02526 1 MANITOBA CLEAN ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION 2 3 4 5 6 7 RED RIVER FLOODWAY EXPANSION PROJECT 8 9 10 11 12 ======================================= 13 Wednesday, March 2, 2005 14 Sheraton Hotel, 161 Donald Street 15 Winnipeg, Manitoba 16 ======================================== 17 18 Volume 11 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 02527 1 APPEARANCES: 2 Clean Environment Commission: 3 Mr. Terry Sargeant - Chairman Mr. Barrie Webster - Member 4 Mr. Wayne Motheral - Member Mr. Doug Abra - Counsel 5 Mr. Dave Farlinger - Technical consultant Ms. Cathy Johnson - Secretary to Commission 6 Ms. Joyce Mueller - Secretary 7 Manitoba Conservation: 8 Mr. Trent Hreno - Chair, Project Admin Team Mr. Bruce Webb - Chair, Tech Advisory 9 Committee Mr. Stewart Pierce - Counsel 10 11 Manitoba Floodway Authority: 12 Mr. Rick Handlon - Counsel Mr. Jim Thomson 13 Mr. Doug McNeil Mr. Doug Peterson 14 Mr. Cam Osler - Intergroup Consulting Mr. John Osler - Intergroup Consulting 15 Mr. David Morgan - TetrES Consulting Mr. George Rempel - TetrES Consulting 16 Mr. Robert Sinclair - KGS Ms. Marci Friedman-Hamm - KGS 17 18 Participants: 19 Mr. Bob Starr - Ritchot Concerned Citizens Mr. Bob Bodnaruk - RM of Springfield 20 Mr. Steve Strang - RM of St. Clements Mr. Orvel Currie - Counsel to Municipalities 21 Mr. Doug Chorney - Coalition for Flood Protection North 22 Mr. Kerry McLuhan - Coalition for Flood Protection North 23 Mr. Rob Loudfoot - 768 Association Mr. Y. Shumuk - 768 Association 24 Paul Clifton - Paul Clifton Mr. Jeff Frank - Rivers West 25 Gaile Whelan Enns - Manitoba Wildlands Earl Stevenson - Peguis Indian Band 02528 1 Participants: (continued) 2 3 Mr. Jake Buhler - Cooks Creek Conservation Mr. Lloyd Crooks - Cooks Creek Conservation 4 Mr. Jon Stefanson - Cooks Creek Conservation Mr. Daryl Chicoine - Counsel 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 02529 1 INDEX OF PROCEEDINGS 2 Presentation by Rivers West and Red River floodway Trail Coalition 3 Jeff Frank Glen Manning 4 Jim August Janice Lukes 5 Lorna Hendrickson 2533 Presentation by Paul Clifton 2580 6 Presentation by Mr. Stuart Manness 2670 Presentation by Mr. Douglas Ford 2697 7 Presentation by Ms Susan Goyer 2711 Presentation by Mr. Dave Woytowich 2729 8 Presentation by Mr. Ross Hadden 2743 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 02530 1 INDEX OF EXHIBITS 2 92 Presentation. Rivers West & The Red 2579 River Trails Coalition. Presented 3 by Jeff Frank, Lorna Hendrickson, Janice Lukes, Jim August 4 5 93 Presentation: Submission to the 2579 Manitoba Clean Environment 6 Commission Public Hearings Regarding Integration of Recreation 7 and Greenway Considerations as part of the Red River Floodway Expansion 8 Project. Submitted by Rivers West and The Red River Floodway Trail 9 Coalition 10 94 Mr. Clifton's presentation to CEC 2668 11 95 Mr. Clifton's submission, We Are 2668 12 All In It Together 13 96 Presentation of Mr. Manness to CEC 2745 14 97 Presentation of Mr. Kocay to CEC 2745 15 16 98 Presentation of Susan Goyer to CEC 2745 17 99 Presentation of Dave Woytowich to 2745 18 CEC 19 100 Presentation of Ross Hadden to CEC 2745 20 21 22 23 24 25 02531 1 INDEX OF UNDERTAKINGS 2 UNDERTAKING NO. PAGE 3 No undertakings given 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 02532 1 WEDNESDAY, MARCH 2, 2005 2 Upon commencing at 1:00 p.m. 3 4 THE CHAIRMAN: Good afternoon. Could 5 we come to order and get back to business. 6 Welcome to day 11 I believe it is. Just let me 7 briefly report on some business. Dave Farlinger, 8 from our consulting team, has been in contact with 9 Dave Andress, the ice jam engineer consultant that 10 we have engaged. He has received most of the 11 material that he needs to review. He has 12 indicated that he will likely have a written 13 report available for us on Monday and that he 14 would be available on Wednesday. We had hoped to 15 get him on Tuesday. It would have made our 16 proceedings next week flow a little easier; 17 however, he felt that wouldn't be sufficient time 18 for him to do all the work he needs to. So he 19 will be here on Wednesday. 20 So the business next week at the 21 beginning of the week, the agenda for Monday will 22 be more or less as already posted. Tuesday, we 23 may not have a full day. Wednesday, we'll deal 24 with Mr. Andress. And then we may finish 25 Wednesday afternoon or we may have to go into 02533 1 Thursday morning, we'll see how it goes. But I 2 don't see any reason why we won't conclude these 3 proceedings sometime next week, Wednesday or 4 Thursday. 5 This afternoon, we have two 6 presenters. First is Rivers West, the Red River 7 Corridor Association. Following them will be 8 Mr. Paul Clifton, resident of RM of Ritchot. 9 Turning to the Rivers West group. I'd 10 ask you all to introduce yourselves for the 11 record. Any of you that are giving evidence will 12 have to be sworn in, so the Commission Secretary 13 will do that following your introductions. So 14 please introduce yourselves for the record. 15 MR. FRANK: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 16 I am Jeff Frank. 17 MR. MANNING: I am Glen Manning. 18 MR. AUGUST: Jim August. 19 MS. LUKES: Janice Lukes. 20 MS. HENDRICKSON: Lorna Hendrickson. 21 22 (JEFF FRANK: SWORN) 23 (GLEN MANNING: SWORN) 24 (JIM AUGUST: SWORN) 25 (JANICE LUKES: SWORN) 02534 1 (LORNA HENDRICKSON: SWORN) 2 3 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. You may 4 proceed. 5 MS. HENDRICKSON: Mr. Chair, before we 6 begin our formal presentation this afternoon, I 7 just wanted to make a statement. After listening 8 to the testimony over the past few weeks and 9 particularly the narratives that we heard on 10 Monday of those people whose lives have been torn 11 apart or destroyed, it is really difficult to 12 present on recreational use of the floodway. We 13 respect the magnitude of the statements that all 14 presenters have made. 15 There has been so much divisiveness 16 and animosity in these proceedings and we 17 certainly do not want to add to this. We do not 18 want this to be another issue that causes 19 additional divisiveness and bitterness in the Red 20 River Valley. We are not advocating recreation 21 over water quality over mitigation or 22 compensation. All issues are important and must 23 be considered and addressed in a matter acceptable 24 to all. 25 The parties involved need to meet 02535 1 their obligation to the people of the Red River 2 Valley. Thanks. 3 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. 4 MR. FRANK: Thanks, Lorna. Our 5 presentation today is with regard to recreation 6 and greenway use of the floodway. The formal 7 submission was distributed some time ago to the 8 panel and the other intervenors. This 9 presentation provides some additional colour and 10 flesh to that presentation and a little less 11 detailed, perhaps a little more information. 12 What we'll be talking about today is, 13 first of all, an introduction to Rivers West and 14 the Red River Trail Coalition. We'll describe the 15 vision and strategy that the coalition has 16 developed to date. How we interpret from the 17 information available to us what the MFEA's vision 18 and strategy is for recreation and greenway 19 development as part of the project. We'll review 20 some precedents that we think are relevant to this 21 discussion. We'll talk about an integrated design 22 approach that incorporates recreation as part of 23 the project. And finally, we'll be making some 24 very specific recommendations to this CEC for 25 consideration for including in the licence. 02536 1 As Lorna said, the floodway project 2 includes some very serious issues such as flood 3 protection, groundwater, upstream flooding, 4 downstream concerns, costs, and we acknowledge 5 that all of these are legitimate interests and 6 we're not in any way, through this presentation, 7 intending to diminish any of those. However, we 8 do think it's important to acknowledge that 9 recreation greenway relates to the quality of life 10 for the citizens of Manitoba, and as well, to 11 addressing specific safety and security concerns 12 that are present in the floodway at this point in 13 time. 14 It's our job today, we feel, to 15 provide you with the information necessary to help 16 you gauge the importance of these values and 17 issues. Remember, please, that recreation has 18 always been part of this project from its very 19 inception. The very first analysis of 20 alternatives referred to recreation as one of the 21 significant benefits that an expanded floodway 22 could provide. 23 As recently as the March EIS draft 24 statement, recreation was acknowledged as one of 25 the four significant benefits of the expansion 02537 1 project. So it's been widely acknowledged, and 2 we'll talk in more detail about that through our 3 presentation, but it's been widely acknowledged 4 that recreation is part of this project. And 5 there is considerable public expectation that it 6 be included. 7 Our intent here today then is to 8 provide what we think is a reasonable process and 9 an effective process by which to go about doing 10 that. 11 I'm going to turn it over to Jim 12 August now. Jim is the Chair of the Rivers West 13 board and he'll introduce you to Rivers West and 14 what it's all about. Jim. 15 MR. AUGUST: Thank you, Jeff. I'm 16 pleased to be here presenting. Just a little bit 17 of background on Rivers West, Red River corridor. 18 It was incorporated in 1999. But about three 19 years prior to that, a fair amount of work had 20 gone on. It was really the focus of can one 21 promote the Red River corridor as a recreational 22 trail, as a tourism destination, not just for 23 local folks but for people coming in from out of 24 town. We did a lot of work in the early days with 25 destination Winnipeg, the tourism department as 02538 1 well as Tourism Manitoba or Travel Manitoba. 2 We started out looking at really from 3 Winnipeg going north through the Town of Selkirk 4 and eventually up to Gimli. But the interest 5 level by the various communities along the 6 corridor was very high. So really now what has 7 happened over the last number of years, our 8 organization, and I'm going to just make a quick 9 list of who is a member of the Rivers West board, 10 but we really now have a mandate dealing from the 11 U.S. border to Lake Winnipeg. 12 Members of our Board of Directors 13 represent Canadian Heritage, Federal Government, 14 Cidam (ph) which is the Francophone Economic 15 Development Corporation, Circle of Life, 16 Thunderbird House, City of Selkirk, City of 17 Winnipeg, Destination Winnipeg, Enterprises Riel 18 Corp. Inc., Greenway on the Red, Lower Fort Garry, 19 National Historic Site, Manitoba Culture, Heritage 20 and Tourism, Manitoba Intergovernmental Affairs 21 and the Recreational Trails Association, Manitoba 22 Water Stewardship, Nature Conservancy of Canada, 23 the O Tours is a private tour operator, RM of East 24 St. Paul, RM of Franklin, RM of Ritchot, RM of St. 25 Clements, St. Boniface Museum, Forks North Portage 02539 1 Partnership, Town of Emerson, Town of Morris and 2 Western Economic Diversification. So it's quite 3 diverse in the sense it has representatives from a 4 number of communities sitting on the board as well 5 as government departments. 6 Our mission statement is fairly 7 succinct. It's to develop the Red River corridor 8 as a destination. And in that sense, and we 9 really do look at the whole idea of tour 10 development. We have looked at a number of trail, 11 river trails throughout North America and really 12 see an opportunity for the local community to 13 benefit from the Red River as a destination. 14 We began looking at it as a marketing 15 and promotional initiative but the more we got 16 into it, we realized that there is much more to 17 it. And I should say we're seeing more of that as 18 these discussions go on. We're looking at the 19 whole conservation side and there's a fair number 20 of initiatives being undertaken focusing on that. 21 So our mandate, it's up on the board 22 here, it's development, promotion and management 23 of a natural, tourism, cultural and heritage and 24 recreational resources of the Red River from 25 Emerson to Lake Winnipeg; to development of an 02540 1 international greenway along the Red River, with 2 the focus on increasing tourism, recreation and 3 economic development activity; and the 4 implementation of the floodway portion of the Red 5 River greenway. So the floodway is an integral 6 part of this overall thrust. And the other thing 7 we are working on is the nomination of the Red 8 River as a Canadian heritage river. And it's 9 quite likely that that will be approved at their 10 annual or their biannual meeting to take place in 11 Winnipeg in 2007. 12 We understand that the premier has 13 committed to the development of an international 14 greenway. That's a public statement that's been 15 made, and we are part of that planning process. 16 And that again, just repeat, that the floodway is 17 an integral part of this greenway. It's the 18 largest piece of contiguous public land along the 19 greenway and becomes a very important part of our 20 overall plan and thrust from a recreational 21 planning perspective. 22 So with that, I'd like to turn it back 23 to Jeff. 24 MR. FRANK: Thanks, Jim. So we're 25 using this term "greenway" and we thought it fair 02541 1 to describe exactly what we mean by that. There 2 are endless numbers of definition. This one I 3 pulled out from B.C. Ministry of Environment. But 4 basically, what it talks about is corridors that 5 link areas of green space, provide wildlife 6 habitat, recreation opportunities, et cetera. So 7 in a very general sense, greenways are corridors 8 that are developed for a multiplicity of reasons. 