A federal judge has overturned a $250 million decision made in 2021 by then-Environment Minister Jonathan Wilkinson under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. The Federal Court faulted Wilkinson for “inexplicable” conduct in the 2021 case when Wilkinson directed Cabinet to license construction of a Canadian National Railway (CNR) megaproject west of Toronto, reported Blacklock’s Reporter on Tuesday. CNR, owned by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, BlackRock and other elite foreign investors, intended to build a container yard with 24-hour service by four freight trains and 800 trucks daily.However, the 600,000 residents of the Regional Municipality of Halton and cities of Burlington, Halton Hills, Milton and Oakville opposed the container yard, citing concerns about it being too noisy and dirty — with some of the yard’s fumes even being “toxic.” .“At issue is a very large $250 million intermodal container transfer facility,” wrote Justice Henry Brown, adding it was “a matter of common sense” that Wilkinson should answer local taxpayers’ concerns, but he failed to do so.Diesel fumes would “contain pollutants, some of which are known to be toxic to human health,” wrote Justice Brown. “While I agree the minister was free to disagree with the review panel in terms of the project’s adverse effects on human health, in my respectful view the minister was also obliged in this case to meaningfully grapple with the review panel’s human health findings,” said court documents. Yet, Wilkinson simply ignored it, the judge pointed out. “Inexplicably neither the minister’s referral decision nor the Cabinet justification decision considered or referred to the finding that the project will likely cause significant direct adverse environmental effects on human health as it relates to air quality,” said the Court. It was “a matter of common sense” that cabinet had to address air quality complaints, yet the issue was “not mentioned or discussed.”“A central issue is whether the Minister and cabinet meaningfully grappled with the expert review panel’s undisputed determination that the project, even after taking into account mitigation measures, will likely cause significant direct adverse environmental effects on human health as it relates to the air quality of local residents,” wrote Justice Brown.
A federal judge has overturned a $250 million decision made in 2021 by then-Environment Minister Jonathan Wilkinson under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. The Federal Court faulted Wilkinson for “inexplicable” conduct in the 2021 case when Wilkinson directed Cabinet to license construction of a Canadian National Railway (CNR) megaproject west of Toronto, reported Blacklock’s Reporter on Tuesday. CNR, owned by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, BlackRock and other elite foreign investors, intended to build a container yard with 24-hour service by four freight trains and 800 trucks daily.However, the 600,000 residents of the Regional Municipality of Halton and cities of Burlington, Halton Hills, Milton and Oakville opposed the container yard, citing concerns about it being too noisy and dirty — with some of the yard’s fumes even being “toxic.” .“At issue is a very large $250 million intermodal container transfer facility,” wrote Justice Henry Brown, adding it was “a matter of common sense” that Wilkinson should answer local taxpayers’ concerns, but he failed to do so.Diesel fumes would “contain pollutants, some of which are known to be toxic to human health,” wrote Justice Brown. “While I agree the minister was free to disagree with the review panel in terms of the project’s adverse effects on human health, in my respectful view the minister was also obliged in this case to meaningfully grapple with the review panel’s human health findings,” said court documents. Yet, Wilkinson simply ignored it, the judge pointed out. “Inexplicably neither the minister’s referral decision nor the Cabinet justification decision considered or referred to the finding that the project will likely cause significant direct adverse environmental effects on human health as it relates to air quality,” said the Court. It was “a matter of common sense” that cabinet had to address air quality complaints, yet the issue was “not mentioned or discussed.”“A central issue is whether the Minister and cabinet meaningfully grappled with the expert review panel’s undisputed determination that the project, even after taking into account mitigation measures, will likely cause significant direct adverse environmental effects on human health as it relates to the air quality of local residents,” wrote Justice Brown.
