@prefix vivo: . @prefix edm: . @prefix ns0: . @prefix dcterms: . @prefix skos: . vivo:departmentOrSchool "Arts, Faculty of"@en, "Sociology, Department of"@en ; edm:dataProvider "DSpace"@en ; ns0:degreeCampus "UBCV"@en ; dcterms:creator "Hessing, Melody Beatrice"@en ; dcterms:issued "2010-06-01T14:47:12Z"@en, "1984"@en ; vivo:relatedDegree "Doctor of Philosophy - PhD"@en ; ns0:degreeGrantor "University of British Columbia"@en ; dcterms:description """The dissertation examines public participation in the hearing process from the perspective of democratic theory. Although "democracy" is popularly invoked as both rationale and evaluative standard for public participation, political theorists have neglected to examine the practice of hearing intervention from this perspective. The dissertation challenges the pluralist model of the hearing using a participatory critique of the hearing process. The dissertation argues that contemporary discussion of public participation is formulated from the perspective of pluralist democratic theory. Pluralist theory perceives the hearing as a forum through which public access to the administrative and policy-making processes can be secured. Central characteristics of the hearing process, from this perspective, include a heterogeneity of participating interests (which includes the public), a fairness of procedures, and a neutrality of decision-making. In contrast, a participatory critique of pluralist theory points to a restricted public participation, a systematic imbalance in resources available to tribunal participants, and an advantage to and alliance among state and entrepreneurial interests as features of the tribunal. The dissertation studies public hearings in two tribunals: the Pesticide Control Appeal Board, and the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Uranium Mining. The first is an administrative tribunal which hears appeals concerning the approval of pesticide applications. In the second, a consultative tribunal, hearings are held for the purposes of receiving information and making recommendations about uranium mining in British Columbia. The methodology includes observation, ethnography, interviewing, and documentary analysis of the public hearing process. The dissertation finds that the practice of the public hearing is generated from and generally consistent with a pluralist democratic perspective: multiple interests participate; quasi-judicial procedures are followed by all participants, and decisions are made by heterogeneous, government-appointed Boards. A participatory critique however shows the dominance of the pluralist model of hearings to be predicated on a social and economic organization in which social inequality and state hegemony are primary features. Accordingly, systematic social inequalities such as differential access to hearing resources disadvantage public interest groups and preclude a balance among competing forces within the tribunal. Structural and professional alliances among administrative and entrepreneurial forces further detract from the impartiality of the hearing. Countering the pluralist notion of the tribunal as an independent forum, this analysis points to the hearing as a vehicle of social control and state legitimation. The dissertation concludes with recommendations for the democratization of the public hearing."""@en ; edm:aggregatedCHO "https://circle.library.ubc.ca/rest/handle/2429/25302?expand=metadata"@en ; skos:note "PRODUCTION OF THE PUBLIC VOICE: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN THE HEARING PROCESS AS CONTEMPORARY DEMOCRACY By MELODY BEATRICE HESSING B.A., The U n i v e r s i t y o f Denver, 1966 M.A., S y r a c u s e U n i v e r s i t y , 1970 A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department o f S o c i o l o g y ) We a c c e p t t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n a s c o n f o r m i n g t o t h e r e q u i r e d s t a n d a r d THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Ju n e 1984 © M e l o d y B e a t r i c e H e s s i n g , 1984 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an a d v a n c e d d e g r e e a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I a g r e e t h a t t h e L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y . I f u r t h e r a g r e e t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may be g r a n t e d by t h e Head o f my D e p a r t m e n t o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l n o t be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . D e p a r t m e n t o f The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a 2 0 7 5 W e s b r o o k P l a c e V a n c o u v e r , C a n a d a V 6 T 1W5 D a t e O c*ofaM <4. A b s t r a c t The d i s s e r t a t i o n examines p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the h e a r i n g p rocess from the p e r s p e c t i v e of democra t i c t h e o r y . A l -though \"democracy\" i s p o p u l a r l y invoked as both r a t i o n a l e and e v a l u a t i v e s t anda rd f o r p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n , p o l i t i c a l t h e o -r i s t s have n e g l e c t e d to examine the p r a c t i c e of hea r i ng i n t e r -v e n t i o n from t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e . The d i s s e r t a t i o n c h a l l e n g e s the p l u r a l i s t model of the h e a r i n g us ing a p a r t i c i p a t o r y c r i t i q u e of the h e a r i n g p r o c e s s . The d i s s e r t a t i o n argues tha t contemporary d i s c u s s i o n of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s f o rmu la t ed from the p e r s p e c t i v e of p l u r a l i s t democ ra t i c t h e o r y . P l u r a l i s t theory p e r c e i v e s the h e a r i n g as a forum through which p u b l i c a ccess to the a d m i n i s -t r a t i v e and p o l i c y - m a k i n g p r o c e s s e s can be s e c u r e d . C e n t r a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the h e a r i n g p r o c e s s , from t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e , i n c l u d e a h e t e r o g e n e i t y of p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t e r e s t s (which i n -c l u d e s the p u b l i c ) , a f a i r n e s s of p r o c e d u r e s , and a n e u t r a l i t y of d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g . In c o n t r a s t , a p a r t i c i p a t o r y c r i t i q u e of p l u r a l i s t theory p o i n t s to a r e s t r i c t e d p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n , a s y s t e m a t i c imbalance i n r e sou r ces a v a i l a b l e to t r i b u n a l p a r t i -c i p a n t s , and an advantage to and a l l i a n c e among s t a t e and e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l i n t e r e s t s as f e a t u r e s of the t r i b u n a l . The d i s s e r t a t i o n s t u d i e s p u b l i c h e a r i n g s i n two t r i b u n a l s : the P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Appea l Boa rd , and the Roya l Commission of I nqu i r y i n t o Uranium M i n i n g . The f i r s t i s an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t r i b u n a l which hears appea l s conce rn i ng the app rova l of p e s t i -c i d e a p p l i c a t i o n s . In the s e cond , a c o n s u l t a t i v e t r i b u n a l , i i h e a r i n g s are h e l d f o r the purposes of r e c e i v i n g i n f o r m a t i o n and making recommendations about uranium min ing i n B r i t i s h Co lum-b i a . The methodology i n c l u d e s o b s e r v a t i o n , e thnography , i n t e r -v i e w i n g , and documentary a n a l y s i s of the p u b l i c h e a r i n g p r o -cess . The d i s s e r t a t i o n f i n d s tha t the p r a c t i c e of the p u b l i c h e a r i n g i s genera ted from and g e n e r a l l y c o n s i s t e n t w i th a p l u r a l i s t democ ra t i c p e r s p e c t i v e : m u l t i p l e i n t e r e s t s p a r t i c i -p a t e ; q u a s i - j u d i c i a l p rocedures are f o l l o w e d by a l l p a r t i c i -p a n t s , and d e c i s i o n s are made by he te rogeneous , government-appo in t ed Boa rds . A p a r t i c i p a t o r y c r i t i q u e however shows the dominance of the p l u r a l i s t model of h e a r i n g s to be p r e d i c a t e d on a s o c i a l and economic o r g a n i z a t i o n i n which s o c i a l i n e q u a l i t y and s t a t e hegemony are p r imary f e a t u r e s . A c c o r d i n g l y , s y s t e m a t i c s o c i a l i n e q u a l i t i e s such as d i f f e r e n t i a l a ccess to h e a r i n g r e sou r ce s d i sadvan tage p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups and p r e c l u d e a ba lance among compet ing f o r c e s w i t h i n the t r i b u n a l . S t r u c t u r a l and p r o f e s s i o n a l a l l i a n c e s among a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l f o r c e s f u r t h e r d e t r a c t from the i m p a r t i a l i t y o f the h e a r i n g . C o u n t e r i n g the p l u r a l i s t n o t i o n of the t r i b u n a l as an i n d e p e n -dent fo rum, t h i s a n a l y s i s p o i n t s to the h e a r i n g as a v e h i c l e of s o c i a l c o n t r o l and s t a t e l e g i t i m a t i o n . The d i s s e r t a t i o n c o n -c l udes w i th recommendations f o r the d e m o c r a t i z a t i o n of the f p u b l i c h e a r i n g . i i i T A B L E OF C O N T E N T S L I S T OF T A B L E S v i i L I S T OF I L L U S T R A T I O N S v i i i A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S i x C h a p t e r 1 . I N T R O D U C T I O N 1 1 .1 P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e H e a r i n g — T h e D e b a t e . . . 1 1 . 2 T h e T h e o r y o f P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n 11 1 . 3 A r g u m e n t a n d O r g a n i z a t i o n o f t h e D i s s e r t a t i o n . . . . 1 3 1 . 4 R e v i e w o f t h e L i t e r a t u r e 1 7 1 . 5 C o n t r i b u t i o n s o f t h e D i s s e r t a t i o n 2 2 2 . D E M O C R A T I C T H E O R Y AND THE C O N C E P T OF P U B L I C P A R T I C I P A T I O N 2 5 2 . 1 I n t r o d u c t i o n 2 5 2 . 2 H i s t o r i c a l P r e c e d e n t s f o r P a r t i c i p a t i o n 2 6 2 . 3 T h e E m e r g e n c e o f P l u r a l i s m 3 2 2 . 4 C r i t i q u e s o f P l u r a l i s t D e m o c r a c y 3 7 2 . 5 C o n t e m p o r a r y C a n a d i a n P l u r a l i s m 4 2 2 . 6 A P l u r a l i s t M o d e l o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e P u b l i c H e a r i n g 4 6 H e t e r o g e n e i t y o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n : R e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e P u b l i c 46 F a i r n e s s o f P r o c e d u r e s 48 N e u t r a l i t y o f t h e D e c i s i o n - M a k i n g P r o c e s s 5 0 3 . R E S E A R C H METHODOLOGY AND I N T R O D U C T I O N TO THE C A S E S T U D I E S 5 3 3 . 1 R e s e a r c h M e t h o d o l o g y 5 3 3 . 2 T y p e s o f P u b l i c H e a r i n g s 6 0 3 . 3 I n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e C a s e S t u d y T r i b u n a l s : T h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A p p e a l B o a r d H e a r i n g s 6 3 T h e L e g a l C o n t e x t a n d t h e I n i t i a t i o n o f t h e H e a r i n g s 64 i v M i l f o i l and the Herbicide Issue 69 A Chronology of the Okanagan Lakes 2,4-D Issue 74 The Royal Commission of Inquiry into Uranium Mining . 76 The Consultative Inquiry . 77 The Issues 80 A Chronology of the Uranium Mining Controversy 85 4. HETEROGENEITY OF PARTICIPATION: REPRESENTATION OF THE PUBLIC INTEREST 89 4.1 Introduction 89 4.2 I d e n t i f i c a t i o n of Participants and Interests.... 90 Pesticide Control Appeal Board Hearings 90 Royal Commission of Inquiry into Uranium Mining 92 Community Hearings 92 Technical Hearings 95 4.3 The I d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the Public Interest 97 Personal Submissions .98 Public Interest Organizations 99 4.4 Heterogeneity and Public Interest Re-examined..106 5. FAIRNESS OF PROCEDURES: PREPARATION AND ORGANIZATION OF INTERVENTION 112 5.1 Introduction 112 Procedural Fairness 113 5.2 Description of Hearing Procedures 116 Quasi-Judicial Procedures 116 Procedures of the Case Study Tribunals 117 The Pesticide Control Appeal Board 117 The Royal Commission of Inquiry into Uranium Mining 119 Community Hearings 120 Technical Hearings 121 5.3 Making A Case — The Preparation and Organization of Intervention... 126 Making A Case: The Organization of Intervention 128 The Pesticide Control Appeal Board 129 The Royal Commission of Inquiry into Uranium Mining 137 Making A Case: Preparation for Intervention..140 The Pesticide Control Appeal Board 141 The Royal Commission of Inquiry into Uranium Mining 145 5.4 Procedural Fairness and the P l u r a l i s t Model 151 6. FAIRNESS OF PROCEDURES: THE PRACTICE OF INTERVENTION..158 6.1 Introduction 158 6.2 The Participatory Setting 158 v T h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A p p e a l B o a r d . . . . , T h e R o y a l C o m m i s s i o n o f I n q u i r y i n t o U r a n i u m M i n i n g . C o m m u n i t y H e a r i n g s . . , T e c h n i c a l H e a r i n g s , T h e H e a r i n g S e t t i n g a n d P a r t i c i p a t i o n . 6 . 3 E x p e r t i s e i n P a r t i c i p a t i o n L e g a l C o u n s e l a s E x p e r t i s e E x p e r t W i t n e s s e s . . 6 . 4 H e a r i n g P r o c e d u r e s : T h e o r y a n d P r a c t i c e . 7 . T H E N E U T R A L I T Y OF THE D E C I S I O N - M A K I N G P R O C E S S . 7 . 1 I n t r o d u c t i o n 7 . 2 T h e D e c i s i o n - M a k i n g P r o c e s s i n t h e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e T r i b u n a l : T h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A p p e a l B o a r d . . T h e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o n t e x t o f D e c i s i o n - M a k i n g B a s i s o f a n d R e a s o n s f o r t h e D e c i s i o n 7 . 3 D e c i s i o n - M a k i n g i n t h e C o n s u l t a t i v e T r i b u n a l : T h e R o y a l C o m m i s s i o n o f I n q u i r y i n t o U r a n i u m M i n i n g T h e M o r a t o r i u m a n d T e r m i n a t i o n o f t h e I n q u i r y 7 . 4 S e l e c t i o n a n d C o m p o s i t i o n o f t h e B o a r d / C o m m i s s i o n T h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A p p e a l B o a r d T h e R o y a l C o m m i s s i o n o f I n q u i r y i n t o U r a n i u m M i n i n g 7 . 5 T h e N e u t r a l i t y o f t h e D e c i s i o n - M a k i n g P r o c e s s . . . 8 . C O N C L U S I O N S 8 . 1 I n t r o d u c t i o n 8 . 2 T h e P l u r a l i s t M o d e l a n d t h e P u b l i c H e a r i n g H e t e r o g e n e i t y o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n F a i r n e s s o f P r o c e d u r e s N e u t r a l i t y o f t h e D e c i s i o n - M a k i n g P r o c e s s 8 . 3 T h e P a r t i c i p a t o r y C r i t i q u e a n d t h e P l u r a l i s t M o d e l H e t e r o g e n e i t y o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n -R e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e P u b l i c I n t e r e s t F a i r n e s s o f P r o c e d u r e s T h e N e u t r a l i t y o f t h e D e c i s i o n - M a k i n g P r o c e s s 8 . 4 T o w a r d s a P a r t i c i p a t o r y D e m o c r a c y P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n a n d t h e P l u r a l i s t M o d e l . . B e y o n d t h e P l u r a l i s t M o d e l 8 . 5 C o n c l u d i n g R e m a r k s A P P E N D I C E S B I B L I O G R A P H Y v i LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1 APPELLANTS, OKANAGAN 2,4-D PCAB HEARINGS 91 2 NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS—RCUM COMMUNITY HEARINGS 93 3 REPRESENTATION OF INTERESTS BY ORGANIZATIONS KELOWNA COMMUNITY HEARINGS, RCUM 94 4 MAJOR PARTICIPANTS, RCUM TECHNICAL HEARINGS 96-97 5 USE OF HEARING TIME, 1978 PCAB HEARINGS 131-132 6 RCUM - LEGAL REPRESENTATION OF MAJOR PARTICIPANTS 178 7 RCUM - LEGAL REPRESENTATION BY INTEREST 179 8 RCUM - APPEARANCE OF WITNESSES ACCORDING TO INTEREST 184 9 PCAB APPEAL PROCEDURE .197 v i i LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Number 1 PCAB - 1978 HEARING SETTING 160 2 PCAB - 1979 HEARING SETTING 161 3 PCAB - 1981 HEARING SETTING 162 4 RCUM - KELOWNA HEARING 164 5 RCUM — TECHNICAL HEARINGS 167 v i i i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I owe thanks to a number of people who have been i n vo l ved wi th the e v o l u t i o n of the d i s s e r t a t i o n over the past f i v e y e a r s . My Committee members deserve i n d i v i d u a l mention fo r t h e i r c o n t r i b u t i o n s . Bob Ra tner , my a d v i s o r , has been a source of s u p p o r t , h e l p i n g to re-deve lop and guide my work through academic channe ls and to ma in ta in c o n t i n u i t y and d i r e c t i o n i n i t s deve lopment . Roy Turner r a i s e d ques t i ons which f o r c ed me to r e c o n s i d e r the t aken- fo r-gran ted aspec ts of much of my r e s e a r c h . P h i l Resnick c o n t r i b u t e d both an ex tens i ve p o l i t i c a l t h e o r e t i c a l knowledge, as we l l as d i r e c t i o n , momentum, and a c e r t a i n pragmat ism. John Mcmul lan , former Committee member, sharpened the d i r e c t i o n and l o g i c of the d i s s e r t a t i o n . A number of people c o n t r i b u t e d l e g a l and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p e r s p e c t i v e s to the a n a l y s i s . Kim Roberts and M a r i l y n Kansky of the West Coast Env i ronmenta l Law A s s o c i a t i o n have shared t h e i r l e g a l knowledge of the hea r ing p r o c e s s , and responded to s p e c i f i c q u e r i e s r ega rd ing the case s t u d i e s . John Rogers and K r i s s B o g g i l d d i s c u s s e d wi th me t h e i r p e r s p e c t i v e s of the Bates Commission e x p e r i e n c e , whi le L i o r a S a l t e r ' s work c o n t r i b u t e d in a more gene ra l way to an unders tand ing of hea r ings and the r e g u l a t o r y p r o c e s s . i x A n u m b e r o f o t h e r p e o p l e w e r e h e l p f u l t o my u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f p o l i t i c a l , e c o n o m i c a n d s o c i a l i s s u e s i n t h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g p r o c e s s . J a c k W a r n o c k p r o v i d e d a p o l i t i c a l e c o n o m i c p e r s p e c t i v e o f t h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g p r o c e s s i n a d d i t i o n t o a r e c a l l o f t h e e v e n t s o f b o t h c a s e s t u d i e s . O t h e r s , e s p e -c i a l l y D o n B a r z , G i l Z e m a n s k y , J o h n R o b i n s o n , a n d B e c k y A b b o t t , h a v e d e a l t w i t h c o m m o n i s s u e s i n t h e i r a n a l y s e s , a n d h a v e i n s p i r e d my o w n i d e a s . S h a r o n M e e n a n d J e a n n e t t e A u g e r h e l p e d ' me t o b e m o r e c o n c i s e a n d d i r e c t i n my w r i t i n g . H o w e v e r , t h e m a j o r c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o my c o m p l e t i o n o f t h e d i s s e r t a t i o n h a v e b e e n made b y t h o s e who h a v e c o n n e c t e d t h e p e r s o n a l t o t h e p o l i t i c a l . J a y L e w i s , my h u s b a n d , h a s b e e n s u p p o r t i v e t h r o u g h o u t t h e p r o c e s s . H i s d i r e c t i n v o l v e m e n t i n a n d u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e h e a r i n g p r o c e s s , a n d h i s h o u s e w o r k a n d c h i l d c a r e h a v e b e e n i n t e g r a l t o t h e c o m p l e t i o n o f t h e d i s s e r t a -t i o n . I r m a D r e s s e l h a s b e e n a n u n f a i l i n g s o u r c e o f c h e e r , m o t i v a t i o n , a n d d a y c a r e . B a r b a r a F i n d l a y h a s b e e n f r i e n d a n d l e g a l c r i t i c . To t h e s e a n d o t h e r s who c o n t r i b u t e d i n n u m e r o u s w a y s t o t h e d e v e l o p m e n t a n d c o n c l u s i o n o f t h e d i s s e r t a t i o n , I am i n d e b t e d . x CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1-Publ ic P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the H e a r i n g — The Popular Debate The p u b l i c hea r ing has emerged as a dominant f ea tu re of t r i b u n a l s in Canada in recent y e a r s . The exper i ence of the Mackenzie V a l l e y P i p e l i n e I n q u i r y , A l aska Highway P i p e l i n e I n -q u i r y , and West Coast O i l Por ts I nqu i r y a t t e s t s to s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l r e c o g n i t i o n of the f o r ce of p u b l i c involvement i n 1 env i ronmenta l i s s u e s . Ex tens i ve media cove rage , as w e l l as the n a t u r e , s cope , and env i ronmenta l i m p l i c a t i o n s of the i s sues under d i s c u s s i o n , c o n t r i b u t e to the c o n s i d e r a b l e i n t e r e s t i n p u b l i c h e a r i n g s . The involvement of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups has generated con t rove r s y r ega rd ing the e f f e c t i v e n e s s and f a i r n e s s of c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the forum. Th i s d i s s e r t a t i o n a d -d resses the p rocess and the problems of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the h e a r i n g . Members of the p u b l i c enter the hea r ing p rocess as i n t e r -veners or a p p e l l a n t s r e p r e s e n t i n g p u b l i c i n t e r e s t o r g a n i z a -t i o n s . Spokespersons t y p i c a l l y p resent submiss ions be fore the Board , are c ross-examined , summarize t h e i r arguments, and may query o ther p a r t i c i p a n t s , thus c o n t r i b u t i n g to the Boa rd ' s 1 e v a l u a t i o n of an i s s u e , and i t s subsequent d e c i s i o n s or recom-mendations. The hearing process i s thus one stage of a t r i b u n a l which serves i n an a d v i s o r y , r e g u l a t o r y , or j u d i c i a l c a p a c i t y to government by e l i c i t i n g and e v a l u a t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n on r e l e -vant i s s u e s . The popular controversy concerning p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the hearing has been d i r e c t e d to a number of r e l a t e d i s s u e s . The purpose of the t r i b u n a l , i t s r e l a t i o n to the p o l i t i c a l process, and the procedures by which hearings are conducted have been major p o i n t s of d i s c u s s i o n . The t r i b u n a l i s p o p u l a r l y viewed as a p o l i c y - g e n e r a t i n g or r e g u l a t o r y mechanism, s t r u c t u -r a l l y independent from and supplementary to government, acces-s i b l e to the p u b l i c , and governed by a f a i r hearing process. The p u b l i c hearing i s viewed as supplementing the e l e c t o -r a l process and p r o v i d i n g a d d i t i o n a l , more d i r e c t c i t i z e n ac-cess to the decision-making process. Environmental i s s u e s are r a r e l y e l e c t i o n i s s u e s , and the parliamentary system provides v i r t u a l l y no c o n t r o l over the important d e c i s i o n s of non-elected o f f i c e r s . P a r t i c i p a t i o n . . . g i v e s the p u b l i c d i r e c t access to an ever-expanding...regulatory bureaucracy. Thus, p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n may be seen as democratizing the l e g i s l a -t i v e and b u r e a u c r a t i c decision-making process (Emond 1975: 786) . The h e a r i n g , from t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e , provides the p u b l i c with an o p p o r t u n i t y to address those i n power concerning a s p e c i f i c development or i s s u e . I t provides i n f o r m a t i o n to those making decisions/recommendations which may not be a v a i l a b l e , or may not be recognized as v a l u a b l e by a d m i n i s t r a t o r s (Elder 1973; S a l t e r 1978). The hearing and i t s t r i b u n a l are portrayed as separate 2 f r o m p a r l i a m e n t a r y g o v e r n m e n t , a n d t h i s i n d e p e n d e n c e i s s t a t u -t o r i l y g u a r a n t e e d ( D o e r n 1 9 7 8 ; L u c a s a n d B e l l 1 9 7 7 ; S a l t e r 2 1 9 7 8 ) . B o a r d o r C o m m i s s i o n m e m b e r s , a p p o i n t e d b y g o v e r n m e n t , a r e a s s u m e d t o h a v e g e n e r a l k n o w l e d g e o f r e l a t e d i s s u e s o r p r o c e d u r e s . T h i s k n o w l e d g e i s t h e p r o d u c t o f p a s t w o r k e x p e -r i e n c e a n d p r o f e s s i o n a l m e m b e r s h i p i n i n d u s t r y o r g o v e r n m e n t , a n d i s g e n e r a l l y r e g a r d e d a s n e c e s s a r y f o r t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d e v a l u a t i o n o f c o m p l e x s c i e n t i f i c a n d t e c h n o l o g i c a l i s s u e s ( A n d r e w a n d P e l l e t i e r 1 9 7 8 ; L u c a s a n d B e l l 1 9 7 7 ; L o w r a n c e 1 9 7 6 ) . C o m m i s s i o n e r s ' g e n e r a l e x p e r i e n c e i s v i e w e d a s a n a s s e t t o t h e i r p e r f o r m a n c e , w h i l e t h e i r d i s i n t e r e s t e d n e s s i n t h e i s s u e s a t h a n d e n h a n c e s t h e o b j e c t i v i t y o f t h e t r i b u n a l . H e a r i n g s a r e v i e w e d a s p r o v i d i n g a f o r u m i n w h i c h t h e r e i s a n e x c h a n g e a n d b a l a n c e a m o n g m u l t i p l e , c o m p e t i n g i n t e r e s t s . P u b l i c i n t e r e s t i n t e r v e n t i o n i s a s s u m e d t o c o u n t e r t h e i n f l u e n -c e s o f i n d u s t r y a n d g o v e r n m e n t . T h e A l a s k a H i g h w a y P i p e l i n e I n q u i r y , i n i t s r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s f o r p l a n n i n g a n d r e g u l a t o r y p r o c e d u r e s , n o t e d : P a r t i c i p a t i o n b y a l l i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s i s n e c e s s a r y t o e n s u r e t h a t c o n f l i c t i n g i n t e r e s t s a r e f u l l y r e p r e s e n t e d b e f o r e t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g b o d y . O n l y b y b a l a n c e d r e p r e -s e n t a t i o n c a n t r u l y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e d e c i s i o n s be made ( L y s y k 1 9 7 7 : 1 3 9 ) . H e a r i n g s a r e p u b l i c l y a c c e s s i b l e , a n d c i t i z e n s a r e a s s u m e d t o h a v e a r i g h t t o s p e a k o n m a t t e r s i n w h i c h t h e y h a v e a n i n t e r e s t . A s C o m m i s s i o n e r B e r g e r n o t e d , w i t h r e g a r d s t o t h e M a c k e n z i e V a l l e y P i p e l i n e I n q u i r y : A l l t h o s e who h a d s o m e t h i n g t o s a y — w h i t e o r n a -t i v e — w e r e g i v e n a n o p p o r t u n i t y t o s p e a k . . . I d e c i d e d t h a t I s h o u l d g i v e n o r t h e r n e r s a n o p p o r t u n i t y t o s p e a k f o r t h e m s e l v e s . . . ! h a v e b e e n c o n c e r n e d t h a t t h e n a t i v e p e o p l e 3 s h o u l d h a v e a n o p p o r t u n i t y t o s p e a k t o t h e I n q u i r y i n t h e i r own v i l l a g e s , i n t h e i r l a n g u a g e s , a n d i n t h e i r o w n w a y ( B e r g e r 1 9 7 7 : v i i - v i i i ) . P u b l i c a c c e s s t o t h e f o r u m p r o v i d e s f o r t h i s h e t e r o g e n e i t y o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n . H o w e v e r , a s L y s y k n o t e s , \" T h e m e r e r i g h t t o p a r t i c i p a t e i s n o t s u f f i c i e n t t o e n s u r e e f f e c t i v e p a r t i c i p a -t i o n . . . . p a r t i c i p a t i n g g r o u p s m u s t a l s o r e c e i v e f i n a n c i a l s u p -p o r t . . . . a n d t h e y m u s t h a v e a c c e s s t o t h e i n f o r m a t i o n r e l e v a n t t o t h e d e c i s i o n s \" ( 1 9 7 7 : 1 4 1 ) . O r g a n i z a t i o n a l o r e c o n o m i c i m b a -l a n c e a m o n g i n t e r v e n o r s i s a d d r e s s e d b y s u c h m e a s u r e s a s f u n d i n g o f i n t e r e s t g r o u p s f o r a c c e s s t o b o t h l e g a l a n d s u b -s t a n t i v e a d v o c a c y . T h i s i s i l l u s t r a t e d b y t h e f o l l o w i n g s t a t e -m e n t a b o u t t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n o f t h e B e r g e r I n q u i r y b y Q u e e n ' s C o u n s e l I a n S c o t t : We d e c i d e d t h a t i t w a s v e r y i m p o r t a n t f o r t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n s i n t h i s c o u n t r y t h a t w e r e i n t e r e s t e d i n t h i s p r o j e c t . . . t h a t t h e y c o u l d t a n g l e w i t h A r c t i c G a s a n d F o o t h i l l s o n e q u a l t e r m s . How d o y o u d o t h a t ? W e l l , t h e f i r s t t h i n g y o u d o i s y o u a l l o w t i m e s o t h e y c a n a b s o r b t h e n a t u r e o f t h e p r o c e s s . T h e s e c o n d t h i n g y o u d o i s y o u s e e t h a t t h e y g e t f u n d e d s o t h a t t h e y c a n h i r e b i o l o -g i s t s a n d a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s a n d s o c i o l o g i s t s a n d l a w y e r s . A n d t h e r e s u l t h o p e f u l l y i s i n t h e e n d t h a t t h e e n v i r o n -m e n t a l i s t s o n o n e h a n d , t h e C h a m b e r o f C o m m e r c e , t h e N a t i v e B r o t h e r h o o d a n d t h e g a s c o m p a n y a r e a l l f i g h t i n g o n m o r e o r l e s s e q u a l t e r m s . A n d i f y o u d o t h a t a n d i f y o u ' r e s u c c e s s f u l i n a s s u r i n g t h a t k i n d o f e q u a l i t y , y o u ' v e g o t a t l e a s t a n e v e n s h o t t h a t y o u ' r e g o i n g t o h e a r t h e t r u e s t o r y i n t h e e n d ( N a t i o n a l F i l m B o a r d : 1 9 7 8 ) . T h e q u a s i - j u d i c i a l f o r m o f h e a r i n g p r o c e d u r e s i s p e r c e i v e d a s e n s u r i n g a n e u t r a l a n d o b j e c t i v e p r o c e s s , a n d o f t h e r e f o r e p r o d u c i n g a n i m p a r t i a l d e c i s i o n . M o r e o v e r , t h e j o i n t m e m b e r -s h i p o f i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s i n t h e h e a r i n g p r o c e s s i s s e e n t o p r o d u c e a s p i r i t o f c o o p e r a t i o n , m i n i m i z i n g t h e i n e q u a l i t i e s i n k n o w l e d g e a n d p o w e r w h i c h may e x i s t . A s F r a s e r n o t e s r e g a r d i n g 4 p u b l i c involvement in F o r e s t r y d e c i s i o n s , \"The p rocess of working t o g e t h e r , in i t s e l f , c r ea t es a degree of e q u a l i t y and produces expec t a t i ons that the we l l - i n t ended layman's view i s as v a l i d as tha t of the t r a i n e d resource p r o f e s s i o n a l and tha t of the i n d u s t r i a l f o r e s t e r ( 1980 :8 ) \" . The s o c i a l and p s y c h o l o g i c a l b e n e f i t s of p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the p o l i t i c a l p rocess through hea r ing i n t e r v e n t i o n are a l so emphas ized. S o c i a l c o h e s i o n , pe r sona l growth, educa t ion and community awareness are some of the deve lopmenta l p roduc ts a s s o c i a t e d wi th p a r t i c i p a t i o n (McCoy and P l a y f o r d 1967; Pateman 1970; G ibson 1975) . Increased p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l awareness a s s o c i a t e d wi th p o l i t i c a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n c o n s t i t u t e s a \" c i v i c c u l t u r e \" (Almond and Verba 1963). Such d e s c r i p t i o n s of the hear ing p rocess r e f l e c t a norma-t i v e p e r s p e c t i v e of p u b l i c h e a r i n g s , one which i s produced by 3 and congruent wi th the dominant l i b e r a l i d e o l o g y . The commit-ment of the Trudeau L i b e r a l government to \" p a r t i c i p a t o r y demo-4 c r a c y \" has conf i rmed the l a r g e r p o l i t i c a l contex t fo r and app rop r i a t enes s of the p u b l i c hea r ing p r o c e s s . In c o n j u n c t i o n wi th t h i s p a r t i c i p a t o r y i d e o l o g y , hea r ing proponents c i t e the p r o d u c t i v e nature of the forum ( e . g . , time and cos t e f f e c t i v e -ness , d i r e c t examinat ion of c o n f l i c t i n g i n t e r e s t s ) , and the independence and supplementary nature of the t r i b u n a l v i s - a - v i s e l e c t o r a l p o l i t i c a l i n s t i t u t i o n s . However, con t rove r sy over the p u b l i c hea r ing has accompa-n ied i t s emergence as a p a r t i c i p a t o r y i n s t i t u t i o n . P o l i t i c a l t h e o r i s t s , l e g a l advocates and p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i n t e r v e n o r s ques t i on the purposes and e f f e c t i v e n e s s of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a -5 t i o n w i t h i n the l a r g e r p o l i t i c a l c o n t e x t . The a l l i a n c e of t r i b u n a l s t a f f and i n t e r e s t s wi th other i n s t i t u t i o n s and the unequal r esources a v a i l a b l e to competing i n t e r e s t s are r a i s e d as problems fo r the o b j e c t i v i t y of the forum. Thus , whi le the hea r ing i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d from the p e r s p e c t i v e of the dominant l i b e r a l i deo logy as a c c e s s i b l e , independent and f a i r , i t s d e -t r a c t o r s would c h a r a c t e r i z e i t as s t r u c t u r a l l y a l l i e d wi th s t a t e and co rpo ra te i n t e r e s t s , and p r o c e d u r a l l y imbalanced in