Blog
Mar 29, 2011

Who Owns This Town? Responses to New Dawn’s Public Meeting

When the money was announced for the harbour dredge I tweeted the following:

1965. (Today is the beginning of the closure of the container terminal.)

Referring of course to the year that marked the beginning of the end for the steel plant. I figure forty-odd years from now we’ll look back on the container terminal as just another relic from the fossil-fuel age. (A friend replied that since we’re living in a more environmentally friendly era, we’re bound not to make the same mistakes. I refer you to Alberta’s tar sands.)

I’ve already stated my ambivalence about the actual form any port development will take. But here’s the thing: however the port gets developed, the community should have the final say, and the community should be the primary beneficiary. For better or for worse, the community will have to deal with the consequences.

New Dawn — at an open community meeting last night — just goes that one step further and reminds us that self-determination is not a gift. It is a responsibility. If our right to self-determination is withheld, it must be taken back. But this is not to repeat the familiar refrain of victimhood. What we truly lack is not self-determination, but self-confidence.

For anyone who continues to doubt the community’s ability to determine its own future, have some faith: capacity, if and where it’s lacking, will come. But it requires us owning our resources — rather than having them liquidated — and then reinvesting the capital. In what? How about a diversified local economy? Imagine Creative Economies in arts & culture; Knowledge Economies in innovation and technology; Green-Collar Economies in agriculture and energy. Now we’re talking capacity.

No matter what happens, some of us won’t be happy with the results. That’s life. But we’re adults. We’ll deal. The distinguishing feature of an adult conversation is not that it resolves every contradiction, but that it contains them.

Below are some commentaries from friends who attended last night’s meeting.

11 comments
Mike Targett By Mike Targett
I'm the owner/operator of Targett Design, a web design company in Sydney, Cape Breton, Nova Scotia. Follow me on Twitter @miketargett or email me at mike@miketargett.com.
 
Tags
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Related
Port Development: We Contain Multitudes

As read on CBC’s Information Morning Cape Breton and published at whatsgoinon.ca I’m skeptical about the potential environmental impact of dredging the harbour, to say nothing of a container terminal itself. I’m apprehensive about the potential economic spin-off of the … Continue reading→

Small Town, Low/No Growth Economy

“If we want to conserve energy and learn how to live on a sustainable scale, we should look to small towns and communities where low-growth or no-growth economies are supporting a high quality of life and housing treasuries of knowledge … Continue reading→

 
 

  • Pingback: Search Terms of Endearment: 2013 - Mike Targett | miketargett.com

  • Sean Howard

    [This letter originally appeared in The Cape Breton Post. Sean has allowed me to republish it here.]

    I am writing to commend Neal Livingston for his concise denunciation of the Darrell Dexter government for its “phony propaganda campaign” on behalf of the Irving shipyard in Halifax (Province should be backing arts, not warships, July 25, 2011).

    Livingston is right: instead of expensive, bureaucratic boosterism in defence of an outmoded and myopic big industry model of development, Nova Scotia needs to invest in the green, co-operative and creative entrepreneurship of the “new economy.”

    And Livingston’s critique can be applied with equal force to the imminent $37-million dredging of Sydney harbour (subsidized almost entirely by federal, provincial and municipal taxpayers), the first stage of an envisaged reindustrialization of the city.

    The second stage, predictably, is an exorbitant advertising campaign, enriching numerous consultants and cheerleading groups, painting the picture of a thriving, prosperous megaport, with the inevitably grim consequences of “success” (pollution, hazardous materials, urban sprawl, unaffordable housing, higher crime rates, intrusive security, etc.) carefully airbrushed away.

    Precisely because of the devastating failure of capitalism in our region, and the deliberate governmental neglect of alternative, co-operative models, many people are desperate to believe in this one-dimensional vision. But with a naturally deepwater, privately-funded international terminal in Melford, plus significant unused capacity in Halifax, the realistic prospects are far dimmer than the ceaseless spin suggests.

