by Logan Atkinson, Seniors for Climate Tantramar

Tantramar Mayor Debbie Wiggins-Colwell wearing her chain of office

Whatever you may think about municipal politics and local politicians, it’s hard to argue that Tantramar’s new mayor and council have been sitting on their hands.

Finally, it seems, we’re working towards a solution to the problems that have plagued Sackville Fire & Rescue. At long last, the province has promised to replace the Peck’s Cove Bridge in Rockport, and it appears as though a citizen’s committee will soon be struck to recommend what to do about the Wheaton Covered Bridge.

And while the premier was invited to visit Tantramar for months and months, it took our new mayor and council to get her here to listen to their, and our, concerns. Great!

But, oh, now this!

Mayor Wiggins-Colwell’s Facebook post just a couple of hours after the province announced its approval  of the Centre Village Gas Plant has raised urgent questions about how committed this council is to the well-being of our community.

To say her post was disappointing is a gross understatement.

It was uncaring, dismissive and patronizing, and may finally demonstrate what many of us have believed all along – that our municipal politicians simply do not understand the perils posed by the NB Power/ PROENERGY gas plant.

In a nutshell, Mayor Wiggins-Colwell said that we must now roll over, accept the gas plant, believe blindly that the province had our best interests at heart by approving it with certain conditions and that besides, such matters fall outside the town’s jurisdiction.

So in response, let me say this loud and clear: No, Madam Mayor. We’re not about to roll over and we’re not dead yet. Not even close.

Let’s go through her post point by point.

First: “On behalf of Council…” she begins. What does that mean really? Where does the mayor get the authority to make public pronouncements on behalf of council? Any deliberative body requires a resolution to authorize the senior officer to speak on behalf of it.

So, where is the resolution? And when was the public meeting that passed it?

We’d like to see a poll. How many members of council agree with the mayor’s statement?

Second: the mayor’s statement says: “…we recognize the significant public interest” in the gas plant project.

No kidding.

Of course there is significant public interest in this brainless project. The Centre Village gas plant is the most consequential proposal to come forward to this community in generations. If built, it would change just about everything about life on the Chignecto Isthmus, for many generations and maybe irrevocably, for humans, for plant life, for birds and animals.

Significant public interest?” We’re not talking about a dog park here.

Third: “…our residents hold a range of perspectives on the project.”

Huh?

Why is this relevant? Is this mentioned as justification for not doing anything? Is the mayor saying, “Our residents hold a range of perspectives, so therefore council can’t take a stand?”

But the council has already taken a stand by passing resolutions opposing the gas plant not once, but twice. Residents held a range of perspectives then, just as they do now.

Besides, there’s “a range of perspectives” on every issue that comes before council. A bylaw on open fires? A new dog park? A slaughterhouse in the industrial park? What about changing the Mixed Use Zone to allow seven stories in our downtown? Didn’t take long for that change to get approved, despite a demonstrated “range of perspectives.”

Every issue generates debate.

We elect our mayor and council to consider all viewpoints, determine the best interests of the community, and act accordingly. Their job is to show leadership.

Fourth: “…we must move forward with the expectation that all public concerns are reflected in the conditions” attached to the environmental approval.

Madam Mayor, have you read the conditions? Do you realize that many of them are mere window dressing, requiring PROENERGY to follow the law, for example, when of course, it’s required to follow the law in any case, whether it’s spelled out in a fancy list of conditions or not?

In the last 14 months, the arguments in favour of the gas plant have been thoroughly debunked by those of us resisting it.

We’ve enlisted economics experts, climate change experts, energy experts, ecologists, medical doctors, environmental scientists, lawyers. We’ve submitted bundles of documents to provincial officials refuting the proponents’ arguments, and in virtually every case we have received bland non-responses or none at all. Instead, NB Power, PROENERGY and provincial politicians continue to trot out the same tired arguments, over and over, as if our arguments were never made or held no weight at all.

Have you read the list of conditions Madam Mayor? Have you considered how embarrassingly vague they are? How ambiguous? How jam-packed with the apparently unfettered discretion of bureaucrats in Fredericton who, so far at least, seem impervious to anything like logic, caring, or concern for our shared future?

I ask again: Have you really read them?

Fifth: “As the development moves forward, Council’s role is to consider matters that fall within municipal jurisdiction.”

This sounds so much like former Mayor Black’s position, publicly stated more than once, when he said words like “We have no levers to pull,” or just as limply, “We must stay in our lane.”

“As the development moves forward…?” No Madam Mayor, we’re not dead yet.

Councillor Butcher famously suggested at a council meeting that we can’t tell the province what do do, akin to a child telling a parent what to do or an employee telling the boss how to run the company.

Well, let’s get this on the table in the hope that any uncertainty about this subject can be removed: We know that the town is not in a position to veto the Centre Village gas plant. No one has asked council to do this. No one expects such a miracle.

But what do we expect? What is within council’s jurisdiction?

Section 5 of the Local Governance Act sets out the purposes of the municipality. Pretty basic stuff. The fundamentals. The genesis, really, of everything that’s done at our town hall. What does section 5 say?

It says that one purpose of the municipality is to foster the social and environmental well-being of its community. Notice use of the word “foster.” This is an active verb, it requires action, it suggests that the council must identify what is consistent with social and environmental well-being, and then take steps to achieve it.

This is not about passivity, it’s not about staying silent so as not to offend the boss. It’s about having a vision for the future, about the environmental and social well-being of the community, and then about developing a plan to actively foster that well-being.

But what to do if social and environmental well-being is jeopardized? What if the very purpose of the municipality is threatened by an outside force?

Don’t you fight with everything you have?

Don’t you pound your fist on the table and on the doors to the legislature?

Don’t you find every possible forum to advocate for the well-being of your constituents?

Don’t you demonstrate, over and over and over again, in solidarity with your constituents, that you recognize the threat, that you understand your responsibilities, that you will insist time after time that the well-being of your community must be protected and advanced?

Sixth: In her post, the mayor “…encourages residents to rely on official sources of information for updates regarding the process.” At every meeting of council, and in keeping with the meeting protocols set out in the Meeting Procedures By-Law, we sit on our hands, we leave our signs and banners at home, we keep our mouths shut. We are very patient, respectful of those who appear before council, deferential to the rulings of our municipal leadership.

But relying on official pronouncements for information on this debacle? Really? When all we’ve received so far through official channels is bafflegab, doublespeak and mumbofudge? Non-answers to our questions. Deflection. Disingenuous clap-trap.

Are we being encouraged to abandon the organizations we have consulted and recruited across the country on this crazy project?  Many of Canada’s (and the world’s) leading thinkers on environmental health and climate change? Some of the top experts on energy economics? Many physicians and ecologists and environmental scientists? In favour of what? Are we being asked to trust the very authorities whose schemes would destroy the Chignecto Isthmus and the futures of our families along with it?

Did you really think this through Madam Mayor? Do you realize what you’re asking us to do?

No, Madam Mayor, we’re not dead yet.

The very essence of life in Tantramar is at stake here, to say nothing of the wider implications for the environment and climate change. The very essence of our community is in jeopardy.

If you don’t think this is something worth fighting for, something sufficiently important for each and every one of us to continue to raise our voices in opposition together, insistently and continuously, then I’m afraid we’ll understand why our municipal leaders avert their eyes when we meet them on the street.

Logan Atkinson, Seniors for Climate Tantramar scantantramar@gmail.com