favour of these i n t e r e s t s . From t h i s c r i t i c a l v iew, p u b l i c i n t e r v e n t i o n i n the hea r ing p rocess i s l i m i t e d and i n e f f e c t i v e . P o l i t i c a l and l e g a l obse rve rs take i s sue wi th the l a r g e r p a r t i c i p a t o r y contex t of the p u b l i c h e a r i n g , b r i n g i n g i n to q u e s t i o n the r o l e and extent of p a r t i c i p a t i o n . The genera l l ack of a p a r t i c i p a t o r y c l ima te i n Canada i s lamented by Lucas , f o r i n s t a n c e , who says , \" C i t i z e n s ' r i g h t s to p a r t i c i p a t e in d e c i -s i ons by resource and env i ronmenta l agenc ies are not e x t e n s i v e \" (1976). In a s i m i l a r v e i n , Howard s t a t e s that \" the system in Canada, wi th few e x c e p t i o n s , i s des igned to exc lude c i t i z e n s from meaningfu l p a r t i c i p a t i o n \" (1980:131-2) . The d i s c r e t i o n a r y nature of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s noted by l e g a l c r i t i c s , who r e f e r to the ad hoc nature of the Berger Inqu i r y and i t s d e s -cendants and who ques t i on the emergence of a \" t r a d i t i o n \" of c i t i z e n involvement in env i ronmenta l matters (Lucas 1978:51) . In c o n t r a s t to the popu lar view of t r i b u n a l s as i n f o r m a -t i o n - g e n e r a t i n g and po l i cy-mak ing i n s t rumen t s , a l t e r n a t i v e f u n c t i o n s of the forum have been no ted : I f p u b l i c hea r ings are not used by agenc ies to i n f l u -ence d e c i s i o n s , then how are they used? One use of 6 p u b l i c hea r ings i s to s a t i s f y minimum l e g a l requi rements fo r c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Hear ings are he ld to document compl iance wi th f e d e r a l requi rements to ' p r o v e ' that c i t i z e n s have p a r t i c i p a t e d . . . . A n o t h e r use i s to p rov ide good p u b l i c r e l a t i o n s fo r the agency. Hear ings are he ld to b u i l d support f o r agency p l a n s . . . . A n o t h e r use i s to d i f f u s e antagonism. Hear ings are he ld to d i s p l a y c o n -c e r n , q u i e t the c r i t i c s , or take the heat o f f . . . . A n o t h e r use of p u b l i c hea r ings i s to l e g i t i m a t e a d e c i s i o n tha t has a l r e ady been m a d e . . . . I n a l l t h i s , p u b l i c hea r ings are used to ach ieve agency ends ra ther than to make e f f e c t i v e use of c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n (Checkoway 1981:570-572).5 P u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the hea r ing i s viewed as c o n t r i b u t i n g to the l e g i t i m a t i o n of the hea r ing and the l a r g e r p o l i t i c a l system. As l e g a l advocate Andrew Roman of the P u b l i c I n t e r e s t Advocacy Centre n o t e s : Many c i t i z e n groups have a deep-seated s u s p i c i o n tha t the reason t h e i r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s d e s i r e d i s to add to the pe r ce i v ed l e g i t i m a c y of the hea r ing process by making i t appear to be a d v e r s a r i a l , whi le t h e i r l ack of r e s o u r -ces ensures tha t t h e i r puny i n t e r v e n t i o n cannot p o s s i b l y have any s i g n i f i c a n t impact on the r e s u l t . In my expe -r i e n c e , t h i s s u s p i c i o n i s not w i thout founda t ion (1979:30) . The e f f e c t of p u b l i c hea r ings in the l a r g e r d e c i s i o n -making contex t i s addressed by a number of t h e o r i s t s . Hear ings are regarded as an e x e r c i s e which l a cks fo r ce as a d e c i s i o n -making mechanism. Hear ings may be e f f e c t i v e as i n f o r m a t i o n -g e n e r a t o r s , but Commissioners l ack the power to implement t h e i r recommendations (Burton 1979; Checkoway 1981; OECD 1978; Wi l son 1973) . Other p o l i t i c a l t h e o r i s t s and p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i n t e r v eno r s are c r i t i c a l of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the t r i b u n a l , the s t a t e , and i n d u s t r y . The apparent independence of the Royal Commission from p o l i t i c a l c o n s t r a i n t s i s addressed by S a l t e r : Inasmuch as the i n q u i r y i s t e c h n i c a l l y independent from both depar tmenta l and pa r l i amen ta r y p r o c e s s , i t f u n c t i o n s ou t s i de these c o n s t r a i n t s . T h i s apparent independence 7 a l lows the mandating government to separa te i t s e l f from the a c t i v i t i e s and recommendations of the i n q u i r y . The government . . .may then ac t in the dua l r o l e as judge or a r b i t r a t o r at the same time as p a r t i c i p a n t i n the d e t e r -m ina t ion of p o l i c y op t i ons (1978:7 ) . From the a l l i e d p e r s p e c t i v e of the Canadian p o l i t i c a l economic l i t e r a t u r e , some obse rve rs adopt a \" cap tu red agent \" p e r s p e c t i v e i n t h e i r c r i t i c i s m s of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n and the r e g u l a t o r y p r o c e s s , no t i ng the s t r u c t u r a l and i d e o l o g i c a l in terdependence between t r i b u n a l , s t a t e and co rpora te i n t e r e s t s (Mahon 1979; Doern 1978; Lucas and B e l l 1977). Other c r i t i c i s m s are d i r e c t e d to the assumption of a b a -lance among competing i n t e r e s t s . The i s sue i s not that agenc ies are n e c e s s a r i l y p a r t i s a n or captured by the i n d u s t r i e s they r e g u l a t e . I t i s tha t agency o f f i c i a l s o f t e n depend upon ou t s i de sources of i n f o rma t i on and support and respond to the most power fu l input they r e c e i v e . And i t i s those wi th an economic s take whose i n t e r e s t s and resources are grea t enough to in te rvene and make a d i f f e r e n c e (Checkoway 1981:569) . Thus , a l though there may be a he t e rogene i t y of p a r t i c i p a t i o n , c r i t i c s b e l i e v e that c e r t a i n i n t e r e s t s have d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y g rea te r access to resources than o t h e r s . Hear ing procedures are viewed by p u b l i c advocacy c r i t i c s as r e s t r i c t i n g p u b l i c a c c e s s , and c o n t r i b u t i n g to an imbalance of power among p a r t i c i p a n t s . I n e q u a l i t i e s in fund ing are seen by l e g a l c r i t i c s and p u b l i c i n t e r v e n o r s to d i m i n i s h the a b i l i t y of many c i t i z e n s ' groups to p resent an adequate c a se , whi le enab l i ng co rpo ra t e proponents to engage in ex tens i ve p r e p a r a -t i o n s (Howard 1978; Checkoway 1981). As E s t r i n no t e s : The proponent of a development comes to the hea r ings hav ing spent years and perhaps hundreds of thousands , i f not m i l l i o n s , of d o l l a r s h i r i n g exper t s and o b t a i n i n g massive r epo r t s to conv ince the t r i b u n a l that i t s p r o j e c t i s worthy. On the other s i d e , persons opposed or who 8 s imp ly wish to p a r t i c i p a t e to ensure that a l l the f a c t s are be fore the t r i b u n a l u s u a l l y have n e i t h e r the r e s o u r -ces to examine adequate l y and respond to such t e c h n i c a l p r e p a r a t i o n nor the resources to appear at the hea r ing through counse l ( E s t r i n 1979 :84 ) . Ebbin and Kaspar , in t h e i r s tudy of the nuc l ea r i n d u s t r y , note tha t \"groups of d i s p a r a t e p r i v a t e c i t i z e n s must seek to agg re -gate and accrue from vo l un t a r y donat ions the f i n a n c i a l r e s o u r -ces necessary to c a r r y t h e i r case through the uncharted admi -n i s t r a t i v e p r o c e s s . . . \" (1974:14) . Temporal and geograph ic c o n s t r a i n t s are c i t e d by p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i n t e r v e n o r s and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c r i t i c s as i n h i b i t i n g p u b l i c access and c o n t r i b u t i n g to the advantage of co rpora te and b u r e a u c r a t i c i n t e r e s t s (OECD 1978; Checkoway 1981) . Inade-quate l e g i s l a t i o n and l ack of access to i n fo rma t i on are c i t e d as f u r t h e r c o n s t r a i n t s to p u b l i c i n t e r v eno r s (Emond 1975; Pape 1978; Franson and Lucas 1975) . With regard to i n fo rma t i on a c -c e s s , Howard argues f u r t h e r t h a t : . . . t h e p resen t complete l ack of mechanisms fo r even seek -ing i n f o rma t i on on normal conduct of government a f f a i r s , l e t a lone procedures to appea l or review t h i s conduct , i s ex c l ud i ng Canadians from the i n fo rma t i on they need to p r o t e c t themselves and to assess t h e i r g o v e r n -ments . . . . There i s no e s t a b l i s h e d p u b l i c procedure whereby the c i t i z e n can take any a c t i o n to ob t a i n a r epor t or document . . . (Howard 1980: 132-3) . The formal and p r o f e s s i o n a l nature of hea r ing p r o c e e d i n g s , and the t e c h n i c a l nature of the i s sues have a l s o been c i t e d as problems fo r a ba lance and he t e rogene i t y of p a r t i c i p a t i o n . The dependence of c i t i z e n s on exper t s fo r p r o f e s s i o n a l guidance i n h i b i t s p a r t i c i p a t i o n by n o n - p r o f e s s i o n a l s (Chr is t iansen-Ruf f - r man 1979; Hadden 1981). Observers from the l e f t say tha t the t e c h n i c a l and s c i e n t i f i c o r i e n t a t i o n of the hear ing i s used to 9 obscure r e l a t i o n s of power and s o c i a l c l a s s . As N e l k i n o b -serves : From a p o l i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e , the p r o t e s t s d e s c r i b e d may be l e s s a g a i n s t s c i ence and techno logy than aga in s t the power r e l a t i o n s h i p s a s s o c i a t e d wi th them; l e s s aga in s t s p e c i f i c t e c h n o l o g i c a l d e c i s i o n s than aga in s t the use of s c i e n t i f i c r a t i o n a l i t y to mask p o l i t i c a l cho i ces (1979:11) . In f u r t h e r c h a l l e n g i n g the he t e rogene i t y of p a r t i c i p a t i o n , c r i t i c s n o t e , \"Hear ings appear to conform to the genera l p a t -t e rn i n which p a r t i c i p a t i o n in government a f f a i r s h i g h l y c o r -r e l a t e s wi th soc io-economic s t a tus (Checkoway 1981:569) . The q u a s i - j u d i c i a l nature of procedures i s s a i d to promote a m id -d l e - c l a s s b i a s (Emond 1975; S a l t e r 1975). Checkoway a l so n o t e s : F r e q u e n t l y , those who a t tend hea r ings are not r e p -r e s e n t a t i v e of t h e i r area p o p u l a t i o n . . . Low-income and m i n o r i t y c i t i z e n s in p a r t i c u l a r tend to be i nadequa te l y represented and unable to a f f o r d what i s r equ i r ed to make a s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n (1981:569) . A r e l a t e d c r i t i c i s m d i r e c t e d to p u b l i c access and to the h e t e -rogene i t y of the forum addresses the problems fo r unorgan ized i n t e r e s t s : One major problem of the p u b l i c hea r ing i s that the views presented are not u s u a l l y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the f u l l range of i n d i v i d u a l s a f f e c t e d by a proposed p r o j e c t or p o l i c y . They o f t e n r e f l e c t on l y the views of i d e n t i -f i a b l e i n t e r e s t g r o u p s . . . I n d i v i d u a l c i t i z e n s or non-es t -a b l i s h e d groups are o f t en i l l - i n f o r m e d about p u b l i c h e a r -i n g s , and i l l - p r e p a r e d to p resent t h e i r views e f f e c t i v e l y (OECD 1978:67) . Not a l l c r i t i c i s m of the hea r ing i s generated from a p e r -s p e c t i v e a l l i e d wi th p u b l i c i n t e r e s t g roups . Corpora te c r i t i c s would f u r t h e r l i m i t the p r a c t i c e and scope of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a -t i o n . Indus t ry laments the economic l o s s e s a s s o c i a t e d wi th the de lays a s s o c i a t e d wi th the hea r ing p r o c e s s . P u b l i c p a r t i c i p a -10 t i o n can \" r e s u l t i n undue i n f l u e n c e by those who are not accountab le fo r the consequences of d e c i s i o n s ; erode p roper t y r i g h t s ; de lay d e c i s i o n making and p l a n n i n g ; and i nc rease unpro -duc t i v e c o s t s and demands on the time of the p u b l i c and f o r e s t land managers. (Fraser 1980 :194 ) \" . News r epo r t s of the hea r ing process r e f e r to the redundancy of c ross-examina t ion (Farrow 1979) . In response to sugges t ions which would expand p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n , c r i t i c s c i t e the p o s s i b i l i t y \"o f f r i v o l o u s and vexa t ious a c t i o n s that would i n e v i t a b l y f o l l o w more l i b e r a l s t and ing r u l e s \" (Emond 1975:791) . Others ques t i on the p u b l i c ' s i n t e r v e n t i o n i n to the complex t e c h n i c a l d i s c u s s i o n s su r round ing many env i ronmenta l i s sues (Fraser 1980). Thus , oppos ing views on the r o l e and e f f e c t i v e n e s s of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the hea r ing have been put fo rward . On the one hand, the hea r ing i s promoted as p u b l i c l y a c c e s s i b l e , o b j e c t i v e , and f a i r . On the o t h e r , c r i t i c i s m s of the o r g a n i z a -t i o n and procedures of hea r ing p a r t i c i p a t i o n as e l i t i s t , r e -s t r i c t i v e , and b i a sed ca s t s e r i o u s doubts on the h e a r i n g ' s p o t e n t i a l to e l i c i t s i g n i f i c a n t and e f f e c t i v e p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a -t i o n . 1.2-The Theory of P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n The concept of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s de r i v ed from demo-c r a t i c t h e o r i e s of government which i n co rpo r a t e an i d e a l of p a r t i c i p a t i o n by the p u b l i c i n t h e i r government. I w i l l demon-s t r a t e i n t h i s work how the con t rove r sy about the p u b l i c h e a -r i n g i s l o c a t e d w i t h i n and generated by i d e o l o g i c a l p e r s p e c -t i v e s about the i d e a l s and means of government. These l a r g e r 11 i s sues are o f t e n ignored in the immediate and s p e c i f i c c o n f l i c t over c e r t a i n aspec ts of v a r i ous h e a r i n g s . The ques t i ons and c r i t i c i s m r a i s e d about the hea r ing can be i n t e r p r e t e d as p r o b -lems of democra t i c t heo r y , q u e s t i o n i n g the very nature of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the p rocess of government. Contemporary Canadian l i b e r a l p o l i t i c a l theory i s domi -nated by a p l u r a l i s t p e r s p e c t i v e , as I w i l l d i s c u s s more f u l l y in Chapter I I . P l u r a l i s t theory assumes tha t p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a -t i o n i s p r i m a r i l y d i r e c t e d to and accommodated by the e l e c t o r a l p r o c e s s , but that ex t r a-pa r l i amen ta r y forums such as the p u b l i c hea r ing p rov ide fo r more d i r e c t communication between c i t i z e n s and government. A he t e rogene i t y of i n t e r e s t s i s m o b i l i z e d wi th respec t to any g i ven i s s u e , and the formal s e p a r a t i o n of and compe t i t i on among these i n t e r e s t s produces a ba lance or compro-mise in the dec i s ion-mak ing p r o c e s s . From the p e r s p e c t i v e of p l u r a l i s t i d e o l o g y , the t r i b u n a l i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d as democra t i c and p u b l i c l y a c c e s s i b l e . Hear -ings supplement the e l e c t o r a l p r o c e s s , p r o v i d i n g more d i r e c t c i t i z e n access to the dec i s ion-mak ing p r o c e s s , and gene ra t i ng a he t e rogene i t y of i n fo rma t i on rega rd ing c o n t r o v e r s i a l i s s u e s . A number of competing i n t e r e s t s are represented in the forum. P a r t i c i p a t i o n by p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i n t e r v e n o r s p rov ides a ba lance to the input of co rpo ra te and b u r e a u c r a t i c i n t e r e s t s . The autonomy of the t r i b u n a l from the government, and the i m p a r t i a -l i t y of Commission members r e s u l t s in the p roduc t i on of an o b j e c t i v e d e c i s i o n . Moreover , the forum i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by a f a i r n e s s of p rocedu res , which ensures an equa l bas i s f o r p a r t i -c i p a t i o n fo r a l l i n t e r v e n o r s . 12 However, a c r i t i c a l l i t e r a t u r e cha l l enges the p a r t i c i p a t o -ry p r i n c i p l e s of p l u r a l i s t t heo r y . Developmental c r i t i c s argue that concern fo r a p r o d u c t i v e and e f f i c i e n t p rocess has o v e r -shadowed the humanist and s o c i a l concerns of democracy, r e s u l -t i n g i n l i m i t e d c i t i z e n involvement i n p e r i p h e r a l p o l i t i c a l a c t i v i t y . E l i t e c r i t i c s note that the p l u r a l i s t concept of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s addressed to a m i n o r i t y of the p o p u l a t i o n , and f u r t h e r , tha t w i t h i n the dec i s ion-mak ing a r ena , a l l i a n c e s among e l i t e s produce a compe t i t i v e imba lance . S t a t i s t c r i t i c s deve -lop t h i s argument f u r t h e r by no t ing tha t a l l i a n c e s between s t a t e and i n d u s t r i a l i n t e r e s t s p rec lude an o b j e c t i v e d e c i s i o n -making p r o c e s s , r e s t r i c t i n g the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of p u b l i c i n t e -r e s t groups and b r i n g i n g i n to q u e s t i o n the purpose of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s . W i th in the context of the p u b l i c h e a r i n g , the c r i t i c a l p a r t i c i p a t o r y l i t e r a t u r e c h a l -lenges the concept of a ba lance among p u b l i c i n t e r e s t and o ther competing i n t e r e s t s . In r e c o g n i z i n g the s t r u c t u r a l a l l i a n c e among s t a t e and co rpo ra te i n t e r e s t s , and the i n d i r e c t ex t ens ion of s t a t e c o n t r o l through s t a f f and procedures of the t r i b u n a l , the i m p a r t i a l i t y of the t r i b u n a l i s q u e s t i o n e d . From t h i s c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e of p a r t i c i p a t i o n , p u b l i c i n t e r v e n t i o n i n the hea r ing may be viewed as a means of c o n t r i b u t i n g to the l e g i t i m a c y of the s t a t e . I w i l l use t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e as a means of e x p l a i n i n g the con t rove r sy over the p u b l i c hea r ing p r o c e s s . 1.3 - Argument and O r g a n i z a t i o n of the D i s s e r t a t i o n I argue that the c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the t r i b u n a l i s a product of contemporary l i b e r a l democracy. 13 F r o m t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e h e a r i n g i s v i e w e d a s s u p p l e m e n t a r y t o , y e t f o r m a l l y i n d e p e n d e n t f r o m , p a r l i a m e n t a r y i n s t i t u t i o n s . T h e f o r u m i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d b y a h e t e r o g e n e i t y o f , a n d b a l a n c e a m o n g , c o m p e t i n g i n t e r e s t s . P u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s e n c o u r a g e d b o t h a s a m e a n s o f e n s u r i n g t h a t a f f e c t e d i n t e r e s t s w i l l b e r e p r e s e n t e d a n d a s a m e a n s o f b a l a n c i n g a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a n d d e v e l o p m e n t i n t e r e s t s . T r i b u n a l s r e f l e c t c o n t e m p o r a r y p l u r a l i s t p o l i c i e s o f g r e a t e r r e d i s t r i b u t i o n a n d i n c r e a s e d a c c e s s i b i l i t y t h r o u g h m e a s u r e s s u c h a s p u b l i c i n t e r e s t f u n d i n g a n d l e g a l a d v o c a c y s e r v i c e s . T h e t r i b u n a l i s t h e n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e l i b e r a l p o l i t i c a l i d e o l o g y w h i c h g u a r a n t e e s p u b l i c a c c e s s t o t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s e s o f g o v e r n m e n t . C o n t r o v e r s y o v e r t h e a c c e s s i b i l i t y , f a i r n e s s , a n d i m p a r -t i a l i t y o f t h e t r i b u n a l s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e p l u r a l i s t m o d e l i s n o t u p h e l d b y t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i n t e r v e n o r s . N o n e t h e l e s s , I a r g u e t h a t t h e g e n e r a l e x p e r i e n c e o f p u b l i c h e a -r i n g s d o e s c o n f o r m t o t h e i n t e n t o f p l u r a l i s t t h e o r y . B y a d o p -t i n g t h e p e r s p e c t i v e o f t h e c r i t i c a l p a r t i c i p a t o r y l i t e r a t u r e , I w i l l d e m o n s t r a t e t h a t t h e p r o b l e m s o f p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n a r e d e r i v e d f r o m a n d o b s c u r e d b y t h e s h o r t c o m i n g s o f p l u r a l i s t t h e o r y i t s e l f . F r o m t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e t r i b u n a l i s s e e n a s l o c a t e d w i t h i n a l i b e r a l a n d c a p i t a l i s t c o n t e x t w h i c h h a s c e r -t a i n c o n s e q u e n c e s f o r i t s a c t i v i t i e s . T h e p r o b l e m s o f p u b l i c i n t e r e s t p a r t i c i p a n t s m u s t b e r e c o g n i z e d a s p o l i t i c a l a n d e c o -n o m i c i s s u e s o f c o m p e t i t i o n a n d p o w e r w h i c h o r i g i n a t e b e y o n d t h e t r i b u n a l , b u t w h i c h a f f e c t t h e c o m p e t i t i v e a b i l i t i e s o f p a r t i c i p a n t s . I n t h i s a n a l y s i s , a c o m p e t i t i v e i m b a l a n c e a m o n g t r i b u n a l p a r t i c i p a n t s i s r e f l e c t e d b y s y s t e m a t i c a l l y g r e a t e r 14 a c c e s s i b i l i t y of co rpo ra te and b u r e a u c r a t i c i n t e r e s t s to h e a r i n g - a p p r o p r i a t e resources ( e . g . , f u n d i n g , advocacy s k i l l s , access to i n f o r m a t i o n ) . I t h e r e f o r e argue tha t p l u r a l i s t theory f a i l s to r ecogn ize the imbalance of compe t i t i on and the interdependence w i t h i n and between s t a t e and e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l i n t e r e s t s which e x i s t as f e a -tu res of the t r i b u n a l . A l though inc reased a c c e s s i b i l i t y to the forum, and movement to e q u a l i z a t i o n of p rocedu ra l o p p o r t u n i t y have been g e n e r a l l y acknowledged, e x t e r n a l i n e q u a l i t i e s of s o -c i a l and economic c o n d i t i o n have not been recogn ized as imped i -ments to a f a i r and compe t i t i v e hea r ing p r o c e s s . In a d d i t i o n , the ex i s t ence of a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a l l i a n c e s w i t h i n which the t r i b u n a l i s l o c a t e d i s not t r e a t e d as a f a c t o r i n f l u e n c i n g the dec i s ion-mak ing p r o c e s s . From a p a r t i c i p a t o r y c r i t i q u e , p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the hea r ing i s r ecogn ized as u s e f u l , not on l y fo r e x p l i c i t and immediate r e g u l a t o r y and c o n s u l t a t i v e purposes but fo r s t a t e l e g i t i m a t i o n and c o n t r o l . The conf inement of p a r t i c i p a t i o n to an i n fo rma t i on-gene ra t i ng r o l e in the t r i b u -n a l , and the use of the hea r ing to d i r e c t , absorb and c o n t a i n p o t e n t i a l t h r e a t s to the r e l a t e d , i f d i v e r s e , i n t e r e s t s of the s t a t e , are c o n s i s t e n t wi th t h i s a n a l y s i s . I w i l l e va lua te the gene ra l compatab i1 i t y of the hea r ing p rocess wi th the p l u r a l i s t model through the a n a l y s i s of case s t u d i e s of s c i e n t i f i c / t e c h n i c a l / e n v i r o n m e n t a l i s sues d i s c u s s e d i n two major types of t r i b u n a l s . The e m p i r i c a l ev idence which I have s e l e c t e d i s comprised of two case s t u d i e s of p u b l i c p a r t i -c i p a t i o n i n env i ronmenta l h e a r i n g s . The f i r s t , a s e r i e s of 15 a d m i n i s t r a t i v e h e a r i n g s , concerned the use of the h e r b i c i d e 2,4-D in the Okanagan Lake system of B r i t i s h Columbia as a c o n t r o l f o r Eu ras i an water m i l f o i l . The hea r ings appea l i ng the use of t h i s chemica l were he ld annua l l y before the P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Appea l Board from 1978 through 1981. These hea r ings are p r e s c r i b e d by l e g i s l a t i o n as a d i r e c t means fo r c i t i z e n i n t e r v e n t i o n i n the r e g u l a t o r y p r o c e s s . The second p u b l i c hea r ing which I s e l e c t e d was the Royal Commission of I nqu i r y i n to Uranium M i n i n g , a Royal Commission of I nqu i r y which took p l ace in B r i t i s h Columbia from 1979-1980, when i t s F i n a l Report was r e l eased by the p r o v i n c i a l gove rn -ment. The government i n i t i a t e d t h i s i n q u i r y in response to p u b l i c concern over the fu tu re of uranium e x p l o r a t i o n and mining i n the p r o v i n c e . The t r i b u n a l was c a n c e l l e d prema-t u r e l y , in c o n j u n c t i o n wi th a seven-year moratorium on uranium e x p l o r a t i o n . In my a n a l y s i s I assess each hea r ing as an a p p l i c a t i o n of the p l u r a l i s t model of democracy. The o r g a n i z a t i o n and p r o c e -dures of these hea r ings are assumed to conform t o , or d i f f e r f rom, a p l u r a l i s t model of p a r t i c i p a t i o n which I a r t i c u l a t e in the f o l l o w i n g c h a p t e r . Conformi ty to the model i n d i c a t e s that the p r a c t i c e of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the hea r ing i s democra-t i c , w i t h i n the parameters of l i b e r a l p o l i t i c a l t heo r y . The t r i b u n a l ' s f a i l u r e to conform to the model can be exp l a i ned as a shor tcoming of the t r i b u n a l . T h i s a n a l y s i s i s l i m i t e d to a c e r t a i n extent by both me thodo log i ca l and t h e o r e t i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . The two case s t u d i e s have been s e l e c t e d and s tud i ed as \" i d e a l t y p e s \" of 16 a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and c o n s u l t a t i v e t r i b u n a l s , yet the d i v e r s i t y of t r i b u n a l s , the q u a n t i t y and v a r i e t y of d a t a , and d i f f e r e n t i a l exper i ence of p a r t i c i p a n t s p r e c l udes d e f i n i t i v e g e n e r a l i z a -t i o n s . In a d d i t i o n , i t must be noted that the p a r t i c i p a t o r y c r i t i q u e has been invoked as a means of e x p l a i n i n g the i n a d e -quacy of p l u r a l i s t theory and of e x p l o r i n g a l t e r n a t i v e s to p l u r a l i s t t heo r y , ra ther than as a t h e o r e t i c a l model in i t s own r i g h t . W i th in the parameters of t h i s r e s e a r c h , .I argue tha t a l though t r i b u n a l exper ience g e n e r a l l y conforms to the p l u r a -l i s t model , the i d e o l o g i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e of l i b e r a l democrat i c theory tends to minimize the problems of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n and e f f e c t i v e l y l i m i t s the more ex tens i ve d e m o c r a t i z a t i o n of the t r i b u n a l . In t h i s f i r s t c h a p t e r , I have in t roduced the p u b l i c h e a -r i n g w i t h i n the contex t of the popu la r deba te , and have i n t e r -p re ted the problem as r e f l e c t i n g a l a r g e r p o l i t i c a l c o n t r o v e r -s y . In Chapter Two, I review and ana lyze democra t i c theory with r espec t to p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n , and generate a p l u r a l i s t model of hea r ing p a r t i c i p a t i o n . In Chapter Three I d i s c u s s the data and methodology adopted fo r the a n a l y s i s . Fo l l ow ing t h i s , I i n t roduce the two case s t u d i e s by b r i e f l y d e s c r i b i n g each of them, d i s c u s s i n g the i s sues which they add re s s , and p r o v i d i n g a b r i e f chrono logy of the events which were the impetus fo r and contex t to the h e a r i n g s . In Chapters Four through Seven, I ana lyze the d a t a , f o l -lowing the c r i t e r i a proposed by the p l u r a l i s t model . In Chap-t e r Fou r , I d i s c u s s the he t e rogene i t y of p a r t i c i p a t i o n and 17 r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of the p u b l i c , and assess the he t e rogene i t y of p a r t i c i p a n t s in the h e a r i n g . Chapters F i ve and S ix examine the p r o c e d u r a l n e u t r a l i t y of the hea r ing p r o c e s s . In Chapter Seven I d i s c u s s the i m p a r t i a l i t y of the dec i s ion-mak ing p r o c e s s . Chapter E i gh t conc ludes the D i s s e r t a t i o n . Here I summarize the f i n d i n g s of the r e s e a r c h , and d i s c u s s the i m p l i c a t i o n s of my a n a l y s i s f o r p l u r a l i s t t heo r y , the p r a c t i c e of h e a r i n g s , and a democra t i c p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s . 