Public hearing starts for Diavik's water licence, leading into mine's upcoming closure
Diavik is expected to stop producing diamonds next year, but its current water licence expires before that. It is applying for another one in order to finish production and begin its closure and post-closure monitoring. The term for the water licence would be 10 years.
Several groups are scheduled to present at the hearing and ask questions during the sessions this week, including the Tłı̨chǫ government, Yellowknives Dene First Nation, Łutsel K'e Dene First Nation and Deninu Kųę́ First Nation. Diavik, the territorial and federal environmental departments, and the Environmental Monitoring Advisory Board are also participating.
In presentations submitted to the Wek'èezhìi Land and Water Board in advance, the groups laid out their chief areas of interest. For many, that includes bringing more traditional knowledge into Diavik's closure plan and adding criteria for cultural uses of the land and water. The Tłı̨chǫ government has also said its main focus will be protecting Lac de Gras.
For its part, Diavik has said it is one of the first N.W.T. mines that will have a traditional knowledge monitoring program that it's developing with Indigenous partners.
In its submissions, Diavik pointed to overlap between the water licence renewal and its final closure and reclamation plan — two separate documents.
It suggested many of the topics presenters have identified would be better addressed in other ways, like through the closure plan, instead of through the water licence renewal.
The hearing is set to run Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday at the cultural centre in Behchokǫ̀.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBC
33 minutes ago
- CBC
Can the ZEV mandate survive political pressure and industry objections?
Social Sharing With the federal carbon tax dead and gone, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has found a new target among the Liberal government's climate policies — the electric vehicle availability standard, otherwise known as the zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) mandate. "We will legalize, into the future, your right to drive a gas or diesel-powered truck or car by repealing the Liberal EV mandate," Poilievre said last week, while restating his desire to see a number of Liberal policies repealed. In a Conservative fundraising email in June, Poilievre's deputy leader, Melissa Lantsman, put the issue in even more bracing terms, writing that the "radical Liberals" were planning to make gas-powered vehicles "illegal" and "force" people to buy "expensive" EVs. Appealing to supporters in rural areas — where EVs might be less practical at the moment — Lantsman added that "Liberals in Ottawa and in busy downtown cores think they know better than you." On Thursday, Poilievre announced that Conservatives would be launching a " nationwide campaign" to stop the mandate. The Conservative leader is smart enough to know he is pushing against a policy that is already under pressure. But that may set up the ZEV mandate as a test of the ability of Mark Carney's government to defend and meaningfully advance climate policy — a test Justin Trudeau's government arguably failed on the carbon tax. Whether or not the Charter can be read to give Canadians the "right" to own an internal-combustion engine, it's not quite the case that gas-powered vehicles will be made illegal. More specifically, the ZEV mandate establishes a series of escalating light-duty vehicle sales targets for auto manufacturers and importers, starting at 20 per cent in 2026 and reaching 100 per cent in 2035. Companies have some flexibility if they are unable or unwilling to meet the annual target — they can buy credits from other sellers or invest in charging infrastructure. The debate over EV policy Advocates of action to fight climate change have supported mandates as a way to guarantee a predictable supply of EVs and accelerate adoption — British Columbia and Quebec have each had ZEV mandates for several years. But North American automakers have bristled at the prospect of additional regulation and would prefer to stick with less-prescriptive regulations aimed at emissions from passenger vehicles. Though those "tailpipe" standards have typically been harmonized with the United States and the Trump administration is currently intent on repealing its regulations. Automakers have called on Carney's government to change or scrap the mandate. Against the backdrop of a trade war, the government seems willing to hear them out — Industry Minister Mélanie Joly told the Globe and Mail in July that the government was working with industry to "find what would be that right level." WATCH | Automakers want EV mandate removed: Automakers push Ottawa to drop EV mandates 1 month ago In arguing against the mandate, the auto industry also now points to a recent slump in EV sales in Canada. But auto executives themselves have said the recent slump is a " direct response" to changes in the rebates offered by federal and provincial governments. The federal government's EV incentive ended in January, Quebec's incentive was temporarily paused in February and British Columbia halted its rebate program in May. The Carney government has said it's working on a new rebate, but that promise might be pushing prospective buyers to wait. Joanna Kyriazis, director of public affairs