Mr. Fletcher says he is willing to debate whether the potential agricultural land to be flooded by the completion of the Site “C” dam, is worth saving (June 14 Saanich News). I would gladly debate him on that. But let me begin this “debate” by saying that the Peace River isn’t any farther than California from which we get a great amount of our produce. Also, the potential produce from the Peace needn’t cross international borders.
But the greater issue is whether the dam is needed at all. Any number of studies indicate that it isn’t, and won’t be for many years. Mr. Fletcher uses the word “delay” when it comes to describing what the NDP and Greens want to see happen through the BCUC. And regardless of comments made much earlier by Mssrs. Horgan and Weaver, when new information comes to light intelligent and informed people are allowed to have a change of mind.
Why, even Christy Clark changed her mind on the efficacy and opportunities of ramping up LNG production. Using similar logic as is being used for LNG, there are no markets for the hydro power Site C represents. Therefore, the word “delay” doesn’t apply to a project that should be terminated, which means the $630 million is a fictional number.
If this BC Liberal government (should it remain in power) really wants to spend the other approximately $7 billion, then put it into alternate energy, transportation, poverty reduction, surgical wait time reduction – the list seems almost endless.
Richard Weatherill
Saanich