1.4-Review of the L i t e r a t u r e The i s sue of c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the p u b l i c hea r ing has been addressed by the academic l i t e r a t u r e in a number of ways, which i n c l ude both e m p i r i c a l and t h e o r e t i c a l s t u d i e s . There i s l i t t l e i n t e g r a t i o n of the e m p i r i c a l d i s c u s s i o n of the p u b l i c hea r ing wi th the t h e o r e t i c a l d i s c u s s i o n of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a p o l i t i c a l framework. Most of the r e l a t e d work addresses e i t h e r the p a r t i c i p a t o r y p r o c e s s , o_r the p u b l i c h e a r i n g , but f a i l s to connect the two. T h i s s e p a r a t i o n c o n t r i b u t e s ' to f o rmu l a t i ons of the a c t i v i t y in r e s t r i c t i v e and mutua l l y e x c l u -s i v e te rms. The a n a l y s i s of p a r t i c i p a t i o n s u f f e r s from a l ack of d e f i -n i t i o n and c o n s i s t e n c y , and sys t emat i c at tempts to p resen t data o f t en ignore the l a r g e r p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l framework (Sadler 1978 :2 ) . P a r t i c i p a t i o n i s consequent l y t r ea t ed apar t from the t h e o r e t i c a l and even s u b s t a n t i v e con tex ts in which i t takes p l a c e . D e s c r i p t i v e l i t e r a t u r e remains j u s t t h a t , f a i l i n g to i n c o r p o r a t e t h e o r e t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e s in i t s a n a l y s i s . I t thus t r e a t s s p e c i f i c problems a s s o c i a t e d wi th p a r t i c i p a t i o n as t r i -b u n a l - s p e c i f i c , r a the r than r e c o g n i z i n g the r a t i o n a l e fo r and 18 problems of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n as o r i g i n a t i n g in a l a r g e r s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l c o n t e x t . The e m p i r i c a l l i t e r a t u r e i s p r i m a r i l y d i r e c t e d to a n a l y s i s of the o r g a n i z a t i o n and procedures of the h e a r i n g . W r i t e r s in the f i e l d s of A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , Law, and P lann ing view hear ings as ins t ruments of d e c i s i o n - or po l i c y-mak ing (Doern 1979, E lde r 1976; Emond 1975) . T h e i r emphasis i s on the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e or l e g a l con tex t in which the p u b l i c hea r ing i s l o c a t ed and the d e c i s i o n i s produced by the t r i b u n a l . By p l a c i n g the t r i b u n a l w i t h i n the framework of the l a r g e r p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s , obse rve rs a l so comment on the inadequac ies of the hea r ing to accompl i sh c e r t a i n i n s t rumen ta l goa l s ( Sa l t e r 1978; Lucas 1976; Pape 1978; H e b e r l e i n 1976) . The e m p i r i c a l work f a i l s to l o ca t e p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the contex t of democra t i c t heo r y , thus i g n o -r i n g the impetus f o r , and l a r g e r p o l i t i c a l contex t o f , p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n . The e m p i r i c a l l i t e r a t u r e a l so i n c l u d e s s t u d i e s of s p e c i f i c examples of p a r t i c i p a t i o n , which range from town meetings to a d v i s o r y commit tees . One approach compares the products of the hea r i ngs to those of a l t e r n a t i v e p a r t i c i p a t o r y modes (Burton 1978) . A s i m i l a r approach i s the e v a l u a t i o n of comparat ive 6 methods of p a r t i c i p a t i o n (Sadler 1978). T h i s l i t e r a t u r e a l s o n e g l e c t s the l a r g e r p o l i t i c a l and economic framework of p a r t i -c i p a t i o n , and tends to emphasize the i n s t rumen ta l goa l s ( e . g . , r e p o r t s , recommendations) of the p a r t i c i p a t o r y p r o c e s s . Another body of e m p i r i c a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n r e l e van t to the t h e s i s i s tha t o r i e n t e d to the s u b s t a n t i v e nature of the i s sues 19 d e l i b e r a t e d b y t h e t r i b u n a l , s p e c i f i c a l l y t h o s e o f a n e n v i r o n -m e n t a l , s c i e n t i f i c a n d t e c h n i c a l n a t u r e . I s s u e s i n t h e s e r e a l m s a r e p e r c e i v e d a s s t i m u l a t i n g p a r t i c i p a t i o n , a s t h e O r g a n i z a t i o n f o r E c o n o m i c C o o p e r a t i v e D e v e l o p m e n t (OECD) n o t e d i n i t s s t u d y o f p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n : I n c r e a s i n g l y a w a r e o f t h e s c a l e o f t e c h n o l o g i c a l u n d e r t a -k i n g s a n d o f t h e i r p o t e n t i a l i m p a c t s , p e o p l e a r e p r e o c c u -p i e d a b o u t d a n g e r s a n d r i s k s a n d t h e e t h i c a l d i l e m m a o f w h o s h o u l d s h a r e t h e m . L i m i t e d a c c e s s t o t e c h n i c a l f o -r u m s o f d e b a t e h a s r o u s e d p u b l i c s u s p i c i o n s a n d i n s p i r e d d e m a n d s f o r p o l i t i c a l a c c o u n t a b i l i t y ( 1 9 7 8 : 1 1 ) . T h e i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n d o m a i n s c h a r a c t e r -i z e d b y s c i e n t i f i c a n d t e c h n i c a l k n o w l e d g e h a v e b e e n a d d r e s s e d b y s o m e o b s e r v e r s ( L o w r a n c e 1 9 7 6 ; OECD 1 9 7 8 ; S a l t e r 1 9 8 1 ) . H o w e v e r , t h e c o n s e q u e n c e s o f t h e s c i e n t i f i c n a t u r e o f t h e i s s u e s i n v e s t i g a t e d b y t r i b u n a l s h a v e b e e n i g n o r e d b y t h e m a j o r i t y o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e . W h i l e t h e l i t e r a t u r e i n c l u d e s b o t h s u p p o r t i v e a n d c r i t i c a l a p p r o a c h e s t o c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g , c e r -t a i n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s p e r t a i n t o t h e m a j o r i t y o f e m p i r i c a l a n a l -y s e s . F i r s t , t h e l i t e r a t u r e c o n v e y s a r e f o r m i s t a p p r o a c h t o i t s s u b j e c t m a t t e r . I t a s s u m e s t h a t s p e c i f i c a n d p r a g m a t i c c h a n g e s i n t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l h e a r i n g w i l l f a c i l i t a t e p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n a n d r e n d e r t h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g m o r e e f f e c t i v e . P r o v i s i o n o f a d d i t i o n a l f u n d i n g m e c h a n i s m s a n d p u b l i c a d v o c a c y s e r v i c e s p r o m i s e g r e a t e r e q u a l i t y o f p a r t i c i p a t o r y o p p o r t u n i t y . S e c o n d , t h e l i t e r a t u r e t e n d s t o s u f f e r f r o m a l a c k o f d e s -c r i p t i v e w o r k . A l t h o u g h c a s e s t u d i e s o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n a r e f r e -q u e n t l y d i s c u s s e d , t h e s e l a c k a n e l a b o r a t i o n o f t h e s p e c i f i c a c t i v i t i e s i n w h i c h p a r t i c i p a n t s a r e e n g a g e d . T h e l i t e r a t u r e 20 assumes tha t the p rocess of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s known and under -s t o o d , and proceeds to g l o s s the \" m i c r o - a c t i v i t i e s \" and p r e -l i m i n a r y a c t i v i t i e s of i n t e r v e n t i o n wi th more a b s t r a c t terms (such a s , i ndeed , \" p a r t i c i p a t i o n \" ) . The conc re te and more mun-dane aspec ts of p a r t i c i p a t i o n remain undocumented, c o n t r i b u t i n g to the c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of the a c t i v i t y in an i d e a l i z e d , or c o n j e c t u r a l f a s h i o n . T h i r d , the l i t e r a t u r e pe rpe tua tes the image of the p u b l i c hea r ing as an independent , ad hoc and a p o l i t i c a l forum. The temporary s t a f f and s t r u c t u r e s , the l ack of d i r e c t d e c i s i o n -making power, and the absence of adequate l e g i s l a t i o n govern ing i t s p rocedures c o n t r i b u t e to the h e a r i n g ' s image as s p o r a d i c and un ique . The i n s t i t u t i o n a l cha rac t e r of the hea r ing remains undeve loped. F o u r t h , the ma jo r i t y of s t u d i e s , even those tha t are adequate l y d e s c r i p t i v e , l ack a t h e o r e t i c a l context ( S ad l e r , 1978) . S ince they are p r i m a r i l y accounts of i s sues and o r g a n i -z a t i o n , they neg l e c t the placement of p resent problems w i t h i n the p e r s p e c t i v e of gene ra l models . The subsequent p e r s p e c t i v e promotes a narrowness of v i s i o n , a l ack of overv iew, as w e l l as a tendency fo r obse rve rs to produce an a h i s t o r i c a l a n a l y s i s . Moreover , the l ack of t h e o r e t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e i s combined wi th the l ack of a s o c i o l o g i c a l a n a l y s i s . The l i t e r a t u r e i g -nores the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of p a r t i c i p a t i o n , that i s , the i n t e r a c t i o n and s o c i a l l o c a t i o n of p a r t i c i p a n t s in the hear ing p r o c e s s . I t r a r e l y addresses the hea r ing as an i n s t i t u t i o n which i s the product of s o c i a l and economic f o r c e s . A d m i n i s -t r a t i v e and l e g a l obse rve rs tend to view the hea r ing as a 21 b u r e a u c r a t i c and t e c h n i c a l p r o c e s s , r a the r than one mediated by a s o c i a l o r d e r , and i t s e l f a s o c i a l a c t i v i t y . F i n a l l y , there i s a tendency to a t tend to the problems of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n terms of s p e c i f i c and i n d i v i d u a l hea r ings (Ab-bo t t 1980; Wigmore 1980) . Problems of s p e c i f i c t r i b u n a l s are t r e a t e d as i f l o c a t e d i n h i s t o r i c a l c i r cumstance and the p e r -s o n a l i t y of Commiss ioners , r a the r than in i n s t i t u t i o n a l f e a -t u r e s . E v a l u a t i o n s of s p e c i f i c t r i b u n a l s promote the i n d i v i -d u a l i z a t i o n of the h e a r i n g . For i t s p a r t , the t h e o r e t i c a l l i t e r a t u r e tends to ignore the p u b l i c hea r ing as a forum of p a r t i c i p a t i o n . The p l u r a l i s t p e r s p e c t i v e assumed by the contemporary democra t i c l i t e r a t u r e d i r e c t s the ma jo r i t y of d e s c r i p t i v e and a p p l i e d work to the e l e c t o r a l forum (Almond and Verba 1963; Dahl 1956, 1970; Rose 1967; Be re l son 1954). C r i t i c s of t h i s approach have extended the l o cus of p a r t i c i p a t i o n to the workp lace , (Hunnius 1971; Mansbridge 1979) , or s m a l l - s c a l e d e c e n t r a l i z e d government (Mansbridge 1979) . The ma jo r i t y of the t h e o r e t i c a l work exami -n ing p a r t i c i p a t i o n as a f e a tu r e of democracy thus f a i l s to address the unique problems a s s o c i a t e d with p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a -t i o n i n the h e a r i n g . The e x i s t i n g work which does a t tend to hea r ings and p a r t i c i p a t i o n assumes an u n s p e c i f i e d democra t i c c o n t e x t , w i thout examining the v a r i e d t r a d i t i o n s of the p o l i t i -c a l system i n which i t takes p l a c e . Thus , the l i t e r a t u r e i n the area of p u b l i c involvement in the hea r ing f a i l s to i n t e g r a t e concepts of p a r t i c i p a t i o n and the s p e c i f i c arena of the p u b l i c h e a r i n g . Both e m p i r i c a l and 22 t h e o r e t i c a l t r a d i t i o n s f a i l to take the other i n to accoun t . Th i s b i f u r c a t i o n in the l i t e r a t u r e makes i t not on l y d i f f i c u l t to eva lua te hea r ings in terms of t h e i r democrat i c a s p i r a t i o n s . I t i s a l so a problem fo r the development of an adequate p o l i t i -c a l theory which can r e f l e c t the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of e x t r a -e l e c t o r a l forms of p a r t i c i p a t i o n , such as the p u b l i c h e a r i n g . 1.5- C o n t r i b u t i o n s of the D i s s e r t a t i o n The d i s s e r t a t i o n has both t h e o r e t i c a l and p r a c t i c a l s i g n i -f i c a n c e . I address the t h e o r e t i c a l l i t e r a t u r e through an a n a l y -s i s of a p p l i e d p l u r a l i s t democra t i c t heo r y . As I noted above, both p l u r a l i s t theory and i t s c r i t i c s have neg l ec t ed e m p i r i c a l documentat ion of e x t r a - e l e c t o r a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n . By address ing e m p i r i c a l p r a c t i c e from the p e r s p e c t i v e of p o l i t i c a l t heo r y , the d i s s e r t a t i o n w i l l c o n t r i b u t e to the r e f o r m u l a t i o n and the c r i t i c a l assessment of a p a r t i c i p a t o r y democra t i c theo ry . I a l so c o n t r i b u t e to the e m p i r i c a l l i t e r a t u r e by p r o v i d i n g a more ex tens i ve d e s c r i p t i o n of p a r t i c i p a t o r y a c t i v i t i e s , which i s exc luded from most formal a c coun t s ; moreover , I have adopted a t h e o r e t i c a l framework which p rov ides a means of a s s e s s i n g other examples of p a r t i c i p a t i o n wi th respec t to t h e i r democra-t i c p o t e n t i a l . Thus I have augmented both the t h e o r e t i c a l and e m p i r i c a l l i t e r a t u r e by p r o v i d i n g a s o c i o l o g i c a l a n a l y s i s of p a r t i c i p a t i o n which takes i n to account the p r o d u c t i o n of the hea r ing i n a s o c i e t y c h a r a c t e r i z e d by d i f f e r e n c e s in c l a s s and power. T h i s speaks to the n e c e s s i t y of an approach which encompasses the p o l i t i c a l and economic con tex ts of an a c t i v i t y . The work i s a l so d i r e c t e d to pragmat ic conce rns . C a l l s fo r more e f f e c t i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n cannot be answered u n t i l the na-23 t u r e o f e x i s t i n g c i t i z e n i n v o l v e m e n t i s b e t t e r u n d e r s t o o d . G i v e n d e m a n d s f o r a d d i t i o n a l h e a r i n g s a n d f o r m o r e e f f e c t i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n , a n d t h e p r o p h e c y o f c o n t i n u i n g i m p e n d i n g e n v i -r o n m e n t a l c o n f l i c t , a n a s s e s s m e n t o f t h e h e a r i n g a s a n i n s t i t u -t i o n i s n e e d e d ( F r a n s o n a n d L u c a s 1 9 7 5 ; OECD 1 9 7 8 ) . My a n a l y -s i s p r o v i d e s a m e a n s o f a s s e s s i n g t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d i m p l e -m e n t a t i o n o f h e a r i n g s f o r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a n d p l a n n i n g a u d i e n -c e s . R e a d e r s i n t h e s e a n d o t h e r a p p l i e d d i s c i p l i n e s , a s w e l l a s m e m b e r s o f p u b l i c i n t e r e s t o r g a n i z a t i o n s w i l l f i n d i n t h e d i s s e r t a t i o n a m e a n s o f e v a l u a t i n g t h e h e a r i n g a s a s o c i a l l y o r g a n i z e d a n d d e m o c r a t i c a l l y d e r i v e d f o r u m f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n . I T h e M a c k e n z i e V a l l e y P i p e l i n e I n q u i r y ( M a r c h 1 9 7 5 t o M a y 1 9 7 7 ) w a s e s t a b l i s h e d t o a s s e s s t h e s o c i a l , e n v i r o n m e n t a l , a n d e c o n o -m i c i m p a c t o f a g a s p i p e l i n e a n d e n e r g y c o r r i d o r o n t h e N o r t h . T h e A l a s k a H i g h w a y P i p e l i n e I n q u i r y ( A p r i l 1 9 7 7 t o A u g u s t 1 9 7 7 ) w a s e s t a b l i s h e d t o r e p o r t o n s o c i a l a n d e c o n o m i c i m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h e p r o p o s e d A l a s k a H i g h w a y g a s p i p e l i n e . T h e W e s t C o a s t O i l P o r t s I n q u i r y w a s e s t a b l i s h e d i n M a r c h 1 9 7 7 , b u t t e r m i n a t e d p r e m a t u r e l y , a n d d e l i v e r e d i t s R e p o r t i n F e b r u a r y , 1 9 7 8 . I t w a s e s t a b l i s h e d t o a s s e s s t h e i m p a c t o f p r o p o s e d o i l p o r t s o n t h e W e s t C o a s t o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . 2 T h e l e g a l s t r u c t u r e o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a n d c o n s u l t a t i v e t r i b u -n a l s w i l l b e d i s c u s s e d i n C h a p t e r T h r e e . 3 T h i s p o s i t i o n w i l l b e e x p l o r e d m o r e f u l l y i n C h a p t e r I I . I t i s d i s c u s s e d b y s u c h w r i t e r s a s M a c p h e r s o n ( 1 9 7 7 ) ; M a r c h a k ( 1 9 8 1 ) ; a n d P a t e m a n ( 1 9 7 0 ) . 4 A n u m b e r o f o b s e r v e r s h a v e d o c u m e n t e d t h e f o r m a l c o m m i t m e n t o f t h e T r u d e a u L i b e r a l g o v e r n m e n t t o p a r t i c i p a t o r y d e m o c r a c y ( C h a p i n a n d D e n e a u 1 9 7 8 ; D r a p e r 1 9 7 8 ; L o n e y 1 9 7 7 ) . 5 C h e c k o w a y ( 1 9 8 1 ) p r o v i d e s n u m e r o u s e x a m p l e s a n d s o u r c e s o f t h e s e a l t e r n a t i v e f u n c t i o n s o f h e a r i n g s i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s . 6 One e x a m p l e i s S a d l e r ' s s e a r c h f o r i m p r o v e d p e r f o r m a n c e i n p a r t i c i p a t i o n m e t h o d s i n t h r e e a r e a s : t h e r e c r u i t m e n t a n d i n -v o l v e m e n t o f t h e p u b l i c ; t h e a n a l y s i s a n d u t i l i z a t i o n o f p u b l i c i n p u t ; a n d t h e l a c k o f e v a l u a t i o n o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n p r o g r a m s ( 1 9 7 8 : 5 - 6 ) . 24 CHAPTER 2 DEMOCRATIC THEORY AND THE CONCEPT OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 2 . 1 - I n t r o d u c t i o n An e x a m i n a t i o n o f d e m o c r a t i c t h e o r y r e v e a l s t h a t p o p u l a r d e b a t e c o n c e r n i n g t h e s t r u c t u r e , p u r p o s e , and means o f p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e h e a r i n g p a r a l l e l s a t h e o r e t i c a l c o n f l i c t among d i f f e r e n t v e r s i o n s o f democracy. I w i l l l o c a t e h e a r i n g p a r t i c i p a t i o n w i t h i n t h e p o l i t i c a l c o n t e x t o f d e m o c r a t i c t h e o r y t o e x p l a i n t h e h e a r i n g c o n t r o v e r s y as one r e f l e c t i n g i s s u e s o f s o c i a l , e c onomic and p o l i t i c a l c o n s e q u e n c e . I n t h i s c h a p t e r , I p r o v i d e a b r i e f h i s t o r y o f t h e c o n c e p t o f p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n as i t o r i g i n a t e d and e v o l v e d i n t h e o r i e s o f d e m o c r a t i c g o v e r n -ment. I examine t h e r o o t s and l i m i t a t i o n s o f p a r t i c i p a t o r y d emocracy, and r e v i e w t h e emergence and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f c o n -t e m p o r a r y p l u r a l i s t d e m o c r a t i c t h e o r y . C r i t i c i s m s d i r e c t e d to t h i s t h e o r y a r e t h e n r e v i e w e d and i n t e r p r e t e d w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o the p u b l i c h e a r i n g c o n t r o v e r s y . I t h e n d i s c u s s t h e e v o l u t i o n o f c o n t e m p o r a r y C a n a d i a n p l u r a l i s m w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o t h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g and t h e r e g u l a t o r y p r o c e s s . I c o n c l u d e by f o r m u l a t i n g a p l u r a l i s t model o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g . The model p r e s e n t s c r i t e r i a a c c o r d i n g t o w h i c h t h e c a s e s t u d i e s 25 w i l l be examined in l a t e r c h a p t e r s . 2 . 1 - H i s t o r i c a l P recedents f o r P a r t i c i p a t i o n Democracy i s the w o r l d ' s new u n i v e r s a l r e l i g i o n . When i t s dogmas of l i b e r t y , e q u a l i t y , s e l f - d e t e r m i n a t i o n and human r i g h t s are v i o l a t e d so o f t e n and so ba rba rous -l y ; and the f a i t h f u l t end , as e ve r , to be fewer than the f a i t h l e s s , then i t i s not s u r p r i s i n g tha t we have, and ought to have, gene ra t i ons of t heo l og i ans t r y i n g to shape and c l a r i f y the democrat i c canon (Corcoran 1983:15) . A l though contemporary l i b e r a l democra t i c theory pe r c e i v e s p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n as l a r g e l y d i r e c t e d to the e l e c t o r a l p r o -c e s s , there are precedents fo r an ex tens i ve and d i r e c t p u b l i c involvement in government. The form, n a t u r e , and extent of 1 p u b l i c involvement have been debated fo r c e n t u r i e s . Corcoran c i t e s the c l a s s i c a l Greek s tandard of democracy, \" the l aw fu l 2 r u l e of the many in the i n t e r e s t of the community\" (1983:13) . P a r t i c i p a t o r y democracy r e f e r s to government in which c i t i z e n s e x e r c i s e some degree of power and c o n t r o l through t h e i r p a r t i -c i p a t i o n . E a r l y democra t i c theory i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by an emphasis on ex tens i ve p o l i t i c a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n (Corcoran 1983) . Rousseau argued tha t p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the democra t i c p rocess developed pe r sona l f a c u l t i e s and f u r t h e r e d the educa t ion of the communi-t y . S o c i e t y was respons i ve to the needs of i t s c i t i z e n s ; they in tu rn a t tended w i l l i n g l y to c o n s i d e r a t i o n s of the commonweal (Pateman 1970:22-27) . Rousseau 's S o c i a l C o n t r a c t , w r i t t e n in 1762, i n t roduced a r a d i c a l concept of popu la r s o v e r e i g n t y , one which took the r u l i n g f o r ce i n government to be the people themselves r a the r than a monarchy or an i n s t i t u t i o n such as P a r l i amen t . Rep resen ta t i on was an a l i e n a t i o n of t h i s sove -r e i g n t y : \"The depu t i e s of the people t h e r e f o r e , are n o t , and 26 c a n n o t b e i t s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s : t h e y a r e m e r e l y i t s s t e w a r d s , a n d c a n c a r r y t h r o u g h no d e f i n i t i v e a c t s \" ( R o u s s e a u 1 9 6 8 : 1 4 1 ) . He e n c o u r a g e d d i r e c t p a r t i c i p a t i o n , w h i c h w a s t o be e n a c t e d t h r o u g h l e g i s l a t i o n b y p e r i o d i c a s s e m b l i e s o f t h e p e o p l e , a n d t h r o u g h c o n t i n u i n g a n d p e r v a s i v e d i s c u s s i o n o f i s s u e s . T h e c o m p l e x c i v i l a s s o c i a t i o n e n v i s i o n e d b y R o u s s e a u w a s \" c a p a b l e o f p a s s i n g l a w s a d m i n i s t e r i n g p o l i c i e s a n d e s t a b l i s h i n g i n s t i -t u t i o n s o f r e l i g i o n , e d u c a t i o n a n d c e n s o r s h i p ( C o r c o r a n 1 9 8 3 : 4 ) . R o u s s e a u ' s t h e o r y r e q u i r e s p o l i t i c a l e q u a l i t y , w h i c h i s r e f l e c t e d b y t h e c o n c e p t o f a l l c i t i z e n s ' p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e i r g o v e r n m e n t . H i s d e m o c r a c y i s p r e d i c a t e d o n a c l a s s l e s s s o c i e t y , w h e r e e c o n o m i c e q u a l i t y ( t h r o u g h a c o m m o n b a s i s o f p r o p e r t y o w n e r s h i p ) a n d i n d e p e n d e n c e a r e t h e c o r n e r s t o n e s : \" N o c i t i z e n s h a l l b e r i c h e n o u g h t o b u y a n o t h e r a n d n o n e s o p o o r a s t o b e f o r c e d t o s e l l h i m s e l f \" ( 1 9 6 8 : 9 6 ) . R o u s s e a u ' s f a i l u r e t o r e c o g n i z e i n e q u a l i t i e s o f s o c i a l c l a s s h a s b e e n a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f h i s e n v i r o n m e n t . H i s t h e o r y i s d i r e c t e d t o t h e p r e - i n d u s t r i a l n a t i o n - s t a t e , a n d t h e c o n c e p t o f d i r e c t p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s r e g a r d e d t o d a y a s i n a p p r o p r i a t e f o r l a r g e -s c a l e , c e n t r a l i z e d c o n t e m p o r a r y g o v e r n m e n t . I n a s i m i l a r s p i r i t , A m e r i c a n d e m o c r a c y w a s c o n c e i v e d b y T h o m a s J e f f e r s o n a s a h i g h l y p a r t i c i p a t o r y g o v e r n m e n t ( A r o n 1 9 6 8 ) . J e f f e r s o n ' s a g r a r i a n m o d e l p r o v i d e d a d e c e n t r a l i z e d b a s i s f o r e l e c t o r a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n , b y w h i c h a l l c i t i z e n s c o u l d d i r e c t l y p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s . A l e x i s d e T o c q u e v i l l e , i n h i s o b s e r v a t i o n s o f t h e A m e r i c a n d e m o c r a t i c 27 e x p e r i e n c e , emphasized i t s ex tens i ve p a r t i c i p a t o r y b a s i s . T o c q u e v i l l e saw American democracy to be d i s t i n c t i v e i n i t s \" a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n a n d . . . . a s s o c i a t i o n a l a c t i v i t y \" (Krouse 1983:71 ) . Loca l democracy, e . g . , p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n mun i c i pa l bod ies and vo lun ta r y a s s o c i a t i o n in o r g a n i z a t i o n s , pe rm i t t ed American c i t i z e n s to p a r t i c i p a t e d i r e c t l y in the com-mon a f f a i r s of everyday l i f e . T o c q u e v i l l e f o l l ows Rousseau 's i d e a l s of d i r e c t , p o p u l i s t , d e c e n t r a l i z e d p a r t i c i p a t i o n wi th deve lopmenta l and normat ive assumptions f u r t h e r c h a r a c t e r i z i n g h i s obse r va t i ons of American democracy: . . . . t r u l y p a r t i c i p a t o r y democracy i s f i r s t and foremost a p rocess of p o l i t i c a l educa t ion gene ra t i ng the i n t e l l i -gence and p u b l i c s p i r i t , the \"moeurs \" , necessary to s u s -t a i n a r e p u b l i c a n p o l i t y — . . . . c r e a t i n g wiser and b e t t e r human be ings (Krouse 1983:74-75) . John S tua r t M i l l con t inued to e l abo ra t e the p a r t i c i p a t o r y 3 and deve lopmenta l a t t r i b u t e s of democrat i c t heo r y . M i l l ' s c o n -cepts are invoked today by those who e x t o l the e d u c a t i o n a l and s o c i a l v i r t u e s of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n (Pateman 1970; Gutmann 1980). C i t i n g i nc reased p u b l i c knowledge and community cohe -s i on as by-products of c i t i z e n involvement in dec i s i on-mak ing , M i l l noted the e d u c a t i o n a l and moral b e n e f i t s of a p a r t i c i p a t o -ry c l i m a t e . He argued t h a t : . . . . t h e on l y government which can f u l l y s a t i s f y a l l the e x i g e n c i e s of the s o c i a l s t a t e i s one i n which the whole people p a r t i c i p a t e ; that any p a r t i c i p a t i o n , even i n the s m a l l e s t p u b l i c f u n c t i o n , i s u s e f u l , that the p a r t i c i p a -t i o n shou ld everywhere be as great as the genera l degree of improvement of the community w i l l a l l o w , and tha t noth ing l e s s can be u l t i m a t e l y d e s i r a b l e than the admis -s i on of a l l (1910:217) . He thus suggested g rea te r p a r t i c i p a t i o n at the l o c a l p o l i t i c a l l e v e l and in the workp lace . I n d u s t r i a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n would 28 t r a n s f o r m h i e r a r c h i c a l r e l a t i o n s o f a u t h o r i t y t o o n e s o f c o o p -e r a t i o n o r e q u a l i t y ( 1 9 6 5 : 7 7 5 ) . P a r t i c i p a t i o n w a s f o r M i l l a m o r a l e n d e a v o r , r e s u l t i n g i n \" t h e a d v a n c e m e n t o f c o m m u n i t y . . . i n i n t e l l e c t , i n v i r t u e , a n d i n p r a c t i c a l a c t i v i t y a n d e f f i c i e n c y \" ( M a c p h e r s o n 1 9 7 7 : 4 7 ) . T h e w o r k o f R o u s s e a u a n d J . S . M i l l e m p h a s i z e d t h e e x t e n -s i v e i n v o l v e m e n t o f t h e p u b l i c i n a r a n g e o f p a r t i c i p a t o r y a c t i v i t i e s , a n d t h e d e v e l o p m e n t a l f u n c t i o n s o f t h i s a c t i v i t y . O t h e r t h e o r i s t s a t t r a c t e d t o a n e x t e n s i o n a n d d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n , w e r e a l a r m e d a b o u t t h e o l i g a r c h i c a l a n d s t a -t i s t t e n d e n c i e s o f g o v e r n m e n t . I n a n a n a r c h i s t v e r s i o n o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n a p p e a r e d i n l a t e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y F r a n c e , P r o u d h o n c a l l e d f o r a d e c e n t r a l i z e d s c h e m e o f c o l l e c t i v e l y r u n p r o d u -c e r s ' a s s o c i a t i o n s , i n w h i c h a l l w o r k e r s w o u l d a c t a s c o -p r o p r i e t o r s ( R e s n i c k 1 9 7 3 : 7 2 ) . L i k e P r o u d h o n , M a r x w a s c o n -c e r n e d w i t h t h e i n c o m p a t a b i l i t y o f s t a t e r u l e a n d p u b l i c p a r t i -c i p a t i o n ( A r o n 1 9 6 8 : 3 3 1 ) . M a r x r e f e r s t o t h e P a r i s Commune a s a n e x a m p l e o f a d i r e c t p r o l e t a r i a n d e m o c r a c y . He e m p h a s i z e s t h e e l e c t o r a l b a s i s , d e c e n t r a l i z e d a n d e x t r a - p a r l i a m e n t a r y c h a r a c t e r , a n d w o r k i n g - c l a s s c o m p o s i t i o n ( a n d w a g e s ) o f t h i s 4 g o v e r n m e n t ( 1 9 4 0 : 5 4 - 6 9 ) . L e v i n o b s e r v e s t h a t a M a r x i s t p e r -s p e c t i v e o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n r e f l e c t s t h e c h a r a c t e r o f t h e s o c i a l a n d p o l i t i c a l s y s t e m , a n d t h a t f o r M a r x a r e v o l u t i o n a r y s i t u a -t i o n : . . . . e v e n t u a l l y l e a d s t o t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f a s o c i a l i s t s y s t e m w h i c h b o t h r e l i e s o n a n d f a c i l i t a t e s t h e f u l l e s t p o s s i b l e p o p u l a r p a r t i c i p a t i o n ( 1 9 8 3 : 9 3 ) . P a r t i c i p a t i o n i s c e n t r a l t o t h i s e v o l v i n g t r a d i t i o n o f d e m o c r a t i c t h e o r y . H o w e v e r , t h e i d e a l i s t i c , o r \" u t o p i a n \" ( M a c -29 p h e r s o n ) q u a l i t y o f t h i s t h e o r y h a s p r e v e n t e d i t s w i d e s p r e a d a c c e p t a n c e b y c o n t e m p o r a r y p o l i t i c a l t h e o r i s t s . T h e c l a s s i c a l p a r t i c i p a t o r y p e r s p e c t i v e h a s b e e n g e n e r a t e d w i t h i n t h e c o n t e x t o f p r e - i n d u s t r i a l , a g r a r i a n , o r c l a s s l e s s s o c i e t i e s , w h i c h p r e s e n t s o b s t a c l e s f o r i t s c o n t e m p o r a r y a p p l i c a t i o n i n l a r g e -s c a l e , p o s t - i n d u s t r i a l ( s p e c i a l i z e d a n d b u r e a u c r a t i c ) c l a s s -d i f f e r e n t i a t e d s o c i e t i e s . N o n e t h e l e s s , p a r t i c i p a t o r y d e m o c r a t i c t h e o r y c o n t i n u e s t o e v o l v e . T h r e e a r e a s i n w h i c h t h e o r i e s a n d a p p l i c a t i o n s o f p a r t i c i p a t o r y d e m o c r a c y h a v e b e e n m o r e r e c e n t l y d e v e l o p e d a r e p o l i c y / p l a n n i n g , l o c a l g o v e r n m e n t , a n d i n d u s t r i a l o r w o r k p l a c e p a r t i c i p a t i o n . I n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n p r o g -r a m s i n u r b a n d e v e l o p m e n t w e r e d e v e l o p e d u n d e r t h e K e n n e d y a n d J o h n s o n a d m i n i s t r a t i o n s ( R i c h a n d R o s e n b a u m 1 9 8 1 ) . A m a n d a t e f o r c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e f o r m u l a t i o n a n d i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f p u b l i c p o l i c y w a s e x p r e s s e d i n C a n a d i a n g o v e r n m e n t p r o g r a m s o f t h e 1 9 6 0 ' s a n d e a r l y 1 9 7 0 ' s ( C h a p i n a n d D e n e a u 1 9 7 8 ) . P u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n w a s e x p a n d e d i n g o v e r n m e n t a g e n c i e s a s w e l l a s v o l u n t a r y o r g a n i z a t i o n s t h r o u g h p r o g r a m s s u c h a s t h e C o m p a n y o f Y o u n g C a n a d i a n s ( 1 9 6 5 ) , L o c a l I n i t i a t i v e P r o j e c t s a n d f u n d i n g t o o r g a n i z a t i o n s s u c h a s t h e F e d e r a t i o n o f H u m a n R i g h t s a n d t h e C i v i l L i b e r t i e s A s s o c i a t i o n ( L o n e y 1 9 7 7 ) . A n o t h e r f o c u s o f c o n t e m p o r a r y p a r t i c i p a t o r y t h e o r y i s l o -c a l , s m a l l - s c a l e g o v e r n m e n t . M a n s b r i d g e , i n h e r s t u d y o n s m a l l - t o w n a n d w o r k p l a c e d e m o c r a c i e s n o t e s t w o f o r m s o f d e m o -c r a c y ( 1 9 7 9 ) . A d v e r s a r y d e m o c r a c y , f r o m h e r p e r s p e c t i v e , i s r e p u b l i c a n — l a r g e - s c a l e a n d c e n t r a l i z e d , a n d i t a s s u m e s a c o n -30 f l i c t of i n t e r e s t s . Un i t a r y democracy, on the other hand, i s a more h i g h l y p a r t i c i p a t o r y d e m o c r a c y — s m a l l - s c a l e , d e c e n t r a -l i z e d , and r e f l e c t s a commonality of i n t e r e s t s . Mansbridge advocates the r e c o g n i t i o n and adopt ion of u n i t a r y , or p a r t i c i -pa tory democra t i c p r a c t i c e s i n a d d i t i o n to those at the s t a t e / n a t i o n a l l e v e l : . . . . M y argument i s that we a c t u a l l y mean two d i f f e r e n t t h i ngs when we speak of \" d e m o c r a c y \" . . . . n e i t h e r c o n d i t i o n i s a p p r o p r i a t e under a l l c i r cumstances (1979: 7 ) . . . . . b y f o s t e r i n g d e c e n t r a l i z e d and h i g h l y p a r t i c i p a t i v e u n i t s , by ma in t a i n i ng a few c r u c i a l remnants of consen -sus , by i n s t i t u t i n g p r i m a r i l y coope ra t i v e economic r e l a -t i o n s , and by t r e a t i n g adversary methods not as a n . . . . i d e a l but as a . . . r e s o u r c e a na t i on can ma in ta in some of the c o n d i t i o n s fo r community, c omradesh ip . . . and i d e a l -ism (1979: 297) . Contemporary t h e o r i s t s advocate the ex tens ion of p a r t i c i -pa tory democra t i c p r a c t i c e s to the workplace (Mansbridge 1979; Gutmann 1980) . In October 1976, the Fede ra l government a n -nounced the Q u a l i t y of Working L i f e (QWL) programme fo r r e -forming i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s in Canada. Workers ' p a r t i c i p a t i o n was advocated on two l e v e l s : workplace reforms ( e . g . , job enr ichment and semi-autonomous work) and dec i s ion-mak ing i n management. A l though l a r g e l y c r i t i c a l of i t s f u n c t i o n s , Swartz notes t h a t , \" . . . f o r m s of worker p a r t i c i p a t i o n mark r e a l advan -ces fo r working p e o p l e , extend ing past accompl ishments a n d . . . . 5 f u r t h e r i n g i n d u s t r i a l democracy, even s o c i a l i s m \" (1981:55) . P a r t i c i p a t o r y democra t i c t h e o r i e s cont inue to emphasize the d i r e c t nature and deve lopmenta l f u n c t i o n s of c i t i z e n i n -vo lvement . The p u b l i c hea r ing con t rove r sy has emerged i n pa r t w i t h i n the con tex t of t h i s c o n t i n u i n g d i s c u s s i o n about the purpose and b e n e f i t s of p a r t i c i p a t o r y democracy. C e r t a i n char-31 a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e h e a r i n g , s u c h a s i t s p r o v i s i o n f o r p u b l i c a c c e s s i b i l i t y a n d c o n c e r n f o r h u m a n i s t b e n e f i t s ( c o m m u n i t y c o h e s i o n , p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n ) h a v e b e e n d e r i v e d f r o m t h i s t r a d i -t i o n . H o w e v e r , o t h e r f e a t u r e s o f t h e h e a r i n g , s u c h a s t h e c o m p e t i t i o n o f i n t e r e s t s , n e u t r a l i t y o f p r o c e d u r e s , a n d o b j e c -t i v i t y o f d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g , a r e f e a t u r e s o f t h e h e a r i n g w h i c h h a v e r o o t s i n a p l u r a l i s t t r a d i t i o n w i t h i n d e m o c r a t i c t h e o r y . 2 . 