    It may be, in fact, that we never recoup the financial costs of dredging the harbour, while the costs to the marine environment, as local fishermen are right to fear, are likely to be severe. While there is considerable hidden unease about the project, open opposition is rare and generally greeted with scorn and hostility. But in all probability, what we are about to witness is an environmental crime, committed in pursuit of an economic illusion: a false, not a new, dawn.

  • Andrew Lionais

    I am a 30 year old native of Cape Breton. I grew up in Bras d’Or, sailed during the summers in North Sydney harbour and now live half the year in Sydney. I feel connected to the region and look forward to prosperous times again. The proposed construction of a container port in Sydney Harbor has lifted the hopes of many in the area with its promises of good, long-term jobs and economic spin-off that will reach thousands on the island. I have worked in the marine industry for the last ten years on the west coast and the thought of landing a good job in Sydney is enticing, but still not enough to convince me that a container port would be a wise decision for the long-term sustainability of our town, island or planet. I fear that it will change our harbour for the worse. We will likely have to deal with a great deal of light and noise pollution, an increase in crime, and harbour waters that will get dirtier, rather than healthier. We will live with an increased threat of the introduction of invasive species and damaging oil spills. I am also skeptical of any corporate or government pledge to make good on the number of jobs it promises us.

    I believe that every man and woman in Cape Breton, and the world, should have the opportunity for well-paying, meaningful employment, but we should be focused on building a strong local economy founded on sustainability, with limits dictated by our fair share of available resources. We should put effort into supporting local business, securing our food and energy supply, and increasing the efficiency of our homes and businesses. These endeavours alone would provide many jobs on our island; possibly rivaling the forecasted numbers of the port.

    We live in an economically depressed region, and to rally against the construction of the container port and the employment it will provide, without providing alternatives, would be wrong in my point of view. However, to not consider more sustainable alternatives, and put some time and effort into finding more sustainable solutions for our island’s future, could be a very expensive, highly-visible, long-lasting mistake. There are no guarantees with this venture, and it’s a lot of eggs to put in one basket.

    The construction of a new container port, and ports in general, signifies an increase in global trade. This is a step backwards in our fight to protect the environment and pass on a hospitable planet to future generations. We have been polluting our water and air, degrading our soil, and creating mountains of waste for much too long. If we were to take stock of our available resources and divide them equally between all people on this planet, we would find that we are living far beyond our means. Our unsustainable western consumer culture comes at the expense of other populations and the planet we live on. It is the driving force behind many violent atrocities and recent environmental catastrophes in the world. We have been bombarded with media for generations that tells us we need to have and to own more and more. We have been taught in schools and our communities for decades that whoever has the most wins. Both not true.

    We actually need very little, and many of the happiest cultures around the world are testament to this. We need food, clothing, shelter, and community; all of which we can provide sustainably. We must learn to live with less. Resources are finite and we are already at the breaking point. As developing nations grow and increasingly transition toward western values, things will get worse. We run the risk of running out of food and water in our quest to obtain material wealth. Capitalism has its limits and we are approaching them fast.

    If we have exhausted all alternatives to a container port and reached the end of the debate, I would urge the community to step up and get involved. No one but ourselves will look out for our interests. The planning, construction, and operation, if left to outside organizations, will be driven by profit margins alone; environmental and social concerns will be met with the minimum adherence required. Why would we allow the corporate elite to get richer at the expense of our beautiful harbour and incredible island community. Now is the chance to take ownership, write the rulebook, and become the watchdog. An island of planners are better than a handful, and with careful thought, transparency, and eagerness to rise above the status quo, we should be able to design, build and operate the most sustainable port in the world. We have the opportunity to set a new standard and become a global example of commitment to excellence. Let us not judge our success by quarterly profits, but by our unwavering integrity and strength of community.

