Municipal officials were pleasantly surprised last week when the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) pledged hundreds of thousands of dollars for community projects in Flin Flon, Creighton and Denare Beach.
Each of the three municipalities will receive $250,000 in recognition of their work with NWMO in examining the now-failed prospect of radioactive-waste storage near Creighton.
The dollars will flow into what NWMO calls Community Well-Being Funds for projects that benefit the public. Creighton had previously received $400,000 for its fund.
NWMO has now awarded community projects in Creighton, Flin Flon and Denare Beach a total of $1.15 million. That’s quite a thank you.
At this point, there’s no sense in opposing acceptance of this money, as some NWMO opponents will no doubt recommend. NWMO has clearly said Creighton’s geology is unsuitable for a nuclear-waste repository and that our region is out of consideration.
Still, it’s worth examining why NWMO feels compelled to hand out such substantial cheques not only to communities that failed in the site-selection process, but also to their neighbours.
Our three communities did indeed make a valuable contribution to NWMO by working with the organization for four-plus years, from late 2010 to spring 2015. In that regard, some compensation is warranted.
But those six-figure cheques are also sending a message to the nine Ontario communities still in the running for the repository. That message: Stick with NWMO and there’s something in it for you.
If a region that is crossed off the list fairly early on (it could be another six to nine years before a repository site is chosen) receives well over $1 million as a thank you, imagine the kind of cash that awaits areas that venture much deeper into the process.
In order to win approval from a community and region on something as contentious as radioactive-waste storage, NWMO will undoubtedly have to appeal to the public’s base instincts.
That’s the reality NWMO faces. Misunderstood or not, radioactive-waste storage is a tough sell, as Creighton’s examination of the concept so starkly illustrated.
In fact, in the five months since NWMO removed Creighton from consideration because of geological problems, some residents have wondered whether the official reason was mere cover for the true rationale: intense public opposition.
I highly doubt that NWMO made up a story about bad geology. While our geology is stable for mining, that doesn’t mean it’s appropriate for the repository envisioned by NWMO.
But I do acknowledge that even if our geology had been perfect, resistance to the repository was too strong and widespread for NWMO to overcome.
For me, the evening in 2014 when Peter Ballantyne Cree Nation declared its opposition sealed the project’s fate, especially since NWMO made it abundantly clear it required First Nations support.
Looking ahead, our communities face the welcome challenge of determining how to spend their NWMO dollars. Now is the time to speak to mayors and councillors about the types of projects our area needs.
As for NWMO, it will remain at work in Ontario, examining where the repository may go and, just as importantly, who may be willing to take it.
Theirs is an unenviable task, as hostility toward the organization is hardly a phenomenon unique to Creighton.
Hence the rationale – at least in part – to incentivize remaining communities with the promise of some much-needed cash.
Local Angle runs Fridays.
