Home » News » Braid: Duck trial deviates from script
News
Braid: Duck trial deviates from script
Opinion | Calgary Herald | Dan Braid | March 04, 2010
Read the full article on the originating site
The Syncrude trial is marred by government showboating, says a company lawyer, coming very close to calling the proceedings a show trial.
If that’s what Robert White was getting at, he has a point.
A show trial is one in which justice is secondary to the government’s need to make some larger social, political or economic point.
The government finds a defendant who typifies the evils it wants to suppress. In these times, an oil company that has 1,600 ducks die on its property is a strong candidate.
The accused gets raked through the tailings pond of public opinion as a lesson to other potential villains. The world at large thinks, yeah, those are tough environmentalist governments.
Meanwhile, the governments hope the world doesn’t realize the company was just doing what they’ve always allowed it do.
Syncrude is charged under the following federal section, which is worth quoting in full:
“No person or vessel shall deposit a substance that is harmful to migratory birds, or permit such a substance to be deposited, in waters or an area frequented by migratory birds or in a place from which the substance may enter such waters or such an area.”
Let’s see now — bitumen is toxic to migratory birds. The birds routinely fly over the tailings ponds.
So there is an offence in the mere existence of the ponds, even if no bird ever lands on them.
Tailings ponds have been illegal by this federal definition at least since Ottawa amended the Migratory Birds Convention Act in 2005 — three years before the ducks died.
The provincial section under which Syncrude is charged is a bit murkier, but not by much. It says, basically, that anyone who “keeps, stores or transports” a hazardous substance must do so in a way that ensures it doesn’t come into contact with plants or animals.
Regulations allow the companies to operate; but seriously, could a tailings pond ever comply with the spirit of this law? The big ponds are out under the wide blue sky. Tired, thirsty animals are sure to blunder in sooner or later, whether the cannons are booming or not.
The fact is oilsands companies have for decades created ponds lethal to wildlife with the full knowledge and approval of both governments. In Syncrude’s case, the relationship goes back to 1974, when Ottawa and Alberta kick-started the consortium with a $500-million investment.
Today, Syncrude admits it made a huge mistake the day those ducks died. There has to be some penalty for that.
And yet, it’s unlikely the company was doing anything in defiance of its long symbiotic relationship with governments.
So if you sense bitterness on Syncrude’s part — White’s angry talk of showboating, for instance — it’s probably because the executives feel betrayed.
Their old pals might actually send them to jail to serve a larger show-trial goal, the image of green government and the salvation of the revenue-rich oilsands.
Did the sense of betrayal convince Syncrude to fight rather than give in? A guilty plea, after all, would have avoided much negative publicity for the company and the industry. Jail terms could have been negotiated away, some lawyers say.
But that didn’t happen. And the governments now have a show trial with a dangerous difference — the sacrificial defendant refuses to sob and confess.
That makes it hard to predict what will happen over the coming weeks. So far, though, Greenpeace thinks things are going very well.
Tagged with: syncrude, ducks, tailings ponds, calgary herald