  • Alison Uhma

    Last night’s Open Community Meeting on Port Development served well as both an informational session and an opportunity to rally around an identity of community. I admittedly find this issue confusing; in my previous reading and discussions with peers I found it hard to see past complex notions of “who is who?”, “who owns what?”, and “when did who own what?”. To spend an evening taking part in a discussion led by a host of esteemed community leaders focused on the why of community harbour ownership was inspiring. Community ownership is a viable and sure way to cement a future where allocation and distribution of gains are employed to best broaden and improve the future of Cape Breton. Cape Breton is a place that we can and should believe in; it is deserving of the optimism afforded last night. Though I proceed cautiously with the idea of immediate port promotion, I do not hold such wary sentiment in regard to community ownership. My hope is that the applause and united yeas of the people this evening will carry weight in New Dawn’s meeting with ECBC come Thursday.

  • Christie MacNeil

    I would like to take this opportunity to thank New Dawn for understanding the necessity of a dialogue on port development, harbour stewardship, and a sustainable visioning of our Island home. I applaud their tenacity and patience in negotiating a meeting with John Lynn and Enterprise Cape Breton Corporation and wish them luck on Thursday. Top-down directives and antagonistic governance must be discouraged as we move forward in planning our future.

    While I do not support the idea of port development as progressive visioning, I stand behind New Dawn’s assertion that if we begin with community ownership of community assets, we can then come together as a community to discuss how we want to grow, engage and sustain our Island in the years to come.

  • Nicole Morrison

    Being a part of the crowd and observing a room of three hundred or more people with locally derived issues, which needed the attention of a community meeting, was a very heartwarming experience. An issue that each person cared about not only for their own self interest, but for others who live in the community and the wellbeing of a generation that has yet to speak for themselves.

    A bridge was built between the young and old at the meeting, while everyone had a sense of hope that their community and its economic stability was in the right hands of New Dawn; a diverse community organization that had become the voice for the concerns of its constituents in the room. The issue of the federal government having control of the harbor bottom and its port fees were on the minds of most, namely that the capital benefits may become lost in limbo instead of belonging to the community. Though everyone may not have the same opinion on the dredging benefits or its said opportunities, everyone had the same concerns about the ownership of the harbor bottom and was very willing to hand their trust to New Dawn when meeting with Enterprise Cape Breton on Thursday morning.

  • Yvette Rogers

    The night opened with an inspiring speech from Doug Lionais that explained the vision behind New Dawn, and what their organization was structured like. A particular point that struck a chord was that they envision a community that is self-reliant.

    Following a rabble-rousing animated delivery from Rankin MacSween, the public got up to speak. This portion of the event was initially described as that they would be touching on each of the four points listed. Several people got up to say their thoughts both on community asset ownership and about the end-result proposed container port project. There wasn’t any discussion of the 4 points however.

    Personally, I felt that instilling the perception of the harbour as an asset, and intervening in ECBC’s acquisition of said asset, was a necessary measure; engaging the public on this matter was accomplished at this event.

    However, the term community-ownership was used. Who is the community? What is their vision? Who among us might not see the container port as a viable business opportunity at all? Who dared say anything in the early stages when there was an angry mob with shovels? Where in the past has their been an opportunity to voice what alternatives there are for using the harbour?

    Why must they “market now”? If the business case is as solid as they say, why is the window so narrow? Aren’t we missing other narrow windows, for instance investing in our community infrastructure, tourism infrastructure, human resources in the culture sector? I heard a man say his children moved to Toronto and he never got to see his grandkids. I wanted to ask him what they do for a living there. Do they work in a container port? When people get together to squawk about outmigration, they had at least better examine more closely the reasons that most folks leave. Yes, a certain number of people who are still being schooled to believe that working in the labour force is the only option for them, do head west to work. Many more are leaving to find a place they consider more desirable to live in. A place with options, with culture, with opportunities for choice.

