The Dominion - Justin Saunders

Battle of the Budget

Tim McSorley — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:06:47 +0000

Police crack heads as Toronto city cuts reversed

TORONTO—Toronto residents are breathing slightly easier after a long-awaited City Council vote on large cuts to core city services took place earlier tonight. The cuts, proposed as part of the 2012 city budget, have been looming ever since Mayor Rob Ford manufactured a budget crisis upon taking office.

In a major blow to Mayor Rob Ford's austerity agenda, many of the most significant cuts were reversed, in large part thanks to a surprising move from the council's centre, led by Josh Colle. An omnibus motion, which used some financial sleight-of-hand to make increases to the budget in the sectors threatened by the proposed cuts, was passed by a vote of 23 to 21. Colle defended his position in an interview after the vote. “We made tough decisions...it's not reckless spending. We settled on a prudent budget that was fiscally responsible and addressed some of the concerns that people had brought up.”

Deputy Mayor Doug Holyday tried to play down the defeat, noting the narrow margin by which the votes on several of the most crucial cuts were defeated. “It's far from the end of the world,” he said.

Approximately two hundred people were in chambers for the vote; almost ten times that number remained outside, prevented from entering by a line of police officers mixed with City Hall security. Attempts to enter the building for the vote were met with violence, as a number of individuals were hit and pepper-sprayed. A small horse-mounted riot squad moved on the crowd. Several arrests were made, people were beaten and choked and an elderly man was thrown to the ground. At least one person was taken to St. Michael's hospital.

Aiden Hennings from Stop the Cuts described the scene:

“I was at the front, trying to get into City Hall. [The police] started grabbing people outside the barricades. I was grabbed by my hair and they tried to drag me through their lines, but other people took me back. About five minutes later I was pepper-sprayed from a foot away—the officer smiled while he did it, and my two little sisters were punched in the face by police as well.”

“I didn't expect it to be one of 'those kinds of rallies'” said Ryan of Occupy Toronto. “[The police] threw a lot of people around. They should have just let us in; they said they wouldn't because it was such a big group.” There was, however, room in council chambers for more people, with a large standing area behind the 250-seat gallery sparsely populated.

During the session, several observers shouted about the police repression outside, while others chanted “stop the cuts, save good jobs” in response to the results of a vote on the privatization of custodial services. They were forcibly ejected from council. “This is just a bunch of elites who claim to represent us, but they don't bother to consult us,” said one, to applause from many in the observation area. She later told the Media Coop: “Security and Toronto Police brought us down the elevator to the first floor. Elise [Thornburn, of Stop the Cuts] started to move toward the main exit, instead of the side exit that the police were taking us to. Police grabbed her, and she went limp. They dragged her down the hall to the door.”

Council Chair Frances Nunziata, who directed security to remove the protestors, had a low threshold for any perceived disruptions from the floor, threatening to clear chambers after a few boos were heard from the gallery.

As the motions wrapped up, City Hall's head of security announced that councillors would have to exit from the side and rear doors of the building, as the Toronto Police were “currently dealing” with the protest. An Occupy Toronto contingent was also present outside, setting up several tents in the middle of the square, which were later moved to the boundary of city and provincial land to “avoid a trespass bylaw.”

Hennings was upset about the police response to the rally: “We wanted to have our voices heard at city hall. We wanted them to hear that Toronto is against the cuts.”

Later, a small contingent of demonstrators marched to 52 Division, where several arrestees were being held. One of the men being held, Derek Soberal, appeared for a bail hearing at Old City Hall on January 18. The remainder of those arrested were released from the station.

Many activists are wondering whether tonight's events constitute a victory or a defeat. Although the feared cuts to libraries, social services and other core services were averted, the loss of jobs within city ranks and privatization measures still culled millions from the city budget.

The cancellation of some of the cuts is testament to months of mobilization by community groups, labour and many ad-hoc committees across the city who came together to save specific city services in their communities. Colle acknowledged the impact of these efforts, saying the budget had generated "more discussion amongst the public and councillors" than he'd ever seen before.

The fight against Ford's austerity agenda will likely continue, with a near-certain lockout of CUPE 416 coming in February, as the union refuses to accept their jobs being farmed out to private contractors.

