Editor’s note: This letter was sent to Squamish council and copied to The Squamish Chief, prior to the provincial order that was issued to WLNG this week.
I am writing to express my disappointment with the recent editorial, “The Woodfibre LNG ‘baby’.”
The editorial lacks balance and professionalism. Comparing the project to a baby, albeit an unwanted baby, trivializes this complex issue that our community has been dealing with over the past decade.
The aftermath of this project will have to be dealt with by the residents of Squamish, not the billionaires who own oil and gas companies and live far away from Squamish. Community voices are crucial in issues like this. If you attended the public hearing, you would know that over 90% of Squamish residents spoke against the project.
The article/editorial completely overlooked that perspective and dismissed the concerns of council members and the overwhelming public opinion as mere identity politics. This undermines the democratic process, an essential pillar that unbiased journalism should not only be recognizing, but also upholding.
Mocking valid environmental, social, and economic concerns, and calling the council’s actions “feet dragging” is very disrespectful. Careful decision-making is essential to building trust in projects like this that can have a long-lasting impact on our community. The concerns raised by the citizens are not baseless. We have seen what is happening in communities in B.C., where LNG projects have destroyed sacred waters and salmon habitats, and deployed military-grade policing units. It is not surprising that Squamish residents are concerned about this project.
Local newspapers have a role in covering local issues, but the editorial has taken it upon itself to basically say that industry should have a greenlight to anything they want to do in this community as long as they tick the boxes, regardless of even ticking them responsibly. This doesn’t look like journalism, this sounds like being paid off by industry and doing their propaganda work for them.
I am really disappointed. Hoping for more professional reporting coming out from the “editorial” section in the future.
Ankit Sharma
Squamish
