Full speed ahead on exploration and exploitation of shale-gas deposits up and downtheshoresof theSt. LawrenceRiver, the Quebec government says. But full stop on even exploration for oil and gas under the St. Lawrence estuary. Isn't this just a little contradictory?
And the hypocrisy, or whatever it is, gets worse when you take a close look. The ban on submarine exploration and development, announced this week by Natural Resources Minister Nathalie Normandeau, is based on a detailed environmental-impact study. There will be no such study on the shale-gas issue, however, the government insists.
The marine environment of the estuary is, we are told, highly sensitive because 27,000 species of wildlife exist there. On the other hand, shale-gas development is planned for areas with, apparently, only a few species. Of course that list does include people, but the prospect of a quick buck seems to have mesmerized the government.
In fairness, the contrast is not utterly stark. The nasty example of the Gulf of Mexico this summer reminded us that large-scale underwater leaks, while rare, can be truly disastrous; even the harshest critics of shale-gas drilling don't offer a direct comparison with the dangers of an uncontrolled underwater leak.
Still, how can the same government be so prudent on one hand and so nonchalant on the other?
A related study, on certain other Quebec waters, will not be finished for another two years. Until that report is in there'll be no work in those areas, either, Normandeau has decreed. It strikes us as particularly shortsighted to ban even exploration work in all these aquatic areas. Natural resources are the patrimony of all Quebecers, and knowing what we have is surely an essential basis for sound policy.
The ban on development in the estuary has been welcomed by those concerned about the environment, just as the green light for shale gas was good news for those concerned about the economy. The problem is that you would be hard-pressed to find anyone at either extreme of that spectrum: Almost everyone nowadays understands that the challenge is to find a way to fit these two essential interests together into one coherent policy.
And this is the point where Jean Charest's government is letting us down: There's nothing coherent about honouring the conclusions of a study in one case while refusing even to conduct such a study in the other case.