9 More recently, Rivers West 10 commissioned a study on the development of a 11 greenway along the Red River corridor. This was 12 completed in 2004 and it describes three kinds of 13 greenway that we're contemplating as part of the 14 Red River greenway. 15 A recreation greenway that's focused 16 on trails, making links for recreational purposes, 17 ecological greenways that develop, enhance, 18 promote, protect significant, natural corridors. 19 Cultural and historic greenways that 20 focus on cultural and historic values along the 21 greenway portion and we believe all of these three 22 subtypes of greenway are applicable to the 23 floodway. 24 So who is this Red River Floodway 25 Trail Coalition? Jim explained what Rivers West 02542 1 is and we'll just talk briefly about the synergies 2 that brought this group together. 3 Back in March of last year, the MFEA 4 issued a call for expression of interest for 5 people who are interested in recreation in the 6 floodway. That became a catalyst for a number of 7 groups to come together. Janice Lukes is the 8 Chair of the coalition currently. She is also the 9 Chair of the St. Norbert Heritage Trails 10 Association, and in that capacity, started to 11 bring together a number of groups to respond to 12 this request from the Floodway Authority. 13 So as the proposal developed, a number 14 of groups came together. Many of them were 15 directed to the coalition by the Floodway 16 Authority, recognizing that it's appropriate that 17 these groups get together and work together. 18 Following that, the coalition members 19 realized that the submission was very conceptual, 20 that it really had little flesh to it and it was 21 necessary for the groups to come together to begin 22 to understand some of the issues and opportunities 23 that the floodway presents for the various 24 interests. As such, Rivers West started to 25 develop this Trail Coalition as more of a working 02543 1 entity. And it undertook to bring parties 2 together to view a greenway, to go down to Grand 3 Forks which has established a significant greenway 4 presence as part of their flood mitigation 5 measures. And following that, to undertake a 6 workshop, to bring stakeholders together and 7 develop together vision guiding principles and a 8 strategy that can become the foundation for future 9 consideration as part of the recreation 10 development. 11 So this coalition represents a very 12 broad public constituency. Approximately 70 13 groups have participated in coalition activities 14 to date. And this runs the gamut from various 15 trail associations and hiking associations and 16 naturalist associations and hang gliding 17 associations and various government agencies that 18 are interested in fitness, recreation and tourism. 19 In response to this opportunity to 20 present to the CEC, the coalition members saw that 21 there is a need to kind of further formalize that 22 process. In our formal submission, we have the 23 terms of an MOU; and to date, we have had response 24 from these various groups. And as you can see, 25 they represent a broad cross-section of municipal 02544 1 governments, of economic development organizations 2 and recreation organizations. 3 So out of this October workshop, the 4 coalition members developed a vision. And that, 5 simply put, is that the Red River Greenway will be 6 accessible, community destination provide high 7 qualities. It will be sustainable. It will 8 provide for outdoor recreation. And I think very 9 importantly, that it will provide for healthy 10 living, connecting communities and the 11 environment. And it's that connecting communities 12 connecting to the environment that we think are 13 really at the core of the strategy. 14 As well, four guiding principles were 15 developed by the coalition and these include 16 obviously flood protection as being number one. 17 And we have always acknowledged that that's the 18 reason for this ditch and that's the most 19 important priority. Safety and accessibility, 20 both accessibility to communities and 21 accessibility to individuals, whatever their 22 condition. 23 Consultation and cooperation. And 24 it's been interesting through this workshop 25 process to have snowmobilers and four-wheel 02545 1 drivers -- four-wheel vehicle drivers sitting in a 2 room with the horse council and the cross country 3 ski association and coming to grips with their 4 differences and dealing with them in a positive 5 and productive way. 6 And it was quite remarkable the manner 7 in which the groups came to agreement in a 8 cooperative and consensus building fashion. 9 And finally, the principle of 10 conservation and environmental stewardship is 11 really something that we need to apply to 12 everything we do. 13 So the design strategy started to 14 provide some hints about some of the key issues 15 that would need to be addressed through a formal 16 design process. Remember, these are really just 17 the seeds of ideas that need to be nurtured and 18 developed. 19 Establishing a trail identity. This 20 was something that the coalition's members felt 21 very strongly about. And as well, they felt 22 strongly that recognition of Duff Roblin in that 23 greenway would be an appropriate thing to do. 24 As you may recall from the first slide 25 that we illustrated, the floodway now is a fairly 02546 1 barren and inhospitable environment so 2 opportunities to seek shelter from the wind and 3 from the sun would be important. 4 There are a number of existing staging 5 facilities along the corridor route. So there is 6 clearly opportunity to grow from those staging 7 facilities. Adding trees and grasses, separating 8 uses where possible. Again the snowmobiling and 9 horseback riding may be compatible with their 10 different seasons but snowmobiling and 11 cross-country skiing may not be. Providing 12 multiple crossing opportunities. Many times 13 during the season, the floodway has some water and 14 it's necessary to cross that and that's something 15 that needs to be considered. 16 Drafting a trail code. The Winnipeg 17 trail system has done that so there is a clear 18 understanding of the roles and obligations of all 19 of the users of the facility as to what the 20 appropriate behaviour is. And this is a necessary 21 part to mitigate some of the concerns that have 22 been expressed to the Commission to date with 23 regard of current unauthorized use of the 24 floodway. 25 Plan for the long-term. We show in 02547 1 these slides an image of the legislative buildings 2 when they were built around the 1920s and as they 3 appear today. The foresight to plant the few 4 trees is something that all of us in Winnipeg 5 relish now, but it required that foresight 100 6 years ago to do that. 7 And finally, creating a stable 8 governance body. This is going to be a complex 9 organism with lots of different users and lots of 10 different needs. The manner in which that whole 11 system is governed needs to be integral to the 12 design of that system. 13 With regard to the spatial 14 organization of a potential system, what we are 15 illustrating here, again very conceptually, is the 16 idea that this isn't necessarily a trail running 17 48 kilometres up the floodway, rather this 18 opportunity is to subdivide that trail into 19 reasonable loops; to borrow diversity from 20 existing features, for example, the Seine River as 21 an existing natural environment that ties directly 22 into the floodway offers a range of diversity that 23 we would never be able to recreate nor would we 24 necessarily want to recreate in the floodway. But 25 it's there. We can make that relationship. 02548 1 And link to growing neighbourhoods. 2 The black lines that you see here are the existing 3 trail systems within the City of Winnipeg that 4 span out to the floodway. So certainly there is 5 opportunity to utilize the floodway right of way 6 as an opportunity to link them together in an 7 interesting and dynamic way. 8 So our objective here is to ensure 9 that recreation and greenway issues are addressed 10 in keeping with the project's initial intent. So 11 what was that initial intent? 12 As I mentioned earlier, recreation has 13 been identified as one of four sizeable benefits 14 of this project, the others being flood protection 15 obviously, employment and infrastructure 16 improvements and recreation is right up there with 17 them in previous documentation from the Floodway 18 Authority, and we happen to agree. 19 Initially, back in July 2003, the 20 description of the project stated that the 21 development of the project will include the 22 maximum practical extent of recreation facilities, 23 not may include, not might include, not should 24 include but will include. 25 And as recently as March 2004, 02549 1 Minister Ashton is quoted in a press release that 2 the MFEA will allocate a portion of overall costs 3 to the expansion. 4 So clearly, between then and now, some 5 things have changed. The guidelines for the 6 preparation of the EIS in February 2004 state that 7 incorporation of recreation facilities to the 8 maximum extent practical. Well, that's a fairly 9 fuzzy statement there. Who is to decide what is 10 practical and what is maximum? The will is gone 11 from here. 12 At our workshop in October of last 13 year, I'll paraphrase Mr. McNeil. We don't have a 14 specific quote. But opening the workshop with a 15 statement that there are no funds available for 16 any recreation or trail development as part of the 17 project. And that's since been confirmed in these 18 proceedings with Mr. McNeil's, I believe it was 19 the opening commentary regarding recreation that 20 it is not part of the project. There is no money 21 for it in the project and that any recreation 22 undertakings are the responsibility of other 23 parties. And again, that's a paraphrase. I'm 24 afraid I don't have the specific quote with me. 25 So what about the EIS? What has it 02550 1 said about recreation? And again, paraphrasing. 2 There is a considerable discussion about the 3 positive benefits of recreation and then they are 4 dismissed as not being an environmental effect. 5 So there are no conclusions with regard to 6 recreation. There are conclusions, however, with 7 regard to the existing conflicts that occur in the 8 floodway and a notation that these conflicts need 9 to be mitigated. And that's a responsibility of 10 the project. 11 The mitigation measures that are noted 12 I believe refer to consultation rather than any 13 particular development. 14 With regard to greenway, I guess the 15 thing that struck me was, quoting from the EIS, 16 that the project will cause "no appreciable 17 adverse effects on aesthetic quality of the area." 18 I don't know what could possibly provide an 19 adverse effect to what is already quite an adverse 20 environment. 21 So the MFEA asked the public to 22 contribute information regarding recreation and 23 its potential incorporation into the floodway. By 24 my count, there were 12 proponents came forward 25 with proposals regarding recreation, and that was 02551 1 back in April of 2004. 2 The reference is made in the 3 supplementary EIS of November 2004 to MFEA having 4 received this information and subsequently an 5 opportunity report, that is essentially a copy of 6 the November 2004 EIS supplementary statement, was 7 issued in January. 8 The most concrete statement arising 9 from that report is that the MFEA will "consider a 10 number of next steps." Amongst those are 11 developing a recreation group and establishing a 12 multi-use four-season greenway trail along the 13 floodway within the project's pre-design. Again 14 I'll underscore that they will consider these 15 things but are making no commitment to do them. 16 The recreation group, as it's defined 17 in the recreation opportunity report, deals with 18 mitigating the negative impacts of recreation on 19 the floodway. It is not described as something to 20 deal with potential or the positive benefits. 21 So the coalition or Rivers West has 22 had a long ongoing dialogue with the MFEA really 23 since the inception of the MFEA. We first visited 24 Mr. Gilroy when there was still plastic on the 25 chairs in the office. More recently, the MFEA has 02552 1 participated in the tour of Grand Forks. The 2 coalition met with the MFEA on January 17th to 3 come to some agreements on a mutual understanding 4 of the Floodway Authority's priorities, 5 understanding that recreation is something that 6 can and should be considered later. Again, this 7 is the MFEA's position. But that the MFEA would 8 assist the coalition to obtain funding to 9 undertake a master plan for the floodway. 10 Subsequently, one of the outcomes of 11 that meeting was a discussion about bridges and 12 crossings. We were assured at that meeting that 13 this is a matter that can be left for later and 14 that there's lots of opportunity to deal with it 15 at a later date. We were a little uneasy about 16 that when looking at the schedule for construction 17 of the bridges and corresponded to the MFEA on 18 January 21st of this year with some very 19 preliminary recommendations for consideration of 20 recreation opportunities on the bridges, this in 21 the absence of any master plan or any specific 22 recommendations which has always been our 23 difficulty. 24 Correspondence received from the MFEA 25 on February 8th states that the MFEA would 02553 1 consider those recommendations in their ongoing 2 design. 3 So we've had this ongoing dialogue and 4 communication and trying to understand one another 5 but it appears, from our standpoint, that what the 6 MFEA is saying is that it's the responsibility of 7 others to design and implement recreation and 8 greenway facilities. 