at Clean Energy Canada, says the Liberal government should broadly stay the course with its mandate, but there are compromises it could make. The Liberals could, for instance, build in additional flexabilities or adjust some of the near-term targets. It could even adjust the ultimate target of 2035. "If this idea of a 100 per cent sales target is really polarizing and really scary to Canadians, then bring it down to 95 per cent — show that there's room for the niche applications or niche situations where in 10 years EVs still might not work," Kyriazis says, though adding that she thinks the technology will have advanced enough by then that such an allowance won't be necessary. Such changes might have the effect of watering down the initial policy without deviating from the larger goal — significantly increasing the use of non-gas-powered vehicles for the sake of reducing the greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change. "[The current sales targets are] in line with where the rest of the world is going," Kyriazis argues. "North America is on a little detour right now, but in the rest of the world, EV sales keep on rising." Worldwide, electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids accounted for 22 per cent of all new car sales in 2024, according to data from the International Energy Agency. In Canada, according to the IEA, EVs accounted for 17 per cent of all sales (Statistics Canada says it was 14 per cent). In the U.K. — where a Conservative government introduced a ZEV mandate in 2024, which was then amended by a Labour government — EVs accounted for 28 per cent of all new cars sold last year. In France, they accounted for 24 per cent. "If you look at jurisdictions that have high levels of EV adoption, it's because they have put in place the conditions to create strong consumer demand. So you have incentives … and you have a much more effective charging infrastructure rollout," says Brian Kingston, president of the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers' Association, which represents Ford, General Motors and Stellantis. Beyond the question of which type of regulations make more sense, that argument might make the case for governments putting even more money toward building charging infrastructure, alongside reintroducing rebates for consumers. The politics of EVs In the meantime, there will be a political fight — and it will apparently be waged in terms of a culture war. In a video posted in June, Poilievre said the mandate was not about reducing emissions, but about "imposing elite ideology on the common people." The last time a federal climate policy came under this much concentrated pressure, the carbon tax suffered from both the surging inflation that followed the pandemic and the falling popularity of the prime minister who introduced it. The Trudeau government then undercut its own policy with a carve-out aimed at voters in one region of the country. Appearing before a Senate committee not long after the Trudeau government made that move, Mark Carney said that "if something is going to be changed, then something at least as good is put in its place. Ideally, if you're going to change something, you put in place something better that still has that credibility and predictability that has the power that drives investment." That stated principle might hang over whatever the Carney government is considering now. Ultimately — for Carney and Poilievre, for Canadians in urban and rural communities — there is the unforgiving math of climate change and greenhouse gas emissions. Canada is currently aiming to reduce its total national emissions by at least 40 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030. The federal government is further aiming to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. The transportation sector accounted for 156.6 megatonnes of emissions in 2023 — 22.6 per cent of Canada's total emissions. Specifically, passenger cars and light trucks for 91.5 megatonnes — 13.2 per cent of the national total.
CBC
33 minutes ago
- CBC
Third Place Studio aims to revitalize Ottawa's downtown community
A new creative studio space in Centretown aims to revitalize the area and provide a 'third place' to foster community and connection.
National Post
3 hours ago
- National Post
Air Canada-CUPE Negotiations End in Impasse
TORONTO — Negotiations between CUPE and Air Canada have ended in impasse. Article content Air Canada still refuses to compensate flight attendants for all hours worked. Article content The union has been firm: all safety-related duties should be paid at full hourly rate. Air Canada does not agree. Article content On wages, Air Canada's last offer will still leave flight attendants living below poverty levels for many years to come. Article content We are heartbroken for our passengers. We do not want to go on strike, and we do not want to be locked out, but it is clear that Air Canada has no incentive to bargain. Article content Rather, Air Canada has refused to bargain in good faith due to the likelihood of the federal government using Section 107 of the Canada Labour Code to interfere in negotiations and have a contract imposed by an outside third-party arbitrator. Article content Article content Article content Article content Article content Contacts Article content Hugh Pouliot CUPE Media Relations (EN) hpouliot@ 613-818-0067 Article content Article content