3 - T h e E m e r g e n c e o f P l u r a l i s m P u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n h a s s e r v e d a n u m b e r o f a d d i t i o n a l p u r p o s e s , i n c l u d i n g t h e p r e s e r v a t i o n o f p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y a n d p r o t e c t i o n a g a i n s t d e s p o t i s m . T h e \" p r o t e c t i v e \" m o d e l o f d e m o c -r a c y w h i c h e m e r g e d i n 1 9 t h c e n t u r y E n g l a n d v i e w e d p u b l i c p a r t i -c i p a t i o n a s a m e a n s t o c o m b a t s t r o n g c e n t r a l i s t g o v e r n m e n t a n d p r o t e c t p r o p e r t i e d i n t e r e s t s ( M a c p h e r s o n 1 9 7 7 ) . J e r e m y B e n t h a m a n d J a m e s M i l l i n 1 8 2 0 e m p h a s i z e d t h e e l e c t o r a l p r o c e s s a s t h e m e a n s o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n , b u t o f f e r e d o n l y a r e s t r i c t e d f r a n c h i s e t o c e r t a i n ( m a t u r e , p r o p e r t i e d , e d u c a t e d ) s e g m e n t s o f t h e p o p u -l a t i o n . C o n c e r n w i t h t h e d e v e l o p m e n t a n d e x t e n s i o n o f t h i s f r a n c h i s e , a n d w i t h t h e m e c h a n i c s o f t h e p a r l i a m e n t a r y p r o c e s s h a v e c h a r a c t e r i z e d m a i n s t r e a m d e m o c r a t i c t h e o r y t o t h i s d a y . T h e e m p h a s i s i n l i b e r a l d e m o c r a t i c t h e o r y d u r i n g t h e f i r s t h a l f o f t h e 2 0 t h c e n t u r y w a s i n i t s p r a g m a t i c a t t r i b u t e s a n d t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e p r o c e s s . T h e c o m p l e x n a t u r e o f i n d u s t r i a l a n d p o s t - i n d u s t r i a l s o c i e t y w a s r e g a r d e d a s p r o b l e -m a t i c f o r d i r e c t p a r t i c i p a t i o n a n d d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n . I n s t e a d , h i e r a r c h i c a l a n d o l i g a r c h i c a l s y s t e m s o f g o v e r n m e n t w e r e r e g a r -d e d a s m o r e s u i t a b l e f o r t h e p r e v a i l i n g l a r g e - s c a l e u r b a n i z e d , 3 2 c e n t r a l i z e d , a n d b u r e a u c r a t i c m o d e s o f o r g a n i z a t i o n ( D u n c a n a n d L u k e s 1 9 6 7 ; P a t e m a n 1 9 7 0 ) . I n a d d i t i o n , t h e t h r e a t o f t o t a l i t a r i a n i s m , a n d t h e e m p h a -s i s o n b a l a n c e a n d s t a b i l i t y c o n t r i b u t e d t o s o m e a p p r e h e n s i o n r e g a r d i n g e x t e n s i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n : T h e c o l l a p s e o f t h e W e i m a r R e p u b l i c , w i t h i t s h i g h r a t e s o f m a s s p a r t i c i p a t i o n , i n t o f a s c i s m , a n d t h e p o s t -w a r e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f t o t a l i t a r i a n r e g i m e s b a s e d o n m a s s p a r t i c i p a t i o n , a l b e i t p a r t i c i p a t i o n b a c k e d b y i n t i m i d a -t i o n a n d c o e r c i o n , u n d e r l a y t h e t e n d e n c y f o r ' p a r t i c i p a -t i o n ' t o b e c o m e l i n k e d t o t h e c o n c e p t o f t o t a l i t a r i a n i s m r a t h e r t h a n t h a t o f d e m o c r a c y ( P a t e m a n 1 9 7 0 : 2 ) . I n t e l l e c t u a l d e v e l o p m e n t s w i t h i n t h e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s c o n -t r i b u t e d a s w e l l t o t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f c o n t e m p o r a r y p l u r a l i s t d e m o c r a c y . T h e e m e r g e n c e o f a n A m e r i c a n t r a d i t i o n o f p o l i t i c a l s c i e n c e w i t h a n i d e o l o g i c a l t e n d e n c y f a v o u r i n g s o c i a l e q u i l i b -r i u m , a n d a m e t h o d o l o g y e m p h a s i z i n g e m p i r i c a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n f l u e n c e d t h e e v o l u t i o n o f c o n t e m p o r a r y d e m o c r a t i c t h e o r y ( B a y 1 9 6 7 ; D u n c a n a n d L u k e s 1 9 6 7 ; P a t e m a n 1 9 7 0 ) . J o s e p h S c h u m p e t e r , w h o s e w o r k i s t h e f o u n d a t i o n f o r c o n -t e m p o r a r y p l u r a l i s t t h e o r y , e m p h a s i z e s t h e i n s t i t u t i o n a l a n d e l e c t o r a l b a s i s o f d e m o c r a c y : . . . . t h e r o l e o f t h e p e o p l e i s t o p r o d u c e a g o v e r n m e n t , o r e l s e a n i n t e r m e d i a t e b o d y w h i c h i n t u r n w i l l p r o d u c e a n a t i o n a l e x e c u t i v e o r g o v e r n m e n t . . . t h e d e m o c r a t i c m e t h o d i s t h a t i n s t i t u t i o n a l a r r a n g e m e n t f o r a r r i v i n g a t p o l i t i -c a l d e c i s i o n s i n w h i c h i n d i v i d u a l s a c q u i r e t h e p o w e r t o d e c i d e b y m e a n s o f a c o m p e t i t i v e s t r u g g l e f o r t h e p e o p -l e ' s v o t e ( 1 9 4 3 : 2 6 9 ) . H i s t h e o r y r e v o l v e s a r o u n d t h e e l e c t o r a l p r o c e s s a n d t h e c o n -c e p t a n d p r a c t i c e o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . T h e f r a n c h i s e o p e r a t e s t o m a i n t a i n g o v e r n m e n t ; e l e c t i o n s a r e a c o m p e t i t i v e s t r u g g l e a m o n g l e a d e r s f o r t h e p e o p l e ' s v o t e . W h i l e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l l o w s f o r r u l e b y a n e l i t e , s e l e c t i o n o f d e l e g a t e s i s c o m p e t i t i v e a n d 33 occurs p e r i o d i c a l l y , thus a l l ow ing the r a t i f i c a t i o n or de fea t of l e a d e r s . E l e c t e d r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s are accountab le to a c o n -s t i t u e n c y through the e l e c t o r a l p r o c e s s . Once e l e c t e d , gove rn -ments shou ld be l e f t to r u l e (Dahl 1943: 291) . Schumpeter 's ideas were f u r t h e r deve loped by a number of w r i t e r s who a l s o viewed p a r t i c i p a t i o n as f u l f i l l e d by the e l e c -t o r a l p r o c e s s . C i t i z e n s v o t e , j o i n p o l i t i c a l p a r t i e s , and e l e c t and lobby r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s , thereby c o n t r o l l i n g t h e i r l e ade r s and produc ing an e f f e c t i v e government (Dahl 1956, 1961; Be re l son e t . a l . 1954; L i p s e t 1960; Almond and Verba 1965). The e l e c t o r a l p r o c e s s , a l though the \"most p r a c t i c a l weapon i n the p l u r a l i s t armory\" (Presthus 1970: 291) i s not the on l y weapon. Other a c t i v i t i e s such as r e f e r e n d a , task f o r c e s , and p u b l i c hea r ings supplement the e l e c t o r a l p r o c e s s , demonst ra t ing the respons i veness of government to p u b l i c p r e s s u r e , and i t s e f f e c -t i v e n e s s in d e a l i n g wi th i s s u e s . A g e n e r a l l y d i s i n t e r e s t e d p u b l i c complements the democra-t i c p o l i t i c a l o r d e r . Dahl argues tha t lower soc ioeconomic groups are a p a t h e t i c , and s t a t e s tha t \" p r e v a i l i n g norms are s u b t l e matters be t t e r ob ta ined by n e g o t i a t i o n than by the c r u d i t i e s and o v e r s i m p l i f i c a t i o n of p u b l i c debate (1961:321) . Apathy g i ves the system f l e x i b i l i t y (Freedman and Smith 1972:72 ) , p revents i t s c o l l a p s e beneath the s t r a i n s of excess i n p u t , and j u s t i f i e s the concept of minimal p a r t i c i p a t i o n (Morr is-Jones 1954:25-37) . M i l b r a t h n o t e s : . . . . m o d e r a t e l e v e l s of p a r t i c i p a t i o n by the mass of c i t i -z e n s . . . . h e l p ba lance p o l i t i c a l systems which must be both r espons i ve and power fu l enough to a c t . . . . h i g h p a r t i c i p a -t i o n l e v e l s would a c t u a l l y be d e t r i m e n t a l to s o c i e t y i f 34 they tended to p o l i t i c i z e a l a rge percentage of s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s . . . . (1965: 153-4) . Low e x p e c t a t i o n s of p u b l i c involvement and concern fo r the pragmat ic aspec ts of government are compat ib le wi th t h i s fo rmu-l a t i o n of p a r t i c i p a t i o n : . . . . w h a t we c a l l ' democracy*—tha t i s , a system of d e c i -s ion-making i n which the l eade rs are more or l e s s r e s p o n -s i v e to the p r e f e r ences of non- leade rs—does seem to operate wi th a r e l a t i v e l y low l e v e l of c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a -t i o n . Hence i t i s i naccu ra t e to say tha t one of the necessary c o n d i t i o n s fo r 'democracy ' i s ex tens i ve c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n (Duncan and Lukes 1967:168) . I n t e r e s t groups have r ep l aced the t r a d i t i o n a l i n d i v i d u a -l i s t focus of p l u r a l i s t theory (Presthus 1970:286) . O r g a n i z a -t i o n s r e p r e s e n t i n g heterogeneous and independent i n t e r e s t s such as c o r p o r a t i o n s , l a b o u r , the s t a t e , and the p u b l i c are a major source of p a r t i c i p a t o r y a c t i v i t y . S cha t t s chne ide r fo r example r e f e r s to a \" m u l t i p l i c i t y of i n t e r e s t s that i s somewhat a s t r o -nomica l in cha rac t e r and p r o p o r t i o n s \" as a pr imary f e a tu r e of contemporary democra t i c s o c i e t y (1942:19) . A f f e c t e d i n t e r e s t s w i l l m o b i l i z e on beha l f of t h e i r conce rns , ensur ing a ba lance i n the compe t i t i v e p r o c e s s : . . . . c o m p e t i t i o n among b ig b u s i n e s s , b ig l a b o r , and b ig government keeps each i n t e r e s t from misus ing i t s power. That the ma jo r i t y of c i t i z e n s and consumers a f f e c t e d by these g i a n t s remains unorgan ized i s not v i t a l , s ince they too cou ld o rgan ize i f they had the w i l l (Presthus 1970:284) . The a b i l i t y to m o b i l i z e resources in the compe t i t i v e s t r u g g l e i s dependent upon a number of v a r i a b l e s , i n c l u d i n g : . . . . t h e degree to which the i n t e r e s t group i s i n t e r n a l l y o r g a n i z e d , the q u a l i t y of l e a d e r s h i p . . . . , the c a p a c i t y of the i n t e r e s t group to fo rmula te a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l y and present i t s i n t e r e s t s , the number of c i t i z e n s who are members of a p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t group, ' and the needs of the i n t e r e s t group i n vo l ved (Card 1979:32 ) . 35 C o m p e t i t i o n a m o n g t h e s e i n t e r e s t s p r e v e n t s t h e d o m i n a t i o n o f a s i n g l e p o w e r a n d c o n t r i b u t e s t o t h e m a i n t e n a n c e o f a b a -l a n c e d g o v e r n m e n t , r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f a b r o a d a r r a y o f i n t e r e s t s ( S m i t h a n d F r e e d m a n 1 9 7 2 : 3 6 4 2 ) . T h e b a l a n c e o f t h e c o m p e t i t i v e p r o c e s s i s s t r u c t u r a l l y a s s u r e d b y t h e s e p a r a t i o n o f p o w e r s . T h u s , c o r p o r a t e i n t e r e s t s a r e o f f s e t i n t h e c o m p e t i t i v e a r e n a b y a d v e r s a r i e s s u c h a s p u b l i c i n t e r e s t g r o u p s . A s K o r n h a u s e r n o t e s i n h i s d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e r o l e o f i n t e r e s t g r o u p s : . . . . i n t e r m e d i a t e g r o u p s h e l p t o p r o t e c t e l i t e s b y f u n c t -i o n i n g a s c h a n n e l s t h r o u g h w h i c h p o p u l a r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e l a r g e r s o c i e t y . . . . m a y b e d i r e c t e d a n d r e -s t r a i n e d . . . F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e s e p a r a t i o n o f t h e v a r i o u s s p h e r e s o f s o c i e t y . . . . m e a n s t h a t a c c e s s t o e l i t e s i n o n e s p h e r e d o e s n o t d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e l i t e s i n o t h e r s p h e r e s . . . T h e s e s a m e f a c t o r s p r o t e c t n o n - e l i t e s f r o m e -l i t e s , s i n c e i n d e p e n d e n t g r o u p s g u a r d t h e i r m e m b e r s f r o m o n e a n o t h e r , a n d s i n c e o v e r l a p p i n g m e m b e r s h i p s a m o n g g r o u p s . . . . r e s t r a i n s e a c h g r o u p f r o m s e e k i n g t o t a l d o m i n a -t i o n o v e r i t s m e m b e r s h i p ( 1 9 5 9 : 7 8 ) . A s e p a r a t i o n a n d b a l a n c e o f p o w e r c o n t r i b u t e s t o t h e p l u r a l i s t c o n c e p t o f t h e s t a t e . I n c o n t r a s t t o t h e i d e a l i z e d m o n o l i t h w h i c h c h a r a c t e r i z e d h i s t o r i c a l E u r o p e a n v e r s i o n s o f s t a t e p o w e r , t h e A m e r i c a n l i b e r a l v e r s i o n i s t h a t o f \" p o w e r b r o k e r \" , w i t h t h e s t a t e a s t h e b r o k e r o f c o m p e t i n g w i l l s ( P r e s -t h u s 1 9 7 0 : 2 8 5 ) . T h e s t a t e i s r e c o g n i z e d a s a n a c t i v e , b u t n e u t r a l p r e s e n c e . A s C a r d s t a t e s , \" . . . . t h e r e i s n o d e f i n i t i v e p o w e r i n t h e s t a t e . . . . ( w h i c h i s r e g a r d e d ) . . . a s a b r o k e r a g e c o m -m i t t e d t o r e c e i v i n g , h e a r i n g a n d g i v i n g e q u a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n t o a l l o f t h e i n p u t f r o m t h e v a r i o u s i n t e r e s t s c o n c e r n e d \" ( 1 9 7 9 : 3 3 ) . T h i s b e n i g n c h a r a c t e r o f s t a t e i n t e r v e n t i o n i n t h e p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s i s e n h a n c e d b y t h e e r o s i o n o f t h e n e g a t i v e c o n c e p t o f t h e s t a t e , a n d r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e c i v i l l i b e r t a r i a n a n d \" p o s i t i v e \" a s p e c t s o f s t a t e a c t i v i t y ( P r e s t h u s 1 9 7 0 : 2 8 7 ) . 36 In summary, compromise, b a l a n c e , and s t a b i l i t y in the p o l i t i c a l p rocess are c e n t r a l to p l u r a l i s t t heo r y . Checks and ba lances are p rov ided by d i v i s i o n s of power, competing p o l i t i -c a l p a r t i e s , and the i n t e rmed ia r y ro l e of i n t e r e s t g roups : The he t e rogene i t y and p e n e t r a b i l i t y of the p o l i t i c a l e l i t e s , the open and a l t e r n a t i v e channe ls of communica-t i o n , the d i s p e r s i o n of i n e q u a l i t i e s in the p o l i t i c a l r e s o u r c e s , and the e x i s t e n c e of o r g a n i z a t i o n a l f reedoms, ensure tha t p o l i t i c a l compe t i t i on among the a l t e r n a t i v e e l i t e s and a l t e r n a t i v e p o l i c i e s (through the medium of f r ee e l e c t i o n ) w i l l not on l y g ive the masses a s i g n i f i -cant c o n t r o l over t h e i r government, but w i l l a l so enable the p o l i t i c a l system to f u l f i l l the needs of most groups w i t h i n the community (Ono 1967:104) . 2 . 4 - C r i t i q u e s of P l u r a l i s t Democracy A c r i t i c a l l i t e r a t u r e cha l l enges t h i s p l u r a l i s t p e r s p e c -t i v e of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Deve lopmenta l , e l i t i s t and s t a -t i s t p e r s p e c t i v e s d i r e c t e d to the l a r g e r p o l i t i c a l p rocess a l s o address the problems of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the t r i b u n a l reviewed i n Chapter 1. Thus , debate concern ing the scope of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n , compe t i t i v e ba lance among i n t e r v e n o r s , and im -p a r t i a l i t y of Board members may be i n t e r p r e t e d as a d i s a g r e e -ment over s o c i a l , p o l i t i c a l and economic power i n the l a r g e r democrat i c p r o c e s s . P a r t i c i p a t o r y t h e o r i s t s accuse the p l u r a l i s t v e r s i o n of democracy of be ing both s t a t i c and r e s t r i c t i v e in nature (Dun-can and Lukes 1967:180-184; Dav is 1967). P l u r a l i s m ' s p r e d i s p o -s i t i o n towards compromise and balance concea l s a r e s i s t a n c e to change. The o r i e n t a t i o n i s to an e m p i r i c a l d i s c u s s i o n of the d i s t r i b u t i o n of power w i t h i n the p o l i t i c a l system: \" P l u r a l i s t s thus ask 'who g o v e r n s ? ' i . e . , who a c t u a l l y has power—rather than de f i ne power i n a c e r t a i n way fo r the purposes of the 37 e x p l a n a t i o n of c o n f l i c t and change\" (Balbus 1971:172) . Pragma-t i sm and dependence on e m p i r i c a l methodology have neg lec ted c o n s i d e r a t i o n of comparat ive h i s t o r i c a l and p h i l o s o p h i c a l a p -proaches to government (McCoy and P l a y f o r d 1967; Bay 1967:12-37) . As w e l l , p l u r a l i s m i s s a i d to ignore h i s t o r i c economic i n e q u a l i t i e s : A l l c u r r e n t p a r t i c i p a n t s i n compe t i t i on over scarce resources ( p o l i t i c a l , economic, m i l i t a r y ) appear to be s t r i p p e d of any b u i l t - i n advantages a f f o r d e d by t h e i r s t r a t e g i c l o c a t i o n i n an ongoing s o c i e t y wi th a p a r t i c u -l a r economic and c u l t u r a l h i s t o r y (Mankoff 1970:419) . Others c r i t i c i z e the t h e o r y ' s r e s t r i c t e d concept of p a r t i -c i p a t i o n . The e l a b o r a t i o n of a system that \"works \" , i s i n p r a c t i c e , and produces \" r e s u l t s \" , has tended to overshadow more a b s t r a c t no t i ons of human p o t e n t i a l and s o c i e t a l b e n e f i t , and economic e q u a l i t y (Bay 1967:3038) . C r i t i c s of p l u r a l i s t s ' i n -s t rumenta l goa l s c l a im that the humanist i d e a l s of c l a s s i c a l democracy have been r ep l aced by a narrow and a p p l i e d theory geared to the maintenance of e l e c t o r a l machinery (Pateman 1970; Macpherson 1977) . P a r t i c i p a t o r y t h e o r i s t s note tha t the e l e c t o -r a l p rocess a f f o r d s but meagre and i n f r equen t access to g o v e r n -ment. T h e r e f o r e , a l though c i t i z e n involvement in the r e g u l a t o -ry p rocess through hea r ing i n t e r v e n t i o n may be f o r m a l l y p o s s i -b l e , the supplementary nature of the a c t i v i t y , the minimal number of p a r t i c i p a n t s , and the ad hoc and s p e c i f i c nature of the i n q u i r y depr i ve i t of deve lopmenta l and dynamic p o t e n t i a l . The p l u r a l i s t concept of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n gove rn -ment i s regarded by many as e l i t i s t (Walker 1967; McCoy and P l a y f o r d 1967; Pateman 1970) . Developmental c r i t i c s p o i n t to 38 the r e s t r i c t e d nature of e l e c t o r a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n and the l i -mited c i v i c s p i r i t as i n d i c a t i o n s of an e l i t i s t o r i e n t a t i o n to p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n (McCoy and P l a y f o r d 1967). They suggest that apathy i s an a r t i f a c t of the p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l sys tems, and tha t i t r e f l e c t s popu la r d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n wi th the ope r a t i on of the p o l i t i c a l system (Walker 1967). C o n f l i c t t h e o r i s t s p o i n t to the r e l a t i o n s of p roduc t i on as a major source of p o l i t i c a l power. For M a r x i s t s , the c a p i t a -l i s t economic system i s p r e d i c a t e d on and perpe tua tes i n e q u a l i -t i e s i n weal th and power. C o n f l i c t t h e o r i s t s note that economic e l i t e s c o n t r o l p o l i t i c a l power, c o n t r i b u t i n g to an imbalance among competing i n t e r e s t s . A c co rd ing to C. Wright M i l l s , t h i s d i s e q u i l i b r i u m r e f l e c t s the r o l e of a \"power e l i t e \" which makes the key d e c i s i o n s f o r s o c i e t y . These are not separa te compe-t i n g f o r c e s but an i n t e r l o c k i n g and converg ing e l i t e who are the l o cus of dec i s ion-mak ing fo r the s o c i a l , economic, and p o l i t i c a l sys tems. Where the p l u r a l i s t argument assumes d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n and compe t i t i on among heterogeneous e l i t e s , i t s c r i t i c s p o s i t a h i e r a r c h y of i n t e r l o c k i n g e l i t e s , who nego t i a t e the d i s p o s i t i o n of power i n t e r n a l l y . Domhoff (1967), f o l l o w i n g M i l l s , demonstrates the i n f l u e n c e of the economic e l i t e on 6 government and p o l i c y - m a k i n g . Those c r i t i c a l of the i ndepen -dence of the hear ing p rocess from man ipu l a t i on by a \"power e l i t e \" would f i n d support in these arguments. S t a t i s t c r i t i q u e s f u r t h e r exp lo re the r e l a t i o n s h i p between c l a s s i n t e r e s t s and s t a t e power. Pan i t ch cha l l enges the p l u -r a l i s t view of s t a t e n e u t r a l i t y : \" . . . t h e idea tha t the modern s t a t e a c t s at the behest of the dominant c l a s s in our s o c i e t y 39 has o f t e n seemed much more p l a u s i b l e than the p l u r a l i s t and s o c i a l democra t i c view of the s t a t e as a n e u t r a l a r b i t e r be -tween competing groups of c l a s s e s \" (1977:3 ) . An a l l i a n c e be -tween s t a t e and e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l f o r c e s cha l l enges the p l u r a l i s t no t i on of compe t i t i on among separa te and c o u n t e r v a i l i n g i n t e -r e s t s . The p l u r a l i s t no t i on of balance \" i g n o r e s the sys temat i c b i a ses ev iden t i n c l a s s based s o c i e t i e s and the r e f l e c t i o n these have on r e l a t i o n s between the s t a t e and co rpo ra te wo r l d s \" (Pani tch 1977:359) . Pan i t ch a l so notes tha t t h i s model \" f a i l s to a cknow ledge . . . the unequal a l l o c a t i o n s of resources necessary to m o b i l i z e and r e a l i z e conce rns \" (1977:359) . The s t a t e i s regarded by some as an inst rument of c l a s s r u l e , as Ratner e t . a l . note w i th respec t to the c r i m i n a l j u s -t i c e system: In c o n t r a s t to the p l u r a l i s t s , a correspondence of c l a s s power and s t a t e power i s s a i d to e x i s t because of the ove r t s i m i l a r i t i e s i n c l a s s background, i n t e r e s t s , and world-view between those who shape and run the econo -my and the pe rsonne l of the s t a t e and c r i m i n a l j u s t i c e system. Common c l a s s p o s i t i o n , c l o s e e d u c a t i o n a l t i e s , f a m i l y and pe r sona l networks , snared i d e o l o g i c a l p e r s p e c -t i v e s , and c l o s e working r e l a t i o n s h i p s between the domi -nant c l a s s and i n t e rmed i a r y i n s t i t u t i o n s . . . . p r e d i s p o s e s t a t e c r i m i n a l j u s t i c e i n s t i t u t i o n s to favour dominant s o c i a l and economic i n t e r e s t s (Ratner e t . a l . 1983: 10 ) . A number of Canadian c r i t i c s adopt an i n s t r u m e n t a l i s t approach such as Clement who n o t e s , \" i t i s c l e a r tha t the co rpora te e l i t e i s very a c t i v e i n both the s t a t e and p o l i t i c a l sys tems\" (1975:347) . The compos i t i on of Canadian r e g u l a t o r y bodies r e -vea l s a s i m i l a r c l a s s b i a s (Andrew and P e l l e t i e r 1978). Fu r the r a n a l y s i s of the r e l a t i o n of s t a t e power to econo-mic i n t e r e s t s has r e s u l t e d in the a r t i c u l a t i o n of a number of 40 p o s i t i o n s which oppose the economic r educ t i on i sm inheren t in 7 t h i s i n s t r u m e n t a l i s t model . The s t a t e i s pe r ce i ved by a number of w r i t e r s as occupy ing a p o s i t i o n of \" r e l a t i v e au tono -my\" (Poulantzas 1973; B lock 1980; Ratner e t . a l . 1983). From t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e , the s t a t e has some l i m i t e d independence from c l a s s i n t e r e s t s and f a c t i o n s , but t h i s \" can never be more than r e l a t i v e and l i m i t e d s i n ce the s t a t e ' s cont inued ex i s t ence u l t i m a t e l y depends on the revenues generated by c a p i t a l \" (Rat-ner 1983 :14 ) . I t i s the s t r u c t u r e of s t a t e r e l a t i o n s which c o n t r i b u t e s to the dominat ion of i n t e r e s t s : . . . . t h e very s t r u c t u r e of the p o l i c y f o rmu l a t i on p rocess i n c a p i t a l i s t s o c i e t y ho lds vas t b i a ses which f a c i l i t a t e and exped i t e the accumula t ion and c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of wea l th i n the hands of the economic power e l i t e . . . . I n t h i s regard i t has been argued that the s t a t e p redomi -n a n t l y f u n c t i o n s as an agent of i n t e r e s t r e a l i z a t i o n fo r those who own and c o n t r o l the means of p r o d u c t i o n . . . (Card 1979: 33 ) . S t r u c t u r a l a n a l y s i s of s t a t e a c t i v i t y has produced a num-ber of i n s t r u c t i o n s to e x p l a i n the d issonance between l i b e r a l and c r i t i c a l v e r s i o n s of hea r ing a c t i v i t y . F u n c t i o n a l a n a l y s i s of s t a t e a c t i v i t i e s (Pan i tch 1977; Ratner e t . a l . 1983) i s i n s t r u c t i v e f o r t h i s s tudy as i t expands the purpose of hea r ing p a r t i c i p a t i o n from s p e c i f i c po l i cy-mak ing a c t i v i t y to the b r o a -der context of the s t a t e ' s ongoing requi rements ( e . g . , c a p i t a l r e p r o d u c t i o n and a c c u m u l a t i o n , and l e g i t i m a t i o n ) . Pan i t ch r e -f e r s to the \" s t a t i s i z a t i o n of the p o l i t i c a l s p h e r e \" , i n c l u d i n g developments such as s t a t e s u b s i d i e s to p o l i t i c a l p a r t i e s ' e l e c t i o n campaigns, as an i n d i c a t i o n of the growing power of the s t a t e (1977). Loney f u r t h e r i d e n t i f i e s the s t a t e ' s s u b s i d i -z a t i o n of p a r t i c i p a t i o n as c o n t r i b u t i n g to i t s f u n c t i o n s of 41 l e g i t i m a t i o n , s o c i a l c o n t r o l , and c a p i t a l accumula t ion and r ep roduc t i on (1977). The \" i d e o l o g i c a l hegemony\" of the s t a t e r e vea l s i t s a b i l i t y to manipulate the b e l i e f system. P u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n thus becomes understood as the s t a t e ' s a b i l i t y to generate and ma in ta in consen t . The i m p l i c a t i o n s of these c r i t i q u e s of p l u r a l i s m fo r an a n a l y s i s of hea r ing p a r t i c i p a t i o n are s e v e r a l . C h a r a c t e r -i z a t i o n of hea r ing procedures as e l i t i s t cha l l enges the concept of a c c e s s i b i l i t y to the t r i b u n a l , and ques t i ons the assumed balance among i n t e r v e n o r s . A l l i a n c e s among competing i n t e r e s t s or between i n t e r v e n o r s and Board members d isadvantage non-a l l i e d p a r t i c i p a n t s and q u e s t i o n the n e u t r a l i t y of the p r o c e s s . S t a t i s t c r i t i q u e s of p l u r a l i s m are d i r e c t e d to the o b j e c t i v i t y and independence c h a r a c t e r i z i n g s t a t e r e l a t i o n s , the m u l t i p l e f u n c t i o n s of s t a t e i n t e r v e n t i o n , and the i n c reased r o l e of the s t a t e . The formal independence of t r i b u n a l s from government, the appointment of i m p a r t i a l Board or Commission members, and the n e u t r a l i t y of the dec i s ion-mak ing process a l l assume a s e p a r a t i o n between economic and p o l i t i c a l i n t e r e s t s which i s cha l l enged by t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e . 2.5-Contemporary Canadian P l u r a l i s m A l though the c r i t i c i s m s vo i ced above are c o n s i d e r a b l e i n numbers and f o r c e , i t i s important to r ecogn ize the p e r s e v e -r ance , a d a p t a b i l i t y and dominance of p l u r a l i s t t heo r y . I t has evo lved i n response to m a t e r i a l c o n d i t i o n s of change and to s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l p r e s s u r e s , and i t s changes accommodate, to some e x t e n t , cha l l enges posed by the c r i t i c a l l i t e r a t u r e . A l -though there has been a de f a c to r e c o g n i t i o n by government of 42 the i n e q u a l i t y of economic power (we l f a re , p r o g r e s s i v e t a x a -t i o n , human resource programs) , the p l u r a l i s t p e r s p e c t i v e c o n -t i nues to assume the e x i s t e n c e of a l i b e r a l i n d i v i d u a l i s t s o c i e t y based on a v i a b l e compe t i t i v e and mixed c a p i t a l i s t economy. Canadian p o l i t i c a l l i f e i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by a: . . . . h i g h degree of i n d i v i d u a l freedom and market a c t i v i t y w i t h i n a system of d e m o c r a t i c a l l y e l e c t e d government . . . . ( a n d i s po r t r a yed by) a benevolent compe t i t i on among i n t e r e s t groups wi th the s t a t e as independent r e f e r ee removing the excesses of the marketp lace (Doern 1978:3-4) . Contemporary Canadian p l u r a l i s t theory r e f l e c t s the expan-s i o n of the s t a t e as a means of s o c i a l , p o l i t i c a l , and economic development. We l f a r e , p r o g r e s s i v e t a x a t i o n , and s p e c i f i c i n t e r -ven t i on such as the Trudeau government 's i m p o s i t i o n of income c o n t r o l s i n the mid-1970's r e f l e c t the r e d i s t r i b u t i v e f u n c t i o n of the s t a t e . The l i b e r a l e g a l i t a r i a n t endenc i es of the contem-pora ry p l u r a l i s t framework r e f l e c t a concern f o r d i s t r i b u t i v e e q u a l i t y which attempts t o : . . . . d e r i v e p r i n c i p l e s of j u s t i c e from an unders tand ing of i n d i v i d u a l i n t e r e s t s . The arguments fo r we l f a re r i g h t s and fo r economic r e d i s t r i b u t i o n . . . . can be understood as outgrowths of a r e l a t i v e l y new l i b e r a l awareness of the m a t e r i a l p r e r e q u i s i t e s fo r e q u a l i z i n g o p p o r t u n i t y among i n d i v i d u a l s tha t appears w i t h i n contemporary advanced i n d u s t r i a l s o c i e t i e s (Gutmann 1980:218) . Gutmann extends the concept of l i b e r a l e g a l i t a r i a n i s m b e -yond the r e d i s t r i b u t i o n of economic goods to i n c l ude expans ion and e q u a l i z a t i o n of o p p o r t u n i t i e s to p a r t i c i p a t e in p o l i t i c a l l i f e (1980) . Ex t ens ion of p a r t i c i p a t o r y e q u a l i t y has been r e -f l e c t e d by both American and Canadian attempts at extend ing the p a r t i c i p a t o r y c l ima te (Rich and Rosenbaum 1981; Chapin and Deneau 1978) . Formal p o l i t i c a l support f o r p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a -43 t i o n as a means of expanding p u b l i c access to government was vo i ced by the Trudeau L i b e r a l Government of 1968. Promises of i n c reased p a r t i c i p a t i o n then took three d i r e c t i o n s : e s t a b l i s h -ment of new c o n s u l t a t i v e b o d i e s , i n t r o d u c t i o n of grant programs to support o rgan i zed p u b l i c invo lvement , and reform of t r a d i -t i o n a l input mechanisms (Chapin and Deneau 1978 :14 ) . N a t i v e s , e t hn i c m i n o r i t i e s , women's groups and o the rs were f o r m a l l y i n v i t e d to p a r t i c i p a t e in the dec i s ion-mak ing p r o c e s s , to be i n c l uded on boards and committees of government (Loney 1977) . In a d d i t i o n to p o l i t i c a l invo lvement , Canadian l abour r e l a t i o n s r e f l e c t the expans ion of p a r t i c i p a t o r y e q u a l i t y in the workp lace . The Q u a l i t y of Working L i f e movement announced by Labour Canada i n 1976 endorses d i r e c t worker p a r t i c i p a t i o n in \"shop f l o o r \" democracy. P l u r a l i s t suppor te r s argue tha t c o n -c e s s i ons made by i ndus t r y concern ing resource d e c i s i o n s and work environments demonstrate the power of workers i n the dec i s ion-mak ing p r o c e s s , and r e f l e c t a l i b e r a l e g a l i t a r i a n p h i l s o p h y . In a d d i t i o n to the r e d i s t r i b u t i v e f u n c t i o n s of s t a t e i n -t e r v e n t i o n , the s t a t e ' s r e g u l a t o r y c a p a c i t y has a l so been more w ide l y r e c o g n i z e d , in c o n j u n c t i o n wi th a \" r e l a t i v e s h i f t from expend i tu re p o l i t i c s to r e g u l a t o r y p o l i t i c s \" i n the Canadian f e d e r a l s t a t e (Doern 1978: 17 ) . Regu l a t i on has been t r a d i t i o n -a l l y unders tood as d i r e c t e d to p r i m a r i l y economic conce rns , i n c l u d i n g \"monopoly and excess i v e compe t i t i on and r e l a t e d l i c -ens ing and p r i c i n g p r a c t i c e s \" (Doern 1978 :9 ) , but has s i n ce been expanded to i n c l ude d i s c u s s i o n of t e c h n o l o g i c a l and s o c i a l 44 r e g u l a t i o n . Doern notes the f e d e r a l i s t , m i n i s t e r i a l , and p o l i -t i c a l dependencies of the r e g u l a t o r y process in the Canadian c o n t e x t , i n comparison to the more independent cha rac t e r of the American r e g u l a t o r y p rocess (1978:11-13) . The t h e s i s tha t r e g u l a t o r y agenc ies become \" c a p t i v e agen ts \" of i n d u s t r y , i s countered by a Canadian q u a s i - p l u r a l i s t p e r s p e c t i v e which notes the : . . . . c o m b i n e d form of i n c r e a s i n g p rov inc i a l -gove rnment i n t e r v e n t i o n s and emerging and i n c r e a s i n g l y permanent p u b l i c i n t e r e s t g roups , many of which are funded by the s t a t e , through other government departments whose man-dates themselves p a r t l y c o u n t e r v a i l those of the r e g u l a -to ry agency\" (Doern 1978 :28 ) . Many t h e o r i s t s respond to the r e c o g n i t i o n of i nc reased s t a t i s m by s t r e s s i n g the s o c i a l j u s t i c e r o l e of the s t a t e (Presthus 1970) . Con t i nu ing access of government p r o c e s s e s , such as r e g u l a t i o n , to p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups a t t e s t s to the p o t e n t i a l of the p l u r a l i s t model . As w e l l , c a p i t a l i s t p l u r a -l i s m i s compared w i th s o c i a l i s t , or n o n - c a p i t a l i s t systems (Dahl 1982) . The l ack of i n d i v i d u a l freedom and the dominance of the S ta te apparatus in n o n - c a p i t a l i s t s t a t e s i s seen to d e t r a c t from the p l u r a l i s t p o t e n t i a l of the system. A l though p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the Sov i e t Un ion , f o r example, i s f o r m a l l y a v a i l a b l e fo r env i ronmenta l dec i s ion-mak ing pu rposes , N e l k i n observes that o l i g a r c h y and s t a t e hegemony e f f e c t i v e l y p rec lude the o r d i n a r y c i t i z e n from an e f f e c t i v e r o l e i n the p rocess (1979) . C i t i z e n involvement in the p u b l i c hea r ing thus r e f l e c t s the expanded p a r t i c i p a t o r y e g a l i t a r i a n i s m and the ex t ens i on of s t a t e r e g u l a t o r y power which are f ea tu res of a p l u r a l i s t con-45 s t r u c t i o n o f t h e c o n t e m p o r a r y C a n a d i a n s t a t e . R e g u l a t o r y a n d p o l i c y - m a k i n g p r o c e s s e s , a s s t a t e - m e d i a t e d a c t i v i t i e s , i n c o r -p o r a t e t h e l i b e r a l e g a l i t a r i a n t e n d e n c i e s o f t h e c o n t e m p o r a r y p l u r a l i s t v i e w . P u b l i c a c c e s s t o a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a n d c o n s u l t a -t i v e t r i b u n a l s s u p p l e m e n t e l e c t o r a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n , a n d f u n d i n g o f p u b l i c i n t e r e s t g r o u p s p r o v i d e s g r e a t e r e q u a l i t y o f p a r t i c i -p a t o r y o p p o r t u n i t y . T h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g d i s p l a y s t h e m a j o r f e a t u r e s o f c o n t e m p o r a r y p l u r a l i s m , a s I w i l l d e m o n s t r a t e i n t h e f o l l o w i n g m o d e l . 