“Your voices were heard” – Dan Perrins
The Perrins report is sure to be remembered in Saskatchewan history. The report is a compilation of the considered views of hundreds of Saskatchewan citizens: ranchers, business people, youth, seniors, mothers, union representatives, the list goes on. The 80 per cent who oppose nuclear power are a diverse group and are not united by a common political ideology of left or right but instead by a concern for the future of our province. These citizens took time from their daily schedules to read technical reports on radiation and health and write briefs on the potential for wind turbines to line the grid roads of our province. When Dan Perrins came to their community, these citizens came home from work, booked babysitters to watch their children and went to the UDP consultations to make their voices heard. It is this active involvement in community affairs that distinguishes citizens from consumers. It is to these dedicated citizens that Perrins wrote: “Your voices were heard.”
The UDP consultation process was a first of its kind; never before has the provincial government gone to such lengths to consult the Saskatchewan people before a policy decision is made. The Saskatchewan Party deserves credit for initiating this consultation process and, unlike the NDP, cannot be accused of withholding their nuclear ambitions from public scrutiny (under the NDP government SaskPower had completed a study in February 2007 suggesting Lake Diefenbaker as the site of two nuclear reactors).
Admiration must be also presented for Perrins; the final report reflects, without filter, the views that Perrins heard at the UDP consultations and in written submissions. The report is a fitting legacy for a long-serving civil servant.
As expected in a debate that could determine so much of the province’s future, efforts are being made to discredit the report. Immediately after it was released, some media grumbled that it was not an accurate representation of the views of Saskatchewan citizens. Political pundit John Gormley wrote in the StarPhoenix on Sept. 18 that “the largely silent majority support nuclear power.”
If this is true, we should be asking, what exactly do these silent citizens support? Do they support a nuclear power plant in Saskatchewan if it is more expensive than building a clean coal plant? Do they support a nuclear power plant if erecting wind turbines would provide a better revenue stream to farmers and more jobs to the province? Do they support a nuclear power plant if there are health risks to children living near the plant?
The Saskatchewan Chamber of Commerce has been careful to temper their support for nuclear by saying “the business case – the economics and the practicality – must drive a decision to proceed.” Dan Perrins has asked the government to study these costs and compare them to other electricity generation options. This study will form a key component of the decision on whether to build a nuclear power plant.
The costs should not be the only consideration of whether to bring nuclear power to the province. For many, the health risks posed by radiation will lead them to reject nuclear power no matter what the cost of alternatives are. As Lloydminster rancher Aaron Hougham said, “as people living next to a nuclear plant, any risk to our health or our children’s health is unacceptable.” A review of the costs of all of our electricity options will help to inform these citizens how much peace of mind costs.
The Standing Committee on Crown and Central Agencies, a seven-person committee with five Saskatchewan Party members and two members from the NDP, will begin to look at the costs and benefits of the province’s electricity options this October and again in January 2010. Chaired by Tim McMillan of the Saskatchewan Party, the committee “will be conducting an inquiry into how the province can best meet the growing demand for electricity.” This is an opportunity for energy experts and knowledgeable citizens to propose concrete plans for meeting Saskatchewan’s electricity needs.
Citizens must continue to make their voices heard if they want a non-nuclear Saskatchewan. After reviewing the Perrins report Bill Boyd, Minister of Energy and Resources commented that, “When I look at this report, it’s neither a green light nor a red light for the future of uranium development. It’s more like a yellow light: Take any next steps with great caution.” This yellow light could easily turn green.
Hermann Scheer, the man responsible for making Germany a leader in renewable energy, warns that the nuclear and fossil fuel industries do not give up easily. “Every action provokes a counteraction,” he said. Scheer notes that the U.S. seemed set for a large-scale transition to renewable energy in the late 1970s, but that transition was thwarted by the actions of powerful fossil fuel corporations. “In order to undermine renewable energy’s development, the energy business pulled out all the stops, down to the systematic purchase of small scale solar companies that were eventually shut down,” he said. Scheer fears that a similar counter-movement could threaten Germany’s growing renewable energy sector. “The ‘energy complex’ is, after all, the largest and politically most influential sector in the world economy,” he warns. “Its resistance to renewable energy will grow to the same degree as the mobilization of the latter has progressed.”
The nuclear industry may be temporarily winded but it, and its supporters in the Saskatchewan Chamber of Commerce and beyond, will be meeting in oak-paneled boardrooms to strategize on how to move our province towards a nuclear future. A strong vision for a renewable energy future is needed to inspire the Saskatchewan public to reject nuclear in favour of greener options. Hints of this vision were presented throughout the UDP consultations. But for this vision to be fully realized, the active citizens of Saskatchewan must continue to tap that inexhaustible resource that has built the farms and businesses of Saskatchewan: people power.
Brett Dolter and filmmaker Myek O’Shea filmed each of the UDP consultations. Footage from the UDP consultations and related proceedings is available online at the “People Power” website.
Sasquatch columnist Brett Dolter is an ecological economist and musician. He teaches economics at the University of Regina and is principal consultant for BD Green Solutions.
One correction. The President of the Saskatchewan Chamber of Commerce said the fact that those who support nukes didn’t show up proved that the people of Saskatchewan want a nuke plant. That doesn’t sound like a careful response to me. As for Gormley, if there is a person in Saskatchewan who doesn’t know that he is just a front man for the SaskParty and their federal Conservative masters, they haven’t been listening to his drivel.
The NDP are right on the money with this one. From the very beginning, they said there has to be a discussion of ALL energy options. And not just a few days’ discussion, but a real discussion involving experts on all sides of the issue. Then we can make a reasonably informed decision.
As for the study conducted by SaskPower some time ago, to the best of my knowledge, the government of the day wasn’t pushing any particular agenda, hadn’t contracted with a Bruce Power or any other company to scout sites for a nuke plant, or suggested that a nuke plant was an option. If it had, and hadn’t conducted public consultations, that would have provided cannon fodder for it’s foes. The reason the Wall gang is in some degree of trouble with its plan is that it went ahead and got into bed with Bruce Power, then tried to sell the idea with “experts” who only pushed the nuke agenda, and that’s when all kinds of red flags went up. Good for those who had the foresight to get out and fight Wall and cpmpany. We now may be able to have an informed discussion on the matter of future energy needs for our province.