Sharp opinions about mines and mining from Jack Caldwell
Random header image... Refresh for more!

Mining the private sector for career satisfaction, justice, & successful mining

Many vigorous e-mails come to my machine.  Here is one that just appeared.   

Hello R:   Thank you for getting in touch with me this morning and giving me a  brief overview of what services you provide and how ethics can be  applied.   In retrospect I would have liked to ask why you believe that the  private sector is a better avenue for career choices than the public  realm.  Could you forward me your thoughts on this when you have a  moment?   Regards,  E

Hi E:   The public sector (particularly federal and/or provincial governments) are like a rut.   A rut is just a long grave. Leave your creativity at home..as well as any notion you may have about personal ethics. There is no room or possible application in that rather mundane yet poisonous environment. Public service..sorry no such concept.   Service me — me me– mmmeeee— our clients are simply a nuisance and “why do we continue to fund our enemies”?    Oh well that pretty much describes how I feel and think about the “public sector.”    R.

They were not talking about India.  I suspect they were not even talking about politicians who ban uranium mining in the Canadian Atlantic provinces so they can send their lusty youth to Alberta and Saskatchewan.   But just maybe they were talking about Ontario and its currently unsuccessful attempt to clarify rights and/or title to lands where there might be uranium.  I refer of course to the Ardoch Algonquins thrown in jail for resisting a mining company.  Seem their only way out is thus:

                                                       Laocoon in the Belvedere Courtyard, 1995

Personally I suspect it will take a reincarnation of Solomon to settle the issue.  We seem to have tried law, courts, judges, and the whole apparatus of western civilization. 

I was always taught: hard cases make bad law.  And this is a hard case.   This is not a situation where laws should be made solving a hard problem that truly belong in the lap of the politicians and public sector employees who so eagerly seek out their privileged positions.   

Clearly there are opposing positions that reflect the agony of Canada as it goes through the pains of changing from a seemingly homogeneous & harmonious white society to a fractious heterogeneous society of aboriginals, Asians, Hispanics, and first to fourth nations.  Not to mention the whole-scale erosion of the Anglican Church and the de-pedification of the Roman church.  And the resurgence of worship of nature and the spirit.

These are times that demand leadership and the application of energy by elected and unelected public servants.  If this is not done, all we will have is more unseemly civil unrest and fuller and fuller prisons. 

I can empathise for the tribe in wanting to share in the wealth of the territory they feel is theirs.  I cannot admire or support their processes that are illegal and no better than those of Hamas or any other terrorist out to get his way by fear.  I learn nothing reading the silly rants and raves of socialists and environmentalists and pseudo-aboriginals who grew up white, rich, and privileged.  So at a time that I can come to no other conclusion than: put ‘em in jail if they misbehave and break the law, I cannot but wonder if my retreat into right-wing bigotry is the direct result of laziness on the part of public servants to act; and on the failure of people of good will and responsible action to step up to action. 

PS:  The following picture is titled:  Solomon helps judge the fashion show:

 Solomon helps judge the fashion show 

1 comment

1 Eileen Kinley { 04.18.08 at 8:06 am }

Civil disobedience has a long and honourable history with lots of reasons to admire it. It is a rude awakening to realize that anyone should need to take such action in Canada. The peaceful blockade of the uranium exploration activity was supported by a coalition of Algonquin and non-native peoples. 16 communities (townships, cities) in the area have passed motions to ban uranium exploration and mining in the area.

The Algonquin communities involved in this action do not want to “share in the wealth” of a uranium mine. They want to obey their law to protect the land, which includes preventing any uranium exploration or mining. They want to stand up for their right to be consulted on a nation-to-nation basis. They want the right to say “no”, just as the First Nations said no to exploration near Screech Lake in NWT.

As stated by the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, “the courtroom is not the most effective forum to settle the dispute”. Experience in Northern Ontario has proven that the only result of FNs initiating court proceedings is to bankrupt the community.

The RCAP also states: “… One of the most significant weaknesses of comprehensive land-claims policy is the lack of any provision for interim measures before submission of a comprehensive claim and during negotiations. Governments are free to create new third-party interests on the traditional lands of aboriginal claimants right up until the moment a claims agreement is signed. It should not be necessary for aboriginal people to mount blockades to obtain interim measures while their assertions of title are being dealt with.”

So why do our laws not reflect these findings?

I believe greed - on the part of governments and other institutions that create and use our laws - has a great bearing on the lack of action to recognize the rights of First Nations (and private land owners wrt “free access”).

Leave a Comment