2 . 6 - A P l u r a l i s t M o d e l o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e P u b l i c H e a r i n g I h a v e d e v e l o p e d a m o d e l o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g i n o r d e r t o d e s c r i b e , c o m p a r e a n d a n a l y z e p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g a s a c o n s t r u c t o f p l u r a l i s t t h e o r y . T h e 8 m o d e l t h u s f o r g e s a c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n p o l i t i c a l t h e o r y a n d i n s t i t u t i o n a l p r a c t i c e . I n t h i s m o d e l , I h a v e i d e n t i f i e d t h r e e c e n t r a l t h e m e s : H e t e r o g e n e i t y o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n : R e p r e s e n t a -t i o n o f t h e P u b l i c I n t e r e s t ; F a i r n e s s o f P r o c e d u r e s ; a n d N e u t r a l i t y o f t h e D e c i s i o n - M a k i n g P r o c e s s . H e t e r o g e n e i t y o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n : R e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e P u b l i c I n t e r e s t P l u r a l i s t t h e o r y a s s u m e s t h e e x i s t e n c e o f a m u l t i p l i c i t y o f o p p o s i n g i n t e r e s t s w h i c h may be a f f e c t e d w i t h r e g a r d s t o a n y i s s u e . T h e s e i n t e r e s t s c o m p e t e f o r p o w e r i n f o r u m s s u c h a s t h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g . T h e w o r k o f g o v e r n m e n t i s t o b a l a n c e t h e i n t e -r e s t s o f t h e s e c o m p e t i n g g r o u p s ( D a h l 1 9 5 6 : 1 4 4 - 1 4 6 ) . T h e t e r m \" p u b l i c i n t e r e s t \" may b e u s e d i n a d i f f u s e c o l l e c t i v e s e n s e : . . . . t h e t e r m ' p u b l i c i n t e r e s t 1 d o e s n o t r e p r e s e n t a m o n o -l i t h i c i n t e r e s t t o be t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t b y t h e g o v e r n -n m e n t . I t i s t h e n a t u r a l c o n s e q u e n c e o f p l u r a l i s m t h a t 46 t h e r e b e n o s u c h t h i n g a s a s i n g l e p u b l i c i n t e r e s t ; r a t h e r , i n a n y g i v e n c o n t e x t , t h e r e may o n l y b e a m y r i a d o f d i v e r s e a n d s o m e t i m e s c o n f l i c t i n g g r o u p a n d i n d i v i d u a l i n t e r e s t s ( L a w R e f o r m C o m m i s s i o n 1 9 8 0 : 9 8 ) . H o w e v e r , t h e t e r m \" p u b l i c i n t e r e s t \" i s t y p i c a l l y i n v o k e d w i t h i n t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e r e g u l a t o r y f r a m e w o r k t o i n d i c a t e t h e e x i s -t e n c e o f n o n - p r o d u c e r i n t e r e s t s . R e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e p u b l i c i n t e r e s t e n s u r e s t h e a p p e a r a n c e o f c o m p e t i t i v e b a l a n c e , b r i n g -i n g w i t h i t t h e n o t i o n o f o p p o s i t i o n a n d a n a d v e r s a r i a l s t a n c e v i s - a - v i s a n y p r o p o n e n t . P u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s v i e w e d a s a m e a n s o f b a l a n c i n g t h e o p p o s i n g f o r c e s . P u b l i c i n v o l v e m e n t w i l l t e n d t o l e s s e n r e g u l a t o r ' c a p t u r e ' b y r e g u l a t e e s , a n d w i l l t h e r e f o r e p r o d u c e m o r e ' b a l a n c e d ' d e c i s i o n s . . . . S i n c e t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a g e n c y m u s t t a k e a n o b j e c t i v e p o s i t i o n , i t i s n e c e s s a r y f o r t h e p u b l i c . . . t o b e c o m e i n v o l v e d s o t h a t s o m e v o i c e a p a r t f r o m t h e i n d u s t r y ' s w i l l b e h e a r d , a n d t h e r e f o r e t h e t r a d i -t i o n a l l y ' u n r e p r e s e n t e d ' i n t e r e s t s w i l l h a v e a n i n f l u e n c e o n t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s . . . . ( L e n n y 1 9 7 6 : 4 9 1 ) . O b s e r v e r s h a v e n o t e d t h a t n o n - p r o d u c e r i n t e r e s t s h a v e n o t s e r i o u s l y p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h e r e g u l a t o r y d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o -c e s s , p r i m a r i l y b e c a u s e \" . . . . t h e r e g u l a t e d i n d u s t r y h a s a h i g h -l y c o n c e n t r a t e d s t a k e i n t h e r e g u l a t o r y o u t c o m e w h i l e c o n s u m e r i n t e r e s t s a r e w i d e l y d i f f u s e d a c r o s s t h e m y r i a d o f g o o d s a n d s e r v i c e s t y p i c a l l y c o n s u m e d i n a l i f e t i m e \" ( T r e b i l c o c k 1 9 7 8 : 1 0 1 ) . T h e n e c e s s i t y f o r c o u n t e r v a i l i n g p o w e r i n t h e f o r m o f p u b l i c i n t e r e s t g r o u p s t o o p p o s e p r o d u c e r i n t e r e s t s h a s i n i -t i a t e d s t a t e s u b s i d i z a t i o n o f p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e r e g u -l a t o r y p r o c e s s . A h e t e r o g e n e i t y o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n n o t o n l y c o n t r i b u t e s t o a b a l a n c e o f i n t e r e s t s , b u t i t a d d s t o t h e s t o r e o f s u b s t a n t i v e k n o w l e d g e a n d t h e r e b y t o t h e a t t a i n m e n t o f a b e t t e r r e s o l u t i o n o f t h e p r o b l e m . P e t e r P e a r s e , r e p o r t i n g o n t h e R o y a l C o m m i s s i o n 4 7 on F o r e s t Resources , s t a t e s tha t t h e : . . . . w i d e range of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the hea r ings c o n t r i -buted s u b s t a n t i a l l y to t h e i r s u c c e s s , and p rov ided me wi th a broad spectrum of i n fo rma t i on and a d v i c e . But apar t from t h e i r u s e f u l n e s s to me and my s t a f f , the hea r i ngs p rov ided a va luab l e forum fo r a c o n s t r u c t i v e exchange of views among those wi th va r y ing and o f t e n c o n f l i c t i n g i n t e r e s t s in the p r o v i n c e ' s f o r e s t resources (Pearse 1976: F 4 ) . A he t e rogene i t y of p a r t i c i p a t i o n , wi th r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of the p u b l i c i s thus regarded as ensur ing a d i v e r s i t y of p e r s p e c -t i v e s , and a ba lanced c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f . t h e i s sues under d i s c u s -s i o n . The m u l t i p l i c i t y of represented i n t e r e s t s c o n t r i b u t e s to the gene ra t i on and e v a l u a t i o n of a range of i n f o r m a t i o n , know-l e d g e , and r e s e a r c h . F a i r n e s s of Procedures P l u r a l i s t theory assumes a hea r ing process which i s p o l i -t i c a l l y f a i r to a l l i n t e r e s t s . The forum i s a c c e s s i b l e to a l l a f f e c t e d i n t e r e s t s , i n c l u d i n g the p u b l i c . The p rocess i s r e g a r -ded as a compe t i t i v e one, which p l a ces a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s at a r e l a t i v e l y equa l advantage wi th regards to one ano the r . The o b j e c t i v i t y of the p rocess i s assumed to compensate f o r , or \" n e u t r a l i z e \" whatever compe t i t i v e d i f f e r e n c e s may e x i s t among p a r t i c i p a n t s . Pape r e f e r s to t h i s compe t i t i v e stance w i t h i n a j u d i c i a l con tex t : The a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of j u s t i c e in common law j u r i s d i c -t i o n s i s based on the concept that i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s to a d i spu te must meet on an equal f o o t i n g to make t h e i r own case and meet that of t h e i r a d v e r s a r i e s (1978:35) . The q u a s i - j u d i c i a l format of the hea r i ngs i s assumed to promote both a c c e s s i b i l i t y and i m p a r t i a l i t y . The r o u t i n e , s t a n d a r d i z e d nature of procedures assures unders tand ing by 48 p a r t i c i p a n t s , and p l a ces a l l i n t e r v e n o r s on a r e l a t i v e l y equal f o o t i n g be fo re the t r i b u n a l . The i n f o r m a l i t y of the p r o c e s s , and r e l a x a t i o n of procedures from courtroom format f a c i l i t a t e p u b l i c a c c e s s . P rocedu ra l r u l e s are d e s c r i b e d to i n t e r v eno r s p r i o r to h e a r i n g s , in order tha t p a r t i c i p a n t s may f a m i l i a r i z e themselves wi th the p r o c e s s , which u s u a l l y i n c l udes the submis -s i o n of e v i dence , summary and c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n . Lega l counse l may be r e t a i n e d by any p a r t i c i p a n t , a l though the q u a s i - j u d i c i a l i n t e r v e n t i o n process c h a r a c t e r i z i n g many t r i b u n a l s i s p r o c e d u r a l l y a c c e s s i b l e and unders tandab le to l ay i n t e r v e n o r s . Fu r the r e x p e r t i s e wi th regards to subs t an t i v e matters i s a v a i l a b l e through the use of exper t w i t n e s s e s . Funding i s f r e q u e n t l y made a v a i l a b l e to secure e x p e r t i s e and a i d p a r t i c i p a n t s in the p r e p a r a t i o n of t h e i r c a s e s . Whi le co rpo ra te and government i n t e r v e n o r s are capable of bea r ing and absorb ing the cos t s of i n t e r v e n t i o n , p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups may r equ i r e s u b s i d i z a t i o n ( Enge lha r t : 1981 ) . T r e b i l c o c k s t a t e s , f o r example, tha t \"consumers as an i n t e r e s t group w i l l not become an e f f e c t i v e p o l i t i c a l f o r c e , an e f f e c t i v e counte rba lance to b ig b u s i n e s s , b ig l a b o u r , and b ig government in modern power c o n f i g u r a t i o n s , w i thout s t a t e a s s i s t a n c e \" (1978:103) . P u b l i c i n t e r e s t p a r t i c i p a n t s may then be s u b s i d i z e d as a means of ensur ing a more ba lanced h e a r i n g . Thus , procedures are regarded as p o l i t i c a l l y f a i r in that they encourage the p r e s e n t a t i o n of a he t e rogene i t y and ba lance of competing p e r s p e c t i v e s . T h i s r e f l e c t s the contemporary p l u -r a l i s t pos tu re of an e q u a l i z a t i o n of o p p o r t u n i t y w i t h i n the h e a r i n g . A l though p a r t i c i p a n t s may possess a d i f f e r e n t i a l of 49 power o u t s i d e of the h e a r i n g , t h e i r performance in the forum has been ba l anced . Hear ing procedures are are t h e r e f o r e cons ide red to be a p p r o p r i a t e to t h e i r t a s k s : the c o n s u l t a t i o n of the p u b l i c i n the i n v e s t i g a t i o n , r e s e a r c h , and e v a l u a t i o n of a p u b l i c i s s u e , or the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n or r e g u l a t i o n of matters of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t . N e u t r a l i t y of the Dec is ion-Mak ing Process D e c i s i o n s (or recommendations) are cons ide red to be made by an i m p a r t i a l Commiss ion, which has been appo in ted by Gove rn -ment to a r b i t r a t e the hea r i ng p r o c e e d i n g s . A l though the Cana -d ian con tex t i n f e r s some degree of s t a t e dependency through f e d e r a l , - m i n i s t e r i a l , and p o l i t i c a l a s s o c i a t i o n (Doern 1978), the formal s e p a r a t i o n of and p o l i t i c a l independence of t r i b u -na l s con t inues to be p o p u l a r l y uphe ld . As former Commissioner Lysyk s t a t e s , \" . . . a l t h o u g h the i n q u i r y r e l i e s upon the gove rn -ment fo r i t s f u n d i n g , i t i s independent in every other r e s p e c t \" (1978:3 ) . The i m p a r t i a l i t y of the t r i b u n a l i s r e f l e c t e d by the i n d e -pendence of Board members or Commissioners from the i n t e r e s t or development under c o n s i d e r a t i o n , the f a i r n e s s of p rocedu res , and the s e p a r a t i o n of the hea r ing from i t s i n i t i a t i n g gove rn -ment. Members of the Board or Commission are s e l e c t e d by gov -ernment, and are assumed to possess some r e l e van t e x p e r t i s e whi le hav ing no d i r e c t i n t e r e s t in the i s sues at hand. Doern notes that members of Canadian r e g u l a t o r y boards are more l i k e l y to represen t b u r e a u c r a t i c than i n d u s t r i a l backgrounds, which i s congruent w i th the l a r g e r Canadian r e g u l a t o r y contex t 50 of s t a t e dependency (1978: 25 ) . However, the formal s e p a r a t i o n of s t a t e and e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l i n t e r e s t s , and the p l u r a l i s t no -t i o n of the s t a t e as a n e u t r a l a r b i t e r cor respond to the popu -l a r assumpt ion of i m p a r t i a l i t y which c h a r a c t e r i z e s these Boards . The Terms of Reference f o rmu l a t i ng the i s sue are produced by Government so as to f u r t h e r ensure the independence of the t r i b u n a l from those i t r e g u l a t e s . The pr imary r o l e of the p u b l i c i n the dec i s ion-mak ing process i s seen to be i n the i n t e r v e n t i o n p r o c e s s . I n te r venors p rov ide the i n fo rma t i on and e v a l u a t i o n of t h i s i n f o rma t i on through which the d e c i s i o n s are made. D e c i s i o n s are cons ide red to be reached by Commission or Board members through the o b j e c t i v e c o n s i d e r a t i o n of i n f o r -mation presented be fo re the h e a r i n g . They are thus made i n d e -pendent l y of d i r e c t p o l i t i c a l and economic conce rns . The d e c i s i o n s or recommendations produced by v a r i ous t r i -buna ls as a r e s u l t of the p u b l i c hea r ing p rocess d i f f e r a c c o r -d ing to the type of t r i b u n a l , the s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s r e g a r -d ing the nature and f o r c e of the d e c i s i o n , the i s s u e s , and the compos i- t ion of the Board/Commission making the d e c i s i o n s . They range i n nature from a f f i r m a t i v e or nega t i ve s tatements r ega rd ing an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e ma t t e r , to recommendations and p r o p o s a l s conce rn ing government p o l i c y . The d e c i s i o n s reached by the Board/Commission are d i r e c t e d to the a p p r o p r i a t e gove rn -ment agency, which responds by making a d e c i s i o n or s e t t i n g a p p r o p r i a t e p o l i c y or r e g u l a t i o n s . Thus , the d e c i s i o n s r e p r e -sent the input of an independent body to the p rocess of g o v e r n -ment. C i t i z e n s ' access to government i s thereby p rov ided 51 through p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the public hearing process. 1 Although participatory democracy has roots in Athenian p o l i t i c a l practice, the exclusion of slaves, women, and other non-citizens from p o l i t i c a l a c t i v i t y prevents i t s consideration as a democratic precedent. 2 Corcoran contrasts the concept of democracy—the rule of the masses—with that of p o l i t y or timocracy, the lawful view of the many in the true interests of the whole community, and notes that democracy was t r a d i t i o n a l l y viewed as a negative, rather than a positive option (Corcoran 1983:13). 3 See Pateman (1970) and Gutmann (1980) for a discussion of M i l l ' s dilemmas regarding educational a b i l i t y and capacity, and his evolving position regarding universal suffrage. 4 Although the Paris commune of 1871 and the Russian So-viets of 1905 and 1917 contained promises of f u l l p a r t i c i p a -t i o n , these were only temporary. Unfortunately, Marx f a i l e d to a r t i c u l a t e a theory of p o l i t i c a l democracy directed to society after the Revolution. 5 Swartz' larger argument is that worker p a r t i c i p a t i o n acts to \"subordinate workers...to the requirements of c a p i t a l accu-mulation, and to weaken working class resistance by undermining the independence and effectiveness of trade unions as vehicles for working class struggle\" (1981:56). 6 The monopolization of p o l i t i c a l o f f i c e (elected and ap-pointed by members of the upper and middle class, indicates the i n t e r - r e l a t i o n s h i p of s o c i a l class, economic e l i t e , and govern-ment (Domhoff 1967). 7 Ratner et. a l . (1983) have compared these di f f e r e n t per-spectives of the \" r e l a t i v e autonomy\" of the state, identifying instrumentalist, s t r u c t u r a l i s t , class c o n f l i c t and c a p i t a l logic positions. 8 I follow Macpherson's d e f i n i t i o n of \"model\" as \"a theore-t i c a l construction intended to exhibit and explain the real relations, underlying the appearances, between or within the phenomena under study\" (1977:2-3). 52 CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND INTRODUCTION TO THE CASE STUDIES 3.1-Research Methodology I have s e l e c t e d case s t u d i e s of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n in two p u b l i c h e a r i n g s , and w i l l ana lyze t h i s data through the a p p l i c a t i o n of the p l u r a l i s t model deve loped i n the p reced ing c h a p t e r . The hea r i ngs i n c l ude an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e hea r ing and a c o n s u l t a t i v e hea r ing i n which p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n was a p r i -mary and v i s i b l e f e a t u r e . These t r i b u n a l s d i f f e r e d i n terms of t h e i r mandates, s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s , t h e i r s i z e and s cope , and the i s sues i n to which they i n q u i r e d , a l though they both c o n -cerned matters of s c i e n t i f i c and t e c h n i c a l deba te . I s e l e c t e d d i f f e r e n t types of t r i b u n a l s fo r a n a l y s i s in order to be ab le to compare the p a r t i c i p a t i o n p rocess w i thout emphasiz ing unduly the l e g a l and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e i n which each was l o -ca ted . The a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t r i b u n a l , the P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Appeal Board (PCAB) h e a r i n g s , took p l ace from 1978-1981 in the Okana-gan V a l l e y of B r i t i s h Co lumb ia , and was concerned wi th the a p p l i c a t i o n of the h e r b i c i d e 2,4-D to the Okanagan l akes s y s -tem. The c o n s u l t a t i v e i n q u i r y , the Royal Commission of I nqu i r y 53 i n to Uranium Min ing (RCUM), took p lace from 1979-1980, and he ld hea r ings throughout the p r o v i n c e . These hea r ings were both i n q u i r i e s i n to env i ronmenta l conce rns , and both p a r t i c u l a r l y a f f e c t e d the Okanagan v a l l e y of B r i t i s h Columbia (See Map, Appendix 1 .1) . Methods of data c o l l e c t i o n i n c l uded o b s e r v a t i o n , i n t e r -v iews , e thnography, documentary research and an a n a l y s i s of w r i t t e n m a t e r i a l s . My sources of data were v a r i e d , but I r e l i e d p r i m a r i l y on hea r ing t r a n s c r i p t s , o b s e r v a t i o n no t e s , newspaper a c coun t s , and p a r t i c i p a n t s ' correspondence and r e s e a r c h . Re-search was d i r e c t e d to a d e s c r i p t i o n and a n a l y s i s of p a r t i c i p a -t i o n by the p u b l i c . In c o n j u n c t i o n wi th t h i s f o c u s , the m a j o r i -ty of data and sources r e f l e c t s the i n t e r e s t s , p rob lems, and concerns of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t g roups . My research methodology, a l though g e n e r a l l y s i m i l a r in both h e a r i n g s , i n c o r p o r a t e d the s p e c i f i c cha r a c t e r of each . Four years of the PCAB hea r ings (1978-1981) were s e l e c t e d fo r a n a l y s i s . W i th in t h i s p e r i o d , the 1978 hear ings were the major focus fo r a n a l y s i s , p a r t i a l l y because of t h e i r l eng th ( r e f l e c t i n g the ex tens i ve a p p e a l ) , and a l so because of the precedent e s t a b l i s h e d by the hear ing as the f i r s t he ld under i t s s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s . I a t tended approx imate l y s i x and one-h a l f of the seven and one-ha l f days of the 1978 h e a r i n g , and was p resen t f o r the e n t i r e appea l of the SOEC, the major a p p e l -l a n t . In 1979, I a t tended s e v e r a l hours of the two and one-ha l f day h e a r i n g , and in 1981 was present through the e n t i r e hea r ing p r o c e s s . My o b s e r v a t i o n s of the PCAB hea r ings i n c luded three types 54 o f w o r k : \" m o n i t o r i n g \" , \" p r o b l e m - i d e n t i f i c a t i o n \" , a n d e t h n o g r a -p h y . I n \" m o n i t o r i n g \" , I k e p t n o t e s t h r o u g h o u t t h e o b s e r v a t i o n p e r i o d r e g a r d i n g t i m e , s p e a k e r , t y p e o f a c t i v i t y , a n d t o p i c o f d i s c u s s i o n . T h i s l a t e r a c t e d a s a r e t r o a c t i v e a g e n d a , p r o v i -d i n g a n i n d e x f o r r e v i e w o f t h e h e a r i n g s , a n d a l l o w i n g me t o l o c a t e p o r t i o n s i n w h i c h I h a d a p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t . \" P r o b l e m -i d e n t i f i c a t i o n \" r e f e r s t o t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f i s s u e s w h i c h w o u l d a f f e c t p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n , s u c h a s s c h e d u l i n g , s e t t i n g , a n d c e r t a i n a s p e c t s o f \" m a k i n g a c a s e \" , s u c h a s t h e d i s c r e d i -t i n g o f w i t n e s s e s d u r i n g c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n . I n a d d i t i o n , I c o m p i l e d a n e t h n o g r a p h y d e s c r i b i n g p h y s i c a l a s p e c t s o f t h e r e s e a r c h s e t t i n g a n d p a t t e r n s o f i n t e r a c t i o n a m o n g p a r t i c i -p a n t s . T h e RCUM i n c l u d e d b o t h c o m m u n i t y h e a r i n g s , w h i c h w e r e h e l d i n t h e i n t e r i o r o f t h e p r o v i n c e , a n d t e c h n i c a l h e a r i n g s , w h i c h t o o k p l a c e i n V a n c o u v e r . My o b s e r v a t i o n s o f t h e RCUM h e a r i n g s w e r e s i m i l a r i n m a n y r e s p e c t s t o t h o s e o f t h e P C A B h e a r i n g s , a n d i n c l u d e d m o n i t o r i n g a n d p r o b l e m - i d e n t i f i c a t i o n a c t i v i t i e s , a s w e l l a s a n e t h n o g r a p h y o f t h e h e a r i n g s . Two m a j o r f a c t o r s r e s u l t e d i n d i f f e r e n t o b s e r v a t i o n t e c h n i q u e s . T h e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f t y p e d , o f f i c i a l t r a n s c r i p t s o f t h e h e a r i n g s a l l o w e d me t o f o c u s o n g e n e r a l i s s u e s a n d p r o b l e m s , r a t h e r t h a n a t t e m p t i n g t o c a p t u r e e x a c t q u o t a t i o n s b y s p e a k e r s . M o r e o v e r , t h e l e n g t h o f t h e h e a r i n g s a n d v o l u m e o f t h e e v i d e n c e , a n d t h e s i z e a n d s c o p e o f t h e t r i b u n a l r e q u i r e d t h e s e l e c t i o n o f a f i n i t e s a m p l e o f h e a r i n g s t o o b s e r v e . ( D u r i n g t h e c o u r s e o f t h e I n q u i r y , o v e r s e v e n m o n t h s o f h e a r i n g s w e r e h e l d , i n c l u d i n g t w o m o n t h s o f 55 community hearings, and seven months of technical hearings. These amounted to over 70 volumes of printed transcripts, t o t a l l i n g more than 13,000 pages.) I attended the Kelowna hearings because, as i t was the f i r s t community session, participants raised procedural issues in which I was interested. The r e l a t i v e l y large size of the community and i t s proximity to a large geographic area in which many mining claims had been staked also pointed to i t s s i g n i -ficance as a locus of discussion. Technical hearing sessions were selected according to several c r i t e r i a . I attended the entire Overview session and for the remaining phases, attended one to two sessions per week. I t r i e d to attend each Tuesday's proceedings, as this was the day on which procedural and \"house-keeping\" items were discussed. As well, I selected days for observation in which witnesses who had been i d e n t i f i e d by participants as controversial or especially interesting would appear. Transcripts of the hearings provided the other major source of my data. The PCAB proceedings were not o f f i c i a l l y transcribed, although the Board's secretary tape-recorded the proceedings. The South Okanagan Environmental Co a l i t i o n (SOEC), the appellant, also taped the proceedings, and I tran-scribed portions of these tapes which I considered relevant. However, the i n f e r i o r quality of the tapes, and the volume of material precluded documentation of the entire proceedings. The RCUM produced formal, written transcripts of a l l i t s hea-rings, and a set was made available to me for study purposes. Contextual analysis of transcripts of sessions which I attended 56 was a means of comparing my obse r va t i ons wi th the formal d o c u -mentat ion of e ven t s . I a l so s e l e c t e d p o r t i o n s of the t r a n -s c r i p t s which were i n d i c a t e d by p a r t i c i p a n t s and the Commis-s i o n ' s Index fo r more i n t e n s i v e s tudy . I used the t r a n s c r i p t s both as a means of gene ra t i ng ideas or exp l ana t i ons about the hea r ing p r o c e s s , and as a source of p a r t i c i p a n t s ' s tatements about the hea r ing p r o c e s s . I a l s o s e l e c t e d data from the f o l l o w i n g s o u r c e s : p u b l i c a -t i o n s of the case study t r i b u n a l s , correspondence between t r i -bunals and p a r t i c i p a n t s , news r e l e a se s and media r e p o r t s , and s tandard b i b l i o g r a p h i c r e f e r e n c e s . O f f i c i a l p u b l i c a t i o n s i s -sued by the case study t r i b u n a l s supplemented my documentat ion of the p r o c e e d i n g s . The PCAB documents c o n s i s t e d p r i m a r i l y of communications wi th the a p p e l l a n t s , i n c l u d i n g p r o c e d u r a l r u -l i n g s and d e c i s i o n s , but the RCUM pub l i shed and d i s t r i b u t e d l a r g e amounts of d e s c r i p t i v e data concern ing the i s sues and the procedures of the Commiss ion. Weekly schedu les of s e s s i o n s , (not ing speakers and dates of appearance) were d i s t r i b u t e d at the beg inn ing of each s e s s i o n . The Inqu i r y pub l i shed a weekly r e p o r t , The Uranium Inqu i r y D i g e s t , in which the i s s u e s , s p e a -k e r s , and work of the Commission were d i s c u s s e d . The RCUM d i s -t r i b u t e d r e g u l a r l y an Index of p roceed ings and h o l d i n g s . In a d d i t i o n , I c onsu l t ed books, a r t i c l e s , and theses from a v a r i e t y of d i s c i p l i n e s concern ing v a r i ous aspec ts of the hea r ing p r o c e s s . P u b l i c a t i o n s by c i t i z e n s ' groups p rov ided a v a r i e t y of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of the i s sues and the hea r ing pro-c e s s . As w e l l , I a t tended numerous p u b l i c speeches and events 57 concern ing the h e r b i c i d e and uranium i s sues dur ing the resea rch p e r i o d . Media coverage of the hea r ings and the i s sues p rov ided yet another source of documenta t ion . Obse r va t i on and documentat ion of the hea r ings themselves p rov ided a record of a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s , i n c l u d i n g p u b l i c i n t e -r e s t , government, and co rpo ra te i n t e r v e n o r s . However, as my pr imary focus was the a c c e s s i b i l i t y and exper i ence of the hea -r i n g p rocess by p u b l i c i n t e r e s t g roups , I d i r e c t e d a d d i t i o n a l r esea rch e f f o r t s s p e c i f i c a l l y to these g roups . I was e s p e c i a l -l y i n t e r e s t e d i n the p re-hea r ing o r g a n i z a t i o n and resources of i n t e r v e n o r s . I assumed tha t government and co rpo ra te i n t e r v e -nors were l o c a t e d w i t h i n b u r e a u c r a t i c s t r u c t u r e s of o r g a n i z a -t i o n through which p r epa r a to r y a c t i v i t i e s were mediated in con junc t i on wi th other ongoing p rocesses ( e . g . , r e s e a r c h , pub-l i c r e l a t i o n s , program imp lementa t ion ) . I was i n t e r e s t e d in how the p u b l i c implemented i t s p a r t i c i p a t o r y a c t i v i t y . Two major forms of r esea rch a ided i n t h i s t a sk : i n t e r v i ews of p a r t i c i p a n t s , and access to and use of t h e i r f i l e s . Dur ing the PCAB h e a r i n g s , and throughout the i n t e r v e n i n g y e a r s , I i n te rv i ewed the major spokespersons fo r the SOEC in dep th . My membership i n the SOEC and marr iage to a key SOEC spokesperson c o n t r i b u t e d to the a c c e s s i b i l i t y of t h i s d a t a . In te rv iews i nc luded both s t r u c t u r e d s e s s i o n s and impromptu d i s c u s s i o n s , as w e l l as \" a c t i v e \" eavesd ropp ing , in which I i n t e r r u p t e d or que r i ed a c o n v e r s a t i o n . Dur ing the a c t i v e hea r ing p r e p a r a t i o n s fo r the PCAB a p p e a l s , i n f o rma t i on on the o r g a n i z a t i o n , s t r a -t egy , r e s e a r c h , p r e p a r a t i o n s , and post-mortems of the hea r ing was generated and documented. Much of c o u n s e l ' s p r e p a r a t i o n of 58 exper t w i tnesses took p l ace i n my home, and consequen t l y , I was p r i v y to many of the p r e l i m i n a r y aspec ts of the h e a r i n g . Dur ing the RCUM h e a r i n g s , I i n te rv i ewed p a r t i c i p a n t s c o n -ce rn ing t h e i r views of the I n q u i r y , wi th s p e c i a l r e fe rence to p r o c e d u r a l mat ters and the c ross-examina t ion p r o c e s s . I have cont inued to d i s c u s s the Inqu i r y p rocess wi th s e v e r a l of them s i n ce the c l o s u r e of the I n q u i r y . I a l so i n te r v i ewed lawyers fo r the West Coast Env i ronmenta l Law A s s o c i a t i o n , one of whom had served as counse l to a p p e l l a n t s i n the PCAB h e a r i n g s , and o the rs who had been a c t i v e in the RCUM. Another source of r esea rch was the f i l e s of the p a r t i c i -pant o r g a n i z a t i o n s , p a r t i c u l a r l y those of the SOEC, which were a c c e s s i b l e to the p u b l i c . For the PCAB h e a r i n g s , the f i l e s of the SOEC p rov ided resea rch and documentat ion of the i s s u e s , a chrono logy of e ven t s , p ress s ta tements , p u b l i c a t i o n s of the proponent , correspondence wi th other p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a n t o r g a -n i z a t i o n s i n vo l ved in s i m i l a r i s s u e s , and research m a t e r i a l s used i n p r epa r i ng and mounting t h e i r a p p e a l , and correspondence wi th government o r g a n i z a t i o n s , i n c l u d i n g the proponent and the Board . Communications between the Board and the a p p e l l a n t i n c l uded statements of a p p e a l , d e s c r i p t i o n s of p rocedu re s , d e c i s i o n s , and other ma t t e r s . For the RCUM h e a r i n g s , the more p u b l i c ( e . g . , v i s i b l e , documented and p u b l i c i z e d ) nature of the p r o c e e d i n g s , and the g rea te r number of p a r t i c i p a n t s r e s u l t e d in i n c reased access to background and supplementary m a t e r i a l s . The RCUM a l s o mainta ined a l i b r a r y and l i b r a r i a n , who d i r e c t l y a ided my r e s e a r c h . 