Muddying the waters

Another nasty surprise from the Cons' budget implementation bill: it would significantly narrow the scope of the Navigable Waters Protection Act by severely restricting the types of projects which are subject to regulation.

The current law applies to any structure that affects navigable waterways, as well as any dumping or excavation that affects a waterway. In contrast, the Cons' revisions would eliminate any regulatory role except where a project interferes with navigation alone - with no regard for any other effect on a waterway. And even within that narrowed definition, the Cons' revisions would allow for two separate processes (one by regulation, another by ministerial order) to bypass the usual approval requirements.

It's particularly striking that the Cons felt the need to toss both elements into the legislation. One could perhaps rationalize a streamlined process in order to speed up infrastructure spending as part of their supposed stimulus. But if that process is put in place, then it's hard to imagine what purpose the Cons would have to also narrow the circumstances where the legislation applies other than sheer contempt for the concept of regulation.

Now, the Cons have already signalled their response to concerns about environmental damage resulting from their budget. Having needlessly and without warning inserted attacks on the environment into a budget implementation bill, they're now criticizing anybody who dares to point out the issue as as unduly focused on specifics within a larger bill.

But it's the Cons who have chosen to ensure that the impacts of hastily passing the budget bill may affect Canada's waterways for a long time to come. Which means that they should rightly face the choice whether to step back from their attacks on the environment, or to answer for forcing through the changes now.