CWS Refuses to Answer Outstanding Questions
In December 2002, we asked CWS questions about the EASG process, Open
House #4, Public Consultation on Doc. #4, and Doc. #5. They replied in early February, 2003, but failed to answer
several important questions.
So we asked them to answer the rest of our questions. They said no. We recently asked again. And again, CWS has refused to answer our questions.
WWLC's Outstanding Questions to CWS
M E M O R A N D U M
IER : Planning, Research and Management Services
7501 Keele Street, Suite 300,
Concord, Ontario, Canada
Telephone: (905) 660-1060
Fax: (905) 660-7812 E-mail: email@example.com
Rhonda Hustler, WWLC
From: Peter Homenuck, IER
Kevin Bechard, CWS
Phil Bosco, GLL
June 9, 2003
Subject: WWLC Response to Outstanding Questions (Our P666)___________________________________________________________________
You indicated in your e-mail messages of May
26 and June 4, 2003 that you are expecting responses to a WWLC document entitled Outstanding questions and concerns from previous
correspondence (February 25, 2003).
Issue #1: Public Consultation
A critical part of the Environmental Assessment is the public consultation
process, the events and opportunities by which we, the commmunity, can review and comment on the proposed expansion plan.
The process is a requirement under the EA Act. The consultation conducted by the proponent (CWS) must be meaningful
The consultation process is controlled by CWS, but we have both the
right and the responsibility to participate fully, making useful contributions throughout the process. In many ways,
the product is only as good as the process, and we're committed to making the public consultation process effective,
equitable, and useful.
What CWS Promised Warwick Watford At the beginning of the EA process, September 2000, CWS developed and committed
to a process for public consultation, including the EASG meetings, the number of Open Houses, newsletters, the release and
timing of documents, the review steps, and local meetings. CWS's plan was finalized and released in Document #1,
What We're Getting In our view, CWS has not been meeting those commitments set out in
Document #1. Following are the highlights and then our complete review from October 2002, of CWS's public consultation process
WWLC Review of Public Consultation: Memo to CWS September 30, 2002.
Paper #3 Final Changes We objected strongly when CWS ended discussion of Doc. #3 before we had completed our review at the EASG meetings.
CWS took the position that the document was finalized with adequate time for our comments.You'll remember that CWS refused
to answer questions or discuss Doc. #3 with the public present at the last Open House.
Changes in the
Public Consultation Process After finalizing Document #1, Public Consultation, in 2001, CWS changed
the EASG process, removing the opportunity for us to respond to CWS comments in the draft documents. CWS said that
the changes had been "developed through discussions among the Township of Warwick, the PRT, and CWS."
Lawyer Peter Pickfield, however, disagreed, saying the Council and PRT knew nothing about the changes and played no role whatsoever
in cahnging the EASG process. Under pressure from the EASG, CWS later withdrew the changes.
Timelines with Overlapping Discussion Papers Although CWS promised to release only one document at a time
and review each document separately, they continually overlap them. In December 2002, we had
Documents #4, #5, and #6 underway at the same time. Overlapping
the documents creates confusion and contradict CWS's own promise on public consultation.
Papers Documents #2, #3, and #4, didn't have important information
on methodology, in particular how the results of the public workshop had been used in Doc. #3 . CWS has still not provided the methodology for Doc.
#3 as promised, and without it we don't know how CWS incorporated community interests and values.