For corporate self-seeking alliances with governments, less oversight, less regulations “liberates” private wealth creation.
The rich get disproportionately richer. Un-allied middle-class, the poor, get poorer.
Taseko’s “lifeline” caught by Williams Lake “net benefits” Taseko’s alliances. “Government” grasping this lifeline becomes pro-corporation with business alliances.
The 2010 Federal Panel scathingly rejected Taseko’s environmental impact. Taseko’s mine development was reckoned unacceptable for the public good. Provincial government assessment had approved Taseko’s mine development before the 2010 federal hearings.
Federal rejection was unacceptable for allied “net benefactors.” A delegation supporting Taseko went to Ottawa with their grievances to override this unfavourable federal environmental assessment. They sought the elimination of the entire federal assessment process. The Conservative cabinet had overriding power. Ottawa granted this delegation a second federal assessment chance for Taseko.
Community clash is exacerbated. Marginalized are those cognizant of elite plundering of our planet…degradation of this valued watershed/eco-system, degradation of inter-generational community social justice, over-stepping unresolved aboriginal land title which government must legally respect until resolution.
For fallacious trickle-down “theory,” we lose another level of legitimate government oversight. Government oversaw private investment/business…regulating unholy practices. Regulating was/is/will be necessary for social justice.
Governments in partnership/alliance with big corporations/business compromises/jeopardizes the commonwealth of the whole community.
Government/private/partnerships permits “Wham bam, thank you ma’am” plunder, profit, raping and running economics. When “their” profits dry up, this corporation will seek “their” profits elsewhere.
Left are undeniable downloaded “externalized” risks, costs, damages to environmental eco-systems, to general public, to future generations. Left…a divided richer/gapping/poorer community.
Mayor’s stance “…to work for the betterment of all communities” we must agree to disagree and City council solidifies community rift. This divisive clash isn’t community building.
Must we agree to disagree?