9 And I think the other factor that is 10 implicit in that is that the recreation fabric is 11 something that can be overlain on the project at 12 some later date without any significant 13 consequence to it. So let us get on with our 14 important engineering works. When we're done 15 that, you can come along and recreate to your 16 heart's content. That's not what other 17 jurisdictions do. 18 First of all, the United States 19 Department of Federal Highways Administration. In 20 1999, the U.S. Federal Highways Administration 21 introduced legislation to incorporate 22 non-motorized facilities in all of their public 23 projects. Any road, bridge in the United States 24 is funded by the Federal Highway Administration 25 must integrate planning and design of recreation 02554 1 facilities as part of its project. 2 The U.S. army corps of engineers 3 spends in the order of $268 million a year on 4 recreation. That comprises 5.4 per cent of its 5 total annual budget which is in excess of 6 $4.5 billion. Again, their policy is that all 7 projects that they are involved in must include 8 consideration of recreation. 9 Another municipality, the City of 10 Boulder. This is something that came up from our 11 Google search, nothing of any specific intimate 12 knowledge other than they do a considerable amount 13 of planning and design around flood and storm 14 water conditions and they have integrated 6 per 15 cent of their budget to recreation. 16 Closer to home in Canada, the City of 17 Saskatoon. Many of you who have visited there are 18 no doubt familiar with the Meewasin Valley. The 19 Meewasin Valley is approximately 6,500 hectares in 20 size. So I believe that's not too terribly 21 dissimilar from the floodway. It's about 80 22 kilometres long. And in 1979, the City of 23 Saskatoon, the Government of Saskatchewan and a 24 neighboring municipality got together and said 25 this is a neat resource and prepared a master 02555 1 plan. In that case, it was a 100 year master plan 2 that they commissioned for that corridor. In the 3 25 years since the preparation of that master 4 plan, a total of $70 million has been invested in 5 the Meewasin Valley. Of this amount, $20 million 6 has come directly from the original partners and 7 the remainder has been levered from public and 8 other sources. It includes conservation measures, 9 interpretive facilities and approximately 40 10 kilometres of trail. Over a million people a year 11 utilize these facilities in Saskatoon. 12 In Edmonton, Alberta, again a place 13 known for its commitment to recreation trails. 14 They recently completed a master plan for the 15 utilization of utility right-of-ways. The outcome 16 was recommendations for 62 kilometre network of 17 trails and a total price tag in excess of 18 $21 million. The first phase of construction 19 recommended is for $7.7 million. 20 Closer to home, Grand Forks, which was 21 visited by the coalition members and the MFEA. As 22 part of their flood mitigation measures, they have 23 developed the greenway which incorporates 32 24 kilometres of paved trails and other facilities 25 such as pedestrian bridges. They have facilities 02556 1 for cross-country skiing and snowmobiling, an 2 investment of $20 million that was cost-shared 3 50/50 by the state and by the army corps of 4 engineers. 5 So you can see through all of these 6 examples that they all involve some form of 7 integration of planning, of design of recreation 8 facilities, as part of the design of an overall 9 project. So this is what we refer to as an 10 integrated design approach. 11 So why should this be a subject of 12 interest to the CEC? Well, the CEC's terms of 13 reference require consideration of the principles 14 of sustainable development guidelines for 15 Manitoba. And this is an act of the Province of 16 Manitoba. 17 So what does that strategy say? And 18 we have selected some of the principles and one of 19 the guidelines from a whole long list. But it 20 says it is necessary to integrate environmental 21 and economic decisions. It talks about 22 stewardship, about shared responsibility and 23 understanding. But in the guideline section, it 24 talks specifically about integrated 25 decision-making and planning. And that is the 02557 1 encouragement and facilitation of decision making 2 and planning processes that are efficient, timely, 3 accountable and cross-sectoral which incorporate 4 an intergenerational perspective of future needs 5 and consequences. 6 So we submit that recreation is an 7 integral part of this project and that 8 integration, integrated planning with a view to 9 immediate needs and long-term intergenerational 10 needs must be part of this project. 11 As well, there are other government 12 organizations at play here. There is a whole new 13 department in government called Manitoba Healthy 14 Living that speaks of the health benefits of 15 recreation. There is the Manitoba -- the capital 16 region review that talks about the incorporation 17 of bicycle and pedestrian paths into all of the 18 capital region's major developments. 19 There is extensive literature from the 20 World Health Organization on the crisis that we 21 are facing globally with regard to health and 22 sedentary lifestyles and how recreation 23 infrastructure is an important factor in 24 addressing that. 25 So the coalition is being awfully 02558 1 presumptuous coming here and telling you all what 2 to do, but we think that we have some good purpose 3 in doing that. First of all, it's quite a 4 remarkable group of diverse users who have come 5 together as a single point of contact. The 6 coalition members have demonstrated that they are 7 able to manage their internal grievances and to 8 come to consensus around decisions. We envision 9 that the same group -- I spoke earlier of a 10 governance body -- can come together as the 11 management group for any future recreation 12 developments. 13 There is existing use of the floodway 14 and it is unsafe and it is unsecure and it is a 15 tremendous nuisance and a difficulty and, in many 16 places, hazardous for adjacent municipalities and 17 they have legitimate and real concerns. And 18 that's something that can be addressed through 19 this process. 20 The coalition members have developed a 21 lot of -- invested a lot in building this 22 consensus to date and are quite proud of that and 23 as well have garnered a great deal of positive 24 media support around the notion of recreation at 25 part of the floodway. 02559 1 So in terms of the MFEA and the 2 coalition, I mean we see that our paths are 3 parallel and that it's in both our interests to 4 adopt a cooperative approach. 5 So our objectives for this integrated 6 planning approach are threefold. First of all, we 7 believe that there are a number of immediate 8 coordination needs. We believe that it's 9 necessary to integrate at the earliest stage 10 long-term plans into the floodway pre-design. And 11 we believe that it's necessary to implement and 12 operate. 13 So what are some of those immediate 14 needs? And again, we aren't privy to the detail 15 of the floodway's plans nor do we have the 16 resources currently to fully address them. But 17 for example, there is temporary access roads, 18 there will be restoration, there will be 19 construction staging sites and facilities. Have 20 any of these been considered with regard to their 21 potential after-use for recreation? Mr. McNeil 22 has talked about the bulk excavation and the 23 potential to utilize that at a later date for 24 earth forming. That's fine. But perhaps there's 25 some efficiencies that can be gained if we address 02560 1 the recreation as part of that initial operation. 2 Perhaps not, I don't know. 3 Bridges and crossings are something 4 that we have had a greet deal of concern about. 5 We understand that it's very costly to add a 6 pedestrian or a bicycle lane or a sidewalk onto a 7 bridge. And that those should only be added where 8 they are warranted. While we've made our best 9 guess at this point in time where we think they 10 may be warranted, the plans aren't in place that 11 can really substantiate that. 12 There would be revetments, there will 13 be other shoreline structures. What use might 14 these have for recreation and how can that be 15 planned into the development? What is Floodway 16 Authority planning with regard to signage or 17 interpretation and how will that relate to future 18 recreation uses? And again, these are all just 19 maybes, but things that we think need to be 20 considered. 21 With regard to the long-term, it's 22 necessary to develop, as Meewasin Valley did, a 23 long-term master plan. And the starting place of 24 that is understanding what the detailed 25 programmatic requirements of the various users 02561 1 are. So that's number one. Out of that falls as 2 master plan and the related budgets. The 3 operation and maintenance plans come out of that. 4 How should it best be implemented given all of the 5 other circumstances, phase, what are the business 6 prospects associated with that, where will the 7 money come from? How can it be sustained? What 8 kind of communication strategy is necessary, both 9 with regard to users and to the public overall in 10 contributing to the plan? And ongoing 11 consultation during the floodway design so that 12 there is a direct knit between the floodway 13 planning and the recreation planning. 14 The third point was implementation. 15 And we believe it will be a real shame to have a 16 ribbon cutting ceremony for the floodway and not 17 have an initial phase of recreation facilities as 18 part of that. 19 So with all of the generalities behind 20 us, we need to develop a number of specific 21 recommendations which we think address these 22 various needs. First of all, we recommend that 23 the environmental licence consider the following 24 things; first of all, that recreation facilities 25 and greenway development be incorporated into the 02562 1 project; that the coalition is in place and 2 frankly delivering on a silver platter to the 3 MFEA, a group that is prepared to take leadership 4 on this issue. And we think it's important that 5 that group continue in partnership with the MFEA 6 in that integrated design approach. 7 The Floodway Authority has spoken of a 8 recreation working group and we support that; 9 however, in addition to that, we envision a 10 recreation and greenway project team that can work 11 collaboratively on the project. And we illustrate 12 those relationships here on this slide. Where the 13 Trail Coalition representing perhaps 40 groups, 14 perhaps more, is responsible for developing the 15 recreation program, integrating user needs, issues 16 identification and resolution of conflicts and 17 design of components of the system. A recreation 18 group that includes non-coalition stakeholders, be 19 they municipalities, be they hay farmers, 20 whatever. 21 And that the third group involved in 22 this project team include the Manitoba Floodway 23 Expansion Authority that can read the technical 24 guidance, the integration with the floodway 25 design, the input on costing and staging and 02563 1 liaising with their expertise and consulting team. 2 And that these three groups be charged with 3 finding ways to make it work, it being recreation 4 and greenway. 5 The outcomes of this partnership are 6 these immediate integration aspects that I spoke 7 of and a master plan that describes the detailed 8 recreation program that provides the 9 implementation plan and the communication 10 strategy. 11 Continuing on with the 12 recommendations. We believe that the operation 13 and maintenance plan, for whatever recreation 14 facilities go in here, has to be integral to the 15 project. It can't just be left out in the cold. 16 We have too much experience on good ideas that had 17 been built without proper consideration to how 18 they are going to be operated and maintained and 19 we make recommendations in our formal submission 20 to you on that. 21 With regard to environmental 22 considerations and addressing those, the Floodway 23 Authority has stated that any future environmental 24 licensing or any future licensing at all will be 25 the responsibility of any recreation proponents. 02564 1 And frankly we think that's inappropriate. That 2 the recreation facilities are an integral part of 3 this floodway project and as such, it should be 4 the responsibility of the Floodway Authority as 5 owner of this right-of-way to be responsible for 6 those considerations. 7 With regard to funding for phase 1, we 8 have included in our submission a recommendation 9 that a minimum of 1 per cent of the overall budget 10 be devoted to recreation. And we provide a range 11 within that. And what we're thinking here is we 12 don't have a number, we don't have a plan, we have 13 a bunch of ideas, we have a bunch of issues, we 14 have a bunch of concepts. But we acknowledge that 15 there is a need to develop initial facilities in 16 order to stimulate future development. That if we 17 don't make that initial investment, the likelihood 18 of anything ever being done with that floodway is 19 remote at best. 20 Whereas with a modest investment in 21 relation to the overall budget, the likelihood is 22 that that investment can be levered many times 23 over and create the seeds to grow a full system 24 over time. 25 And finally, just a recognition that 02565 1 the coalition and the Floodway Authority need to 2 partner in finding those other sources of funds, 3 that there is an opportunity, a significant 4 opportunity to lever those partnerships and that 5 we should all be obliged to pursue that. 6 So in conclusion, finally, we believe, 7 and we really do, that it's necessary to do this 8 or we're going to lose opportunity. So the danger 9 of leaving this process to a later date is that 10 loss of synergy between this construction activity 11 and a potential after-use of it. And really 12 wasted effort of opportunity. And that is by not 13 integrating at the earliest possible stage, we 14 will inevitably backtrack and have to do things 15 over again. 