I had a fascinating exchange with the CEO of the Pacific Carbon Trust (PCT) last week.
I’m troubled by the structure of the PCT and some of the projects it has approved for “carbon offsets.”
The $25 million/year of public money going into the PCT is only available for private sector projects. Luxury resorts and hotels, greenhouses, Lafarge and Encana have been the recipients so far.
In examining the latest Encana project, I discovered what I believe are valid questions about whether Encana should have qualified for the Trust’s money.
Ethically, I struggle with giving public money to a highly profitable company that is also one of B.C.’s largest emitters of greenhouse gases. Along with this ethical concern, I raised technical questions about whether Encana should have qualified for “offset” money according to the standards of the PCT and government regulations.
That’s when the Trust’s CEO made a very interesting and forceful challenge to me: he asked me if I was calling into question the two validators of the project (KMPG and an engineering firm) and the regulator of the industry (Oil and Gas Commission.)
All three agencies had certified that the project qualified for our tax money and, therefore, according to the CEO I was supposed to be satisfied.
Wrong!
My rebuttal to the CEO involved mentioning the savings and loan debacle in the U.S., Enron, the derivatives mess that collapsed the US economy and the recent BP disaster.
I could have gone on for a very long time listing situations where regulators and validators told legislators everything was rosy when it most definitely was not. There is a long and sordid history of regulators and validators failing to protect the public interest with catastrophic results.
It is every legislator’s duty to question regulators and third party validators. When legislators fail in this duty, history proves that the public interest is all too often not protected.
In a similar vein, Vicki Huntington and I have asked the premier to allow a committee of legislators to investigate the cumulative impacts of the expansion of the development of B.C.’s unconventional natural gas resources using hydraulic fracturing. This is a highly controversial technology that is either being banned, subjected to moratoria, or coming under question in most other jurisdictions around the globe.
We’ve asked the premier to strike a special committee of the Legislature to examine the regulatory framework and the emerging scientific information about the environmental and social impacts of the use of this technology.
Bob Simpson is the MLA for Cariboo North.