Jurisdictional confusion plagues bridge debate

Earlier this month, the NCC unveiled its decision to proceed with Kettle Island and both Lower Duck Island corridors in the environmental assessment study’s second phase. The announcement came days after both the Quebec and Ontario governments called for further analysis of the Lower Duck locations.

The set-up of the bridge debate – and where each level of government comes in – may have been confusing for many residents now puzzled why the city’s most recent position of support for Kettle didn’t pull more weight, suggests Innes Coun. Rainer Bloess.

Though the city “became the information funnel” for the debate, both Ottawa and Gatineau have less say than other governments – like the provinces – who will be financially contributing to the project, he explains. “I don’t fault the NCC,” Bloess says. “They did a very competent and very thorough job. (It’s just that) people tend to know who their councillors are.”

Regardless, confusion and governmental sway should not have an impact on the study’s conclusions, which should instead be determined by facts and not emotions, he continues. “It’s unfortunate that at the city level, communities were being pitted against communities,” Bloess adds. “The outcome should always be determined by evidence.”

Orléans Coun. Bob Monettte, meanwhile, suggests the NCC should have taken requested feedback more seriously before announcing it would also examine both Lower Duck corridors earlier this month. “They always talked about how they wanted input from the three levels of government before they made a decision,” he says. “I thought (the city’s opinion) would have meant something.”

The provinces, Monette continues, “put on pressure at the last minute” in order to change the study’s second-phase mandate. The timing of their letters to the NCC was “very specific,” he adds, calling it an attempt to “interfere” in the environmental assessment’s progression.

With a provincial election in the fall of 2007 – after east-end officials had already started drumming up support for Kettle Island – “the residents of Ottawa would have liked to have heard” their true opinions on the crossing, he suggests.

As a significant funder, the federal government should have a major voice in the future bridge, continues Ottawa-Orléans MP Royal Galipeau, also highlighting their status as “one that is prudent with taxpayers’ dollars” and their obligation to be fiscally responsible.

The NCC, an arms’ length organization funded by the feds, should not cater to any level of government or political influence, he explains, recounting his surprise at the Lower Duck sites being included in the study’s next step.

The opinion of many east-end residents in favour of Kettle Island, however, “is not inconsistent with the historical perspective,” Galipeau adds, pointing that the link has been on the books for 60 years.

Galipeau attributes at least some of this shift in attitude to “some mischievousness” on the part of local politicians, specifically Vanier’s elected officials and Ottawa-Orléans MPP Phil McNeely, who has endured some criticism in recent weeks for modifying his position on the bridge debate.

Since previously expressing support for Kettle Island, McNeely says a flurry of new information and first-phase study results have led him to adjust his position and reconsider one of two proposed Lower Duck sites, adding that his job would be easier if the NCC decided to move forward with only Kettle Island. “I felt there was a need to look at other options,” McNeely explains, upon realizing the potential impact to the community adjacent to the proposed Kettle corridor. “There’s something to be said for considering the evidence.”

The second Lower Duck option – which would cut a swath through the Convent Glen community – makes no sense, however, McNeely suggests. “I don’t think it’s economical,” he continues, also touching on encroachment to residential neighbourhoods and wetlands.

And while the wait for further study feedback begins, McNeely says in the interim he will meet with east-end residents to hear their take. “We have some time now,” he adds. “I want to make sure Convent Glen is not significantly impacted.”