—with files from Megan Kinch

Justin Saunders is an information technologist and journalist based in Toronto.

The article was originally published by the Toronto Media Co-op.

Jan 17 stop the cuts 1

Jan 17 stop the cuts 2

Occupy Toronto survives Eviction Day

Tim McSorley — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 10:37:44 +0000

Occupiers, city, to present arguments in court today

TORONTO—November 15 was a whirlwind day for Occupy Toronto. Residents woke to the news that an eviction order had been issued for midnight that night. At the same time, word arrived that New York's Occupy Wall Street, the heart of the Occupy Movement, was being evicted from Zuccotti park. A morning march in solidarity with protesters in New York resulted in two arrests.

Bylaw officers soon entered the park, tagging tents and other structures with eviction notices. Camp organizers met with clergy from St. James Cathedral, which technically owns a portion of the land the camp is situated on, and a General Assembly convened to discuss potential responses. The camp buzzed with nervous energy as people prepared for an eviction and the possibility of police violence. A surge of support for Occupy Toronto became evident as the day wore on, with large numbers of people streaming into St. James, and prominent support coming from unions and even some celebrities, including renowned folk singer Gordon Lightfoot.

Sid Ryan, president of the Ontario Federation of Labour, released an "Open Letter to Rob Ford": "Please take this letter as formal notice that I will be personally joining the occupiers in St. James Park tonight, along with many other labour activists and community leaders, to link arms with the Occupy Movement. We are all part of the 99 per cent. [We] have a long and proud history of support for civil disobedience. It represents the finest instincts of citizens in a democracy to correct the actions of their governments...without it, there would have been no Civil Rights, women’s rights, environmental or other seminal movements that have changed the course of history."

The eviction order, signed by City Manager Joe Pennachetti, states that protesters are being evicted due to business complaints and the need to winterize the park. While media have highlighted several complaints from business owners, the Toronto Media Co-op has reported on several business owners in the area who are supportive of or benign to the Occupy site.

Julie, a City Liaison from Occupy Toronto, said that occupiers were more than willing to help with the process of winterizing the park. “Of course we care about the park, we live in it,” she told the Media Co-op. “I contacted five people at the Parks and Rec department. The only one I could get on the phone told me that he had been instructed not to speak with people from Occupy. I left very polite messages on Thursday the 10th and Monday the 14th with four other city workers indicating our willingness to cooperate with them, and received no reply.” Lana Goldberg, another protester living at the camp, says the city has not approached Occupy Toronto regarding winterizing the park. “We would obviously be willing to work with them on doing so,” she said.

Late in the day, the tide had shifted. As a result of negotiations through the church, police had promised not to follow through with a midnight raid, and a ruling on an injunction filed by several camp members against the eviction came down. Lawyers from Green and Chercover successfully argued for a stay against the eviction until a full hearing could be held to determine its legality. The injunction was granted at 5:30pm November 15, giving the camp a temporary reprieve. The legal teams are scheduled to debate the ruling in court today, Friday, November 18, with a final decision from the judge on Monday, November 23. The lawyers for the occupiers are expected to argue that Charter of Rights and Freedoms, namely freedom of expression and freedom of assembly, protect protestors from any action against the camp.

“I think this case is about whether city by-laws trump Charter rights, which is pretty incredible if you think about it,” said Dave Vasey, an occupier living at the camp who sits on a number of committees. Meanwhile, 11 city councilors have signed a letter calling on the mayor to stop the eviction.

Some activists were unhappy with attempts to call off a planned rally in solidarity with Occupy Toronto, and with the injunction itself. Bruce Darden said “I think it's irresponsible for anyone to ever demobilize people, to thwart community members' desires or will to action...The effect [it will have] is that people will continue to look to the institutions of the one per cent, that of the courts, to solve our problems instead of trying to act together and to deal with our issue in collective spaces like the park.” In spite of this development, a large crowd gathered in St. James for a General Assembly, which went late into the night.

Protestors have vowed to stay and continue to fight the eviction.

Justin Saunders is an information technologist and journalist based in Toronto. Megan Kinch is an activist and journalist in Toronto.