16 Running out of funds. If we don't 17 oblige it, we will run out of funds. That this 18 will be the last priority. And as a result, these 19 obligations will be deferred and the likelihood of 20 acquiring this opportunity again diminished. 21 So when we thought the workshop 22 participants, the public thought of this Duff 23 Roblin greenway idea, we approached Mr. Roblin and 24 asked him for his thoughts. And his written 25 response to us included this comment: 02566 1 "This overdue concept has been an 2 unrealized aspiration of mine so I am 3 happy to endorse your efforts." 4 So let's not repeat this again where 5 30 years down the road we have another unrealized 6 aspiration. 7 And I'll leave it at that with this 8 image of the existing floodway as it appears today 9 and some of the ideas that have developed around 10 that. And that concludes the presentation. Thank 11 you very much. 12 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Any 13 questions from the Floodway Authority? 14 Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have no 15 questions but I'd just like to say thanks to Lorna 16 Hendrickson and Rivers West and the Trail 17 Coalition for the efforts to date and we look 18 forward to working with them in the years to come. 19 Thank you. 20 MR. WEBSTER: I have one specific and 21 one general question. First of all, you mentioned 22 the importance of bridges and crossings being 23 built to accommodate pedestrian and bicycle 24 traffic. Can you tell us of instances where 25 pedestrian and bicycle provision on highway 02567 1 bridges is missing and is currently a problem? 2 I don't believe there are -- any of 3 the bridges incorporate any safe pedestrian 4 crossings at this time. Are there, Glen? 5 We've heard recently there is a 6 discussion of a bike lane on one of the bridges. 7 But as far as pedestrian only access, we haven't 8 heard of any. 9 I know over the gates in St. Norbert, 10 it is not a legal-sized pedestrian access crossing 11 but people use it thinking it is and it presents a 12 very dangerous situation and there is always 13 hundreds of people out there on the gate bridge, 14 Courchaine Road. So that is a real concern. 15 I'll just make a comment on the 16 generality of trail development linking into 17 bridges and roads. I mean we are much further 18 behind many many other communities throughout 19 North America. We did some original research on 20 the Rivers West concept in the early days and 21 we're just not there. And as new initiatives come 22 forward, that's when it has to be integrated. 23 It's too difficult and too expensive to start 24 adding either widening roads or bridges or 25 walkways. 02568 1 If I may. The existing demand for 2 those bridges, we are uncertain of what that is. 3 Our expectation is though that, you know, with the 4 kind of bubble diagram that you see here, is that 5 it will create significant demand potentially. 6 And that's what we need to understand. 7 MR. WEBSTER: I am under the 8 understanding that the highway bridge in 9 Sprucewoods Park north/south across the 10 Assiniboine is in fact an example of that at the 11 present moment. 12 Okay. 13 MR. WEBSTER: And I'm not sure whether 14 you have experience of that. 15 I'm sorry, it incorporates bicycle 16 facilities or it doesn't? 17 MR. WEBSTER: No. But I wondered if 18 you were aware of that? I was hoping that you 19 were aware of it. 20 The other aspect which I didn't hear 21 you speak about was the effect of a desolate 22 aspect such as presently exists in the floodway 23 and the invitation to vandalism versus the effect 24 of some development to allow recreation and simply 25 to make it look more attractive. Have you thought 02569 1 about that aspect of things in terms of your 2 proposals and your thinking for the kinds of 3 things you'd like to do with the floodway 4 right-of-way? 5 Yeah. I think going back to process 6 again, what we envisioned, that it is necessary to 7 engage the people that are directly affected now 8 as well as the people who will use it in the 9 future. What -- the most appropriate method is to 10 mitigate that. We can speculate on that. There's 11 lots of literature about how if you make a place 12 nice, it's less likely to be vandalized, if you 13 provide more access, if you provide more rules. 14 So there's lots of different measures to be 15 applied to that. 16 It's a little early to describe 17 specifically which one is best. And that requires 18 the consultation amongst all the parties. And 19 there is even, you know, issues about the 20 emergency response. For example, Springfield is 21 concerned because of the costs they incur in 22 responding to difficulties in the floodway. 23 So how is that going to be organized? 24 And that really becomes part of that governance 25 that needs to be flushed out and worked through. 02570 1 MR. WEBSTER: But it sounds as if it's 2 an interest of the coalition that you represent, 3 to make these things work? 4 Yeah. I think everybody recognizes 5 that that's all part and parcel of doing this kind 6 of thing. You have to work through all those 7 details. 8 On the same subject of crossings, you 9 had mentioned you would like to see 1 per cent of 10 the funds and that's not hard to figure out, it's 11 about 6 and a half million dollars. Did you 12 assume that would be paying for these extended 13 bridges, the crossings, like for the pedestrian 14 and crosswalk? Would that cover all of your 15 crossings? 16 Actually, in the formal submission and 17 the specific recommendations that we include 18 there, we specifically exclude that from that 19 budget. 20 Okay. 21 And, you know, $6 million, 6 and a 22 half million dollars, it sounds like a lot of 23 money. But over 48 kilometres, it evaporates 24 pretty quickly. 25 No, I realize that. I'm wondering 02571 1 just if that was part of it. I'm not an engineer 2 but I don't think 6 and a half million dollars 3 would go very far in extending the crossings and 4 bridges. 5 If this was incorporated into part of 6 the plan of the floodway, to make the bridges 7 accessible to pedestrians, how many of the 8 crossings did you foresee of the several that are 9 being done? 10 Yeah. See again, that puts us in the 11 difficult position of trying to anticipate these 12 things in the absence of a plan and we tried to do 13 that. In our correspondence to the MFEA, what we 14 suggested was three crossings as being the most 15 important and most obvious. And clearly, the 16 floodway gate that Janice spoke of is an obvious 17 one that already receives a significant pedestrian 18 warrant and really needs to be attended to. The 19 others I believe were Highway 59 north and south. 20 Actually there may have been four. Let me check. 21 But nevertheless, what we did was 22 basically from this diagram, we said okay, where 23 is a lot of stuff likely to occur? And it's 24 likely to occur around where stuff occurs now. So 25 given that, we have Highway 59 by Birds Hill Park 02572 1 in the north -- sorry, the Spring Hill area and 2 Birds Hill area. There is St. Mary's and the St. 3 Norbert crossing. 4 So that was our response to that very 5 question to the MFEA. And it's a guess. So 6 that's -- based on what we know, that's what we 7 have guessed now. 8 Have you been pleased with your 9 association with the MFA in your past meetings? 10 That's a very general question. 11 Well, it's a difficult question. I 12 mean we acknowledge that they have a difficult 13 task and they are under significant time 14 constraints to address all the things that they 15 need to address. If I said we weren't 16 disappointed that we weren't further along, you 17 know, I wouldn't be telling the truth, and 18 apparently that's illegal here. So we would have 19 hoped that this would have been addressed a long 20 time ago. That the integration of the recreation 21 components into the pre-design was something that 22 occurred a year ago. 23 So we have had a cordial communication 24 and we have received fair hearings and we haven't 25 always received all the information we have asked 02573 1 for. But it's really I think the timeliness of 2 the process. And I think it really boils down to 3 this, that the MFEA has some serious issues with 4 regard to serious engineering issues, problems, 5 and believes that recreation can wait till later. 6 And we don't. I mean we think it's something that 7 has to be integrated as quickly as possible or 8 we're going to miss opportunities. 9 I don't think it's a disappointment 10 with the organization and their team. It seems to 11 be, whether related to economics or whatever, a 12 policy shift that we understood was going to be 13 part of -- recreation was going to be very much 14 part of the planning process. That was our 15 understanding in the early days. And over time, 16 we have come to realize that's not going to be the 17 case or it doesn't seem to be taken seriously or 18 it will come later. And that's not what our -- 19 our vision from the early days -- that it wouldn't 20 be integrated and we understood that that's how 21 the whole planning process would proceed with 22 recreation as a part of it, given that their 23 mandate of building a floodway is, first and 24 foremost, an engineering side. But this needs to 25 be tied in with it. That's where the 02574 1 disappointment is. 2 I think those expectations have been 3 set to the public also in the numerous statements 4 that have been made. Maybe because we were closer 5 to working with them and involved in this process, 6 we are seeing the expectations that are set aren't 7 necessarily being met. 8 Thank you. And just a little bit on 9 the lighter side. I mentioned to the Chairman 10 here a minute ago, when I looked up there, I seen 11 Duff Roblin greenway and you realize, Greenway was 12 a liberal. 13 THE CHAIRMAN: Barrie. 14 MR. WEBSTER: One other question and 15 comment. Have you looked at all at the approach 16 taken by the Netherlands in terms of dealing with 17 waterways and the corridors they provide for 18 recreational purposes because they have done a 19 marvelous job in that country. 20 We were actually planning a trip there 21 but we had budget cuts. 22 MR. WEBSTER: Well, even if you don't 23 have budget cuts, you may be able to look at it by 24 other means. 25 THE CHAIRMAN: Have you thought how 02575 1 prepared trails with trees and other vegetation 2 along the way might co-exist or not co-exist with 3 the farmers who are taking hay off the floodway at 4 present? 5 Yeah, we have. And there's an obvious 6 conflict here between trees and hay I guess. But 7 in reading through some of the background 8 documents in the EIS, I noted that this is 9 something that the hay farmers acknowledge is a 10 future use of the floodway and they are prepared 11 to cooperate in how that will be integrated. So 12 we see them as a stakeholder just as all the other 13 stakeholders. 14 And if you look at the diagram here, I 15 mean there is some places that may have a heavy 16 hand and some places that may have a soft hand in 17 relation to the recreation of greenway 18 developments. So it doesn't necessarily have to 19 be contiguous throughout the whole length to be a 20 truly fine product. 21 So all of those -- we don't understand 22 the nuances of all those things. We understand 23 that that's an issue that needs to be dealt with, 24 that these are important users of that resource. 25 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Do any of 02576 1 the registered participant groups have questions 2 of Rivers West? Please identify yourself for the 3 record again, Dr. Stewart, and proceed. 4 Good afternoon, I'm Dr. Stewart. I'm 5 Chair of the North Richot Action Committee. I 6 have a comment, a question for clarification and 7 then kind of a what-if question. 8 The comment first, thanks very much 9 for your opening statement. The question for 10 clarification is, does the concept of the greenway 11 depend on floodway expansion or could it go ahead 12 with the existing floodway, recognizing there is 13 an opportunity for synergy if expansion goes 14 ahead -- when expansion goes ahead, I'm sorry. 15 Yeah. I mean the geographical land 16 mass is there and the right-of-way is there. But 17 what isn't there without the expansion is a 18 project to build off of. So while it's 19 conceptually feasible, because the space is there, 20 the linkages are there and everything is there to 21 develop this recreation component, could it happen 22 without the motivation of infrastructure project? 23 It hasn't happened yet and a lot of people have 24 tried over the years. So I can't answer it any 25 better than that, I'm sorry. 02577 1 There's probably not an answer for the 2 next one or there might be. Mr. McNeil used the 3 phrase "reservoir" the other day and we've been 4 using that for about seven years and 10 months. 5 And most of the area that we represent lives in 6 the reservoir. 7 And the Chair asked the other day, you 8 know, what might be some solutions and I suggested 9 perhaps a grandfather buy-out or some kind of 10 buy-out. The downside of that is we end up with a 11 ghost community. You know, the municipality is 12 depopulated. 13 Do you see any joint benefit as we 14 leave? I don't think the hills are going to be 15 high enough for hang gliding but there will be 16 lots of potholes. Do you see any way that some of 17 the integrity of the RM can be maintained as a 18 green zone as people either leave voluntarily or 19 less voluntarily the reservoir? 