Freedom of Information, and the courts, are all we have now

The public will is once again being hijacked by industrial interests and complacent civil servants

I’ve just filed a FOI request for the information about the downgrading of the Wetland Conservation Policy. As I’ve reported, an internal directive has functionally delisted thousands of hectares of Wetland of Special Significance, and the government is not being transparent about it. The Department of Environment’s communications people are obfuscating. It’s becoming very tiresome.

I know there is a lot going on in the world right now, and it’s very overwhelming and scary, but it’s at the local level that we can still affect some change. It’s here at home that we might still have some impact, where we can voice our disdain for the erosion of democratic principles. The Houston government is contradicting an official policy and does not feel any need to acknowledge or explain its rationale to the public.

Here is the Freedom of Information request I have just submitted:

All emails, internal communications, documents, or texts pertaining or relating to the Wetland Conservation Policy and how it should be interpreted by Department of Environment and Climate Change staff. Specifically, I'd like to see internal communications within ECC about what the designation of wetlands of special significance (WSS) should be limited to. As well, all communications that led up to the new interpretation of WSS, and about the new interpretation between ECC and the DNRR. For your reference, I've attached the article that appeared in the CBC about this internal directive.

I’ve written about the hijacking of the public will before, and there is nothing that bothers me more than to see policies and strategies that have been developed based on authentic public consultation, abandoned because they are not approved by vested interests.

The work of  Thomas Piketty is central to the lens from which I have written over the last many years. After integrating years of income data he came up with a general law of accumulation: the rate of return on capital tends to exceed the rate of economic growth, which leads to a concentration of wealth. The extreme divergence of income we now see in our society has led to a range of anti-democratic consequences because the financial elites use their earnings to essentially fund “a cycle of political capture that protects their interests from political challenge.”

Piketty’s research shows us that capitalism can lead to neofeudalism – “marked by the consolidation of elite wealth and power far beyond the control of ordinary people and the mechanisms of democratic consent.”

That’s where we are folks—this is neofeudalism — and we are “under seige” as one government insider told me months ago. His comments bear repeating now:

It's so clear now that the actions that we are taking are really just band aids on gushers, when behind the scenes there are people working both inside and outside governments to undo it all. So, all of these permanencies that people affix to protections – everything is on the table.

I will report back here on what comes back from my FOI request. I would encourage you to make your views about this known.