Eviction night in Toronto

It's Not Easy Being Green!

Tim McSorley — Mon, 09 May 2011 05:11:58 +0000

Unraveling myths of sustainable power

VANCOUVER & TORONTO—As the climate crisis worsens, the Canadian public is being told that new developments in “green energy” are helping reduce the carbon footprint of our energy needs. The PR push around green energy comes as the fossil fuels sector in Canada is plowing ahead, extracting heavy crude from the tar sands, pulling coal from open pit mines, and opening up remote territories for natural gas extraction.

While the idea of cleaner energy resonates with many, provincial governments have increasingly undermined the concept of “greener” energy production. Today, high-impact hydro-electric and nuclear power projects make up a significant percentage of so-called clean energy targets in Ontario and British Columbia.

“The climate argument is being used as a justification for lots of new dams around the world. It’s being used to greenwash dams,” Patrick McCully, Executive Director of the International Rivers Network (IRN) told The Dominion. He highlighted hydro-kinetic turbines, and wave and tidal energy as potential alternatives in the ongoing redefinition of hydro potential.

“There’s a possibility of getting electricity out of flowing water in an environmentally benign way, but not by building big dams everywhere,” added McCully. “And lots of small dams on lots of small rivers—that could also do a lot of harm.”

As with large-scale hydro-electric dams, the greening of nuclear power is dependent on the omission of economic externalities: costs or benefits that affect a third party and are not accounted for in market transactions. Nuclear power generation offers a clear example of the externalities potentially overshadowing the direct impacts of a nuclear power plant itself.

Along with hydro, wind, and solar, nuclear power is considered by the Canadian government to be “clean energy,” defined as “energy that is produced, transmitted, distributed and used with low or zero greenhouse gas (GHG) and other air emissions.” The government of Canada has indicated that by 2020, 90 per cent of the country’s electricity will come from these “non-emitting sources,” including nuclear power.

PHOTO: SAM BRAD

“The nuclear power industry has latched onto global warming as an argument for its renaissance,” wrote Karl Coplan, a Law Professor, in 2008. “[Put] simply, the nuclear industry, with government complicity, has transferred and deferred the most expensive part of the cost of the nuclear fuel cycle to future generations and civilizations unknown,” he wrote, addressing the contentious externality of nuclear fuel waste over its lifespan of at least hundreds of thousands of years.
Communities across Canada have been negatively impacted all the way along the nuclear fuel cycle.

On the front end is uranium, of which Canada is the world’s number one supplier. According to the Canadian Nuclear Association’s Nuclear Facts, “In 2008, the uranium mines in Saskatchewan accounted for approximately 21 per cent of the world’s total uranium production.”

Canada’s uranium deposits and mines are concentrated in the Athabasca Region in northern Saskatchewan, in First Nations territory. Strong resistance to uranium mining across the country over the last several decades has resulted in uranium mining bans in different provinces and regions.

“Mining companies came and robbed us of our country, where we lived, fished and hunted,” said Annie Benonie. The 88-year-old from Wollaston Lake near the Saskatchewan uranium mines was interviewed by Swedish journalist Fredrik Loberg last year. “The land will never be restored again [for] future generations,” she said.

Canadian uranium powers nuclear plants in a number of provinces, including Ontario. Today, Ontario’s energy grid stands at a crossroads. According to the Ontario Power Authority, by 2025 80 per cent of the province’s aging energy-generating infrastructure, traditionally powered by nuclear, hydro and coal, will need to be replaced to avoid increasing power line loss and allow for broader deployment of renewable energy projects. By 2030, the province plans to spend an additional $87 billion on overhauling the power grid.

“The constraint in increasing the installation of renewables is currently in transmission and distribution,” Adam Scott, Renewable Energy Coordinator at Environmental Defence, told The Dominion. “Ontario needs dramatic upgrades to the transmission and distribution systems.”

Yet, at this critical moment, the province’s recently released Long Term Energy Plan (LTEP) is focused primarily on the rapid elimination of coal-fired generation—using increases in nuclear, hydro and natural gas generation—in order to meet the modest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change targets of 450 parts per million atmospheric CO₂ by 2045.