20 You know, the depopulation of the Red 21 River is something that's been going on. If you 22 go south from -- south of Morris to Emerson, 23 virtually nobody lives on the river. And you 24 know, it's quite a shock actually when we first, 25 through Rivers West, started to develop this 02578 1 greenway initiative. And people have really 2 turned their back on the river or moved to the 3 ring dyke communities and just said forget it. I 4 mean, we're not living through this anymore. And 5 that's a great misfortune for those people I'm 6 sure. But what it does provide is an opportunity 7 for the greenway development of those. Because 8 you have less direct conflict with individuals, it 9 perhaps creates an opportunity for greenway 10 development as sad as that is. 11 So if we can move to some kind of 12 negotiated or mediated resolution to occupying the 13 reservoir, your coalition would be a stakeholder 14 in those kinds of discussions? 15 Potentially. I mean we certainly have 16 an interest. 17 My ideas are less than an hour old, so 18 thank you. 19 Thank you. 20 THE CHAIRMAN: Fresh ideas are often 21 the best ones. Anybody else from the registered 22 participant group have questions? Do you have any 23 final comments you wish to make today? 24 No. 25 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much for 02579 1 your presentation. 2 MS. JOHNSON: Mr. Chairman, as we are 3 moving on to the next presenter, could I add the 4 presentation we just saw as Exhibit 92 and the 5 submission Integration of Recreation and Greenway 6 Considerations as Exhibit 93? 7 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. 8 9 (EXHIBIT 92: Presentation. Rivers West 10 & The Red River Trails Coalition. 11 Presented by Jeff Frank, Lorna 12 Hendrickson, Janice Lukes, Jim August) 13 14 (EXHIBIT 93: Presentation: Submission 15 to the Manitoba Clean Environment 16 Commission Public Hearings Regarding 17 Integration of Recreation and Greenway 18 Considerations as part of the Red 19 River Floodway Expansion Project. 20 Submitted by Rivers West and The Red 21 River Floodway Trail Coalition) 22 23 THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Paul Clifton. 24 Could I ask you to introduce yourselves and I'll 25 have the Commission Secretary swear you in. 02580 1 MR. CLIFTON: Mr. Chairman, my name is 2 Paul Clifton. I am self-represented. And I have 3 to my right, Richard Sherring and he's technically 4 supporting me. And on my left, I have Janet 5 Vanderkruys and she's going to be reading off 6 throughout my presentation. 7 8 (PAUL CLIFTON: SWORN) 9 (JANET VANDERKRUYS: SWORN) 10 11 THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Clifton, how long 12 do you anticipate your presentation will take? 13 MR. CLIFTON: I understand I have 14 three hours and I'm going to ask that I go through 15 part of it. I'm going to seek, at an opportune 16 spot, to break for about 15 minutes. 17 THE CHAIRMAN: That's what I'm going 18 to get at. In about three-quarters of an hour or 19 at about three o'clock? 20 MR. CLIFTON: A little bit longer than 21 that because of a potential impediment in that I 22 have a 50 minute continuous representation to 23 make. It runs 50 minutes and seconds. But as 24 soon as that's done -- just let me explain first 25 off. There's some housekeeping stuff I need to 02581 1 do. And I see that there's been some grievous 2 representations made on a very hurtful project, 3 potentially, and I think it's woefully 4 inappropriate and I'd like to speak to that. I 5 wasn't here but I had been reviewing the 6 transcripts and I speak specifically to 7 transcripts of Professor Doering to you. And, 8 Mr. Chair, I understand that he presented right 9 after Mrs. Maxine Clifton and Mrs. Rita 10 Bartmanovich. Both those gals named have suffered 11 grievously through representations actually 12 through being flooded repeatedly and through 13 representations to this Commission. 14 As it turns out, Professor Doering was 15 supported and for his work I understand he will 16 likely receive a cheque with a buffalo on it. And 17 I believe that that is inappropriate, that we are 18 at a public forum here for public representations. 19 And a professor with maybe an opinion, making 20 representations which he was brought back in to 21 apologize for, the representations were made and 22 you commissioners had heard it. That's woefully 23 inappropriate and I think his entire submission 24 should be expunged from the public record, sir. 25 THE CHAIRMAN: I disagree, Mr. 02582 1 Clifton, because as you know, we hear any and all 2 opinions from members of the public who wish to 3 make the same. Whether we agree with Professor 4 Doering or not remains to be seen but we hear all 5 comments on all sides of the issue and then we 6 will weigh them and come to some decisions 7 accordingly. 8 And I would note that Professor 9 Doering, when he called to request an opportunity, 10 was calling just as an individual, as a Manitoban. 11 He was not doing it as a representative of any 12 particular organization to my knowledge. 13 MR. CLIFTON: Sir, just for the 14 record, reread the transcripts of his apology and 15 his representation to this Commission. 16 THE CHAIRMAN: He did note that he had 17 been a consultant to the Manitoba Floodway 18 Authority, but he did not state that he was 19 speaking on their behalf. Anyway -- 20 MR. CLIFTON: Okay. Let me go on with 21 my -- 22 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes. 23 MR. CLIFTON: I know, sir, that you 24 are clearly aware of who I am, and you likely 25 learned from the Government of Manitoba that I 02583 1 have very strong opinions on this issue. And I 2 think that possibly you have inappropriately read 3 in that my issues are of a monetary value relating 4 to past actions. 5 THE CHAIRMAN: I have come to no such 6 judgment. And I have discovered just from dealing 7 with you alone that you have strong opinions. 8 Nobody else had to tell me that. 9 MR. CLIFTON: Yes. When I first met 10 you, I asked if you had stamina, Mr. Sargeant, 11 and -- 12 THE CHAIRMAN: So far I have, but it's 13 not over yet. 14 MR. CLIFTON: Okay. Can I read in 15 then, my dear mother-in-law from Boissevain wrote 16 to me and everything seems to fall in my lap in a 17 timely fashion here. February 26th, '05, 5:15 18 p.m. 19 "Hello, Paul, I am cleaning up my 20 desk. I keep everything. And though 21 I thought this was nice and will keep 22 of course. Have so many cards and 23 letters to keep, I hate to throw 24 anything away." 25 I wrote to my mother-in-law, and I write a card to 02584 1 my mother-in-law I said, 2 "Dorothy, I think we've been through 3 the trials of 1996 and hopefully onto 4 a brighter prospect ahead. From an 5 extremely long, cold winter, excessive 6 snows, late spring, and extreme runoff 7 in the Red River basin, I think we've 8 seen it all. It's because of your 9 unselfish efforts to assist us during 10 the sandbagging operation this spring 11 that this thank you goes out. Please 12 accept this card, though late, as a 13 thank you for your assistance during 14 the flood of 1996." 15 Sir, in the submission I submitted to 16 you, I have a letter, starts off with a letter of 17 reply from Minister, the current Minister of Water 18 Stewardship, Mr. Steve Ashton. And it's in 19 relation to a couple letters I wrote to the then 20 Minister of the Environment, Mr. David Anderson, 21 and a subsequent letter to Prime Minister Paul 22 Martin. Along the way, I will represent 23 Mr. Martin as Mr. Dithers, so there is no 24 confusion who we're talking about. 25 But essentially, the Minister of Water 02585 1 Stewardship essentially said, the place for 2 dealing with compensation or discussions of your 3 beliefs of inequity is not at public hearings, and 4 I do not plan at all to ever talk about '97 and my 5 own personal issues related to '97, and I want 6 that clearly understood. 7 But along the way, in Mr. Anderson's 8 acknowledgment and reply, it talks about in the 9 first paragraph wherein I enclosed several 10 documentations with regard to the Winnipeg 11 Floodway. The prime minister's office has also 12 forwarded to me a copy of the letter of 13 February 29th on the topic. I, for some six 14 years, have taken the tact that Manitoba just 15 doesn't seem to want to listen to folks. I have 16 been working diligently trying to have them listen 17 up to the grievous harm that they have been doing 18 and they plan to and continue to do. 19 Further to that, I have a cut and 20 paste, I have page 89, and that's from the '57, 21 '58 report on the Royal Commission on Flood Cost 22 Benefit. And your technical advisor is Mr. David 23 Farlinger, who did a very credible representation, 24 as I had said before, on the Manitoba Water 25 Commission report. And they are cut and pasted 02586 1 for two reasons, and I'll go through that later. 2 There is an excerpt, page 89, and 3 that's just much the same but it's specifically 4 embolded "Further," and this is after it's 5 prophesied that the City of Winnipeg would top up 6 their flood protection by 4 feet. 7 "Further, if the floodway gates were 8 operated in such a way as to raise 9 water levels in St. Norbert to 3 feet 10 above the natural in any given flood, 11 it would be possible to pass an 12 additional 11,000 CFS through the 13 floodway." 14 So the way I read that, it's further, 15 as in after you do the other. And I'm going to 16 talk a little bit later on on these next two 17 pages. I'm also going to want to read into the 18 record, and I have a few less props than last 19 time. I have significantly more weight in my 20 props, but less props. 21 I have something in front of you. I'm 22 not an engineer. I can tell you what it is. 23 Would you want an engineer from the Water 24 Resources Branch to validate what you're looking 25 at or can I tell you and you will believe me? 02587 1 THE CHAIRMAN: We will accept your 2 word. 3 MR. CLIFTON: Okay. You are looking 4 at one-half length of a bridge structure of the 5 servo bridge of the floodway. This is above water 6 line, and I'm representing to you in that full 7 size model the bridge structure that has been 8 modified since the flood. And I'm going to go 9 into that in detail. On this end is the 1962 to 10 '68, I don't know exactly when it was done. There 11 was a design that was done in haste in advance of 12 the crest in 1997. That was discarded as inferior 13 engineering, and what you're saying on the other 14 end is now the current in place. And the inferior 15 engineering was done by KGS Group, and I'll talk 16 about that later. 17 I also want to reference in the 18 records a few things. And I find in the 19 transcripts of my back and forth a while ago, I 20 forget dates, that Mr. McNeil, in talking about 21 going to rule 2, he advised, and we, as in we, 22 City of Winnipeg, who Mr. McNeil was working for 23 at the time, we went into rule 2. 24 Mr. Bowering represents that the 25 action of going into emergency operation was a 02588 1 department decision. I'm going to talk to you 2 further on that very shortly. The decision that 3 was made was not made a department decision. That 4 is inaccurate. And I'll explain why. 5 The decision to go to emergency 6 operation causes grievous harm in the valley. A 7 decision at that level would never be taken except 8 at the executive level of this province, and the 9 chief executive officer, and the premier at that 10 time was Premier Gary Filmon. And Premier Gary 11 Filmon was lobbied by a lot of people, and Premier 12 Gary Filmon was specifically lobbied by his 13 Minister then of Natural Resources, Mr. J. Glen 14 Cummings. And Mr. J. Glen Cummings, previous to 15 that, had had a visit in the south of Winnipeg, 16 and Mr. Doug McNeil explained and demonstrated to 17 the Minister of Natural Resources that the City of 18 Winnipeg was at grievous risk of overtopping the 19 dykes in the south of Winnipeg. And so Mr. McNeil 20 and others lobbied the Minister, who in turn 21 advised the premier that we have to go into 22 emergency operation. That was an executive 23 decision. The man that did that on behalf of the 24 City of Winnipeg and others is now purporting a 25 project to do the very same thing again to us. 02589 1 I'm going to just step from the mic 2 for a second. This, sir, is the flood inundation 3 map, and I have this here to show you Niverville. 4 Niverville, in the Town of Niverville there's a 5 Natural Resources office. And in that Natural 6 Resources office, we have an affiliation with 7 Water Branch people. We have an affiliation, Paul 8 and Maxine, with very, very credible engineers, 9 very good Water Branch engineers, very honest 10 engineers. 11 Those engineers in 1996 told us day by 12 day what we are going to see, what's happening in 13 the valley. And they actually had a Natural 14 Resources shoulder patch on his -- and he was 15 ferrying people, because our roads were cut off, 16 he had a boat and he was ferrying people, at 17 government expense, up and down the road in 1997. 18 We had been through the drill in 1996. 19 In 1997 they staffed Niverville again. 20 We were on a first name basis and we knew this 21 time it was serious. And we talked on a daily 22 basis with the water engineer, unnamed, and say, 23 what's going to happen? Well, we're -- this is 24 after, after the operation of the floodway, after 25 they started to operate the floodway, after they 02590 1 choked the floodway inlet with ice, after they 2 tried to dynamite the ice, after they were 3 unsuccessful, after they cranked the gates, gave 4 us 10 feet in 30 hours, after that we're into a 5 flood. 6 I suppose that they set an altitude -- 7 attitude on that initial operation to half fill 8 the valley with 10 feet of water, that caused the 9 crash that we saw in the valley. But I'll get to 10 that later. 11 In Niverville, there was a gentleman 12 or two there. We would phone up on a daily basis, 13 and I would ask him, what are we going to see 14 today? You know, it's just an average sort of a 15 day. You're going to see about 8 inches in 24 16 hours. 17 So I was out there, had a sandbag 18 dyke. And you know what, 24 hours later there was 19 8 inches. 20 And then you talked to the fellow and 21 he would say, you know what, maybe another 22 8 inches. And you know the next morning, bang on, 23 8 inches. Now a sandbag, I don't know, a sandbag 24 is about 4 inches, so you got a grasp. That's the 25 way the Red River comes up, just incrementally, 02591 1 it's a long wide area, incrementally. 