“Social licence” is a concept on everyone’s lips these days as we debate pipelines, dangerous rail cargoes, appropriate forestry policies, etc. But this benign sounding term conceals a multitude of dangerous and arbitrary features. In the end, as I argue in my column for today’s ROB, it masks a unilateral requirement for a project’s opponents to give their blessing before a project can proceed, making it a licence for NIMBYists to kill things they don’t like, regardless of their net benefit to Canadians. This is unacceptable in a world where change always creates winners and losers and in a society governed by the rule of law.
Social licence: 007 never had such a powerful licence to kill!
Related Posts
Don’t look at unemployment, but rather employment to understand Donald Trump
Brian Lee CrowleySeptember 7, 2017
It is completely inappropriate for government or the Indians to use industry and the public as pawns in a turf war over sovereignty. (Veto/Consent)
If it continues all Canadians will be losers, observing from the sideline self destruction of Canada. Governments are elected and funded by taxpayers and duty bound to manage the land, natural resources, and the Indians pursuant to the Constitution. To sluff off this most sacred Crown duty to the public and industry in the absence of Statute and without contract is cowardly and borders on treason. It appears that the Chief Justice legislating a new social license from the bench of the Supreme Court of Canada in 2004 failed to, among other things, properly clarify or define the “Honor of the Crown”