Of the forecasted $87 billion in capital investment, the LTEP estimates $33 billion will be spent on nuclear power compared with $9 billion on solar, $14 billion on wind, $4.6 billion on hydro and $4 billion on biomass.

Scott, however, is generally pleased with the LTEP, pointing to the fact that it puts a greater emphasis on Ontario’s Feed In Tariff (FIT) program, which compensates wind and solar generators for energy they produce and feed in to the grid. Such programs have been successfully adopted over the past 20 years throughout Europe.

“Ontario added more solar power in its first year than [any FIT program in] Spain, Germany [or] France,” added Scott.

However, not everyone agrees that the LTEP was a step in the right direction. Criticism from environmental organizations has focused on the potential of a nuclear disaster, coupled with the long-term commitment required to re-invest in the technology.

“[Ontario] exempted its nuclear electricity plan from an environmental assessment,” said Shawn Stensil, Nuclear Analyst at Greenpeace Canada, in a news release. Stensil stated that nuclear re-investment “will limit the long-term growth of cleaner, safer and more affordable energy options.” A recent study commissioned by Greenpeace, the Pembina Institute, and the Canadian Environmental Law Association claims that renewable investment with a larger wind portfolio would be cheaper than re-investing in nuclear power.

The enormous cost overruns of nuclear power continue to be a point of contention even among those who are optimistic about the province’s expansion of FIT. “LTEP didn’t move us away from nuclear. We’re actually paying other jurisdictions to use the surplus electricity at night from reactors that can’t be throttled down,” Mike Brigham, Chairperson of the Toronto Renewable Energy Co-op [TREC], told The Dominion.

TREC helps incubate locally owned solar and wind projects such as Windshare, a 100-metre-high turbine located along Toronto’s waterfront that produces enough energy to power at least 100 homes per year. An urban project like Windshare could never be built today, said Brigham, because of recent legislation prohibiting the construction of turbines within 500 metres of residential areas. As a result, groups like TREC have invested a significant amount of resources in solar installations, which can be deployed in both rural and urban areas.

At the other end of the fuel cycle is nuclear waste. In late January, New Brunswickers held a rally outside the NB Power headquarters in Fredericton, protesting the costly and potentially hazardous errors made in the ongoing reconstruction of the Point Lepreau Nuclear Generating Station. Located along the northern shore of the Bay of Fundy, only some 20 kilometres west of Saint John, Point Lepreau has a history of controversy, including a 1997 leak in the reactor core that produced a 75-day shutdown.

Atlantic organizations joined forces with the Nuclear Out of Quebec Movement (MSQN) to denounce Hydro-Quebec’s plans to remodel the Gentilly-2 Nuclear Generating Station in Becancour, 100 kilometres northeast of Montreal. They point to the controversial Point Lepreau reconstruction, slated to go back online in 2012, as reason enough for their opposition.

A joint press statement released by the MSQN and Atlantic organization representatives on January 26, 2011, the same day as the NB protest, said Gentilly-2 will be “far more costly than anticipated, and will create entirely new categories of radioactive waste that will have to remain in Quebec for permanent storage because the federal government takes no responsibility for such wastes.” The release also noted that the upgrades would add approximately 100 tonnes of high-level waste to the existing stockpile for every year of continued operation.

In terms of policy at the federal level, the “Creating the Economy of Tomorrow” budget document on Canada’s Economic Action Plan website outlines investments in science and technology, as well as in universities and research. While improving infrastructure at universities and colleges has the highest stimulus value for 2009-10 out of the 13 categories included, “Strengthening Canada’s nuclear advantage” is in second place at $351 million. Right behind it is “Transformation to a Green Energy Economy” at $200 million. The budget allotment for nuclear development is over ten times more than the amount designated for the Canada Graduate Scholarships program.

The development of sustainable technologies is constantly redefining the potential for “green” energy in Canada; however, as of yet, the term has not captured much real meaning.

Justin Saunders is an information technologist and journalist based in Toronto. Sandra Cuffe is a freelance writer, a contributing member of the Vancouver Media Co-op, and a coffee-lover.

This article was published in A People's Forecast: The Climate Justice Issue, our 2011 special issue. To read more articles as they are published, click here.

Good power bad power

Good power bad power II