    In order to create more opportunity for choice, we can take a peek at the term New Dawn used to describe their vision. Self Reliance. We have an opportunity to invest in something sustainable. I doubt a container port is in any way sustainable. We have the opportunity to begin to develop a new community, removing ourselves from the dirty-fossil-fuel based historical functions of industry and into the progressive and forward-thinking renewable technologies. We have not enough doctors and nurses, we have reactive and antiquated health care, we have issues that a community psychologist could certainly dive into, and yet encourage the masses to get together to support this one idea of a container port (which is at the end of the scope of the harbour-bottom issue). These people simply don’t know any better, and aside from those who have made their minds up that this could “work”, seemingly without any regard for future unpredictable market-driven obstacles that will certainly arise, the rest have just jumped on board to say “we need this”.

    We do need to take control of the harbour, and to look at the harbour as an asset. Then, we need to allow for all the visions to be presented. What are our options? What are the REPERCUSSIONS of those options? Will this be a HEALTHY choice for our community? For our Island’s biodiversity?

    If we invested 1/8th of the money it took to dredge the harbour into cultural activities, and/or the music industry, in the communities surrounding that very harbour, I think we would be astounded with the positive result. Resulting in attracting more people to our city, or at least diverting the current complaint of there being “nothing for the tourists to do”. It would instill a sense of pride, and could give as many young artists (I dare say there are more of whom than there are young labourers) an opportunity to work.

    Thanks to New Dawn for opening this door

  • Erika Shea

    I left last night’s meeting hopeful, humbled, inspired and yet apprehensive.

    I was made hopeful by the common sense feasibility of the port proposal under discussion. It wasn’t distant, difficult, or in the realm of dreams and ideas. It has been done, done successfully, and was very easy to envision community owned and led port development becoming a reality in Cape Breton.

    I was humbled and inspired by the number of people who took the time to attend and the quality of the perspectives shared. A great number of people in this community are concerned, informed and seriously invested in the outcome of this issue. There is so much reassurance in this.

    And yet the nagging sense of apprehension. I think the meeting helped me to truly grasp the gulf between the future communities that the ECBC and New Dawn proposals would help to create. Between on the one hand a one-off one-time top-down project investment framework in which dividends are used to sustain a federal organization whose utility, necessity and intentions are being increasingly questioned; and on the other, a community governed trust in which any surplus would be leveraged to foster the vitality of many different social and economic endeavours and sectors. Between on the one hand more stand alone industrial investment and development that benefits those directly involved while the rest of the community continues to struggle against the consequences of poor planning, poor investments and poor governance; and on the other, the beginnings of a new direction grounded in health, happiness, diversity, and sustainability. It feels like there is so much to be gained but also so much to be lost.

  • Suzanne MacNeil

    There will come a time when climate change and ecological devastation will be as urgent an issue to us here in the CBRM as outmigration and a dwindling population. Today, we talk about community control of our assets and locally-generated wealth. Tomorrow, we may well be talking with great urgency about how to ration home heating fuel, reclaim marginally agricultural land, and desperately working to secure the last remaining supplies of unpolluted freshwater that haven’t been sold off to bottling companies for profit. Our situation won’t be unique, and there are places in the world facing some version of this disaster today.

    This is not to create a picture of cynicism and despair. Our current conversations in taking community control of our wealth and assets will not just aid us in stabilizing our current socioeconomic indicators, but may be our salvation for the challenges in the coming decades. Getting ourselves practiced in exercising true democratic control of our natural resources, industries, and other assets will be key in equitably distributing our precious, life-sustaining resources. Otherwise, we risk allowing an oligarchic elite to insulate themselves with the glut of our world’s wealth and resources, leaving the rest of us to fight each other for scraps. This dystopia is far from inevitable, but it will require of us no small amount of work for an alternative. Maybe, in its own paradoxical way, getting democratic local control over a piece of transportation infrastructure will start giving us the practice we need.