2 We're working away, working away. 3 What's going to happen? Well, you're going to see 4 a foot. We've had some rain in the valley and 5 you're going to see a foot, and there was a foot. 6 So here is a gentleman I've been talking to for a 7 week and a half, two weeks. And I said, what are 8 we going to see? I don't know. You don't know? 9 I don't know. The government has taken control of 10 the operation. You don't know? Well, what do I 11 do? Do you know a politician he said? I said no. 12 He said, if you know a politician, call him. 13 So I called J. Glen Cummings office, I 14 looked in the phonebook, called J. Glen Cummings. 15 He didn't take the call. Well, he's got a deputy, 16 call Mr. Tomasson. Mr. Tomasson didn't take the 17 call. About an hour later the phone rings. 18 Mr. Steve Topping, professional engineer on the 19 phone. Mr. Clifton? Yes? You had some question 20 about what's going on? And I said, yeah, what the 21 hell's going on? And he said we're operating by 22 the rules, we're holding 24.5. Rules? Geez, 23 rules, 24.5? That's where it started, 24.5, in my 24 head. Never knew there was rules. 25 I thought I needed to validate what 02592 1 this was. I do want to talk about one thing here, 2 they are called temporary thrust blocks. Okay. 3 These guys can call me a liar if I'm a liar, but 4 KGS Group was involved and they installed these 5 temporary thrust blocks before the crest in 1997. 6 And a thrust block, in an engineering sense, is to 7 stop a thrust upward. And those thrust blocks 8 were put in. When I get to explain the model, I 9 will tell you about an inferior design and why 10 they are not there now. 11 There is a facet here called emergency 12 operation. I'm going to show you what emergency 13 operation looks like in the valley. 14 15 (CBC News presentation) 16 17 MR. CLIFTON: I read the Free Press 18 about Mr. Godfrey coming to town and suggesting 19 that east/west power grid beyond. I humbly 20 believe that Canada really wants to help out. I 21 tell Maxine, this is Canada, you just work hard, 22 you be honest, and things will work out. 23 We have been at this nine years, and 24 it's not for political gain, it's not for monetary 25 gain, it's to fix it. You know, Canada can't tell 02593 1 Manitoba how to control, how to treat their 2 citizens, but I humbly believe Canada is trying to 3 help. 4 Mr. Dithers and Mr. Godfrey are 5 helping out by offering up a western power grid, 6 where we can turn some megawatts with this water, 7 we can make revenue and we can likely, through 8 some sort of monetary arrangement, fix this. 9 This is the most divisive, hurtful 10 system in place that has its limitations. And it 11 has its limitations as we saw in 1997. It's been 12 studied, studied, studied, and I'm going to go 13 into that. 14 I have never blind-sided anybody in 15 this. I have always, always, always given folks a 16 chance to try and do the right thing in advance of 17 me having to slam them. Because we can't keep 18 living like this. 19 Janet, would you read into what I 20 wrote? I wrote to Mr. Jim Volmershausen. I've 21 been having a relationship with Mr. Jim 22 Volmershausen for six or so years. Jim 23 Volmershausen is the regional director general for 24 Environment Canada. He's responsible for Alberta, 25 Saskatchewan, Manitoba and part of the territories 02594 1 as they got split however. 2 Environment Canada had an interest in 3 this, a residual interest in this. I'm dealing 4 with Canada and I'm thinking, this is not right, 5 Canada, we don't do this in Canada. 6 And initially for about five years, 7 Canada treated me as, geez, you are trouble, let's 8 hide records, you are trouble. But you know what, 9 since Mr. Dithers got in place, they are not 10 hiding records. I received two records that I had 11 been chasing for six years. 12 I get some stuff from Environment 13 Canada, and I'm looking through, looking through, 14 and there is infamous 197 and 198. I'll talk 15 about that later. Manitoba has since -- well, 16 before that shredded or got rid of their 197 or 17 198. Canada provided me 197 and 198. And before 18 he retired, Mr. Barry Tuckett, the ombudsman who 19 has been working with me for six years was trying 20 to help me fix the problem. I have to do it 21 aggressively, because it has to be done. Janet, 22 please. 23 MS. VANDERKRUYS: This letter was 24 dated January 30, 2005. 25 "Gentlemen, I need a sign or insights 02595 1 where we are at. 2 As a backgrounder, I provide the 3 attachment and I am seeking reply from 4 one of you. Or even a note from one 5 responsible minister. Nobody over the 6 last eight long years from government 7 has ever asked about my motivations or 8 my intention. I have always done in 9 life what my mother has taught me, 10 treat your friends and neighbours how 11 you would like to be treated yourself. 12 And my father taught me, you are a 13 man, a man is of his word and a word 14 is his bond. I have tried to always 15 live my life by these simple 16 teachings. 17 In the summer of 1997, having saved 18 our home during the Red River flood, I 19 was in our community with unique 20 insights to large construction 21 efforts, providing insights where I 22 could. In these travels I met Mrs. 23 Mary Lasco on St. Mary's Road. She 24 lives on the other side of the river 25 to us. Mrs. Lasco, widow and former 02596 1 market gardener was again flooded out 2 and was attempting to recover. This 3 was the same as she and her husband 4 Taras had done following the '69, '74, 5 '76, '79 and later '96 Red River 6 floods. In sitting with folks over 7 lunch break, Mrs. Lasco asked who I 8 was and where I worked. 9 I advised her of my name and where I 10 worked. She immediately asked if I 11 was an engineer. I told her that I 12 wasn't, though I advised that I worked 13 solely for engineer and with 14 engineers. She immediately asked if I 15 could help to get the engineers to 16 listen to the floodway problems. 17 I said I could likely help, wherein 18 she provided me with her late 19 husband's past floodway construction, 20 the 1968 records and documentations. 21 And this is where it all started with 22 me and all of you named above. 23 I am a military brat and conduct 24 business as one would likely do in a 25 battle, yes, a battle, because that is 02597 1 what it has been. This has been a 2 long war. Please note from the photo 3 beyond the cover of the Adobe 4 attachment file the hat badge of my 5 father, MWO H.C. Clifton. My dad was 6 a gunner, proudly serving this fine 7 country for 39 years, 29 years in the 8 artillery, and 10 years as chief 9 custodian, RCMP Training Depot, Regina 10 Saskatchewan. 11 Thus I was the gunner in my record 12 searches of the municipal, provincial 13 and federal governments. I started by 14 laying down a barrage of probing fire, 15 lobbing shells or access requests to 16 the government. In the case of Canada 17 to the PM, as he can likely be the 18 best to start things out, or find the 19 present department or agency 20 responsible for the 1962 Ministry of 21 Northern Affairs and Natural 22 Resources. As it turns out, this in 23 October and November 1997 was exactly 24 correct, though it would take me some 25 seven years to fully validate this. 02598 1 Over time, as my probing continued, 2 access requests sparked activity. I 3 would start to narrow the fire to 4 become more concentrated. 5 Folks, you can see, given your 6 knowledge of my success on record 7 searches where this is going. As time 8 went by the searches became, or the 9 barrages became more concentrated and 10 pinpointed. Artillery in battle is 11 always used to soften up the enemy 12 before the ground troops go in. My 13 ground troops as it now turns out are 14 you folks listed above, as well as 15 some remaining locals here. Most 16 locals though have been wounded by 17 your partner in Red River flood 18 protection, Manitoba, and in the names 19 of Maxine Clifton and two of the 20 longest term members of North Ritchot 21 Action Committee. 22 Thus folks, given your assistance, we 23 can still make it right in Manitoba. 24 NRAC has been the longest and most 25 reputable upstream contact, and always 02599 1 truly, unselfishly motivated to do 2 right for our fellow Canadians. 3 All of that said, when Maxine was away 4 for respite in New York State to get 5 away from our flood mess, she was in 6 the company of a dog breeder and 7 mentor. This woman, a retired aid to 8 a U.S. congressman, was questioned 9 with Maxine seeking insights into how 10 to handle big government. After 11 hearing of our plight in '98, she 12 advised, if you are to hit and hurt 13 government, the hit must be a fatal 14 blow and a final blow. Along the way 15 they, if able, will flick you away in 16 such a way as you will never recover. 17 As Mr. Vollmershausen's record will 18 show, the Manitoba engineers have 19 tried repeatedly, though as of yet 20 have not succeeded to flick Clifton 21 away. The record attached and beyond 22 my dad's picture starts with the 23 Ritchot municipality access reply, 24 wherein one record was highlighted. 25 The notes by Reeve Stefaniuk to 02600 1 respond to NRAC's community mailings 2 is attached for comparison to the 3 municipal fact sheet to counter NRAC's 4 notice of January 14, 2000. This 5 January 19, 2000 mailer printed front 6 and back was written by Manitoba's 7 director of Water Resources, Mr. Steve 8 Topping, in the RM's name and included 9 the Red River Floodway sign off sheet 10 on the report of the Red River 11 Floodway Operations Rules Review 12 Committee. These rules for current 13 and proposed expanded floodway 14 operation were as the record shows, 15 were brought by Canada through the 16 removed Manitoba director of the PFRA 17 and signed off by Minister Anderson on 18 April 26, 2001. 19 The next record, April 29th, 1998 to 20 Premier Gary Filmon was to explain to 21 Manitoba and Canada at the time 22 Clifton's personal plight. As well as 23 November 14, 1997, a letter to 24 Manitoba's Minister of Natural 25 Resources, Mr. J. Glen Cummings. The 02601 1 next page is Premier Filmon's 2 June 1st, '98 reply to us. Then a two 3 page letter to Doer and record of 4 mailing receipt strongly requesting a 5 meeting in advance of the resumed 6 wastewater hearings on the City of 7 Winnipeg sewage systems. Mr. Doer 8 declined to meet with me at that time. 9 They then even went so far as to 10 orchestrate the new Winnipeg downtown 11 arena sod turning at the exact hour of 12 my scheduled funded presentation to 13 the resumed CEC hearings on the City 14 of Winnipeg's sewage systems. 15 Why does Clifton keep coming back to 16 sewage systems for the City of 17 Winnipeg? Therein lies my issues, as 18 also found with Canada's unofficial 19 records. Winnipeg is gravely 20 susceptible to sewer backup and city 21 basement damages. A Manitoba or City 22 of Winnipeg problem? If it were that 23 simple, in the lead up to the crest of 24 the '97 flood, Winnipeg would not have 25 monitored their sewage system so 02602 1 closely, this through planned reliance 2 on the presence and counting on the 3 floodway's use for sewage relief. 4 Winnipeg's infrastructure wasn't ready 5 for a flood, which with study was now 6 well documented, so the floodway gates 7 were operated with ice still present 8 in the river proper. This early 9 operation choked the Channel Inlet 10 with ice and aggressive actions were 11 then necessary to clear the channel. 12 The gates were cranked, 10 feet of 13 river water rose within 30 hours. 14 This very action set an altitude to 15 the pending crest that could not be 16 removed. 17 This early action partially filled the 18 valley, or as the water branch would 19 declare, filled their reservoir half 20 full. Later when the perception that 21 the city basements were at dire risk, 22 the Minister of Foreign Affairs and 23 senior Manitoba Minister, the 24 Honourable Lloyd Axworthy and then 25 Premier Gary Filmon, after lobbying 02603 1 with Mr. Doug McNeil, and now 2 VP-Hydrology Manitoba Floodway 3 Authority and others advanced to 4 Floodway Emergency operation. This 5 action though accepted as necessary, 6 given the known infrastructure in 7 place at the time, actions and 8 undertakings beyond 'the 97 flood 9 emergency are not appropriate. 10 Winnipeg was well near lost and both 11 Filmon and Axworthy knew it. The 12 floodway gates became bouyant above 13 771, and the end run as planned for in 14 1962 design was no longer palatable 15 for governments and most especially 16 residents of the City of Winnipeg. 17 On or about May 1, 1997, with signing 18 of the Canadian/Manitoba partnership 19 agreement, these two named individuals 20 undertook to immediately partner on 21 Red River Floodway Expansion. This 22 despite a lack of study, sober second 23 thought, and the clear and concisely 24 thought out engineered plan for 25 Winnipeg's future flood protection. 02604 1 The politically motivated and 2 reactionary decisions made then don't 3 justify the mess we are in now, but 4 for the May 2, 1997 Red River Valley 5 artificially induced flooding captured 6 by Red Sherron and the CBC National 7 team did the true upstream valley 8 story get out. 9 I strongly believe that Canada are 10 now, through Minister John Godfrey, 11 working with Mayor Sam Katz, are 12 working for the greater good of all 13 Canadians. Winnipeg must bring their 14 infrastructure up to some acceptable 15 flood protection standard or there 16 will never be peace in the valley. I 17 have now been assigned a four hour 18 slot as the opening speaker for 19 "Public" at the Manitoba Clean 20 Environment Commission hearings on 21 Floodway Expansion, that before this 22 weekend were to happen on February 21, 23 2005. There will be no turning back 24 after that, and I don't threaten, 25 though I can assure all of you, as 02605 1 well as Prime Minister Paul Martin and 2 others, they will unfortunately again 3 see Clifton's front and centre from 4 the living rooms across this country, 5 via the CBC National News. What is 6 done is done, though you will continue 7 to help and let my infantry in, this 8 being NRAC and Maxine. Please show me 9 a sign. Canada, please show us a 10 sign." 11 MR. CLIFTON: And then 12 Mr. Vollmershausen actually replies. Janet can 13 you read the reply? Janet was to say that Canada 14 bought the sign up on the operating rules by the 15 removed director of PFRA. Read his reply, please. 