LETTER — Ajax can be part of strong economy if it passes review
In a recent column by Councillor Denis Walsh, the Kamloops Chamber of Commerce was quoted; stating that, “the city of Kamloops’ economy is strong and diverse with a growing population”. The Chamber stands by this statement; however it should be noted that the strength and diversity of our economy relies greatly on heavy industry, including mining. Many businesses in Kamloops and the surrounding region, and by extension the people that live here, benefit every day from heavy industry.
Steve Earl
Councillor Walsh further noted that “…the 42 business leaders who recently signed a letter of support were painting a negative view of our economy with large employers laying off or closing.” These leaders were correct in stating that Kamloops has lost such employers over the recent years. We believe they were trying to make a point, one which the Kamloops Chamber holds as well, that to ensure we continue to have a thriving economy, new opportunities must be developed to offset these losses. KGHM Ajax has the potential to be just such a development, but only if it can be operated in a manner that meets the modern environmental standards that Canada has and should be proud of.
The position of the Board of Directors of the Kamloops Chamber of Commerce has been that a decision on the proposal should be based on sound science and research that can only come upon completion of the environmental impact review. Should the review come back favourably, there will be obvious economic benefit for the city of Kamloops, the surrounding area and the businesses that operate in the region. Should the review reflect an unfavourable response, it will be because the cost to the environment was not acceptable. Our Board of Directors will continue to support the KGHM Ajax proposal, but this will remain contingent on a positive environmental review.
There will continue to be emotional debate from those who favour and those who oppose the development. We believe that this debate is important, but suggest that it should be based on science versus rhetoric. We encourage all Kamloops residents and business owners to remain open-minded to data as it has been and will be made available. What needs to be remembered is that the great majority of businesses and people in Kamloops want this proposal to go through the process and then have a final decision rendered on fact.
Kamloops is home to all of us and it is our responsibility to ensure we have a strong economy that respects the environment both now and into the future.
STEVE EARL
President, Board of Directors
Kamloops Chamber of Commerce
ArmchairMayor.ca 
How many supporters of Ajax would approve of a plan to pump millions of liters of water from Kamloops Lake uphill to a dirt-based holding dam and pond above their homes , where it is poisoned before storage and release? The recent rain storm in Westsyde gave us a small illustration of potential consequences.
LikeLike
On a very significant and important issue like this, our city council, should have a referendum on whether or not the citizens of Kamloops support KGHM Ajax mine?
What a way to listen and act on behalf of the majority of the people.
LikeLike
It is interesting that the Chamber is echoing the line coming from KGHM/Ajax themselves.
Wait for the science.
Is that the same “science” that the proponent promised to share with the citizens of Kamloops as it was developed, then changed their minds and decided to keep private? Are projections and modelling that can be changed depending on the inputs selected considered “science”?
LikeLike
Negative people seem to get a lot of ink but it sure is good to hear the positives. We await the reports that Ajax must complete before making a constructive opinion. Odd how when the other mine closer to Aberdeen run by Tech years ago never got all this negative, fear mogerling, etc, response. We never heard one complaint or even noise in those days of operation. Good letter, Steve Earl.
LikeLike
Not to sound like a broken record, but the prior mine that was in place, and run by Teck is nowhere near comparable to what KGHM wants to do. Aberdeen was not as developed and close to the mine site then as it is now, and the new plan KGHM has makes the overall footprint of the mine much bigger… that’s why you never heard any complaints… years ago when Highland Valley Copper was first built, Logan Lake was specifically built 15 km away because no one should have to live that close to a mine…
LikeLike
The review will come back favorably…it only depends on the right “virtual” parameters. Like a good Hollywood movie, where they can make almost anything believable.
New opportunities must be developed to offset…the large body of science already available in regards to everything related to mining and to the questionable overall economic effects this project will have, especially in the long term. KGHM is not here because it is attracted to the greatest place on Earth, it is here to exploit an ore body and to piggy-back, on the cheap, on existing infrastructure.
LikeLike
Thank you Mr. Earl for a nicely balanced commentary.
LikeLike
Probably more than 70% of the employees at HVC live in Kamloops…will the opponents of AJAX want to shut down HVC ? How about New Gold….
LikeLike
They won’t and they haven’t been because unlike Ajax they actually support new gold and HVC because they aren’t 2km from the city. The biggest issue with ajax is proximity.
LikeLike
As far as I know, no one has tried to shut down New Gold or HVC. Do you think we should build a city 1.5 kms away from HVC? I am guessing not….we should probably all refrain from putting words in the mouths of others.
