Re: The limits of municipal jurisdiction

Gray Merriam | Aug 10, 2016

Dear Editor,

In your editorial (The Limitsl of Municipal Jurisdiction, Aug 4/16), you stated, "… no one really wants to live next to a power plant of any type." You also made the point that we all share the electricity grid. But you did not address the geographic distribution of the demands for electricity. That could leave readers with the false belief that urbanites can create unlimited demands for electricity, and low-density population areas will be burdened with those generator plants that no one wants. Provincial elections will not enable those rural folks to change such an outcome. The relocation of the Oakville generator plant illustrates the political nature of the contest.

But there was a case in 2001 in the municipality of Hudson, Quebec that may suggest a future jurisdictional direction that could give local municipalities power over higher jurisdictions. In that 2001 case, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld a law passed by the local municipality (Hudson) and concluded that municipalities have an important role to play in environmental protection. In that case it also was pointed out that all provincial and territorial legislation allows municipalities to make bylaws for the general health and welfare of their citizens.

The Brundtland Commission (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987) had also made the point that "local governments should be empowered to exceed, but not to lower, national norms" for environmental protection.

If local municipalities provide substantial evidence that locating energy generators in their landscapes will denigrate those landscapes in future, perhaps we need to listen to their propositions rather than refer only to "… long-standing principles of confederation…".