There is more discussion on BAPE in Quebec. You have to read it all and figure out.
Last Friday, Michel C. Auger received on his program Midi Info Karel Mayrand , Executive Director of the David Suzuki Foundation for Quebec and the Atlantic, to discuss various topics concerning the institution of the Bureau of Public Hearings on the environment (BAPE). Unsurprisingly, the discussion focused on Sayona Mining's avoidance strategy, which modified her Authier project to bypass its automatic subjection to the BAPE. We invite you to listen to it as a whole, but here is a transcription of the strong points to remember:
KM: What we're seeing right now is that companies will negotiate with economic departments. They are trying to circumvent the licensing or public consultation process by dividing the project into parts so that the whole project is not studied [by the BAPE] as Transcanada wanted to do with Energy East.
MCA: And we saw a mine in Abitibi [(the Authier project of Sayona Mining)] where we lowered a little bit the annual production so that it does not go to the BAPE.
KM: [...] In short, we circumvent the rules constantly. And it's problematic because the BAPE is one of the organizations that allows us to consult the public and restore the bond of trust with the citizens. As we know, people have become cynical institutions, and the BAPE is an institution that consults the real world, not just big lobbies, it's not done behind closed doors, it's transparent and it's that's why many people in the business community, the industrialists, do not like the BAPE because what would be done behind the closed doors where they would have the big end of the stick, suddenly is in the open and then it is necessary that they expose themselves to making modifications to the project and even having to deal with projects that should be refused.
[...]
MCA: In closing, to talk about the BAPE itself. The BAPE has never had so few cases to deal with, even as in a previous report it is said that they are people with gray heads, pensioners who introduce themselves, who seem interested in that. Are we asphyxiating the BAPE?
KM: We are slowly withdrawing its relevance, but on the other hand, I think it's a mistake. In the past, you remember, some 20 years ago, there were huge debates on the issue of water in Quebec. And, eventually, the government has given the BAPE the mandate to consult the entire population on the issue of water. And after that, we no longer heard about it, the BAPE managed to report on the subject that led to a consensus, there is a water policy that was adopted. [...] We have an institution that is there for that, that works well, that is recognized, that is there for a long time and that is the envy, it must be said, of several jurisdictions in the world. In the end the government makes the decisions, but he will be able to say "I consulted citizens in a transparent and rigorous way". And so, let's use it our BAPE. He is there, he is credible, he has investigative powers.
MCA: If we want to use it.
KM: Exactly.
(20min delay)