LikeLike
When have you ever heard anyone say we should shut down highland valley copper or new gold? Perhaps the problem is the pro-ajax crowd trying to frame anyone who is opposed to the Ajax mine as being anti-mining… we are not anti-mining, we are currently opposed to this mine… that’s it. Never have we or anyone else on our behalf made a statement that we should shutdown or close either New Gold or Highland Valley Copper. How can the community have a legit debate about this mine, when false claims like that are being made?
LikeLike
all we ask is a honest scientific review not old fashioned ideas coming forth not based on modern technology
LikeLike
So the Board of Directors of the Chamber of Commerce has decided, as a group, that it should come down to the environmental review? That’s all there is to it? Did they give any thought to how even the *perception* of the mine (which clearly isn’t entirely positive) might impact the local economy?
Now keep in mind, I’m just spit-balling here, but is there any chance that the mine would impact the tourist dollar spent in town? Or, perhaps, that foreign students (injecting some significant dollars into the local economy) might decide that TRU isn’t the best place to go to school? Will it be easier or more difficult to attract doctors to town (or any other educated professional for that matter) once the mine is up and running?
A strong economy is generally based on diversity and sustainability. Putting all our eggs in the mining basket while bobbling the other baskets just doesn’t seem well-considered to me.
Given that it’s called the Chamber of ‘Commerce’ and not the Chamber of ‘Quality of Life’, I suppose it should be apparent what the group’s primary objective is here? It strikes me that the group isn’t thinking too far out of the box… or perhaps I should say, ‘too far out of the open pit’.
LikeLike
I take issue with the line “there will be obvious economic benefits for the city of Kamloops” if it passes an environmental review. From what I understand, the BCEAO is not doing a thorough economic assessment of this project. Their main concern is environmental. The assumption that Mr. Earl makes, which is made by a lot of people, is that as long as this project is deemed environmentally sound, then the economics of it is a no-brainer. He along with many other people are ignoring the possible negative impacts. The tourism industry in the Thompson-Okanagan region brings in more than $1.5 billion annually, and Kamloops is a big part of this. How will the mine impact this? How will the Kamloops brand be impacted, and how much will this cost us annually? How will property values be impacted? How will our image as a healthy and family-oriented city be affected? There are dozens of issues which could result big in negative economic consequences.
If one just looks at the jobs and money that flows into the economy, then Ajax looks wonderful. But the real picture is a lot less clear. A car salesman isn’t going to tell you about a car’s shortcomings. Perhaps Mr. Earl should think about the other side of the equation.
Mr. Earl encourages debate yet would rather have it based on “science versus rhetoric”.
This sounds a lot like the line KGHM has used to duck the whole debate issue. There has never been an open debate or town hall style meeting or anything in the last four years precisely because of this attitude. And there probably never will be a debate.
The reason being of course is that they have all the answers, and us plebs should just sit and wait. How nice.
LikeLike
Thank you Steve Earl. The reasoned and logical minds are finally beginning to take a stand.
LikeLike
I know. And isn’t it great that Ajax has actually been listening to first nations concerns over the past years? Oh wait, they haven’t been.
LikeLike
“Reasoned and logical minds”…. Please explain. I read a desire on the part of the writer to let the environmental review decide the future of Kamloops. Where’s the logic and reason in that? Should no other factors be considered?
If Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) commissioned an environmental review that determined it was safe enough to store nuclear waste in barrels behind your neighbour’s shed, would you accept that determination without demanding other factors be considered? Yes, an extreme example, but the principles at issue remain essentially the same.
I submit that ‘reasoned and logical minds’ would demand that all factors be considered before coming to a ‘reasoned and logical’ decision. What part of the article met your definition of ‘reasoned and logical’?
LikeLike
When calculating the net economic impact of the mine, I’d like to see what sectors are expected to be negatively impacted… it’s clear that the mine will bring jobs, but what sectors are going to be hurt by the mine? How many jobs will be lost in other areas? That will take away from the hundreds of jobs the mine is going to be creating… if we subtract that negative impact on the economy, how will that affect the overall economic impact this mine has on our community?
Also, I’d like a clear explanation on what to expect in approximately 23 years when all these hundreds of people lose their jobs as the mine closes, as well as the “thousands :)” of other support jobs? Sounds like that would have quite the negative impact on our economy… we’re just setting ourselves up for huge losses aren’t we? Maybe we should focus on a sustainable workforce?
LikeLike