59 The data from which I have gathered m a t e r i a l fo r the a n a l y s i s cap tures the formal procedures of the h e a r i n g s , through t r a n s c r i p t i o n s and o b s e r v a t i o n s , as w e l l as p a r t i c i -p an t s ' views of the hea r ing p r o c e s s . A l though my c o n c l u s i o n s are drawn from study of on l y two t r i b u n a l s , I f e e l tha t these are g e n e r a l l y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the hea r ing p a r t i c i p a t i o n p r o -c e s s . The s e l e c t i o n and c o l l e c t i o n of data r e f l e c t my t h e o r e -t i c a l focus on p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a n t s ' p e r s p e c t i v e s of the h e a -r i n g . 3.2-Types of P u b l i c Hear ings The term \" p u b l i c h e a r i n g \" r e f e r s to the a c t i v i t y whereby submiss ions are p resented and examined p u b l i c l y before a Board or Commiss ion. Hear ings are one stage i n a l a r g e r i n v e s t i g a t i v e or r e g u l a t o r y process which may i n c l ude the f o l l o w i n g r e l a t e d a c t i v i t i e s : e s t ab l i shment or a c t i v a t i o n of a Board/Commiss ion, a r t i c u l a t i o n of terms of r e f e r e n c e , appointment of Board/Com-mi s s i on members, commiss ioning of r e s e a r c h , s e l e c t i o n and p r e -p a r a t i o n of exper t w i t n e s s e s , d e l i b e r a t i o n by Board members, and p r o d u c t i o n of i n t e r i m and f i n a l recommendations and/or d e c i s i o n s . The hea r ing i s thus j u s t one stage of an ongoing po l i cy-mak ing or r e g u l a t o r y p r o c e s s . P u b l i c hea r ings are he ld under the d i f f e r i n g mandates of a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and c o n s u l t a t i v e t r i b u n a l s . The a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t r i b u n a l i s a s p e c i a l i z e d body which oversees the work of government b o d i e s , by a c t i n g i n r e g u l a t o r y and j u d i c i a l c a p a -c i t i e s . Roberts notes that \"much of the burden of ensur ing j u s t i c e , equ i t y and f a i r n e s s in a d m i n i s t r a t i v e matters has s h i f t e d from cou r t s of law to t r i b u n a l s \" (T. Roberts 1980 :77 ) . 60 Th i s d e l e g a t i o n of a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y i s exp l a i ned in the f o l l o w i n g : Cour ts do not have the time to become s u f f i c i e n t l y exper t in the enormous v a r i e t y of sub j e c t s which t r i b u -na l s must dec ide e f f i c i e n t l y ; s i m i l a r l y government d e -partments do not have enough i m p a r t i a l i t y and freedom from p o l i t i c s to be c r e d i b l e as i m p a r t i a l d e c i s i o n - m a -k e r s . T r i b u n a l s are seen as a workable compromise: in t heo r y , they are more exper t than the cou r t s and l e s s f o r m a l ; more f l e x i b l e and speedy than c o u r t s . The c o u r t s ' use of precedent and r e l i a n c e on a u t h o r i t y tend to c r ea t e a conse r v a t i v e b i a s which t r i b u n a l s , not i n t e n -ded to be dominated by l e g a l v a l u e s , shou ld not share (Roman 1977 :4 ) . Fu r the r e x p l a i n i n g the comparat ive va lue of a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t r i -bunals v i s - a - v i s the c o u r t s , Roberts notes such advantages a s : . . . . t h e i r g rea te r speed , l e s s e r c o s t , l e s s e r f o r m a l i t y and g rea t e r f l e x i b i l i t y of a c t i o n than c o u r t s . T r i b u n a l s can a l s o employ persons wi th p a r t i c u l a r e x p e r t i s e in the matter under c o n s i d e r a t i o n . D isadvantages are the p o s s i -b i l i t y f o r d e n i a l of a f a i r h e a r i n g , b i a s in favor of government p o l i c y ( t r i b u n a l members are o f t e n appo in ted by government ) , the u n p r e d i c t a b i l i t y of d e c i s i o n s because of the wide degree of d i s c r e t i o n a l l o w e d , and a narrow-ness of v iewpoint a r i s i n g from the p a r t i c u l a r compos i -t i o n of the Board (1980:77-78) . A d m i n i s t r a t i v e hea r ings p rov ide p u b l i c access to c e r t a i n r e g u l a t o r y p r o c e s s e s . They are governed by s t a t u t e and hea r ings f u n c t i o n i n a j u d i c i a l c a p a c i t y ( e . g . , Labour R e l a t i o n s Boa rd ) , by hea r ing d i s p u t e s between i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s , or in a r e g u l a t o r y c a p a c i t y , making d e c i s i o n s rega rd ing a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p o l i c y , r a t e - s e t t i n g , or p r o j e c t a p p r o v a l . The v a r i a t i o n among a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t r i b u n a l s i s noteworthy: . . . . T h e r e are l i t e r a l l y over a hundred t r i b u n a l s c r ea ted by the f e d e r a l government and rough ly 50 to 100 in each p r o v i n c e . T r i b u n a l s vary enormously in f u n c t i o n , p e r s o n -ne l and a c c e s s i b i l i t y (Roman 1977 :2 ) . The hea r i ng p rocess i s a c t i v a t e d through a number of p r o c e s s e s , such as the p roponen t ' s i n i t i a t i o n of a development or a p p l i c a -61 1 t i o n f o r a permit. D e c i s i o n s produced by the t r i b u n a l , such as approval or non-approval of a permit, are implemented by the ap p r o p r i a t e M i n i s t r y . The c o n s u l t a t i v e hearing, on the other hand, i s estab-l i s h e d by government w i t h i n the framework of a p u b l i c i n q u i r y to i n v e s t i g a t e i s s u e s of concern f o r the purpose of recommen-2 d a t i o n (Law Reform Commission 1977). The c o n s u l t a t i v e hearing i s one stage i n a Commission of Inquiry which i s s t a t u t o r i l y d e f i n e d at both p r o v i n c i a l and f e d e r a l l e v e l s . The s u b j e c t matter of the i n q u i r y i s t y p i c a l l y urgent, of concern to more than one m i n i s t r y and l e v e l of government, and i s the su b j e c t of some con t r o v e r s y . I t i s intended to a n t i c i p a t e events and i s s u e s — t o i d e n t i f y , o b t a i n , and analyze i n f o r m a t i o n r e l e v a n t to i t s unique terms of r e f e r e n c e . The c o n s u l t a t i v e hearing i s thus cre a t e d to i n v e s t i g a t e i s s u e s and formulate p o l i c y , r a t h e r than to produce f i n a l d e t e r m i n a t i o n s, l i k e i t s a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o u n t e r p a r t . The a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and c o n s u l t a t i v e t r i b u n a l s d i f f e r as hearing types i n three r e s p e c t s : t h e i r impetus, procedures, and decision-making powers. The a d m i n i s t r a t i v e hearing i s i n i -t i a t e d as a r o u t i n e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e / r e g u l a t o r y process by a pro-ponent's proposal or a p p l i c a t i o n f o r development. A d m i n i s t r a -t i v e hearings are bound by the r u l e s of n a t u r a l j u s t i c e ; proce-dures may be d i c t a t e d by s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s (which may be very general and d i s c r e t i o n a r y ) . D e c i s i o n s or recommendations reached through the hearing process are designed to lead to binding d e c i s i o n s on the M i n i s t r y i n q u e s t i o n . Examples of 62 a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t r i b u n a l s a r e t h e A t o m i c E n e r g y C o n t r o l B o a r d , t h e B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a U t i l i t i e s C o m m i s s i o n a n d t h e W o r k e r s ' C o m -p e n s a t i o n B o a r d . T h e c o n s u l t a t i v e h e a r i n g i s m o r e v i s i b l y s u b j e c t t o p o l i -t i c a l , e c o n o m i c , a n d s o c i a l p r e s s u r e s , a n d i s i n v o k e d a t t h e d i s c r e t i o n o f g o v e r n m e n t . I t s p r o c e d u r e s a r e s u b j e c t t o a g r e a t e r e x t e n t t o t h e B o a r d ' s d i s c r e t i o n . I n q u i r i e s may b e b o u n d b y r u l e s o f n a t u r a l j u s t i c e . T h e p r o d u c t o f t h e h e a r i n g t y p i c a l l y i s i t s F i n a l R e p o r t , i n c l u d i n g r e s e a r c h f i n d i n g s a n d r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s w h i c h a r e n o t g e n e r a l l y b i n d i n g , a n d may o r may n o t b e a d o p t e d b y g o v e r n m e n t . T h e r e i s c o n s i d e r a b l e v a r i a t i o n w i t h i n a n d b e t w e e n t h e s e t y p e s o f t r i b u n a l s . S o m e , s u c h a s t h e f e d e r a l E n v i r o n m e n t a l A s s e s s m e n t R e v i e w P a n e l ( E A R P ) , a r e a h y b r i d , e n c o m p a s s i n g f e a -t u r e s o f b o t h a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a n d c o n s u l t a t i v e h e a r i n g s . W h i l e t h e i n i t i a t i n g a c t i o n s o f t h e p r o p o n e n t r e f l e c t t h e a d m i n i s t r a -t i v e o r i g i n s o f t h i s t r i b u n a l , t h e r e l a x e d p r o c e d u r e s o f t h e E A R P h e a r i n g s a n d t h e i n f o r m a t i o n - g a t h e r i n g a p p r o a c h a t t e s t t o i t s c o n s u l t a t i v e s t a t u s . T h e p r o c e s s o f p u b l i c i n t e r v e n t i o n i n t h e s e t w o t y p e s o f t r i b u n a l s , a l t h o u g h r e f l e c t i n g s i m i l a r i t i e s i n f o r m , i s s u b j e c t t o d i f f e r e n c e s d e p e n d i n g o n t h e c o s t s , s t a t u s o f p a r t i c i p a n t s , f o r m a l p r o c e d u r a l g u i d e l i n e s , a n d o t h e r f a c t o r s , a s t h e a n a l y s i s w i l l d e m o n s t r a t e . I h a v e s e l e c t e d o n e b o d y o f h e a r i n g s f r o m e a c h o f t h e m a j o r t y p e s o f t r i b u n a l f o r a n a l y s i s . I w i l l n o w i n t r o d u c e t h e s e c a s e s t u d i e s , d i s c u s s i n g t h e i r i m p e t u s a n d t h e i s s u e s , a r e a s , a n d e v e n t s c o n c e r n i n g w h i c h t h e h e a r i n g s w e r e h e l d . 3 . 3 - I n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e C a s e S t u d y T r i b u n a l s 6 3 T h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A p p e a l B o a r d H e a r i n g s T h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A p p e a l B o a r d w a s a t r i b u n a l c r e a t e d b y t h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A c t o f M a r c h 1 9 7 8 , w h i c h h a s s i n c e 3 b e e n s u p e r c e d e d b y t h e E n v i r o n m e n t a l C o n t r o l B o a r d . T h i s a c t p r o v i d e s f o r p u b l i c i n i t i a t i o n o f a n a p p e a l h e a r i n g p r o c e s s t h r o u g h f o r m a l o b j e c t i o n t o a n a p p r o v e d p e s t i c i d e a p p l i c a t i o n . B e g i n n i n g i n 1 9 7 8 , a n d c o n t i n u i n g o v e r t h e f o l l o w i n g t h r e e y e a r s , i n d i v i d u a l c i t i z e n s a n d o r g a n i z a t i o n s o p p o s e d a p p l i c a -t i o n s b y m u n i c i p a l a n d g o v e r n m e n t a g e n c i e s t o a p p l y t h e h e r b i -c i d e 2 , 4 - D i n t h e O k a n a g a n L a k e s s y s t e m t o c o u n t e r t h e s p r e a d o f E u r a s i a n w a t e r m i l f o i l . My a n a l y s i s w i l l f o c u s o n t h e O k a n a g a n 2 , 4 - D h e a r i n g s h e l d u n d e r t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n o f t h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A p p e a l B o a r d f r o m 1 9 7 8 t h r o u g h 1 9 8 1 . I i n c l u d e a d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e l e g i s l a t i v e c o n t e x t i n w h i c h t h e h e a r i n g p r o c e s s i s s i t u a t e d , a s i t d e f i n e s t h e s c o p e a n d n a t u r e o f t h e p u b l i c a p p e a l p r o c e s s . T h e L e g a l C o n t e x t a n d t h e I n i t i a t i o n o f t h e H e a r i n g s L e g i s l a t i o n g o v e r n i n g h e r b i c i d e u s e h a s b e e n c r i t i c i z e d a s c o m p l e x , d i s o r g a n i z e d , a n d i n a d e q u a t e ( L e e 1 9 7 8 ) . P r i o r t o t h e 1 9 6 0 * s , l e g a l c o n t r o l s o n p e s t i c i d e s w e r e l i m i t e d , b u t d e m a n d f o r m o r e s t r i n g e n t l e g i s l a t i o n w a s v o i c e d i n c r e a s i n g l y b y p u b -l i c i n t e r e s t g r o u p s ( T . R o b e r t s 1 9 8 1 ) . T h e r e p o r t o f t h e R o y a l C o m m i s s i o n o f I n q u i r y i n t o t h e U s e o f P e s t i c i d e s a n d H e r b i c i d e s c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a s p e c t s o f p e s t i c i d e c o n t r o l w e r e i n a d e q u a t e , a n d d i f f i c u l t t o e n f o r c e ( L e e 1 9 7 8 ) . T h e l a c k o f c i t i z e n i n p u t t o t h e e x i s t i n g p r o c e s s o f d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g , a n d t h e l a c k o f g o v e r n m e n t c r e d i b i l i t y w e r e s p e c i f i c a l l y n o t e d : 64 A major de f e c t i n the p resen t arrangement f o r the c o n t r o l of p e s t i c i d e s in the P rov ince was r epea ted l y brought to the a t t e n t i o n of the C o m m i s s i o n . . . . a f r u s t r a -t i o n on the pa r t of c i t i z e n s about be ing unable to have any input i n to the dec i s ion-mak ing process on the use of p e s t i c i d e s . . . T h e r e was a genera l exp re s s i on of a l ack of c r e d i b i l i t y of government departments in matters of p e s -t i c i d e c o n t r o l (Royal Commission of I nqu i r y i n to Pes -t i c i d e s and H e r b i c i d e s 1975 1:253) . The j u r i s d i c t i o n p e r t a i n i n g to h e r b i c i d e s e x i s t s at both f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l l e v e l s of government, and i s d i s p e r s e d among m i n i s t r i e s w i t h i n each . The pr imary f e d e r a l ac t w i th regards to p e s t i c i d e s i s the Pest C o n t r o l Products A c t , p r o -c la imed in 1972, which dea l s p r i m a r i l y wi th t e s t i n g , l a b e l l i n g , and r e g i s t r a t i o n of p e s t i c i d e s , and i s admin i s t e red by the De-partment of A g r i c u l t u r e . The Fede ra l Government a l s o governs the impor t/expor t of p e s t i c i d e s , and t h e i r i n t e r p r o v i n c i a l d i s -t r i b u t i o n (K. Roberts 1980 Speech) . In g e n e r a l , f e d e r a l j u r i s d i c t i o n c o n t r o l s the r e g i s t r a t i o n and l i c e n s i n g of chemica l s f o r use as p e s t i c i d e s . The a p p l i c a - t i o n of such produc ts i s governed by p r o v i n c i a l s t a t u t e . Fede -r a l l e g i s l a t i o n does not c o n t a i n mechanisms fo r p u b l i c i n v o l v e -ment i n the r e g u l a t i o n and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of p e s t i c i d e use . Thus , p u b l i c i n t e r v e n t i o n must be geared towards the a p p l i c a -t i o n , r a the r than the r e g i s t r a t i o n or l i c e n s i n g of h e r b i c i d e s , as i t i s on l y at t h i s l e v e l tha t such input i s p o s s i b l e . The B r i t i s h Columbia P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A c t , which has ex -t ens i v e j u r i s d i c t i o n over h e r b i c i d e s , was p roc l a imed in March 1978. The Ac t \" p r o v i d e s fo r l i c e n s i n g of a l l p e s t i c i d e uses , i t permi ts the a d m i n i s t r a t o r to revoke or suspend a l i c e n s e , permit or c e r t i f i c a t e when a use i s l i k e l y to cause an u n r e a -sonable adverse harm to man or the env i ronment\" (Lee 1978:15-65 1 6 ) . T h e A c t c r e a t e d t h e p o s i t i o n o f A d m i n i s t r a t o r , r e s -p o n s i b l e f o r t h e e x e c u t i o n o f t h e A c t ( s . 1 2 ) , a P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l C o m m i t t e e , a p p o i n t e d b y t h e M i n i s t e r ( s . 1 7 ) , a n d e s t a b l i s h e s t h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A p p e a l B o a r d ( s . 1 4 ) g i v i n g t h e C a b i n e t p o w e r o f a p p o i n t m e n t . T h e A c t i s a d m i n i s t e r e d b y t h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l B r a n c h o f t h e M i n i s t r y o f t h e E n v i r o n -m e n t , w h o s e p r o g r a m s i n c l u d e l i c e n s i n g , c e r t i f i c a t i o n , a n d t h e i s s u i n g o f p e r m i t s . I t i s w i t h t h e l a t t e r a r e a o f j u r i s d i c t i o n t h a t I am c o n c e r n e d , a s i t i s t h r o u g h t h e i s s u i n g o f p e r m i t s t h a t t h e a p p e a l p r o c e s s i s i n i t i a t e d . I w i l l n o w d e s c r i b e t h e a p p e a l p r o c e s s t h r o u g h w h i c h t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e h e a r i n g i s p r o d u c e d . T h i s may b e d i v i d e d i n t o f o u r s t a g e s : a p p l i c a t i o n f o r t h e p e r m i t , a d m i n i s t r a t o r ' s a p -p r o v a l , p u b l i c n o t i c e , a n d n o t i f i c a t i o n o f a p p e a l . ( S e e A p p e n -d i c e s 1 . 2 , 1 . 3 , a n d 1 . 4 ) On t h e a v e r a g e , s i x h u n d r e d p e r m i t s f o r p e s t i c i d e a p p l i c a t i o n a r e i s s u e d e a c h y e a r ( T . R o b e r t s 1 9 8 1 ) . A p p l i c a t i o n f o r p e r m i s s i o n t o a p p l y a p e s t i c i d e i s made t o t h e A d m i n i s t r a t o r o f t h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l B r a n c h i n a c c o r -d a n c e w i t h t h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A c t : s . 6 S u b j e c t t o t h e r e g u l a t i o n s , n o p e r s o n s h a l l a p p l y a p e s t i c i d e t o a b o d y o f w a t e r o r a n a r e a o f l a n d u n l e s s : a ) h e h a s a p p l i e d f o r a P E R M I T f r o m t h e a d m i n i s t r a t o r t o d o s o a n d t h e a d m i n i s t r a t o r , o n b e i n g s a t i s f i e d t h a t t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e p e r m i t w i l l n o t c a u s e a n u n r e a -s o n a b l e a d v e r s e e f f e c t , h a s g r a n t e d t h e p e r m i t , a n d b ) h e a p p l i e d t h e p e s t i c i d e i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e t e r m s a n d c o n d i t i o n s c o n t a i n e d i n t h e p e r m i t ( B . C . P e s t i c i d e C o n -t r o l A c t 1 9 7 8 : s . 6 ) . T h i s a p p l i c a t i o n i s c o n t i n g e n t u p o n t h e s c h e d u l e ( l e v e l ) o f p e s t i c i d e u s e d ( s c h e d u l e V p e s t i c i d e s a r e e x e m p t ) ; a n d t h e p r o -p o s e d m e a n s a n d p l a c e o f a p p l i c a t i o n . A l t h o u g h a l l u s e o f 6 6 p e s t i c i d e s on p u b l i c land i s t e c h n i c a l l y sub j ec t to permit r equ i r ements , the use of permi ts has g e n e r a l l y been reserved 4 fo r l a r g e - s c a l e and aqua t i c p u b l i c use . Permit a p p l i c a t i o n s f o l l o w the schedu le of p e s t i c i d e used , and the l o c a t i o n of proposed a p p l i c a t i o n . The proponent must make formal a p p l i -c a t i o n to the A d m i n i s t r a t o r of the P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Board fo r such use . A p p l i c a t i o n fo r the permi t i n i t i a t e s a p rocess through which p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n may l a t e r o c c u r . The second s tep i s the review of the permit a p p l i c a t i o n by the A d m i n i s t r a t o r of the P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l B ranch , wi th the a i d of a P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Committee. The l a t t e r i s composed of r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of the a g r i c u l t u r e , env i ronment , f o r e s t r y , h e a l t h m i n i s t r i e s , and o ther persons deemed a p p r o p r i a t e (s. 17 ) . The t e s t used fo r review of these a p p l i c a t i o n s i s whether or not use of the p e s t i c i d e w i l l cause an \"unreasonab le adverse e f f e c t \" (s . 4 ) . An \"adverse e f f e c t \" i s \"an e f f e c t that r e s u l t s to damage to man or the env i ronment \" . There are no s t a t u t o r y g u i d e l i n e s fo r de te rmin ing when an adverse e f f e c t i s \" u n r e a s o n -a b l e \" , a l l o w i n g the A d m i n i s t r a t o r and Committee c o n s i d e r a b l e d i s c r e t i o n i n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . There i s some disagreement c o n -ce rn ing p u b l i c access to t h i s review p r o c e s s . A l though K e l l e t t r epo r t s tha t the Branch \"makes a v a i l a b l e to a p p e l l a n t s . . . the r epo r t s of the committee members\" (1978), i t has been the exper i ence of s e v e r a l env i ronmenta l groups tha t t h i s i n f o r m a -t i o n i s cons ide red c o n f i d e n t i a l (K. Roberts 1981 I n t e r v i ew ) . Permits may be approved or denied by the a d m i n i s t r a t o r , and i f approved, may l a t e r be revoked i f h i s s t i p u l a t i o n s are not 67 f u l f i l l e d , or i f new ev idence of adverse e f f e c t s appears . Fo l l ow ing the A d m i n i s t r a t o r ' s approva l of the permit a p -p l i c a t i o n , n o t i c e must be made by the p e r m i t - h o l d e r . Th i s may be done through four methods: p u b l i c a t i o n i n the Government G a z e t t e , p o s t i n g of the permit in a consp icuous p l a ce on the land i n q u e s t i o n , through a p ress r e l e a s e , or adver t i sement in the l o c a l p r e s s . The A d m i n i s t r a t o r dec ides which method i s to be used , and makes i t a c o n d i t i o n of the p e r m i t . U s u a l l y , as was the case i n the t r i b u n a l s I s t u d i e d , n o t i c e i s g iven through adver t i sements in the l o c a l p r e s s . Ob j ec t i ons to the proposed a p p l i c a t i o n must be f i l e d i n the form of an a p p e a l , w i t h i n f i f t e e n days a f t e r the e f f e c t i v e date of the permi t (s . 49) . It i s at t h i s p o i n t tha t the p u b l i c may enter i n t o the p r o c e s s . An appea l must be i n i t i a t e d in order fo r c i t i z e n s to take pa r t in the h e a r i n g . The p u b l i c may appea l the permit D granted by the A d m i n i s t r a t o r through responding to the a p p l i c a -t i o n n o t i c e . Any member of the p u b l i c may f i l e an appea l (s. 12 ) . However, o r g a n i z a t i o n s can on l y appea l i f they have l e g a l s t and ing as \" p e r s o n s \" ( e . g . , i f i n c o r p o r a t e d as a r e g i s t e r e d s o c i e t y or c o r p o r a t i o n ) . In order to a p p e a l , the a p p e l l a n t n o t i f i e s the A d m i n i s t r a t o r of the P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Branch of h i s /he r o b j e c t i o n . The A d m i n i s t r a t o r con f i rms r e c e i p t of the a p p e a l , and responds by r eques t i ng the a p p e l l a n t to send to the PCAB the grounds of a p p e a l . A l though s. 12(3) of the Act s t i p u -l a t e s tha t the a p p e l l a n t s may have to cover the cos t s of the 5 a p p e a l , t h i s was not r e q u i r e d i n the case s tudy h e a r i n g s . The Board r e p l i e s to the a p p e l l a n t , no t ing the l o c a t i o n , t ime , and 68 date of the h e a r i n g . Thus, the p u b l i c hearing i s but one stage i n an appeal process which i t s e l f i s l o c a t e d w i t h i n a complex p r o v i n c i a l and f e d e r a l network of p e s t i c i d e j u r i s d i c t i o n . I turn now to the i s s u e s , l o c a t i o n , events, and p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the case study hearing. M i l f o i l and the H e r b i c i d e Issue The r a p i d i n c r e a s e of Eurasian water m i l f o i l (Myriophyllum spicatum Linnaeus) i n the Okanagan Lake system of B r i t i s h Columbia has aroused c o n s i d e r a b l e concern. T h i s p e r e n n i a l water p l a n t has c o l o n i z e d many water bodies i n eastern Canada and the United S t a t e s , and has more r e c e n t l y spread to western North America. I t occurs i n lakes throughout B r i t i s h Columbia, i n c l u d i n g the Okanagan Lake system, l o c a t i o n of the case study (See map, Appendix 1.1). The p l a n t i s considered u n d e s i r a b l e f o r a number of r e a -sons. Brochures p u b l i s h e d by the Aquatic P l a n t Management Program of the B.C. M i n i s t r y of the Environment note that m i l f o i l i s regarded as a e s t h e t i c a l l y unappealing, i n that i t renders p r e v i o u s l y open areas of water a morass of \"slimy, tangled weeds\" ( B r i t i s h Columbia M i n i s t r y of Environment). Decomposition of the weed during summer months r e s u l t s i n shore accumulation of o d i f e r o u s and u n s i g h t l y fragments. I t r e -s t r i c t s water r e c r e a t i o n use i n shallow areas, e s p e c i a l l y swim-ming and powerboat use. I t i s thus viewed as economically and environmentally c o s t l y , e s p e c i a l l y i n areas, such as the Okana-gan, which are r e l i a n t on r e c r e a t i o n and tourism. The p l a n t has 69 been accused of damage to the sa lmonid environment by c o n t r i b u -t i n g to the s i l t a t i o n of spawning beds. M i l f o i l i s r e f e r r e d to as a \" n u i s a n c e \" and a \" p r o b l e m \" , and i t s growth has prompted c a l l s f o r i t s conta inment , to be accompl i shed by a v a r i e t y of methods, i n c l u d i n g h e r b i c i d e use . Other methods of weed man-agement i n c l u d e : root removal by mechanica l means such as r o tova to r s and h a r v e s t e r s , s u c t i o n d r e d g i n g , lake and r i v e r b a r r i e r s , and p u b l i c i n f o rma t i on and q u a r a n t i n e . Env i ronmenta l o r g a n i z a t i o n s argue tha t m i l f o i l i s not t o -t a l l y h a r m f u l . In t h e i r v iew, i t p rov i des h a b i t a t f o r f i s h , f i l t e r s water and improves i t s q u a l i t y , and impedes a lgae growth. Fu r the rmore , they say the r e s t r i c t e d appearance of the weed i n water under f i v e metres and en r i ched bottom e n v i r o n -ments l i m i t s the p o t e n t i a l spread of the weed, in the Okanagan example, to ten percent of the lake system (SOEC 1978) . A phenomenon of n a t u r a l d e c l i n e , or d i eback , has a l s o been c i t e d , sugges t ing tha t the p l a n t w i l l become more ba lanced in c o n j u n c -t i o n wi th other env i ronmenta l f a c t o r s (SOEC 1980) . The appea -rance and i n c rease of m i l f o i l i s an i n d i c a t i o n of env i ronmenta l change or d e g r a d a t i o n . From t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e , env i ronmenta l groups s t a t e tha t a t t e n t i o n shou ld be r e d i r e c t e d to the r e d u c -t i o n or e l i m i n a t i o n of the p rocess of e u t r o p h i c a t i o n and n u -t r i e n t enr ichment of the l akes (SOEC 1978) . The means by which m i l f o i l r educ t i on and c o n t r o l i s to take p l ace has p rov ided the major source of deba te . Most o b s e r v e r s , i n c l u d i n g government and env i ronmenta l g roups , agree tha t some \" c o n t r o l \" of the weed i s both d e s i r a b l e and p r a c t i -c a l . The pr imary c o n f l i c t around m i l f o i l c o n t r o l has centered 70 around the chemica l means of t r ea tment . The h e r b i c i d e used in t h i s approach i s 2,4-D ( 2 ,4-d i ch l o rophenoxyace t i c a c i d ) , a c h l o r i n a t e d phenoxy compound deve loped du r i ng World War I I . The Water I n v e s t i g a t i o n s Branch (WIB) of the B .C. Department of Environment has proposed chemica l t reatment through the use of 2,4-D, i n c o n j u n c t i o n wi th other means, to c o n t r o l the m i l f o i l p rob lem. The WIB has advocated the use of t h i s h e r b i c i d e as e f f i c i e n t , economic , and s a f e . Approva l of the p e s t i c i d e a p -p l i c a t i o n permit by the A d m i n i s t r a t o r i n d i c a t e s that he c o n -dones the a p p l i c a t i o n (with the endorsement of the P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Commit tee ) , and c o n s i d e r s that i t w i l l have no \" u n r e a -sonable adverse e f f e c t \" . However, c i t i z e n s and p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups have f o r m a l l y opposed the proposed h e r b i c i d e t r ea tmen ts . T h e i r o p p o s i t i o n to h e r b i c i d e a p p l i c a t i o n s has i nc luded the f o l l o w i n g grounds , s t a t ed in t h e i r n o t i c e of appea l to the 1978 p e s t i c i d e a p p l i c a -t i o n permi t g ranted the WIB: 1. R isk to the h e a l t h of human b e i n g s , based on the mutagen ic , t e r a t o g e n i c , and c a r c i n o g e n i c e f f e c t s of 2,4-D on l i v i n g o rgan i sms . 2. R isk of harm to f i s h and w i l d l i f e in the genera l area su r round ing the p r o j e c t based on the t o x i c e f f e c t s of 2,4-D. 3. R isk of damage to a g r i c u l t u r a l c rops s u s c e p t i b l e to the e f f e c t s of 2,4-D. 4. R isk of harm as d e s c r i b e d i n the above 3 pa rag raphs , based on the p e r s i s t e n c e of 2,4-D and the l i m i t a t i o n s of the t e s t i n g equipment des igned to t e s t fo r the e x i s t e n c e of 2,4-D. 5. R isk of harm as d e s c r i b e d in paragraphs 1 through 3 as a r e s u l t of d r i f t o c c u r r i n g from the p r o j e c t a p p l i c a -t i o n s i t e s . 71 6. That no c o s t / b e n e f i t a n a l y s i s has been done on the use of 2,4-D in the Okanagan Lake System and the m i l f o i l c o n t r o l program to determine i f the 2,4-D a p p l i c a t i o n i s e conomica l l y j u s t i f i a b l e — p a r t i c u l a r l y i n l i g h t of the r i s k s i n v o l v e d . 7. That the use of 2,4-D w i l l not remove the m i l f o i l p rob lem, but w i l l merely n e c e s s i t a t e i t s r e a p p l i c a t i o n over s u c c e s s i v e years ( West Coast Env i ronmenta l Law A s s o c i a t i o n 1978) . A c co rd ing to the South Okanagan Env i ronmenta l C o a l i t i o n , there i s s u b s t a n t i a l ev idence tha t 2,4-D may be unhea l thy fo r humans and an ima l s . They s t a t e that there i s ev idence tha t 2,4-D ac t s as a c a r c i n o g e n , t e ra togen and a mutagen (Warnock and Lewis : 1978) . The aqua t i c a p p l i c a t i o n of the h e r b i c i d e i s viewed as p o t e n t i a l l y hazardous , due to the p o s s i b l e a b s o r p t i o n of the chemica l through the s k i n , the r e s i d u a l e f f e c t s , the p o s s i b i l i t y of d r i f t beyond e s t a b l i s h e d b u f f e r zones , and t o x i -c i t y to sa lmonids (SOEC 1978) . I r r i g a t i o n to v ineya rds wi th h e r b i c i d e - t r e a t e d water i s c i t e d as hazardous to grape c r o p s . The r i s i n g cos t of h e r b i c i d e a p p l i c a t i o n , e s p e c i a l l y mon i t o -r i n g , has a l s o been r a i s e d as a problem (SOEC 1978) . The con t rove r sy over the use of 2,4-D takes p lace w i t h i n a wider debate over the h e a l t h and s a f e t y dangers a s s o c i a t e d wi th h e r b i c i d e use . E n v i r o n m e n t a l i s t s i n d i c a t e tha t a l though the debate i s l a r g e l y r ecogn ized as a s c i e n t i f i c one, i t i s on another l e v e l an economic c o n f l i c t . The p e s t i c i d e i n d u s t r y in the Un i ted S t a t es i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by the f o l l o w i n g p a t t e r n of development, condensed from T . Roberts : 1. Rapid growth in the p e r i o d between 1950-1975, a s s o c i a t e d wi th chemica l war fare resea rch dur ing W.W.II; a g r i b u s i n e s s , w i th i t s r e l i a n c e on monocu l tu re , mechan i -z a t i o n , and c a p i t a l - i n t e n s i v e p r o d u c t i o n ; and emphasis on s y n t h e t i c o r g a n i c p e s t i c i d e s . Between 1950 and 1975, p e s t i c i d e p r o d u c t i o n in the USA i nc reased by 10-15% per 72 annum. The tendency more r e c e n t l y (1970's +) has been to \" i n t e g r a t e d pest management\", which would be l e s s r e l i a n t on chemica l p e s t i c i d e s . 