Tailings Contaminate Lake

[Merry]

Oh, oh, I bet this is going to make some of the BC Liberal righties nervous:

http://vancouversun.com/storyline/ndp-t ... am-failure

The paragraph that struck me the most was this one:

Heyman also said as part of a wide review of B.C.’s environmental laws, penalties and enforcement, his regime will examine whether the time limit on laying charges needs to be increased.

If it really does take more than 3 years to do a thorough investigation, then the time limit SHOULD be increased. But if it can be shown that the only reason the investigation is taking so long is due to deliberate "foot dragging" then the people responsible should be either disciplined or punished.

Personally I have a hard time believing that 3 years is not long enough, but given the fact that the only reason no charges have been laid is because the investigation wasn't completed within the time allowed is bothersome. I could live with it if the investigation had found that charges were inappropriate ((I wouldn't have liked it, but I'd have accepted it). But to know that there's a possibility that the investigation might conclude that charges would have been appropriate, if only the investigation had been completed on time, is an awful prospect.

If it does turn out that once the investigation is complete charges ought to have been laid, then there needs to be a public inquiry into why the investigation took so long.

[Gone_Fishin]

With British Columbia's new NDP government choosing not to bring legal action, the only remaining avenue for pursuing charges is under the federal Fisheries Act.

Right from the CBC article. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-c ... -1.4236469

The NDP is the government now, and they CHOSE not to bring legal action against Imperial Metals.

[hobbyguy]

Actually I severely doubt that charges can be laid. There are many instances where "stuff happens" and nobody did anything criminally wrong.

IF for example, the mining company had engaged an engineering firm to design tailing pond expansions, and the company followed the certified designs of the engineering company , then the company and its officers have fulfilled the requirements for "due diligence". If the engineering company followed standard engineering practices, performed the recommended design cross checks, and an error in the initial design work slipped through, then they also likely meet the standards of "due diligence".

So it is possible that everyone met the standard of "due diligence" and thus are not criminally responsible.

Lawsuits for damages are another matter entirely.

[Queen K]

^Which is the case in the Oliver dam burst. No charges laid.

Stuff happens. And I think putting BC politics aside, it may be the case that an expensive court go around was avoided by both the Libs and the NDPers. Premier Horgan put the onus on the Feds to use their money and time.

[hobbyguy]

IF provincial lawyers decided that the standards for "due diligence" were met, then it is unlikely that the feds will find otherwise.

I AM only guessing that "due diligence" is the governing legal point, but it is in virtually all industrial accident cases - certainly the ones I have been involved in. There are other points law regarding such cases, but as far as I know, if the "due diligence" standard is met - no criminal charges.