Not enough people have shown an interest in leaving Little Bay Islands to prompt a formal relocation vote, the minister of municipal affairs says.
“The policy of this department is that we won’t entertain it unless
we have 90 per cent of the permanent residents (in favour of) the proposal,” Kevin O’Brien told The Telegram.
This past summer, Municipal Affairs received 52 petitions from residents supporting relocation of the Notre Dame Bay community, which has a population between 80 and 90 and is serviced by a provincial ferry that makes three to five runs a day.
But, in September, a petition opposed resettling residents was sent to the department by the Coalition to Save Little Bay Islands. It was signed by 35 permanent residents and 38 seasonal residents. (It’s worth noting the latter don’t have a say in relocation.)
Late last month, O’Brien wrote Dennis Budgell, who spearheaded the petition in favour of relocation. The minister informed the Little Bay Islands councillor a vote wasn’t the cards right now because 90 per cent weren’t showing an interest.
O’Brien said in an interview he’d actually prefer if the numbers were closer to 100 per cent.
“We just don’t want to upset people who’ve lived in communities for their entire lives.”
Budgell says he is undeterred by the minister’s response.
“Keep on rallying around. Try to get people going,” he replied when he was asked what he was going to do next.
There’s been little economic activity or employment in Little Bay Islands since the crab plant closed in fall of 2009.
“Most of the people on the island would like to get out of here now, because there’s nothing for them anyway,” Budgell said.
He added the population is aging and many need to be closer to health care facilities. The nearest is the Green Bay Medical Clinic in Springdale, a 45-minute ferry ride and 20-minute drive away.
Budgell also noted supporting the community — including the ferry and a school with only two students – costs the province millions and millions each year.
O’Brien admitted his department is cognizant of the expense, but services will continue as long as people want to live there.
“We will not force relocation just because it’s a benefit to government in a budgetary manner,” he said.
Besides proof that 90-plus per cent of the people want to leave, the minister noted the town’s council will need to take a position on the issue.
That hasn’t yet happened.
Messages left for Mayor Perry Locke were not returned by the reporter’s Friday deadline.
Budgell acknowledged relocation is not a popular topic with council or with some in the community.
Because it can be such a sensitive issue, O’Brien said his fear is it will split the people, something he doesn’t want to happen.
“Respect each other’s (opinion) is all I’ll say to them,” he said.
Budgell noted he was disappointed in how O’Brien responded. He feels the minister should have written a letter to everyone who filled out his petitions.
Asked about that, the minister explained that, if someone writes him, he’s obligated to respond, but if he receives a petition, he replies to whoever is leading the effort.
One resident of Little Bay Islands told The Telegram there is some concern in the town about how much money families would get if they voted to relocate.
O’Brien said each case would be looked at separately, with numerous factors considered.
“In the process of evaluating, we’d consider the cost to government to provide the services to the community over a 20-year period and then that would help determine the value or the payment that would go to each resident,” he explained.
“For me to put a figure on it now (in the absence of a formal relocation process) would be a disservice to the community.”
sbartlett@thetelegram.com
Twitter: bartlett_steve
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
I think we all need to get some things straight. Get rid of the sentimentality - (of course, it's still there, but push it to one side.) This is not about "saving a community." This is about whether or not it is ever okay for the NL government to force a group of competent adults to re-locate from one geographical area to another; while in the process being forcred to exchange all their immovable assets, such as houses and land, for a pre-determined, and relatively non-negotiable, amount of money. This "forced re-location" is quite similar to the definitions of both "banishment," and "exile." If this sort of thing were being proposed to any other group of people in any other part of the world, their would be a human rights outcry! In fact, it's been done - try googling "forced relocation," or another similar term. The choice to move from one community to another within Canada has historically been just that - a choice. When this choice has been taken off the table, we've wound up with such significant events as the establishment of the Japanese Canadian Internment Camps, and more recently and closer to home - the relocation of Davis Inlet to Sheshatshiu. I wouldn't call either of these forced relocations "successful ventures" on behalf of our federal governing bodies. Nor would I call the "resettlement" forced upon many Newfoundlanders by past provincial governments "a good idea." If you're not sure, I suggest to take up the questions with a gentleman or woman who was "drove out." Maybe they could make you understand just what this means. By taking this resettlement nonsense off the table, all we have done here is decide not to compel individuals to 1.) uproot their lives and families, and physically move and 2.) trade all their wordly immovable possessions for a lump sum of money that couldn't possible cover replacement value. Those who wish to make a change, for whatever reason, are still absolutely free to do so. If you wanna go, then go - but at least there will be no "Trail of Tears" between Sullian's Cove and Shoal Arm. Also, just a note to all of those "professional economists" out there who feel the need to comment on the impossibilty of future economic growth for LBI (and probably rural NL in general) - I'm not going to argue with you because I haven't personally done much research in the way of potential opportunities for economic growth and development in situations such as the one at LBI - however, I doubt you've done much either, so perhaps we're better off leaving those matters to the indivuals involved. I am certain that there is a group of educated people from Little Bay Islands who are actively involved in such research, and are also doing quite a bit of legwork in working towards potential positive developments for the community and it's residents. Lastly, to those of you who can't believe that the goverment would bear the expense of subsidizing the transport of residents and others between the island and the mainland - I would suggest gathering more information before making uninformed statements. Please remember that this ferry system takes the place of a highway. Should we discuss discontinuing maintenance on public roadways, or highhway branches, that aren't used by a pre-set number of individuals, or that lead into smaller communities? Perhaps we could just cut back on snow-clearing and ice-control for these roads, since they aren't used by that many people? Once you start to find ways to justify taking away various levels of necessary public works and services using only statistics that you may not even understand, you are treading on very dangerous ground - it's hard to say where it's ok to stop making cuts, and exactly how many people do we need in one place to guarantee their right to public services? If we aren't careful, these justifications will come back to haunt everyone of us as Newfoundlanders - let's remember that places like Little Bay Islands may be the small fish in the big pond called "Newfoundland," but likewise Newfoundland is the small fish in the big pond called "Canada." I'm willing to bet that there's not a Newfoundlander out there with an opinion on this "resettlement issue" that wouldn't jump to defend every Newfoundlander's right to have access to the same federally provided basic public works and services that are enjoyed by those in Ontario and Quebec. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion - however, this matter is not a question of opinion, but of right and wrong.