2. S y n t h e t i c p e s t i c i d e s a l e s in 1975 t o t a l l e d a p -p rox ima te l y $4 b i l l i o n , or 6% of the gross s a l e s of the chemica l i n d u s t r y . Corpora te c o n c e n t r a t i o n i s h i g h . 3. P e s t i c i d e demand i s now beg inn ing to dec r ease , and i s es t imated from 1976 to 1985 at 6% per y ea r . As North American markets have been s a t u r a t e d , new markets in the T h i r d World and Eas te rn Europe have been gene -r a t e d . 4. The chemica l i n d u s t r y has responded to f a l l i n g markets and growing concerns of the p u b l i c in the f o l l o w -ing ways: a d v e r t i s i n g , government l o b b y i n g , and i n d u s t r y involvement in s c i e n t i f i c s o c i e t i e s (such as CAST, Coun-c i l f o r A g r i c u l t u r a l Sc ience and Techno logy ) (1981 :1-5 ) . Env i ronmenta l c r i t i c s note that 2,4-D i s one of the most w ide l y used p e s t i c i d e s in North Amer i ca ; tha t in Canada, i t accounts fo r 25% of a l l h e r b i c i d e and p e s t i c i d e s a l e s Warnock and Lewis 1982 :35 ) . The ex tens i ve use of h e r b i c i d e s in B r i t i s h Co lumb ia , a c co rd ing to env i ronmenta l c r i t i c s , has promoted an atmosphere of t a c i t a ccep tance . These c r i t i c s t h e r e f o r e argue tha t gov -ernment cho i ce of p e s t i c i d e (chemical ) t reatment r e f l e c t s the i n d u s t r y ' s past growth and cu r r en t demands. E n v i r o n m e n t a l i s t s a l s o note tha t A g r i c u l t u r e Canada, r a -ther than departments of Hea l th or the Env i ronment , i s r e s p o n -s i b l e fo r the r e g i s t r a t i o n of p e s t i c i d e s in Canada. Warnock and Lewis note the p o t e n t i a l b i a s of a g r i c u l t u r e s p e c i a l i s t s in the assessment of p e s t i c i d e s such as 2,4-D (1982:35) . Those a c c e p t i n g or advoca t ing p e s t i c i d e use on the o ther hand c i t e the checks and ba lances by which p e s t i c i d e s are t e s t e d , r e g i s -t e r e d , and approved (Ormrod 1982). Popular con t rove r sy over the chemica l 2,4-D r e f l e c t s a s c i e n t i f i c deba te , as Warnock and Lewis of the SOEC s t a t e : 73 S i n c e i t s d e v e l o p m e n t d u r i n g t h e c h e m i c a l a n d b i o l o -g i c a l w a r f a r e p r o g r a m d u r i n g W o r l d War I I a n d c o n t i n u i n g t h r o u g h i t s u s e i n V i e t n a m , i t ( 2 , 4 - D ) h a s d a m a g e d a g r e a t m a n y o r g a n i s m s b e s i d e s t h e v e g e t a t i o n a t w h i c h i t w a s a i m e d . T h e s c i e n t i f i c c o m m u n i t y i s d e e p l y d i v i d e d a s t o i t s s a f e t y , a n d r e g u l a t o r y d e c i s i o n s a r e c u r r e n t l y b a s e d o n d i s t o r t e d e c o n o m i c s ( ' w e c a n ' t a f f o r d n o t t o u s e i t ' ) r a t h e r t h a n b i o l o g i c a l r e s e a r c h . M a n y p e o p l e d o u b t t h a t i t w o u l d b e r e g i s t e r e d u n d e r t o d a y ' s t e s t i n g p r o t o -c o l s ( 1 9 8 2 : 3 4 ) . T h o s e a d v o c a t i n g p e s t i c i d e u s e r e p l y t h a t t e s t i n g i s a d e q u a t e , a n d t h a t p e s t i c i d e u s e i s \" s a f e \" , e s p e c i a l l y i f e x p o s u r e i s m i n i m a l . T h u s , t h e c o n t r o v e r s y o v e r p e s t i c i d e u s e i s c o m p l e x a n d u n r e s o l v e d . A C h r o n o l o g y o f t h e O k a n a g a n L a k e s 2 , 4 - D I s s u e T h e i n c r e a s e o f E u r a s i a n w a t e r m i l f o i l i n t h e O k a n a g a n L a k e s s y s t e m e l i c i t e d c o n c e r n b e g i n n i n g i n t h e 1 9 7 0 ' s . T h e A q u a t i c P l a n t M a n a g e m e n t P r o g r a m w i t h i n t h e W a t e r I n v e s t i g a -t i o n s B r a n c h o f t h e M i n i s t r y o f t h e E n v i r o n m e n t i n i t i a t e d r e s e a r c h o n t h e g r o w t h o f m i l f o i l a n d t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f v a r i o u s h e r b i c i d e s b e g i n n i n g i n 1 9 7 2 . T h e R o y a l C o m m i s s i o n o f I n q u i r y i n t o t h e U s e o f H e r b i c i d e s a n d P e s t i c i d e s , a p p o i n t e d i n 1 9 7 3 , c a r r i e d o u t i t s m a n d a t e o v e r a t w o - y e a r p e r i o d , m a k i n g r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h e r e g u l a t i o n o f h e r b i c i d e s , i n c l u -d i n g 2 , 4 - D . I n 1 9 7 6 , a n A d v i s o r y C o m m i t t e e o n t h e C o n t r o l o f E u r a s i a n W a t e r M i l f o i l i n t h e O k a n a g a n L a k e s y s t e m w a s a p p o i n -t e d b y t h e M i n i s t r y o f E n v i r o n m e n t . A l t h o u g h t h e f i r s t i n t e r i m r e p o r t o f t h i s C o m m i t t e e c a l l e d f o r t h e \" p o s s i b l e e x c e p t i o n o f t h e u s e o f h e r b i c i d e s \" , t h e s e c o n d r e p o r t e n d o r s e d a n \" a l l - o u t a t t a c k o n t h e w e e d s \" , t o i n c l u d e a n i n t e g r a t e d p r o g r a m o f m e c h a n i c a l , h y d r a u l i c , b i o l o g i c a l , a n d c h e m i c a l ( e . g . , 2 , 4 - D ) c o n t r o l ( W a r n o c k a n d L e w i s 1 9 7 8 ) . T h e A d v i s o r y C o m m i t t e e h e l d a 74 s e r i e s o f p u b l i c m e e t i n g s i n t h e s p r i n g o f 1 9 7 7 r e g a r d i n g t h e m i l f o i l i s s u e . On M a y 5 , 1 9 7 7 , t h e p r o v i n c e a g r e e d t o f i n a n c e , d e s i g n , a n d i m p l e m e n t a w e e d c o n t r o l p r o g r a m i n c o o p e r a t i o n w i t h l o c a l o f f i c i a l s . D u r i n g t h e s u m m e r o f 1 9 7 7 , c h e m i c a l a n d m e c h a n i c a l c o n t r o l m e t h o d s w e r e t o be t e s t e d i n f o u r O k a n a g a n L a k e s . M o r e w i d e s p r e a d u s e o f 2 , 4 - D w a s f o r e c a s t b y t h e A d v i s o r y C o m m i t t e e a n d t h e M i n i s t r y o f E n v i r o n m e n t f o r t h e s u m m e r o f 1 9 7 8 . A c i t i z e n s ' g r o u p , t h e O k a n a g a n E n v i r o n m e n t a l C o a l i t i o n , w a s f o r m e d i n t h e s p r i n g o f 1 9 7 7 , f o l l o w i n g t h e p u b l i c m e e t i n g s o f t h e A d v i s o r y C o m m i t t e e . T h i s g r o u p o p p o s e d t h e p r o p o s e d u s e o f h e r b i c i d e s i n c o n t r o l l i n g m i l f o i l , a n d e n g a g e d i n p o l i t i c a l l o b b y i n g , p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n , r e s e a r c h , a n d n e t w o r k i n g w i t h o t h e r e n v i r o n m e n t a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s t o t h i s e n d . I n M a r c h , 1 9 7 8 , t h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A c t w a s p r o c l a i m e d , a l l o w i n g f o r f o r m a l p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n t h r o u g h a s y s t e m o f a p p e a l s t o d e c i s i o n s a p p r o v i n g p r o p o s e d a p p l i c a t i o n s o f p e s t i -c i d e s . L a t e r t h a t s p r i n g , t h e W a t e r I n v e s t i g a t i o n s B r a n c h (WIB) o f t h e M i n i s t r y o f E n v i r o n m e n t w a s g r a n t e d 1 5 p e r m i t s t o a p p l y 2 , 4 - D i n f o u r o f t h e m a j o r O k a n a g a n l a k e s . T h e s e w e r e a l l a p p e a l e d b y a n u m b e r o f a p p e l l a n t s , i n c l u d i n g i n d i v i d u a l s , a n d l o c a l a n d p r o v i n c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s ( s u c h a s t h e S O E C , S o c i e t y f o r P o l l u t i o n a n d E n v i r o n m e n t a l C o n t r o l ( S P E C ) , a n d t h e C o n s u m e r s A s s o c i a t i o n o f C a n a d a ) . T h e h e a r i n g s w e r e h e l d i n J u n e , 1 9 7 8 , i n P e n t i c t o n , a n d w i l l b e d i s c u s s e d i n g r e a t e r d e t a i l i n t h e f o l l o w i n g c h a p t e r s . I n t h e i r 1 9 7 8 d e c i s i o n , t h e P C A B u p h e l d f o u r o f t h e a p -7 5 pea l s (on Osoyoos Lake ) , but d i s a l l o w e d the remain ing e l e v e n . The SOEC requested a J u d i c i a l Review, which had the e f f e c t of ex tend ing the h e a r i n g s , and consequent l y d e l a y i n g the p e s t i c i d e a p p l i c a t i o n , caus ing r e d u c t i o n in the a p p l i c a t i o n s which were made. In the f a l l of 1978, the M i n i s t e r of Environment s t a t ed that no f u r t h e r h e r b i c i d e a p p l i c a t i o n s would be made on Okana-gan and Skaha Lakes . In 1979, the use of 2,4-D was con f i ned to Wood and Kalamalka Lakes at the nor th end of the l akes system. In both 1979 and 1980, appea l hea r ings took p lace i n Vernon , w i th d e c i s i o n s by the Board upho ld ing a l l the permi ts in both y e a r s . In 1981, the C e n t r a l Okanagan Reg iona l D i s t r i c t o b j e c -ted to many of the p e r m i t s , thereby c a n c e l l i n g them before p u b l i c hea r ings cou ld be h e l d . Permit a p p l i c a t i o n s were made f o r Osoyoos Lake by the Okanagan Water Bas in Board . These were appealed by the SOEC, and the Board aga in upheld the p e r m i t . In 1982, the PCAB had been r ep l aced by the Env i ronmenta l Assessment Board . H e r b i c i d e c o n t r o l programs had been cut back, and no permi t a p p l i c a t i o n s were made. The SOEC c l a ims that i t s e f f o r t s have been e f f e c t i v e , by reduc ing the proposed a p p l i c a -t i o n s , through the p rocesses of p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n , p o l i t i c a l e c o l o g y , and b u r e a u c r a t i c d e l a y , but the p o s s i b i l i t y of f u tu re a p p l i c a t i o n s of 2,4-D remains . The \" b u r e a u c r a t i c momentum\" of the Water I n v e s t i g a t i o n s Branch (Warnock and Lewis 1981) , the lack of s i g n i f i c a n t p u b l i c v i c t o r i e s in the appea l p r o c e s s , the l ack of a s h i f t in agency p o l i c y and the c o n t i n u i n g e x i s t e n c e of the weed promise f u r t h e r c o n t r o v e r s y . The Royal Commission of I nqu i r y i n to Uranium Min ing The B r i t i s h Columbia Royal Commission of I nqu i r y i n to Ura-76 nium Min ing (RCUM), was e s t a b l i s h e d on February 16, 1979. Three Commissioners were named to head the I n q u i r y — D r . David Ba t es , P ro f e s so r of Med ic ine at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia and o c c u p a t i o n a l h e a l t h s p e c i a l i s t ; Dr . James Murray, P ro f e s so r of Geology at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Co lumbia ; and Mr. V a l t e r Raudsepp, C i v i l Engineer and former chairman of the P o l l u t i o n C o n t r o l Board and P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Appea l Board . The Commission schedu led two se t s of p u b l i c h e a r i n g s : communi-ty h e a r i n g s , to be he ld twice throughout the p rov ince and t e c h n i c a l h e a r i n g s , to be he ld in Vancouver beg inn ing in Sep -tember, 1979. Funding was p rov ided to a i d p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a n t s . In the midst of i t s i n v e s t i g a t i o n s , the I nqu i r y was te rminated by the government on February 27, 1980, and a seven year mora-tor ium on uranium e x p l o r a t i o n and mining was put in e f f e c t . I w i l l now presen t an overv iew of the i s sues and the events a s s o c i a t e d wi th the R .C .U .M. The C o n s u l t a t i v e I nqu i r y Commissions of i n q u i r y are e s t a b l i s h e d by government as independent t r i b u n a l s to i n v e s t i g a t e matters of p u b l i c concern and p rov ide adv i ce to government on p o l i c y (Pape 1978). Theo -r e t i c a l l y , the commission of i n q u i r y supplements and s h o r t - c u t s the e l e c t o r a l p rocess by s e c u r i n g i n fo rma t i on and making recom-mendations which are then taken i n t o account by a p p r o p r i a t e branches of government. A l though not b i nd ing on government, recommendations are r a r e l y comple te l y d i s r ega rded (OECD 1978) , and i n B r i t i s h Co lumb ia , are submit ted to the L e g i s l a t u r e , becoming p u b l i c documents. The Royal Commission of I nqu i r y i n to Uranium Min ing was 77 e s t a b l i s h e d under the p r o v i n c i a l P u b l i c I n q u i r i e s Act (R .S .B .C . I960, c . 3 1 5 ) , which s t a t e s that the Cab ine t may e s t a b l i s h a commission of i n q u i r y to adv i se i t on \" . . . . a n y matter connected w i th the good government of the P r o v i n c e ( s . 3 ) . The Ac t p rov ides fo r the appointment of commiss ioners and o u t l i n e s t h e i r d u t i e s ( s s . 3 f 9 ) . Under t h i s A c t , Commissioners a p p o i n -ted to the I nqu i r y are g i ven wide powers in de te rmin ing the matters under i n v e s t i g a t i o n . The I n t e r p r e t a t i o n A c t , R . S .B .C . 1960 r e q u i r e s tha t a l l enactments , \"be g i ven such f a i r , l a rge and l i b e r a l c o n s t r u c t i o n and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n as best ensures the a t ta inment of i t s o b j e c t s \" (West Coast Env i ronmenta l Law A s s o -c i a t i o n 1979) . The Act thus g ran ts a l a rge share of d i s c r e t i o -nary powers to the Commiss ioners . The Terms of Reference set out by government in O r d e r - i n -C o u n c i l No. 170/179, and adopted by the RCUM are as f o l l o w s : (1) to examine the adequacy of e x i s t i n g f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l requi rements f o r the p r o t e c t i o n of the h e a l t h and s a f e t y of workers a s s o c i a t e d wi th e x p l o r a t i o n , mining and m i l l i n g df uranium in B r i t i s h Co lumb ia , and fo r the p r o t e c t i o n of the environment and of the p u b l i c , and , (2) to r e ce i v e p u b l i c input on these ma t t e r s , and, (3) to make recommendations f o r s e t t i n g and ma in t a i n i ng s tandards f o r worker and p u b l i c s a f e t y as a r e s u l t of the e x p l o r a t i o n fo r the mining and m i l l i n g of uranium ores (RCUM 1980) . These e x p l i c i t l y d i r e c t the t r i b u n a l to \" r e c e i v e p u b l i c i n p u t \" . They d i r e c t the i n q u i r y to i n v e s t i g a t e the h e a l t h and s a f e t y of workers and the p u b l i c i n the mining and m i l l i n g of uranium. The Royal Commission as a mode of i n q u i r y g i ves i t s Com-m i s s i one r s a d i s c r e t i o n a r y r o l e . E a r l i e r Commissions are im-por tan t in shap ing the s t r u c t u r e and procedures of the I n q u i r y . 78 A number of p u b l i c i n q u i r i e s preceded the RCUM, s e t t i n g i n f o r -mal p recedents f o r the procedures and the i n v e s t i g a t i o n of i s s u e s . The Berger I nqu i r y (Mackenzie V a l l e y P i p e l i n e Inqui ry ) was i nnova t i v e i n i t s p r o v i s i o n of fund ing fo r p u b l i c p a r t i c i -p a n t s , and i t s e s t ab l i shment of both community and formal hea r i ngs (Berger 1977) . The West Coast Coast O i l Por ts I n q u i r y , a l though premature l y t e rm ina t ed , c o n t r i b u t e d to t h i s t r a d i t i o n of h i g h - p r o f i l e p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n . P u b l i c i n q u i r i e s i n to nuc l ea r i s sues and uranium mining have a l s o preceded the RCUM. In A u s t r a l i a , the Ranger Uranium Env i ronmenta l I nqu i r y was appo in ted i n 1975 by the Labour g o -vernment, and conducted i t s hea r ings in the f o l l o w i n g manner: Three commiss ioners he ld p u b l i c hea r ings from Septem-ber 1975 to August 1976. They l i s t e n e d to 281 w i tnesses from both pro- and an t i-uran ium groups , v i s i t e d major cen t r es and uranium mining l o c a t i o n s a l l over A u s t r a l i a , and cons ide r ed 354 w r i t t e n submi s s i ons . Un l i k e the Bates Commission (RCUM), i t i n t e r p r e t e d i t s g u i d e l i n e s to i n -v e s t i g a t e the env i ronmenta l impact and hazards of the Ranger mine fo r the miners themse lves , the A b o r i g i n a l l andho lde r s and the l o c a l e co l ogy , but a l s o the hazards and e t h i c a l ques t i ons su r round ing the e n t i r e nuc l ea r f u e l c y c l e — i n c l u d i n g waste d i s p o s a l , nuc l ea r power p l a n t a c c i d e n t s , nuc l ea r t e r r o r i s m , nuc l ea r p r o l i f e r a t i o n and r e p r o c e s s i n g (Newell and Hamel-Green 1979:13 ) . A l though the Ranger I nqu i r y had widespread p u b l i c suppo r t , i t s recommendations were by-passed by the L i b e r a l government which r e ce i v ed them. C o n t i n u i n g o p p o s i t i o n to uranium mining has been demonstrated by l a b o u r , church groups and env i ronmenta l o r g a n i z a t i o n s i n the form of b o y c o t t s , demons t r a t i ons , and c i v i l d i s o b e d i e n c e . The Ranger Inqu i ry p rov ided a v e h i c l e fo r m o b i l i z i n g p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n . I t promoted p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n , and focused the nuc l ea r debate , but the f a i l u r e of government 79 to implement i t s recommendations r a i s e d ques t i ons conce rn ing s t a t e and co rpo ra t e r e l a t i o n s and the f o r c e of the t r i b u n a l . Another p redecessor to the RCUM was the Bayda, or C l u f f Lake Board of I nqu i r y i n Saskatchewan. The Bayda Inqu i r y l a s t e d 15 months, beg inn ing i n J u l y 1974, and addressed q u e s -t i o n s tha t ranged from the s p e c i f i c p lans proposed fo r mining i n the C l u f f Lake area to the dangers of nuc l ea r p r o l i f e r a t i o n . I t s f i n a l r epo r t summarizes the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of nuc l ea r power, dea l s w i th the problems of energy s u p p l y , and approves the mining of uranium. A l though the scope of the Inqu i r y was w ide , and i n c l uded c o n s i d e r a t i o n of s o c i a l , p o l i t i c a l , econo -m i c , and e t h i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , the Inqu i r y has been c r i t i -c i z e d s t r o n g l y by opponents of uranium m in ing , who c l a im tha t the d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y l a rge resources of government and i n d u s -t r y enabled them to s l a n t the p rocess in t h e i r f a vou r . The Issues The RCUM was e s t a b l i s h e d to i n q u i r e i n to the adequacy of r e g u l a t i o n s conce rn ing the e x p l o r a t i o n , m in i ng , and m i l l i n g of uranium in B r i t i s h Co lumb ia , as i n d i c a t e d by the Terms of Reference c i t e d e a r l i e r . At the time of the appointment of the i n q u i r y , no uranium mines were ope r a t i ng in t h i s p r o v i n c e . A l though i n d u s t r y was a c t i v e l y e x p l o r i n g fo r uranium, p u b l i c o p p o s i t i o n was mount ing. Among those i s sues con tes ted were the f o l l o w i n g : the h e a l t h and s a f e t y of uranium e x p l o r a t i o n , m i -n i n g , and m i l l i n g fo r workers and the p u b l i c ; the economics or uranium m i n i n g ; and the nuc l ea r f u e l c y c l e , i n which e x p l o r a -t i o n / m i n - i n g / m i l l i n g p l a y s a s t r a t e g i c r o l e . The i s sues of h e a l t h and s a f e t y are r e l a t e d to the r ad i o-80 a c t i v e nature of uranium and i t s daughter p r o d u c t s . A l though background r a d i a t i o n occurs on a n a t u r a l b a s i s , the a d d i t i o n a l r a d i o a c t i v i t y r e l e a sed through the mining of uranium i s r e c o g -n i zed as a p o t e n t i a l h a z a r d . E f f e c t s of exposure to r a d i a t i o n on human h e a l t h are documented, but the debate i s over what amount of exposure i s \" a c c e p t a b l e \" , who d e f i n e s i t , and the r i s k s and b e n e f i t s of uranium mining (Community I n t e r e s t Re-search Group 1980:29 ) . Opponents of uranium mining argue tha t i t c r ea t e s a h e a l t h hazard fo r mine workers and the gene ra l p u b l i c . They argue tha t r a d i o a c t i v i t y b iocumulates i n the food c h a i n , tha t r a d i o a c t i v i t y would e s c a l a t e in the water supp ly in the reg ions near mine s i t e s , and tha t radon gas would escape and d i s p e r s e i n the r eg ion of a mine. The Canadian C o a l i t i o n f o r Nuc lea r R e s p o n s i b i l i t y s t a t e s that mine workers run an i n c reased r i s k of i n c u r r i n g cance r : \" . . . i t i s known tha t the number of miners who have d i ed as a d i r e c t r e s u l t of working i n Canada 's uranium mines runs i n to the hundreds\" (1982:3 ) . The e x i s t e n c e of f e d e r a l hea l t h r e g u l a t i o n s and i ndus- t r y c o m p l i -ance wi th these s tandards form the bas i s fo r i n d u s t r y ' s r e p l y . The p e r s i s t e n c e of uranium daughter p r o d u c t s , and the problems of adequate t a i l i n g s d i s p o s a l are among r e l a t e d e n v i -ronmental problems c i t e d by mining opponents . Uranium mining t a i l i n g s remain r a d i o a c t i v e fo r at l e a s t one m i l l i o n years (Canadian C o a l i t i o n f o r Nuc lear R e s p o n s i b i l i t y 1978) . E n v i r o n -m e n t a l i s t s c l a i m that techno logy fo r the permanent d i s p o s a l of t a i l i n g s does not p r e s e n t l y e x i s t : There i s no e x i s t i n g techno logy capable of d i s p o s i n g of the uranium mining wastes in a manner which would 81 assure no need fo r human i n t e r v e n t i o n and no danger from i nadve r t en t human i n t r u s i o n . . . . ( T o r r i e 1982:17 ) . . . . . T h e uranium mining i n d u s t r y con t inues to demonstrate a l a ck of env i ronmenta l s e n s i t i v i t y and s o c i a l r e s p o n s i -b i l i t y i n i t s approach to the problem of r a d i o a c t i v e waste hand l i ng (To r r i e 1982:25) . Env i ronmenta l groups have noted tha t economics and the r o l e of government in the uranium i n d u s t r y were s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r s i n the convening of the RCUM. At the time of the announcement of the I n q u i r y , uranium mining and m i l l i n g were a l r e a d y t ak i ng p l ace i n Onta r io and Saskatchewan. A l though mining had not yet begun i n B r i t i s h Co lumb ia , by the summer of 1978, l a rge amounts of uranium had been l o c a t e d in the Okanagan P l a teau and i n other areas of the p rov ince (Canadian C o a l i t i o n f o r Nuc lea r R e s p o n s i b i l i t y 1978 :1 ) . I t s p r i c e had e s c a l a t e d from $5 a pound f o r ye l lowcake (uranium p r i o r to p r o c e s s i n g i n to f u e l ) in 1971 to above $40 per pound in 1978 (Vancouver Sun 1981) , c r e a t i n g c o n s i d e r a b l e p ressu re to mine i t . Opponents of uranium mining c i t e d s e v e r a l f a c t o r s which they f e l t would a l t e r the economic c l ima te fo r uranium m in i ng . They suggested that the nuc l ea r i n d u s t r y faced an imminent demise , due to the h igh c a p i t a l cos t s and government s u b s i d i z a -t i o n of much of the i n d u s t r y (RCUM 1979 3 :190) . D i s cove ry of Canadian p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n an i n t e r n a t i o n a l uranium c a r t e l was announced i n 1981. D i s s o l u t i o n of the c a r t e l , i t was w ide l y f e l t , would be fo l l owed by a c o l l a p s e of the market to more \" n a t u r a l \" l e v e l s of economic v i a b i l i t y . The dramat i c i n c r ease in shor t- te rm p r o f i t , combined wi th f o r e c a s t s fo r dec r eas i ng va lues in the 1 9 8 0 ' s , thus c r ea ted p ressure to mine i d e n t i f i e d d e p o s i t s as q u i c k l y as p o s s i b l e . 82 D u r i n g t h e t e c h n i c a l h e a r i n g s , i t w a s a n n o u n c e d t h a t s e v e r a l C a n a d i a n m i n i n g c o m p a n i e s h a d s i g n e d m u l t i m i l l i o n - d o l l a r c o n -t r a c t s t o s e l l B . C . u r a n i u m t o S o u t h K o r e a . T h e s e c o n t r a c t s , f o r a b o u t s e v e n m i l l i o n p o u n d s o f u r a n i u m o x i d e o v e r 11 y e a r s , c b e g i n n i n g i n 1 9 8 3 , w e r e e s t i m a t e d t o b e w o r t h a b o u t $ 3 0 0 m i l -l i o n . A s a r e s u l t o f t h i s d i s c l o s u r e , o n e m a j o r p a r t i c i p a n t , G r e e n p e a c e , w i t h d r e w f r o m t h e C o m m i s s i o n , s t a t i n g t h a t t h e c o n -t r a c t s w e r e \" i n c o n t e m p t o f t h e u r a n i u m i n q u i r y p r o c e s s a n d w i l l p u t u n d u e p r e s s u r e o n t h e B . C . g o v e r n m e n t t o a d o p t h e a l t h a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l s t a n d a r d s b a s e d o n e c o n o m i c v i a b i l i t y r a t h e r t h a n e n v i r o n m e n t a l p r o t e c t i o n \" ( V a n c o u v e r S u n \" 1 9 7 9 ) . A d e c l i n e i n t h e p r i c e o f u r a n i u m w a s a l s o p r e d i c t e d b e -c a u s e o f t h e l i m i t e d m a r k e t . A b o u t 9 0 % o f C a n a d a ' s u r a n i u m i s e x p o r t e d t o o t h e r c o u n t r i e s , a n d t h i s m a r k e t i s l i m i t e d t o w e a p o n r y a n d p o w e r g e n e r a t i o n ( K i n e s i s 1 9 8 2 : 1 5 ) . A l t h o u g h u r a -n i u m s a l e s f o r a r m a m e n t p u r p o s e s a r e r e s t r i c t e d , s a l e s t o t h i r d - w o r l d c o u n t r i e s h a v e b e e n j u s t i f i e d o n t h e b a s i s o f e n e r g y n e e d s ( C a n a d i a n C o a l i t i o n f o r N u c l e a r R e s p o n s i b i l i t y 1 9 7 8 : 1 ) C r i t i c s c i t e t h e c o n v e r s i o n o f s u c h \" a t o m s f o r p e a c e \" i n t o \" c l a n d e s t i n e n u c l e a r a r s e n a l s \" ( S p e c t r u m 1 9 7 9 ) . T h e y a r e a l s o s k e p t i c a l o f t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f c e n t r a l i s t a n d c a p i t a l - i n t e n -s i v e n u c l e a r e n e r g y t o t h i r d - w o r l d n a t i o n s : \" i n c o u n t r i e s i n w h i c h c a p i t a l i s s c a r c e a n d l a b o u r i s a b u n d a n t b u t p o o r l y t r a i n e d , t h e n u c l e a r o p t i o n r e p r e s e n t s a g r o s s m i s a l l o c a t i o n o f 6 r e s o u r c e s \" ( R e g i n a G r o u p f o r a N o n - N u c l e a r S o c i e t y 1 9 8 0 ) . F u r t h e r m o r e , m i n i n g o p p o n e n t s s t a t e t h a t : 8 3 nuc l ea r s a l e s cont inue because they s p e l l p r o f i t s to the s u p p l i e r n a t i o n s . Reactor o rde rs secure the t r a n s f e r of d e s p e r a t e l y needed development c a p i t a l to the h i g h -techno logy i n d u s t r i e s of the western wor ld (Regina Group f o r a Non Nuc lea r S o c i e t y 1980) . P o l i t i c a l economists note the ex tens i ve s t a t e i n t e r v e n t i o n i n the nuc l ea r i n d u s t r y . The uranium c a r t e l c i t e d above i s one example of t h i s . The Canadian government has been e x t e n s i v e l y i n vo l ved in the uranium mining i n d u s t r y through n a t i o n a l i z a -t i o n , i n c e n t i v e s and d i r e c t equ i t y i n t e r e s t . The Community I n t e r e s t Research Group (CIRG) notes tha t in 1944, the f e d e r a l government n a t i o n a l i z e d the c o u n t r y ' s on l y uranium mine, to secure the l i m i t e d s u p p l i e s of uranium and ensure the ma in t e -nance of low p r i c e s (1980:36) . The Fede ra l Uranium Reconna i s -sance Program p rov ided government s u b s i d i z a t i o n of e x p l o r a t i o n , through a \"10-yea r , $50 m i l l i o n programme to i d e n t i f y and d e l i n e a t e a l l p o t e n t i a l uranium-bear ing zones i n Canada\" (Com-munity I n t e r e s t Research Group 1980:21 ) . P o l i t i c a l economists a l so note tha t c o n c e n t r a t i o n w i t h i n the energy i n d u s t r y has taken p l ace through v e r t i c a l and h o r i -z o n t a l i n t e g r a t i o n : the former a l lows u t i l i t i e s to c o n t r o l t h e i r o i l s u p p l i e s as we l l as energy g e n e r a t i o n ; wh i le the c o n c e n t r a t i o n of power h o r i z o n t a l l y l i n k s o i l , gas , and nuc l ea r f u e l s i n the same c o r p o r a t i o n s . Th i s p rocess has l ed to the i n c reased power of m u l t i n a t i o n a l s , and has taken p l ace wi th the a c t i v e suppor t of the f e d e r a l government, through the c a r t e l , and the p r o v i s i o n of a s t a b l e o p e r a t i n g c l ima t e (Community I n t e r e s t Research Group 1980 :42 ) . The t h i r d i s sue c e n t r a l to the con t rove r s y su r round ing uranium mining i s the r o l e of uranium in the nuc l ea r f u e l 84 c y c l e , which i n v o l v e s s i x major s t e p s : m in i ng , m i l l i n g , e n -r i chment , f u e l f a b r i c a t i o n , power p l a n t s , and r eac to r wastes . T h i s c y c l e produces two types of p r o d u c t s : weapons (ma te r i a l s fo r deve lop ing nuc l ea r warheads) ; and energy ( e l e c t r i c i t y i s generated from steam in the nuc l ea r power p l an t ) ( K i nes i s 1982:16 ) . Opponents of uranium mining argue tha t i t must be seen i n terms of l a r g e r s o c i a l consequences . The use of nuc l ea r energy fo r m i l i t a r y purposes (weaponry) has been argued s i n ce H i r o s h i -ma. Opponents say tha t t h i s source of energy i s i n a p p r o p r i a t e , not on l y to t h i r d - w o r l d , l e s s developed n a t i o n s , but fo r North American a p p l i c a t i o n as w e l l . They r e f e r to the sma l l p e r c e n -tage of e l e c t r i c a l power needs which nuc l ea r energy can supp ly and c i t e the a v a i l a b i l i t y of a l t e r n a t i v e s such as c o n s e r v a -t i o n , s o l a r , w ind , thermal and biomass sources (Brooks 1981; B rooks , Robinson e t . a l . 1983; L o v i n s , 1977) . Opponents of nuc -l e a r power warn of the h e a l t h dangers of nuc l ea r power, and suggest tha t d e c e n t r a l i z e d , more l a b o u r - i n t e n s i v e forms of energy would be s o c i a l l y and e conomi ca l l y p r e f e r a b l e (Lov ins 1977) . A Chronology of the Uranium Min ing Con t rove r sy The con t rove r s y over uranium mining in B r i t i s h Columbia has i t s roo ts in the i n t e r n a t i o n a l r e s i s t a n c e to nuc l ea r t e c h -no logy . O p p o s i t i o n to a l l forms of nuc lea r t echno logy has taken p l ace s i n ce 1975 in B r i t a i n , through p u b l i c involvement in government i n q u i r i e s i n to r eac to r s a f e t y (The Windsca le I n q u i r y ) , p u b l i c demons t r a t i ons , and a pa r l i amen ta r y l obby . 85 I n S w e d e n , t h i s i s s u e h a s b e e n a f o c u s o f e l e c t i o n s a n d a r e f e r e n d u m i n 1 9 8 0 . A n t i - n u c l e a r g r o u p s h a v e b e e n a c t i v e t h r o u g h o u t E u r o p e . O p p o s i t i o n t o n u c l e a r t e c h n o l o g y i n J a p a n a n d t h e P a c i f i c h a s a c c e l e r a t e d s i n c e 1 9 7 4 , w h e n t h e f i r s t N u c l e a r F r e e P a c i f i c C o n f e r e n c e w a s h e l d . I n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s , t h e T h r e e M i l e I s l a n d i n c i d e n t i n 1 9 7 9 f u e l e d t h e n u c l e a r c o n t r o v e r s y , p r e c i p i t a t i n g p u b l i c d e m o n s t r a t i o n s a n d p o l i t i c a l d e b a t e o v e r t h e s a f e t y a n d f u t u r e o f n u c l e a r t e c h n o -l o g y . P u b l i c o p p o s i t i o n t o n u c l e a r t e c h n o l o g y h a s t a k e n m a n y f o r m s . A l t h o u g h d e m o n s t r a t i o n s , s u c h a s t h e a n n u a l P e a c e M a r c h a r e a p o p u l a r a n d v i s i b l e f o r m o f p o l i t i c a l a c t i o n , i n t e r v e n -t i o n a t p u b l i c h e a r i n g s h a s a l s o b e e n a s i g n i f i c a n t m e a n s o f c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e n u c l e a r d e b a t e . I n t e r v e n t i o n i n A t o m i c E n e r g y C o m m i s s i o n r e g u l a t o r y h e a r i n g s i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s i n t h e 1 9 6 0 ' s a n d e a r l y 1 9 7 0 ' s , l e d t o t h e i m p o s i t i o n o f s t r i c t e r s a f e t y s t a n d a r d s o n t h e n u c l e a r i n d u s t r y ( K i n e s i s 1 9 8 2 : 2 1 ) . P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C a n a d i a n i n q u i r i e s , s u c h a s t h e P o r t e r C o m m i s s i o n i n O n t a r i o , a n d t h e B a y d a h e a r i n g s i n S a s -k a t c h e w a n , c o n t r i b u t e d t o p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n a n d a w a r e n e s s o f t h e n u c l e a r c o n t r o v e r s y . S p e c i f i c e v e n t s a l s o c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h e c o n t r o v e r s y w i t h i n w h i c h t h e RCUM w a s a n n o u n c e d . A l t h o u g h t h e r e w a s n o a c t i v e m i n i n g o f u r a n i u m w h e n t h e C o m m i s s i o n w a s a n n o u n c e d , t h e r e w a s e x p l o r a t i o n a n d s t a k i n g o f u r a n i u m , t h r o u g h o u t t h e p r o v i n c e . I n r e s p o n s e t o a c t i v e u r a n i u m e x p l o r a t i o n , a p p r o x i m a t e l y t w e n -t y - s e v e n e n v i r o n m e n t a l g r o u p s s t a t e d t h e i r o p p o s i t i o n ( S c h m i t t 1 9 7 9 ) . I n G e n e l l e , B . C . , t h r e e p e o p l e w e r e a r r e s t e d f o r b l o c k -8 6 ing uranium e x p l o r a t i o n work in the China Creek watershed, the source of the town's water s u p p l y . Th i s i n c i d e n t in p a r t i c u l a r r a i s e d p u b l i c awareness of t h i s i s s u e , and c o n t r i b u t e d to the government 's promise of a p u b l i c i n q u i r y . Abbott c i t e s M i n i s t e r of Mines H e w i t t ' s reasons for e s t a b l i s h i n g the i n q u i r y : (1) There was a need to p rov ide an assessment : ' . . . of the s p e c i a l c o n d i t i o n s i n B r i t i s h Co lumb ia , which would be of s i g n i f i c a n c e i f uranium was mined i n the p r o v i n c e . (2) There were such s i g n i f i c a n t unknowns tha t a f u l l and open s tudy of the sub j e c t ( s a f e t y , h e a l t h and e n v i -ronmental p r o t e c t i o n ) was c a l l e d f o r ' (1980:8 ) . These , t hen , are the i s sues and events which p r e c i p i t a t e d the two case s tudy t r i b u n a l s . In the f o l l o w i n g c h a p t e r s , I w i l l p resen t the p a r t i c i p a n t s of the t r i b u n a l s , and des c r i be the procedures and the dec i s ion-mak ing process i n g rea te r dep th . 