16 MS. VANDERKRUYS: He replied to it. 17 As you are aware, the current 18 cooperative environmental review 19 process, which assigns certain 20 responsibilities under the Manitoba 21 Environmental Act and Canadian 22 Environmental Assessment Act is 23 proceeding as agreed to by the 24 responsible federal and provincial 25 authorities. I can only encourage you 02606 1 and others to continue to make your 2 concerns known to the review process 3 in order that the impacts of the 4 proposed Floodway Expansion Project 5 are fully understood and can be 6 addressed." 7 MR. CLIFTON: Troops! I have some guns 8 over here. I have Armstrongs, Peter and Darlene. 9 If you happen to live in southern Winnipeg, you 10 will know they grow the finest sweet corn 11 possible. Armstrongs! Room 111-80 Wellington 12 Street, Ottawa, troop! Helen and Cliff Nizol, 13 neighbours of mine. I watched their basement 14 flood. I had to phone Helen at home, at her 15 evacuated home. I had to tell Helen, your 16 basement is full of flood water. I had to tell 17 Helen, the water is an inch from the floor joist. 18 Nizol! Room 204-450 Broadway Avenue! Troop! 19 Another battery, Mary Lasco and her son. Her 20 husband for 22 years had tried to get the 21 engineers to listen up. Lasco! One round, 200 22 Saultaux Crescent! Professional engineer, Steve 23 Topping! Fire and report! Sir, direct hit! One 24 round, sir! Coordinates, 033, 05! Access 25 request, in your records. Please provide the cut 02607 1 list dated February 15th, a reply. The cut list 2 for these emergency components supplied to the 3 Manitoba Water Resources Branch as well as 4 purchase invoices for said components. 5 The records that you have requested 6 are not in our possession. The department 7 contracted with KGS Engineering to design and 8 construct the inlet thrust walks. KGS Engineering 9 subcontracted Shop Post to be responsible for the 10 steel cutting. Shop Post has advised that they no 11 longer have the records relating to the project 12 with regard to the steel cut list. Any purchases 13 and subsequent invoices for the material, if they 14 still exist will be at KGS Engineering and not 15 found within the files. 16 Sir, I've been digging. I have been 17 digging to try and wonder, how could it have been 18 so bad for us? How? You know, as I fired a shot, 19 I'd get a half answer. I'd fire another shot, get 20 a quarter answer. But I would put it together. 21 It's taken me seven years to put it together, but 22 I have pretty well put it together. 23 I want to credit Mr. Gary Filmon, I 24 want to credit Mr. Lloyd Axworthy, Minister of 25 Foreign Affairs at the time, senior Manitoba 02608 1 Minister, and I want to credit Mayor Susan 2 Thompson for saving the day for those folks 3 cutting a deal to flood the valley for the 4 exclusive salvation of the City of Winnipeg. I 5 want to credit those folks. I also want to credit 6 Premier Gary Filmon for having the foresight to 7 realize that they damn near lost Winnipeg, they 8 gall darn near lost it. And these engineers will 9 tell you, we will never let Winnipeg flood. We 10 will never, ever, ever let Winnipeg flood. 11 In my many many representations -- I 12 had been before the CEC, this is the sixth time, 13 sir, I have never, ever, ever suggested that 14 Winnipeg should flood. But I have always thought 15 that we need to do what's appropriate in Canada. 16 I saw a picture, I saw a picture of 17 this. Gall darn it, the picture, there's two of 18 them, I provided them to you, these things here, 19 DYWIDAG anchors. I know them, DYWIDAG anchors 20 from DYWIDAG International Systems. You know, I 21 got on their website and I contacted DYWIDAG in 22 Chicago, Illinois. I said I seen some DYWIDAG 23 anchors, can you help me out? That night they 24 sent me back -- I guess they work late -- they 25 sent back and said, you are in Canada. How about 02609 1 you contact the fellow in Vancouver? 2 So I contacted the fellow in Vancouver 3 and I said, you know, I saw some DYWIDAG anchors, 4 I wonder if you can help me? You know, DYWIDAG 5 out of Vancouver said yeah, we'll help you. It 6 sounds like a noble project. So DYWIDAG sent this 7 stuff to me. And I said, you know, I not only 8 need 10 inches of length of inch and a quarter 9 DYWIDAG, I need the top nuts. And you know, I got 10 to hold it in from below. Can you send those too? 11 And they said what about the grout tubes, do you 12 want them? Yeah, you betcha. So you know what, I 13 was off my cellular phone for about three days. 14 The bus depot is phoning me saying, Mr. Clifton, 15 your DYWIDAGs are here. 16 And you know what, that's what Canada 17 is about. And I want to tell you what Canada is 18 about, these beams. These beams are 24 inches. 19 They came from Paragon Industries Limited. They 20 are a demolition contractor. And I said I had a 21 noble project, could you help me? And these 22 things here, these H beams, it's interesting, 23 there's eight of them, this is a half model. They 24 came from Falcon Machinery Limited. And I went in 25 there and I said, is the owner here? And yeah, 02610 1 he's here. And I said, you know, could you help 2 me out? I want to make a model to demonstrate to 3 the Clean Environment Commission. He says, you 4 know, we have studied this and we have studied 5 this and we've got to do something here. We can't 6 just keep studying this stuff. And I said but you 7 know, this is a noble project. I said it's not 8 right what happens in the valley. I said this is 9 Canada. 10 And you know what, I got a call a week 11 and a half later, they are ready. And, oh, I 12 can't get there, I've got a job. Well, they will 13 be outside, you pick them up. So I picked them 14 up. These blocks here. These blocks came from 15 Brunswick Steel. They are 9 inches by 11 inches, 16 two and a half inches thick, $315. They cut them 17 up right away and had them ready for me. 18 This work here was done by an unnamed 19 machine shop. These holes were drilled in this. 20 These things here came from Drummond 21 McCall, now Russel Metals. These blocks here were 22 by P.E. Clifton. You know somebody else had five 23 feet of this stuff, and damn, the day before I 24 needed them, they dug them out of the snow and 25 made a guy's steps out of them. Shit. So I had 02611 1 $200. 2 These things here, now that is a 10 3 inch "I" beam. This is 1962 on this end. They 4 put those thrust blocks in there but they weren't 5 happy with that, that was an inferior design. 6 They went to the real dam builders. They went to 7 H.G. Acres. And I'll talk about H.G. Acres a 8 little later. Mr. Carson used to work for H.G. 9 Acres, now Mr. Carson works for KGS. 10 But you know what, this is an inferior 11 design. The engineers knew that this other thing 12 was an inferior design. So they didn't say no, 13 no, no, you stupid ass, it's stupid. The 14 engineers don't work like that, they have a 15 professional ethic. The engineers never say your 16 design is full of shit, they just change it. And 17 that is what they did, that's what they did with 18 this. 19 How am I ever going to get that in 20 here? How am I ever going to demonstrate that? I 21 had to spread the work around. 22 You know, I took these down, talked to 23 a guy in Niverville. I said, you know what, can 24 you help me? He was a young guy, Leon. Yeah, 25 I'll help you he says. So he had this done. 02612 1 You know, I went down to Rosenort and 2 I said, you know, your flood protection here is 3 not very good. One day you're going to see the 4 water coming over your dyke. Haul All, Haul All 5 did the bulk of the welding on this thing. And 6 you know, I went down to Winnipeg Castor and Wheel 7 and I said, I've got a noble project, can you 8 provide me castors to fix? Yeah. That's what we 9 do in Canada. That's what we do when we have a 10 problem. 11 In 1997, people from across the 12 country saw this. People contributed $26 million. 13 You know, the Red Cross, the Red Cross tried to 14 divie it up. They had more money than they knew 15 what to do with. The Filmon government was 16 clawing back this Red Cross money, saying if you 17 get that, you don't get some of your EMO money. 18 You know, they did the right thing to 19 save the City of Winnipeg, but we're going down 20 the wrong road now. We've got an inferior design. 21 I'm going to, I lose track of time, 22 but Janet is going to read, and I'm going to go 23 through a historic record. She's going to read 24 the cover of a book by Lieutenant General Romeo 25 Dallaire. Lieutenant General Romeo Dallaire was in 02613 1 Rwanda. He didn't have sufficient peacekeepers to 2 stop a genocide. He would have liked to have 3 stopped the genocide, but he was unable to because 4 he couldn't safely do it without losing men. The 5 parallels of his book, the way I think, the way I 6 work, has got to be read into the record. 7 Would you please, Janet? 8 MS. VANDERKRUYS: The title of the 9 book is, Shakes Hands With The Devil, The Failure 10 Of Humanity in Rwanda. 11 "In the summer of 1967, when some of 12 my friends had chosen to do the summer 13 training in Montreal so they could 14 soak up the life of the city and the 15 excitement of Expo, I found myself in 16 Shilo, Manitoba, smack in the middle 17 of the Prairies. Shilo was where I 18 first confirmed my vocation as a 19 combat arms officer and gunner. 20 During my first time here in the 21 summer of 1965, they had us sit on the 22 side of the hill to watch a live 23 firing exercise. It was a splendid 24 setting with the white sand dunes of 25 the Carberry Desert, the only one in 02614 1 Canada, glistening under a clear blue 2 sky. A young officer, who had 3 graduated from the Royal Military 4 College only the previous year, 5 explained his duties to us. He was 6 responsible for the live firing of 7 heavy artillery guns and had about 90 8 people reporting directly to him in 9 the field. He was just glowing, 10 imbued with the inner excitement and 11 concentration that comes with command. 12 He had his gunners demonstrate a 13 fast-action deployment. We watched 14 the guns come from behind a hill to 15 our left and take aim at a simulated 16 Warsaw Pact target, about three 17 kilometres away. The young officer 18 stood on a truck in the middle of it 19 all, like a conductor on his podium, 20 and ordered the immediate disposition 21 of the guns, the ammunition vehicles, 22 the survey teams and the heavy, 23 mounted machine guns for self-defence. 24 When all was in place, he bellowed 25 fire. There was a colossal bang as 02615 1 the gun spat out a projectile that 2 exploded a huge plume of dust just to 3 the right of the target. He 4 immediately yelled, left 200 fire. 5 The gunners went about their tasks 6 fluidly and efficiently, barely making 7 a sound, firing to his command again 8 and again. I became consumed by the 9 noise and awesome destruction and 10 intoxicated by the smell of the burnt 11 cordite. Seeing all the raw power 12 under the command of one young 13 officer, I decided then and there that 14 this was the branch of the army I 15 would join." 16 This page is entitled My Father Told Me Three 17 Things. 18 "So when my friends went home to 19 Montreal for the summers, I went back 20 to Shilo, even though any failure 21 there would have resulted in me being 22 dismissed from military college. Each 23 summer I survived the milieu only 24 because of the help my classmates gave 25 me with the finer elements of the 02616 1 artillery fire discipline jargon. The 2 summer of 1967 was particularly 3 difficult as I was the only French 4 Canadian in a class of 40. To make 5 matters worse, our course officer, a 6 rotund artillery pilot who disliked 7 the smart ass Royal Military College 8 gang, decided to make my life 9 miserable. He paraded me in front of 10 the chief instructor, where he 11 abraided me for being flippant, among 12 other failings. I acknowledged his 13 criticism, saluted, and returned to my 14 quarters, certain that I was destined 15 to flunk. I had no idea what he 16 meant. Only at the insistence of my 17 room-mate did I decide not to cave 18 into the pressure. I even finally 19 asked my instructor the meaning of 20 flippant. Cocky he said. Bewildered 21 I carried out. 22 MR. CLIFTON: I am flippant but I am 23 driven. 24 MS. VANDERKRUYS: Back to Shake Hands 25 with the Devil. 02617 1 "When I returned to the Royal Military 2 College that fall, my future was in 3 serious doubt. My poor mark from 4 summer training and my even poorer 5 academic performance at the college 6 made my failure seem inevitable. But 7 at the last minute I locked into my 8 old habit of creating a bubble of 9 concentration and slowly and steadily 10 pulled myself out of the hole. In the 11 fall of 1968, with the election of 12 Pierre Elliot Trudeau and the 13 publishing of the preliminary report 14 on the Royal Commission on bilingual 15 and biculturalism, the language issue 16 became more and more significant at 17 the Royal Military College. 18 MR. ABRA: Can you slow down, please? 