  • Albert Lionais

    I think everyday about the “what-ifs” of Cape Breton. What if our coal mines and steel production had been owned by the community? What if we received our fair share from the Province, what is rightfully ours? What if we didn’t keep making the same mistakes over and over again?

    What if we developed a port that did actually increase jobs here? What if it was economically and environmentally sustainable? What if the profits from that industry stayed in Sydney? What if my friends and I could get jobs that would raise us above the poverty line? What if Cape Bretoners could afford to buy land in Cape Breton, have families in Cape Breton and live fulfilling lives in Cape Breton?

    There are a lot of what-ifs, but a big one is what if the community actually decided what was best for the community for once? What if that happened?

  • Mark Sparrow

    As an active member of our islands’ youth, as a sort-of novice student of community economic development, and as a passionate supporter and developer of locally owned co-operative organizations based on certain values and principals such as self-help, self-responsibility, concern for community, democratic control, etc., I must say that one thing I have learned to date is that anyone who knows anything about how to make communities work, grow, and become sustainable would tell you that community ownership of its key assets is absolutely imperative to development.

    If the community does not own and benefit from its assets, someone else does. Given the complexity of such things as port development, the immense planning that goes into creating a ports master plan, the governance structures that need to be put in place to oversee the project, many issues as complex as these admittedly go over my head. It’s not the sector I work in and I don’t have the direct experience, as I am sure most people can relate to. But it does not take an understanding of these greater complexities, or to be a professional in port development or governance structures, to know and understand that it’s never a good thing when a competent and capable community does not own its most important assets.

    New Dawn, as we have heard, does not want to own the Greenfield site, they want to ensure that mechanisms are put into place so that it is used to maximize the return to the community when the time comes for that site to be developed and when ships cross our harbour bottom. That, I think, is a very simple concept to grasp, and one that everyone should have no problem getting behind.

    We do, as Doug Lionais mentioned on Monday on CBC Mainstreet and as Rankin MacSween communicated to the CBRM council recently, have the responsibility as a community to take ownership, and to be the good stewards of our most precious assets. We do, in my opinion from my experience working with various capable organizations in Cape Breton, have the expertise and resources within our community to rise up to meet any such challenge.

    Actually New Dawn is itself, as a model of a successful community economic development organization in Canada and internationally, a shining example of what can be accomplished here when talented people with a concern for community collaborate to meet the community’s needs.

    I believe it was Margie Gillis who mentioned on CBC Mainstreet yesterday the clear benefits of collaboration and co-operation in reaching for common goals. I happen to agree and I think you would be very hard pressed to find anyone who thinks collaboration is a bad thing; and if you did, that person would be wrong.

    Again, there are a lot of pieces here that most of us not involved with port development can’t pretend to know everything about, but we can all be certain that collaboration works and is a key requirement for community economic development.

    Community ownership and collaboration are not just buzzwords. These concepts are studied internationally in theory and practice and their benefits are evident wherever they are applied. In fact it is how we got to where we now find ourselves with this project. We have had a great deal of community support for this project from the beginning, and a great deal of collaboration among those who wanted to see it move forward and up until this point there appeared to be a unified front moving on the issue.

    Although we have heard that there is now to be a meeting scheduled between New Dawn and ECBC on Thursday, from my understanding the fate of this particular asset, and in turn the resulting way in which it will be used and to what extend the community will benefit from it, lay with the decision of the board of Laurentian Energy.

    I know that these are some of the most experienced business leaders in our community that make up this board, and many of us young people can only hope that one day we will have the experience and opportunity to be in a position of influence to help in deciding and charting the course for Cape Breton’s economic future. However, I do know from many conversations I’ve been having for months with my peers on this topic that if we were in the position to have that influence right now, it would be unanimous that those assets should belong to the community and that the community should take the lead, working in co-operation with and supported by all levels of government.