currently, the ERD is replete with phrases and terminology that virtually guarantee that its application is almost completely subjective. Second, we have real concerns about the consultation, or comment process around the ERD. We have been asked to provide comments on a Directive that has already become operative. This offends a fundamental principle of public consultation, which is that opportunities for input are to be made prior to final decision-making.
 

Toxic contamination issues are not a new problem. What is new is the widespread concern about toxic contamination among the general public, in business and in government. This concern reflects society's rapidly expanding environmental awareness, as well as a growing recognition of the potentially enormous financial costs of failing to properly handle our toxic waste.

What gives the toxic contamination issue a special urgency now is that `Who pays?' is so unclear. Unless this uncertainty is resolved by law reform, at both the federal and provincial levels, it will instead be resolved through years of expensive litigation.

This report is intended to identify the key issues, setting the stage for the law reform necessary to deal with toxic contamination. The report should be considered `work in progress'. We are aware that the B.C. government is currently considering specific legislation to address certain aspects of the toxic contamination problem and is awaiting presentation of a consultants' report on the government's options. Also, a lengthy study is in draft form before the Law Reform Commission of Canada and, in due course, the views of the Commission will be known. Neither of these documents has been available to us in the preparation of this report. However, we look forward to participating further in the law reform process as it unfolds.

In addition to law reform, education is the second key purpose of this report. We trust that by introducing readers to this complex area, this report will help people in all aspects of the real estate industry--as well as related professionals, government officials and citizens--to conduct their affairs so as to prevent and, where necessary, to solve potential toxic problems.

The BC Government has asked the public to comment on a paper entitled 'A Results-Based Forest and Range Practices Regime for British Columbia'. The Discussion Paper proposes extensive changes to the Forest Practices Code. We hope that the government will consider and incorporate public comment into any changes to the Code. Accordingly, this report is an extensive review of the Discussion Paper, providing both a critique and suggesting alternative approaches to amendments to the Code. However, we remain skeptical of the government's interest in public consultation due to the tight time-line imposed both on the public and on legislative drafters, as well as the fact that cuts to Ministry of Forests staff prior to opening the matter up for public discussion, all of which may constrain what type of Code BC can expect.

We agree with the authors of the Discussion Paper that there are some significant problems with the current Act and its regulations. We agree with some of the points raised in the Discussion Paper (for example, the recognition of the rights of tenants in a residence in which pesticides are used). However, the Discussion Paper represents a one-sided contribution to the debate, justifying decisions that are already reflected in the draft Legislation, rather than promoting genuine public consideration of the issues behind pesticide management. Before turning to the Legislation itself, it is worth commenting on some of the shortcomings of the Discussion Paper.

The purpose of these submissions is to respond to the Consultation Document dated May 15, 2000, entitled "Developing a Response to Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation in British Columbia". The West Coast Environmental Law Association (WCELA) has long been concerned about the harmful effects of non-meritorious litigation on the right of citizens to debate important public issues and has advocated an anti-SLAPP law for British Columbia for some time. Accordingly, WCELA congratulates the Ministry of the Attorney General for its attention to the serious concerns raised by the use of litigation to limit public participation in decision-making processes, and for embarking on the current public consultation process.