19 MS. VANDERKRUYS: Okay. 20 "In November, four of my Francophone 21 classmates convened a bilingualism 22 committee and drafted a memorandum 23 outlining the problems that 24 Francophones encountered at the 25 college. They presented it to the 02618 1 commandant which caused a minor 2 explosion. The committee members were 3 paraded in front of the commandant and 4 asked to explain themselves -- a 5 frightening experience for the young 6 officer cadets, who were being accused 7 of harbouring nationalistic 8 tendencies. But their quite logic and 9 commitment to their principles won the 10 day, and they succeeded in forcing a 11 small change. Those of us who stayed 12 in the Canadian force also resolved to 13 continue to monitor and defend French 14 rights within the army. We were one 15 of the first classes of French 16 Canadians at the Royal Military 17 College who were comfortable with our 18 cultural identity; even so, only 58 of 19 the 130 French speaking cadets who had 20 begun military college with me 21 actually graduated in the spring of 22 1969." 23 MR. CLIFTON: Spring of 1969 I 24 graduated. You know, whether you agree with it or 25 not, the Government of Canada saw as a national 02619 1 priority bilingualism. I understand they are 2 looking at the floodway as a national priority. 3 They had the Royal Commission look at bilingualism 4 and they thought this was important. 5 1958, '57, they had a Royal 6 Commission. And they looked at flood protection 7 in the Red River Valley because Winnipeg has a 8 problem. And they looked at what to do. And it 9 was a national priority. Now we got a City of 10 Winnipeg priority. How do we, as a nation, get so 11 convoluted? I presented many times and I've just 12 dug. 13 In 1969, first time they ever operated 14 the floodway in the spring, people upstream 15 suffered an adverse effect. You know, the 16 property we owned was owned by John and Ann Nizol. 17 Now John and Ann Nizol in the 50's were mixed 18 farmers like most everybody in the valley. They 19 had some cattle, they had grain. They were a 20 mixed farm. I think, Mr. Motheral, you might 21 even be a farmer. But anyway, they had cattle. 22 And in the 1950 flood, the home they lived in, it 23 wasn't low. They wouldn't live along the river in 24 a low house because they know the Red River 25 floods. But you know, Nizols brought their cattle 02620 1 up to the house. 2 Now a farmer that keeps cattle likely 3 have a fence around their home to keep the cattle 4 out. And they likely have their home on a bit of 5 a hill to keep the flood waters out. And so 6 that's what they did. But they brought their 7 cattle to the home. It's high. Going to be all 8 right, and it was all right. 9 And you know, John and Ann Nizol, they 10 ran the community store. Red River Drive used to 11 be the large Selkirk highway. It was a single 12 lane highway that took you down to Emerson and 13 down to the States. That was their home and that 14 was the main north/south highway. 15 Time goes by, time goes by, we become 16 part of St. Norbert. We're now in a rural 911 17 system and we've got a name. They needed a name. 18 Well, you know, Clifton's home, or property at 19 least, was the Howden community store. And in the 20 Howden community store was the post office. It 21 was a gathering place. And it was a gathering 22 place of people. And so now, it's inadvertently 23 flood central but there's a task to be done. 24 Other people. 25 You heard Rita Bartmanovich, and I can 02621 1 call her Rita. I don't think it was appropriate 2 Mr. Doering did but I can call her Rita because I 3 can affiliate with Rita. And Rita talked about 4 her marriage home, the home that they were 5 building in '49, '50. And the flood water came up 6 just to the floor joists. Didn't touch the floor 7 joists, didn't get the wood wet. Because if wood 8 gets wet, it gets moldy and and mould will kill 9 you. And we've learned that. We've learned that. 10 How's my time? 11 THE CHAIRMAN: We're probably getting 12 close to needing a break. 13 MR. CLIFTON: You know what, I think 14 I've brought my point of this. I presented five 15 different times. I also presented to the 16 International Joint Commission. Could I ask for 17 15 minutes? 18 THE CHAIRMAN: We will gladly take a 19 break right now. 20 MR. CLIFTON: Thank you. 21 THE CHAIRMAN: So 15 minutes, just 22 before half past. 23 24 (PROCEEDINGS RECESSED AT 3:12 P.M. ) 25 02622 1 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, we will continue 2 now. 3 MR. CLIFTON: Thank you, Mr. Chair. 4 I have five points for the flood 5 protection for the City of Winnipeg. One of them 6 is the flood protection infrastructure, internal 7 to the city. One of them is the inlet control 8 structure. One of them is the Operating Rules for 9 the operation, which is critically important. The 10 next one is the west dyke and this ability to hold 11 water in their supposed reservoir. And the last 12 one is the channel. 13 I have a question, if I could. I had, 14 in my submission, submitted a poster board of the 15 deviation from the natural and you see in the 16 Hansards that you're not certain whether or not it 17 is within your purview to deal with the natural or 18 deviate them. 19 I would like to enter as an exhibit my 20 question one the details of that, so at least it 21 is on the public record I did that. 22 And the other thing is -- if I don't 23 get to it -- I have nine pages of drawings. You 24 had tasked Northwest Hydraulics, I believe, out of 25 Calgary to help on the ice-jamming issue. 02623 1 The west dyke has been topped up since 2 1997. Those drawings detail that upwards of five 3 and a half feet. I propose in my demonstration 4 here to show that this structure and facility was 5 incapable of 778. It may soon be capable of 778, 6 but the intent was never there. 7 I am not an engineer and I need an 8 engineer to validate what I say. So, I don't know 9 how to deal with that, sir. 10 MR. CHAIRMAN: I am not sure either, 11 Mr. Clifton. So, you make your comments and we 12 will consider them. 13 MR. CLIFTON: Okay. There has been a 14 lot of efforts by various people to determine what 15 goes on here and what we really do. How do we 16 come to the ultimate fix? 17 We have a document called the EIS 18 document and I read from it. It is on the 19 introduction, page one of 11. It talks about a 20 series of consultations of the public were held 21 regarding their project alternatives. They 22 included four -- I say four -- public meetings of 23 the Clean Environment Commission, in January of 24 2002, to receive input regarding the project and 25 to -- and its comparison to the alternate that has 02624 1 been considered at the time. 2 The meetings were held in Selkirk, 3 Winnipeg, Ste. Agathe and Morris. Over 1000 4 people attended the meetings and there were more 5 than 1000 submissions by stakeholders. A report 6 summarizing these discussions were provided to 7 government in February 2002. 8 I purport to you, sir, that 9 Mr. Axworthy and Mr. Filmon undertook Floodway 10 expansion because they almost lost the city. 11 There was a charade after that, that 12 all the work that happened was to validate this 13 project and also that these people are editing 14 representations to sell this project. 15 There were five meetings, sir. Those 16 meetings were all minuted in a verbatim form -- 17 no, pardon me. In a summary form, not verbatim. 18 In a summary form. 19 In the first meeting, I represent and 20 I say my submission will be in two parts: A 21 multi-media presentation and will include a more 22 complete, detailed and politically-sensitive 23 written submission. 24 I have never, without warning, slammed 25 government. I've always offered up a better way 02625 1 to do things. 2 I submitted in confidence, received by 3 Joyce Mueller, 9:00 o'clock, January 31, 2002, a 4 significant contribution to the process. It 5 didn't fall within the record. 6 It wasn't until the Wastewater 7 investigation that was necessitated by the failure 8 of the City of Winnipeg's North End sewage, that 9 it became part of the record, but folks still 10 didn't act on that. It is on Mr. Stephane Dion's 11 desk and Stephane Dion, the current Minister of 12 the Federal Environment suggested and came to 13 Manitoba and talked about initiating a national 14 environmental assessment initiative. 15 He didn't just stumble on Manitoba as 16 a federal initiative on environmental assessments. 17 He stumbled on Manitoba because he knows that the 18 environmental assessments done by Manitoba to date 19 on some, especially this particular project, have 20 not been done the way they should have been. 21 Anyway, I had cautioned Mr. Terry 22 Duguid. I said, you have an obligation under the 23 Legislative Library Act to maintain audio tapes of 24 proceedings. Mr. Terry Duguid did. About a year 25 and a half ago, I got his tapes. 02626 1 I am a little bit more technically 2 advanced now in that I was able to incorporate, 3 with the help from a dear friend here, 4 transparencies. When I presented, I presented 5 with transparencies on overhead and in audio. 6 This was a meeting number five. It is 7 going to run 50 minutes and I would like to play 8 it into the record, please. 9 10 [Audio tape played of Mr. P. Clifton's 11 presentation to the Manitoba Clean 12 Environment Commission. Chair, 13 Mr. Terry Duguid. Red River Flood 14 Protection Options for the City of 15 Winnipeg, Meeting #5, January 28th, 16 2002.] 17 18 MR. CLIFTON: We don't agree on much, 19 unfortunately. 20 This Board I am going to talk about 21 very briefly, and I am going to talk about 22 Mr. Tony Kettler. Mr. Tony Kettler, PFRA. He was 23 number three in PFRA in the dealings with a number 24 of things. 25 When I first saw Water Branch -- or 02627 1 sought funding of the Cloutier Dyke Extension and 2 they -- I sort of modified my position, the 3 Turnbull Dyke should go. But, Mr. Cloutier, they 4 farm out there and that ring dyke could likely 5 stay, the Turnbull Dyke should go and all the 6 residents in there. 7 Mr. Tony Kettler, when I went to visit 8 him, he was just in receipt of a Federal Access to 9 Information Request, that I asked PFRA to please 10 give me information relating to the review of the 11 Operating Rules of the Red River Floodway. 12 You see, residents were completely 13 excluded from that. So, I asked through the 14 Federal Access to Information Request to give me 15 the documentation that relates to the review of 16 the Operating Rules. They had just received it 17 that day when I went in unannounced to 18 Mr. Kettler. 19 Mr. Kettler came out of his office: 20 Oh, shit, it's Clifton, and he went back in. He 21 regained his composure, he came out and visited 22 with me. We went and had coffee. We talked about 23 how could you be so stupid as to be involved with 24 the Cloutier Dyke, blocking, obstructing the 25 inlet? How? What engineer? I can't comment; 02628 1 that's Manitoba. 2 So, you know, that's fine. We sat 3 down for coffee, talked about Operating Rules, and 4 he said, it is the most economical thing to do. 5 That's all he said. It is just the most 6 economical thing to do. I didn't pin him down on 7 that. 8 Mr. Kettler is a very credible civil 9 servant. There are credible civil servants 10 around. I would suggest that civil servants -- 11 that this fellow is reporting to on the federal 12 side -- you got to do your job. If you're not 13 able to do your job, hearing the grief that these 14 folks are going to cause us, you look around in 15 your office and you find out who would likely be 16 able to move into your shoes and do the job right. 17 And you recommend to your Regional Director 18 General, if you are the feds, or Deputy Minister, 19 I can't do this job, but this guy could. I bet 20 you he could get this done right. 21 And I am going to talk about 22 peacekeepers in a bit because I understand I am a 23 military brat. World renowned peacekeepers. 24 Mr. Dithers commands the peacekeepers. 25 Mr. Dithers could have them here. 02629 1 Do you know what they would do? They 2 would come around with a personnel carrier and 3 drive down Red River Drive: There is that 4 galled Mr. Clifton. And they would stop and look 5 up our hill and would sit there in their armoured 6 personnel carrier and they would be wondering, Is 7 Mr. Clifton going to shoot at us? 8 Do you know what, I am not shooting at 9 them. I am on my elevated hill and I got my aim. 10 Every shot I fire, I can hit. Every time. And 11 they got their four to five moat. So, they will 12 procrastinate and won't listen and they will duck 13 and hide and I will shoot, and they will duck and 14 hide and I will shoot. We get nowhere with that. 15 Nowhere. 16 So, do you know what the Canadian 17 Forces would do? The fellow would get out and he 18 would stand by his armoured personnel carrier, 19 maybe see if Mr. Clifton's home. And Mr. Clifton 20 would say, geez, there is the Canadian Forces. 21 United Nations maybe. I wonder, I will go down 22 and talk to that fellow. 23 I would walk down the hill and he 24 would walk up the hill and he would say to me: 25 You got some guns up on your hill. I would say, 02630 1 Yeah. Those there are a son of a gun. I just 2 can't get them to listen. 3 He would suggest to me, Mr. Clifton, 4 why don't you get your troops to roll those guns 5 down and put the tarps on them. Do you know what 6 I would say? Troops, cease fire. Stand down. 7 Back'em up. We got to talk. 8 And he would talk to me and sit down 9 in my kitchen and say, you know, it has been a 10 long road, hasn't it, Mr. Clifton? I would say, 11 Yeah, can I get a coffee? It has been a long, 12 long road here and I don't know what is wrong with 13 those people. They just don't understand and we 14 cannot do this again, but they feel they have to. 15 Do you know, this is Canada, isn't it? 16 This is not a third world country. We don't do 17 this. If they got to do that, why don't they be 18 honest? 19 You know, why don't they say that in 20 1997, in the lead up to the flood, they stopped 21 operation because our gates we were not sure of. 22 We put in a thrust bo