Thread by @Lidsville

Come on, @globeandmail. This claptrap was not fact-checked & should *never* have been printed. It gives the false impression the #SiteC dam received proper enviro review. It was NEVER subjected to proper regulatory approval.. .1/x #bcpoli #cdnpoli theglobeandmail.com/opinion/articl…

@globeandmail ..It's hard to know where to start with the false, misleading & inaccurate statements in it but let's start with this bit of fiction. The #SiteC dam is a political project that was passed only via *bypassing the BCUC regulator*! The govt wrote legislation to ram it past review!

..Not to mention that as a friend says, "enviro reviews of major projects in BC & Canada over the past 10+ yrs have just been a means to arrive at the conditions of approval rather than a determination of whether approval is in the best interests of the jurisdiction." #SiteC #TMX

..In fact, #SiteC is an example of precisely what your business school author proposes - lighter regulation, no utilities commission oversight, etc.. & look what we get for that: a stranded asset of a dam that's now facing serious, likely irremediable problems at public expense.

..In short #SiteC is a project that was rammed through a rushed BC-fed Joint Review Panel process with insufficient time & funds, removed from @BCUtilitiesCom's regulatory oversight by BC govt, & its federal enviro permit rushed through by Harper during writ period. DO BETTER.

@BCUtilitiesCom ..Oddly, the @globeandmail has just now slightly redeemed itself by running this editorial: "BC’s #SiteC has become a cash bonfire. Hard decisions are ahead"... but it repeats the sunk cost fallacy by saying we're at point of no return! We're NOT. #bcpoli theglobeandmail.com/opinion/editor…