Remembering Harriet and Pierre

Last week the BC environmental movement lost two of its foot soldiers in the shape of Harriet Nahanee and Pierre Rovtar.

Harriet was instrumental in the Eagle Ridge bluffs protest and at 71 had been sent to prison for 14 days for simply not apologising to the construction company at Eagle Ridge Bluffs. Along with fellow protestor Betty Krawzyk, Harriet took a stand on the bluffs overlooking West Vancouver, like Betty she was arrested for breaking the will of a judge who simply issued a piece of paper.

It is a statement of our times to see pictures of Harriet on the blockade holding in one hand a piece of paper originally written 200 years ago; the other hand in hand with a West Van RCMP officer. Our court system refuses to acknowledge such an old document, even if it was written in the King's hand. Today a court order can overrule the word of a long dead king with a simple signature.

Betty and Harriet as great grandmothers have memory of the days when Madam Justice Brown never had the opportunity to sit in her current position. Justice Brown is in her position today because women of the past suffered, got arrested and sometimes died to fight for the right for her right to be recognised. Today a construction company has more right to make a buck than people have the right to protest said companies immoral activities.

Make no mistake, Harriet Nahanee died in her attempt to save Eagle Ridge Bluffs, she maybe the first casualty of a new war in the woods.



I knew Pierre Rovtar from his time running for the Green Party in the BC election of 2005. Unlike many GP candidates Pierre did not dissapear from the radar after the election. In fact Pierre raised his profile significantly by raising a Surrey based fight to stop the BC Liberals Gateway Plan; ironically set in motion by Kevin Falcon, who Pierre ran against in 2005.

Pierre's stand against the Gateway Plan would certainly not have been an easy one. The vast majority of residents south of the Port Mann were originally in favour of the plan. However, thanks to Pierre [and others] hard work and dedication to the realities of increased traffic, Surrey, Langley, Cloverdale residents and their local media are now questioning the logic of the Gateway Plan; particularly in light of the Liberals green speech of several weeks back.

As far as I know Pierre Rovtar and Harriet Nahanee never met, yet their commonality is obvious. From each end of the freeway expansion these two warriors fought the fight of so-called "progress". We shall remember them both as such.

Surrey fashions are different from those in East Van

Surrey fashions are different from those in East Van


In the BC election of 2005 you would be hard pressed to find a would be MLA south of the Port Mann speaking against the Gateway Plan and the subsequent twinning of the bridge. On the televised leaders debate all but one leader spoke in favour of the Gateway Plan.

However, times change and now there seems to far more opposition to the Gateway Plan in Victoria than ever before - or is there ?

As a candidate in the 2005 election I often found myself the single opponent of the freeway expansion, particularly in several televised debates on Ch 10. [NOW TV] with Doug Kooy. [May 17th, 2005] In that debate candidate Bruce Ralston of the NDP voiced his support of the Gateway Plan. Jagrup Brar was quoted in the Surrey Now in support of the plan and even leader Carole James voiced her support for the plan both in the Surrey Now and on the leaders tv debate.

However, that was way back in 2005 and political winds doth change. At the 2005 NDP convention Vancouver Kensington put forward a motion [I have a copy if you want it]

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the NDP oppose unilateral plans for the expansion of Highway 1 & the twinning of the Port Mann bridge in favor of assessing the most effective means for lasting solutions to traffic congestion that are consistent with adopted local and regional policy including but not limited to:

introducing improved transit options
increasing use of HOV lanes and introducing HPV lanes
introducing new rail options
implement congestion pricing and ramp signals
implement transportation demand management
[R2005-02 Lower Mainland Transportation]

The NDP in Abbotsford Clayburn put forward a motion:

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the BC NDP press the provincial government to implement a comprehensive public transit strategy for the Fraser Valley which gives serious consideration to the utilization of existing rail facilities in the Fraser Valley on the south side of the Fraser River.[ R2005-04 Public Transportation in the Fraser Valley]

The reality of politics is that had the NDP had this policy in place prior to the 2005 election it may not have elected as many new MLA's. Policy changes tend to be a reflection of the current fashion of a political party - they can remain in the closet but never get worn out in public.

So it is with great interest we now observe a step up in the political rhetoric around the Gateway Plan. One begs to ask the question, how many Surrey NDP MLA's will be wearing their transportation policy out in public, particularly south of the Port Mann bridge ? What transportation policy fashion will the NDP leader be wearing in 2009 ?

As a resident of East Van who lives a mere 50 meters from Hwy 1, I am well aware of the NDP opposition to Gateway; but then just about every politician of every stripe is against the Gateway Plan in East Van, [as they should be]. However, it is those politicians over in Surrey, where support for Gateway is fashionable, that I am most concerned about. We never hear from Messrs Brar and Ralston on the issue; we never see them out in public wearing their NDP transportation policy suits and ties.

The logical question arising from this ambiguity [flip flopping] is: Should we trust the NDP to hold the course and wear their policy in public, leading up to the 2009 election ? History tells us political parties will do just about anything to get elected, including pushing their fashionable attire back in to the closet to gather dust, only to brought out when politically expedient.

Many of us have worked hard and long on opposing the Gateway Plan. To put our eggs in one political basket, namely the NDP, is risky. They have a long history of turning their backs on the people who supported them in the past. Maybe it is time for the NDP to wear unfashionable clothing at election time and damn the consequences, you never know people just might follow suit.

The Rights and Wrongs of being Betty

Today environmental elder Betty Krawczyk returned to court to face a yet another jail sentence. Without knowing the predictable outcome, Betty has garnered more and more support for causes, specifically the need to amend the law so that protestors can be charged under the criminal code.

As it stands environmental protest fall between the cracks in the justice system. If, like Betty and the 20 or more protestors of Eagle Ridge Bluffs, you are charged with "contempt of court" then your legal rights are severely diminished compared to a straight criminal court case.

The intention of which is to completely dissuade protestors for becoming inspired in the first place. Imagine if you knew you would have a fair trial for your protesting activities, wouldn't that inspire you to go live outside for 30 days in a tent beside a busy freeway ? Of course not !

It is interesting to look at the perception of public protest in BC over the last twenty years. Under the BC NDP government, environmentalists were labelled as the "enemies of progress" by the premier of the day [Glen Clark]. Under the Liberals, protests have become more common place, yet more marginalised. The Liberals have not taken on the protestors in the media but in the court rooms. Yet, in East Vancouver particularly, the notion of protest has never been so prevalent has never been so strong, yet how far are protestors willing to go for their cause ?

Are we willing to go to jail to stop the freeway expansion ? Are we willing to risk a strip search in order to protest against the 2010 Olympics ? Are we willing to risk rough treatment from the VPD in order to stop the gentrification on yet another DTES hotel ?

Everyone has their limit - Betty K's limit involves going to jail in order to protect our future. However, not everyone is a Betty K in the making. Betty's age and demeanour is directly related to how successful she has been in bringing attention to her causes. Would a twenty year old have the same success ? Would a twenty year old get the same treatment by police ?

We should not let an unfair justice system stop us from acting, in fact we should seek inspiration from such a system to act even more; like Betty we must risk our personal freedoms in order to save what we value most.