1 In the case of the N a t i o n a l Energy Board , f o r example, the p r o p o n e n t ' s a p p l i c a t i o n fo r a development permit se t s i n motion a hea r i ng p r o c e s s . 2 The F e d e r a l I n q u i r i e s Ac t a l l ows the cab ine t to e s t a b l i s h an i n q u i r y to adv i se i t upon \"any matter connected wi th the good government of Canada or the conduct of any pa r t of the p u b l i c bus iness t h e r e o f \" ( s . 2 ) . P r o v i n c i a l l e g i s l a t i o n i s e q u a l l y gene -r a l , e n t i t l i n g the Cab ine t to e s t a b l i s h a commission of i n q u i r y to adv i se i t upon \" . . . . a n y matter connected wi th the good gov -ernment of the P r o v i n c e ( s . 3 ) 3 In 1982 the PCAB and the P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Board were superceded by and amalgamated in the Env i ronmenta l Appeal Board . 4Most mun i c i pa l sp r a y i ng occurs on p u b l i c land wi thout p e r m i t . A l though s e c t i o n Four of the Ac t r e q u i r e s permi ts fo r p e s t i c i d e a p p l i c a t i o n s to land and water , S e c t i o n 22 of the Regu l a t i ons r e q u i r e s a permi t on l y fo r p u b l i c l and/water . In 1979, an o rde r- in-counc i1 exempted p r i v a t e land owners from r e q u i r i n g pe rmi t s on p r i v a t e land fo r a p p l i c a t i o n s of Schedule I I , I I I , or IV p e s t i c i d e s (T. Roberts 1981) . 87 5 Beg inn ing i n 1982, a p p e l l a n t s were r equ i r ed to submit $25 fo r each permi t appea l ed . 6For i n s t a n c e , the Regina Group fo r a Non-Nuclear Soc i e t y c i t e s Premier B lakeney of Saskatchewan as j u s t i f y i n g the export of uranium to deve lop ing na t i ons on the b a s i s that \" to reduce the energy a v a i l a b l e to the wor ld i s to con f i ne the poores t na t i ons to un to ld misery and p r i v a t i o n \" (1980). 88 CHAPTER 4 HETEROGENEITY OF PARTICIPATION: REPRESENTATION OF THE PUBLIC INTEREST 4 .1- I n t r oduc t i on P l u r a l i s t theory assumes a he t e rogene i t y of p a r t i c i p a t i o n in a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and c o n s u l t a t i v e p rocesses of government which w i l l promote the a t ta inment of ba lanced d e c i s i o n s . In t h i s p r o c e s s , the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i s represented by a number of o r g a n i z a t i o n s which counter the i n f l u e n c e of co rpora te and other p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t e r e s t s . The d i v e r s i t y of i n t e r e s t s represented by hear ing p a r t i c i p a n t s in t h i s s tudy con f i rms to a c e r t a i n extent the p l u r a l i s t no t i on of p a r t i c i p a t i o n . A number of i n t e r e s t s , i n c luded the p u b l i c , are represented in both case s t u d i e s , a l though the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e h e a r i n g , by n a t u r e , i s l e s s s u c c e s s f u l i n a t t r a c t i n g a d i v e r s i t y of p a r t i c i p a n t s . In both case s t u d i e s , i n t e r v e n t i o n by p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a n t s coun -t e r s , on a s u b s t a n t i v e b a s i s , the input by proponents or pro-development f o r c e s . The p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i s seen to be r e p r e -sented by a number of i n t e r v e n o r s , thereby p r o v i d i n g a h e t e r o -gene i t y of input to the d e c i s i o n - or po l i cy-mak ing p r o c e s s . None the l e s s , I w i l l argue tha t c e r t a i n f e a tu r e s of hear ing p a r t i c i p a t i o n r a i s e problems when sub jec ted to c r i t i c a l ana ly-89 s i s . R e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n t h e h e a r i n g i s f l e x i b l e and d i s c r e t i o n a -r y ; i t f a i l s t o e n s u r e t h e d e l e g a t i o n and a c c o u n t a b i l i t y o f s p e a k e r s . The s u b j e c t i v e and v o l u n t a r y d e f i n i t i o n o f \" i n t e -r e s t \" on w h i c h p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s based does n o t g u a r a n t e e t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f a l l r e l e v a n t i n t e r e s t s . From a c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e h e a r i n g f a i l s t o p r o v i d e f o r a f u l l h e t e r o g e n e i t y o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n — o n e i n c o r p o r a t i n g \" o b j e c -t i v e \" i n t e r e s t s s u c h as t h o s e o f s o c i a l c l a s s and g e n d e r , and e x t e n d i n g t o a f u l l range o f a f f e c t e d i n t e r e s t s . T h i s c h a p t e r w i l l l a y t h e groundwork f o r t h e a n a l y s i s o f t h e f o l l o w i n g c h a p t e r s by i n t r o d u c i n g t o t h e r e a d e r t h e p a r t i -c i p a n t s i n t h e h e a r i n g s under s t u d y . I w i l l b e g i n by i d e n t i -f y i n g t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t h e two t r i b u n a l s , and c o n t i n u e by d i s c u s s i n g t h e p r o c e s s by w h i c h t h e p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i s i d e n t i -f i e d . The h e t e r o g e n e i t y o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s t h e n a s s e s s e d . I c o n c l u d e w i t h an a n a l y s i s o f p u b l i c i n t e r e s t p a r t i c i p a t i o n as an i n d e x o f h e t e r o g e n e i t y and b a l a n c e . 4.2 - I d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f P a r t i c i p a n t s and I n t e r e s t s In t h i s s e c t i o n I w i l l b r i e f l y i d e n t i f y t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s o f t h e c a s e s t u d y t r i b u n a l s , t o g i v e t h e r e a d e r a s e n s e o f t h e i r numbers and t h e range and b a s i s o f t h e i r i n t e r e s t s . P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A p p e a l B o a r d H e a r i n g s In t h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A p p e a l B o a r d c a s e s t u d y h e a r i n g s , p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s l i m i t e d t o a s m a l l number o f g r o u p s and a few i n d i v i d u a l s , a l l o f whom have f i l e d o b j e c t i o n s t o t h e a p p e a l 1 p e r m i t a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e p r o p o n e n t . A p p e l l a n t s may a p p e a r b e f o r e t h e B o a r d d i r e c t l y , o r be r e p r e s e n t e d by w i t n e s s e s and/or by l e g a l c o u n s e l . The p u b l i c c a n n o t t a k e p a r t d i r e c t l y 90 i n the hea r ing un l ess they have p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the appeal p r o c e s s . Tab le 1 l i s t s the a p p e l l a n t s in the 1978-1981 Okana-gan 2,4-D PCAB h e a r i n g s . TABLE 1 - APPELLANTS, OKANAGAN 2,4-D PCAB HEARINGS 1978 - Mr . J im Foo rd , Mrs . George P r e t t y Consumers' A s s o c i a t i o n of Canada (CAC) Osooyoos Ratepayers A s s o c i a t i o n South Okanagan Env i ronmenta l C o a l i t i o n (SOEC) Soc i e t y fo r P o l l u t i o n and Env i ronmenta l C o n t r o l Kelowna Greenpeace 1979 - Mr. Ray Worsley I n d i v i d u a l (not i d e n t i f i e d ) Vernon and Kelowna SPEC Okanagan Greenpeace Foundat ion South Okanagan Env i ronmenta l C o a l i t i o n 1980 - Mr. Ray Worsley Vernon and Kelowna SPEC Okanagan Greenpeace Foundat ion South Okanagan Env i ronmenta l C o a l i t i o n 1981 - Mr. R.G. Johnson South Okanagan Env i ronmenta l C o a l i t i o n The PCAB case study covers a number of p a r t i c i p a n t s a p -p e a l i n g permi ts of the p e s t i c i d e 2,4-D in the Okanagan Lakes system over a four-year p e r i o d . Dur ing t h i s t ime , f i v e i n d i v i -dua l s and s i x o r g a n i z a t i o n s were f o r m a l l y r e g i s t e r e d as a p p e l -l a n t s . In 1978, a sma l l v a r i e t y of i n t e r e s t s were r ep r e sen t ed , i n c l u d i n g those of env i ronment , consumers, and l o c a l p r o p e r t y . Dur ing the remainder of the h e a r i n g s , on l y env i ronmenta l i n t e -r e s t s (SOEC, SPEC) were o r g a n i z a t i o n a l l y r ep r e sen t ed . P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the PCAB h e a r i n g s , in summary, was con-2 f i n e d to a few i n d i v i d u a l s and o r g a n i z a t i o n s . The dominance of one o r g a n i z a t i o n (the SOEC), in i t s su s t a i ned appea ls throughout the study p e r i o d c h a r a c t e r i z e t h i s case of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n . The nature of the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e h e a r i n g — t h e 91 t e c h n i c a l nature of the i s s u e s , the a d v e r s a r i a l nature of the appea l p r o c e s s , and the l ack of p u b l i c f u n d i n g — e f f e c t i v e l y r e s t r i c t p a r t i c i p a t i o n to a l i m i t e d number of i n t e r v e n o r s . In the case s tudy h e a r i n g s , the he t e rogene i t y of p a r t i c i p a n t s i s r e f l e c t e d by the a d v e r s a r i a l cha rac t e r of the appeal p rocess s t r u c t u r e which i s congruent with the p l u r a l i s t no t i on of a ba lance among competing i n t e r e s t s . Royal Commission of I nqu i r y i n to Uranium Min ing The Royal Commission of I nqu i r y i n to Uranium Min ing he ld two d i s t i n c t se t s of h e a r i n g s , both of which were open to p a r t i c i p a t i o n by the p u b l i c . As s t a t ed by the P r e l i m i n a r y R u l i n g s : . . . . t h e Royal Commission of Inqu i ry i n to Uranium Min ing w i l l ho ld p u b l i c hea r ings throughout the P rov ince of B r i t i s h Co lumb ia . To ensure maximum p a r t i c i p a t i o n the Commission w i l l gather ev idence and r e ce i ve p u b l i c com-ments r ega rd ing the matters d e s c r i b e d in i t s Terms of Reference by h o l d i n g p u b l i c h e a r i n g s , c o n s i s t i n g of f o r -mal hea r ings and l o c a l h e a r i n g s , and by r e c e i v i n g w r i t t e n b r i e f s (RCUM 1979) . I w i l l adopt the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of p a r t i c i p a n t s used by the RCUM and recorded i n i t s t r a n s c r i p t s . The number of p a r t i c i -pants and nature of t h e i r i n t e r e s t s d i f f e r e d between hea r ing types (community and t e c h n i c a l ) , thus war ran t ing separa te d i s -c u s s i o n . Community Hear ings Community hea r ings were he ld in communit ies e i t h e r c l o s e to known uranium d e p o s i t s or i n areas of i n t e r e s t to the u r a -nium mining i n d u s t r y , as determined by the Commiss ion. A l though two rounds of community hea r ings were s chedu l ed , the second was never h e l d , due to the e a r l y c l o s u r e of the Commiss ion. The 92 f i r s t round of community hea r ings was he ld in June and J u l y , 1979. These were in tended to e l i c i t i n f o rma t i on and concerns from l o c a l p o p u l a t i o n s , and to o b t a i n i n fo rma t i on from the mining companies. Tab le Two r e vea l s the l o c a t i o n , the a p p r o x i -mate audience s i z e and the number of p a r t i c i p a n t s , and the r a t i o of i n d i v i d u a l to o r g a n i z a t i o n a l submis s i ons . TABLE 2 - NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS—RCUM COMMUNITY HEARINGS I n d i v i d u a l June 5,6 June 8,9 June 11 June 18,19 June 20,21 June 21,22 June 26 June 27 J u l y 3 J u l y 4 Kelowna C learwater Kamloops Rock Creek Grand Forks C a s t l e g a r W i l l i ams Lake Vanderhoof Fo r t Ne lson A t i i n 6 15 9 8 5 19 6 1 8 77 O r g a n i z a t i o n 22 7 12 9 14 7 3 6 9 89 3 Audience 320 230 80 200 300 135 50 6 100 1421 Those who presented submiss ions before the Commission were on l y a sma l l p r o p o r t i o n of the t o t a l hea r ing aud i ence . Both \" p e r s o -n a l \" and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l submiss ions were p r e s e n t e d , a l though the r a t i o of these to one another v a r i e d among communi t ies . In the Kelowna h e a r i n g s , there were twenty-e ight submiss ions made to the Commission over a 2-day p e r i o d . S ix of these were from p r i v a t e i n d i v i d u a l s . O r g a n i z a t i o n s represented the f o l l o w i n g i n t e r e s t s : 93 TABLE 3 - REPRESENTATION OF INTERESTS BY ORGANIZATIONS KELOWNA COMMUNITY HEARINGS, RCUM INTEREST ORGANIZATION Mining Industry (3) Envi ronmental (4) Health (3) P l a c e r Development L t d . PNC E x p l o r a t i o n (Canada) Co. L t d . Norcen Energy Resources Vernon Branch, SPEC South Okanagan Environmental C o a l i t i o n Greenpeace (Okanagan) Foundation S i e r r a Club of Western Canada, Okanagan Group Kelowna Chapter of Re g i s t e r e d Nurses Nurses A s s o c i a t i o n of B.C. South Okanagan Similkameen Union Board of Health Canadian P u b l i c Health A s s o c i a t i o n Church (5) A g r i c u l t u r e ( 2 ) Native (1) Labour (1) Peace/Anti-Nuclear (1) Women (1) M i s c e l l a n e o u s (1) B.C. Conference, United Church of Canada InterChurch Committee A n g l i c a n Church S t . Paul's United Church - Kelowna Holy S p i r i t P a r i s h Summerland United Church South and East Kelowna Okanagan M i s s i o n L o c a l , B.C. F r u i t Growers A s s o c i a t i o n South East Kelowna I r r i g a t i o n D i s t r i c t Union of B.C. Indian C h i e f s I n t e r n a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n of M a c h i n i s t s Canadian C o a l i t i o n f o r Nuclear R e s p o n s i b i l i t y Kelowna Business and P r o f e s s i o n a l Women's Club I n t e r n a t i o n a l Hostess S e r v i c e T o t a l — 2 2 O r g a n i z a t i o n s 94 P a r t i c i p a n t s thus represen t a d i v e r s i t y of i n t e r e s t s . Each of these l i s t e d presented separa te submi s s i ons . A l though the r a t i o of v a r i ous i n t e r e s t s v i s - a - v i s one another d i f f e r e d among h e a r i n g s , each e x h i b i t e d some minimal d i v e r s i t y of r e p r e s e n t a -t i o n . T e c h n i c a l Hear ings T e c h n i c a l hea r ings were he ld by the RCUM in Vancouver , and were a l s o open to p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n . The Commission de f i ned p a r t i c i p a n t s to these hea r ings in i t s p r e l i m i n a r y r u l i n g s , as f o l l o w s : 1.1 Any person who adv i ses the Commission in w r i t i n g of h i s i n t e n t i o n to appear and g i ve ev idence at any formal hea r ing or who a c t u a l l y appears , g i ves h i s name and address to the Commission and s t a t e s h i s i n t e n t i o n to g i ve ev idence w i l l be deemed a p a r t i c i p a n t . . . . . 1 . 3 The Commission s h a l l , from time to t ime , i d e n t i -fy c e r t a i n p a r t i e s as 'major p a r t i c i p a n t s in the p r o c e e -d ings in the sense tha t they e i t h e r have i n d i c a t e d an i n t e n t i o n to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the p roceed ings on a more or l e s s r egu l a r bas i s or have been i d e n t i f i e d as posses s i ng i n f o rma t i on of p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t and re levance to the work of the Commiss ion. The p a r t i c i p a t i o n of these major p a r t i c i p a n t s s h a l l be governed by f u r t h e r p r o c e d u r a l r u l e s of the Commission (RCUM 1979) . Two forms of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the t e c h n i c a l hea r ings of the RCUM are d e s c r i b e d . The Commission i t s e l f thus f o r m a l l y d i s t i n g u i s h e s between o c c a s i o n a l and/or l i m i t e d p a r t i c i p a t i o n , and c o n t i n u i n g , or major p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Major p a r t i c i p a n t s are recogn ized f o r m a l l y by the Commiss ion, and may app ly fo r f u n -d ing by the Commiss ion. (See Tab le 4 on the f o l l o w i n g page fo r a l i s t of major p a r t i c i p a n t s ) . Dur ing the tenure of the RCUM, the cas t of major p a r t i c i p a n t s was a l t e r e d on l y s l i g h t l y , to i n c o r p o r a t e a d d i t i o n a l p a r t i c i p a n t s , and to d i sm i s s i n a c t i v e 95 p a r t i c i p a n t s . TABLE 4 ~ MAJOR PARTICIPANTS, RCUM TECHNICAL HEARINGS INTEREST ORGANIZATION Indust ry (5) Government (3) Commission (1) Labour (2) Environment (5) Community/Regional (3) B .C. and Yukon Chamber of Mines C o n s o l i d a t e d Rexspar M ine r a l s and Chemica ls L t d . Min ing A s s o c i a t i o n of B.C. Norcen Energy Resources PNC E x p l o r a t i o n (Canada) L t d . B.C. M i n i s t r y of Energy, M ines , and Petroleum Resources B.C. M i n i s t r y of Environment B.C. M i n i s t r y of Hea l th Commission Counse l Con f ede r a t i on of Canadian Unions B.C. F ede ra t i on of Labour and Un i ted S tee lworkers of America Greenpeace Foundat ion West Coast Env i ronmenta l Law Assn . Yel lowhead E c o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n C l ea rwa te r ; and Kamloops Env i ronmenta l A l l i a n c e A g a i n s t Uranium Min ing A t l i n Community A s s o c i a t i o n C o a l i t i o n of Concerned C i t i z e n s of the Bulk ley-Nechako J o i n t Committee Uranium T e c h n i c a l Hear ings Peace/Ant i-Nuc lea r (3) A g r i c u l t u r e (1) Na t i ve (1) Church (1) Hea l th (1) ( T o t a l — 25) Kootenay Nuc lear Study Group South Kelowna I r r i g a t i o n D i s t r i c t Union of B .C. Ind ian C h i e f s B.C. Conference Un i ted Church of Canada B.C. Med i ca l A s s o c i a t i o n Tab le Four above i d e n t i f i e s the major p a r t i c i p a n t s of the 96 t e c h n i c a l hea r ings of the RCUM, as des igna ted by the l a s t e d i t i o n of P r e l i m i n a r y R u l i n g s , on October 10, 1979. P a r t i c i -pants represent a spectrum of i n t e r e s t s , i n c l u d i n g those of government, i n d u s t r y , and a number of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t s — i n c l u -d ing h e a l t h , env i ronment , a n t i - n u c l e a r , and l a b o u r . Th i s i n t r o d u c t i o n to the p a r t i c i p a n t s of the case s t u d i e s i n d i c a t e s c e r t a i n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the t r i b u n a l s which uphold the p l u r a l i s t model . A p l u r a l i t y of o r g a n i z a t i o n s , and i n t e -r e s t s are represented at both se t s of h e a r i n g s . The RCUM as a c o n s u l t a t i v e t r i b u n a l i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of a wider spectrum of i n t e r e s t s than the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e PCAB hea -r i n g s . Ex tens i ve p u b l i c i t y , the a v a i l a b i l i t y of fund ing fo r p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n , the i n v e s t i g a t i v e o r i e n t a t i o n of the I n q u i r y , the nature of the i s s u e s , and the prov ince-wide scope of the I nqu i r y have been f a c t o r s conduc ive to e l i c i t i n g more widespread input and s u p p o r t . 4.3 - The I d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the P u b l i c I n t e r e s t I n d i v i d u a l s and groups i d e n t i f y themselves as r e p r e s e n t i n g the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t , or one of many p u b l i c i n t e r e s t s . The nature of t h i s p rocess i s vo lun ta r y and s u b j e c t i v e , a l though i t i s mediated by and may be de f i ned by the t r i b u n a l . The sense of r e p r e s e n t a t i o n tha t I use here i s a \" speak ing on beha l f o f \" , and does not i n c l ude the s p e c i f i c i t y and economic r e l a t i o n s h i p of l e g a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , nor the f o r m a l i t y and a c c o u n t a b i l i t y of p o l i t i c a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . Rep resen ta t i on i n the t r i b u n a l i s ra ther an i n f o rma l but r ou t i ne f ea tu re by which speakers extend t h e i r p r e s e n t a t i o n s to an i d e n t i f i e d c o n s t i t u e n c y and i n t e r e s t . 97 Although formal c r i t e r i a f o r i d e n t i f y i n g i n t e r e s t are absent, speakers r o u t i n e l y r e f e r to a s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n which l o -c a t e s , expands, and c r e d i t s t h e i r submissions as \" p u b l i c \" . Personal Submissions I n d i v i d u a l speakers connect themselves to a s o c i a l o r g a n i -z a t i o n which ranges from f a m i l y to o c c u p a t i o n a l and community bases. Speakers c l a i m to speak f o r t h e i r c h i l d r e n , spouse, parents, or the f a m i l y as a u n i t . Speakers r e f e r to a \"communi-ty \" with which they i d e n t i f y , r e f e r r i n g to geographic and s o c i a l , groupings. A community may be represented through a speaker's reference to others l i v i n g i n the same area or sha-r i n g s i m i l a r p o i n t s of view. Speakers c l a i m residence and geographic, r e g i o n a l , or community membership i n an area by p r o v i d i n g a minimal or expanded address. In the RCUM communi-ty h e a r i n g s , speakers f r e q u e n t l y prefaced t h e i r p r e s e n t a t i o n s with an address i n the area: \"My name i s Nan McGarvie and I l i v e i n Rock Creek.\" (RCUM 10:1406) During the PCAB hearings, a p p e l l a n t s introduced themselves as r e s i d e n t s of the South Okanagan, c i t i n g t h e i r addresses, the l o c a l i t y of t h e i r work and a f f i l i a t i o n s . Speakers a l s o enhance claims of community membership with c h r o n o l o g i c a l and b i o g r a p h i c a l support. Spea-kers i n the community hearings of the RCUM o f t e n s p e c i f i e d that they had l i v e d i n an area a number of years, or had spent t h e i r childhood i n the area. I n d i v i d u a l speakers a l s o extend t h e i r r e p r e s e n t a t i v e capa-c i t y through t o p i c a l , or s u b s t a n t i v e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . That i s , speakers may r e f e r to a community of b e l i e f s or p e r s p e c t i v e s with regards to an i s s u e . They r e f e r to a shared i d e o l o g i c a l 98 o r p o l i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e , a s i n t h e 1 9 8 0 P C A B h e a r i n g s w h e n M r . W o r s l e y o f V e r n o n s t a t e d t h a t h e s p o k e f o r h i m s e l f a n d \" o t h e r s l i k e m e \" , r e f e r r i n g t o a c o m m u n i t y o f s h a r e d p e r s p e c t i v e s . T h i s r e f e r e n c e t o a s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f o t h e r s e x t e n d s t h e p e r s o -n a l t o t h e p u b l i c : . . . m y name i s D o u g P i t n e y , I ' m a r e s i d e n t o f K e l o w n a . I ' m s p e a k i n g o n b e h a l f o f , I g u e s s , J o e P u b l i c (RCUM 5 : 5 0 7 ) . T h u s , i n d i v i d u a l p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g p r e -s e n t t h e m s e l v e s a s s p e a k i n g o n b e h a l f o f g e n e r a l , a n d f r e q u e n t -l y u n s p e c i f i e d p o p u l a t i o n s . T h e i r p r e s e n t a t i o n s i n d i c a t e a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e c a p a c i t y w h i c h c o n v e y s t h e s p e a k e r ' s e x t e n s i o n b e y o n d t h e \" p e r s o n a l \" , t o t h e \" p u b l i c \" , ( a n d i n t h e c o n t e x t o f t h i s s t u d y , t o t h e \" p o l i t i c a l \" ) . H o w e v e r , t h i s e x t e n s i o n i s i n d i r e c t , i n f o r m a l , a n d h a s n o o f f i c i a l s t a t u s . \" P e r s o n a l \" s p e a k e r s a r e n o t a c c o u n t a b l e ; t h e i r c o n s t i t u e n t s a r e n o t o f f i -c i a l l y c o u n t e d a n d l a b e l l e d . P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e t r i b u n a l b y i n d i v i d u a l s p e r s o n a l i z e s t h e p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s — i t i l l u s t r a t e s t h e a c c e s s i b i l i t y o f t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s . T h e p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i s i d e n t i f i e d i n t h i s c o n t e x t a s b o t h c u m u l a t i v e , b u i l t o n t h e s u m o f t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n s o f i n d i v i d u a l s p e a k e r s , a n d c o l l e c t i v e i n i t s i n f o r m a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e n a t u r e . P u b l i c I n t e r e s t O r g a n i z a t i o n s P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g , i n k e e p i n g w i t h t h e c o n t e m p o r a r y p l u r a l i s t m o d e l , i s p r i m a r i l y e x e r c i s e d b y a n d o r i e n t e d t o t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f o r g a n i z a t i o n s o r g r o u p s . T h i s t h e o r e t i c a l l y p r o v i d e s f o r g r e a t e r i n s t i t u t i o n a l e f f i c i e n c y , a v o i d s r e d u n d a n c e a n d a d d s f o r c e t o s u b m i s s i o n s . I n t h e c a s e 9 9 s t u d i e s , the c o n s u l t a t i v e t r i b u n a l ' s formal i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and fund ing requi rements of major p a r t i c i p a n t s r e i n f o r c e d t h i s o r g a n i z a t i o n a l t h r u s t of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i n t e r v e n t i o n . Dr . Bates of the RCUM presented the f o l l o w i n g g u i d e l i n e s fo r f u n -d ing at the f i r s t of the h e a r i n g s , an overv iew s e s s i o n . There shou ld be an a s c e r t a i n a b l e i n t e r e s t that ought to be represented at the I n q u i r y . I t should be e s t a b l i s h e d tha t separa te and adequate r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of that i n t e r e s t w i l l make a s u b s t a n t i a l c o n t r i b u t i o n to the I n q u i r y . Those seek ing funds shou ld have a record of concern fo r or shou ld have demonstrated in one way or ano the r , the i n t e r e s t which they r e p r e s e n t . I t should be i n gene ra l shown tha t those seek ing funds do not have s u f f i c i e n t f i n a n c i a l r esources to enable them to b r i n g those concerns before us and w i l l r equ i r e funds to do s o , and those seek ing funds should have a f a i r l y c l e a r p roposa l as to the use they in tend to make of them and shou ld be s u f f i c i e n t l y we l l o rgan ized e i t h e r as i n d i -v i d u a l s or as groups to account fo r the funds In order to avo id d u p l i c a t i o n , v a r i ous groups of s i m i l a r i n t e r e s t s in d i f f e r e n t pa r t s of the p r o v i n c e , w i l l be encouraged to j o i n t l y work towards a b r i e f fo r p r e s e n t a t i o n to avo id d u p l i c a t i o n and a l s o to a s s i s t such groups i n any way we can (RCUM 1979:9-10) . I d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i s thus d i r e c t e d by the c o n s u l t a t i v e t r i b u n a l fo r economic and b u r e a u c r a t i c pu rposes . O r g a n i z a t i o n s who met the c r i t e r i a of the RCUM were des igna ted 4 major p a r t i c i p a n t s . The s e p a r a t i o n of i n t e r e s t s , o r g a n i z a t i o -na l c r e d i b i l i t y , f i n a n c i a l need and c o o r d i n a t i o n of e f f o r t s c a l l e d fo r by the t r i b u n a l was a method of n e g o t i a t i n g who and how a l l i n t e r e s t s , i n c l u d i n g the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t would be r e p r e s e n t e d . For the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t r i b u n a l , i n t e r e s t s were de f i ned through the a d v e r s a r i a l nature of the appea l p r o c e s s , and the Board d i d not p l ay an a c t i v e r o l e in the c o n s t r u c t i o n of i n t e r e s t s . A l though there i s no formal p r e s c r i p t i o n fo r the i d e n t i f i -100 c a t i o n of i n t e r e s t , a s i m i l a r i t y of methods i s used to c o n -s t r u c t a p u b l i c i n t e r e s t . As in the p roduc t i on of pe r sona l submi s s i ons , speakers r e l y on o c c u p a t i o n a l and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l f e a t u r e s to produce an i d e n t i t y . Speakers o f t e n present themselves as a member of a p r o f e s s i o n or t r a d e , whose work i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d as r e l e van t to the i s sues at hand. As r e p r e -s e n t a t i v e s of o r g a n i z a t i o n s , speakers i n c o r p o r a t e t h e i r o c cupa -t i o n as w e l l as the o r g a n i z a t i o n of that occupa t i on to e s t a b -l i s h both re levance and the grounds of t h e i r i n t e r v e n t i o n . Hea l th p r a c t i t i o n e r s , such as doc to rs and r e g i s t e r e d n u r s e s , are among the occupa t ions c i t e d by speakers at the RCUM hea -r i n g s . In the f o l l o w i n g example, a doctor in the town of C lea rwate r d e f i n e s the nature of the i n t e r e s t s fo r which he speaks : D r . W o o l l a r d : My name i s Robert W o o l l a r d . I l i v e here i n C l ea rwa te r . I 'd l i k e t o , i f I may, wear two hats today , on separa te o c c a s i o n s . I n i t i a l l y , my hat as the Chairman of the Env i ronmenta l Hea l th Committee of the B r i t i s h Columbia Med i ca l A s s o c i a -t i o n and break (s ic ) a b r i e f statement and p r e s e n t a t i o n to the Commission of I n q u i r y , a f t e r which I would l i k e to make a pe r sona l b r i e f on beha l f of myse l f and my f a m i l y . The i n i t i a l d i s c u s s i o n , i s on beha l f of the B .C .M.A. The B .C .M.A. has been, as y o u ' r e aware, a c t i v e l y c o n -cerned about the uranium mining i s sue fo r two years now and we have , through the Env i ronmenta l Hea l th Committee, attempted to e s t a b l i s h a r e s p o n s i b l e a t t i t u d e and to he lp to fo rmula te the i s sues and t o , most p a r t i c u l a r l y fo rmu-l a t e p u b l i c involvement in the d e c i s i o n making l e a d i n g up to the p o s s i b l e i n t r o d u c t i o n of uranium mining in to B r i -t i s h Columbia (RCUM 1979:636-637) . The o r g a n i z a t i o n a l b a s i s and the s u b s t a n t i v e i n t e r e s t of the speaker are revea led i n t h i s s ta tement . The formal o r g a n i z a -t i o n of g roups , and e s p e c i a l l y the d e s i g n a t i o n of o f f i c e , i n f e r the d e l e g a t i o n of a speaker . In a d d i t i o n , s u b s t a n t i v e r e l e -101 vance connotes a p a r t i c i p a n t ' s \" r i g h t \" to speak. Through Dr . W o o l l a r d ' s b r i e f d e s c r i p t i o n of the p e r s p e c t i v e s and a c t i v i t i e s of the Env i ronmenta l Hea l th Committee, he e s t a b l i s h e s r e l e -vance , commitment, and knowledge concern ing the i s sues at hand. Through the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of t h e i r work and the p e r s p e c -t i v e to be adopted conce rn ing the i s s u e s , p a r t i c i p a n t s e s t a b -l i s h re l evance and conce rn ; they j u s t i f y t h e i r p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Most i m p o r t a n t l y , in the present c o n t e x t , they extend the base of t h e i r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . Let us examine a few more examples of r e p r e s e n t a t i o n cons t ru c t ed through subs t an t i v e i n t e r e s t s . In the community hea r ings of the RCUM, one p a r t i c i p a n t p re faced her remarks wi th the f o l l o w i n g : I am Doreen B u r n s t i l l and a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e fo r the In ter-Church Committee who works fo r wor ld development and e d u c a t i o n . We are a very sma l l group and the A n g l i -can r e p r e s e n t a t i v e , we work wi th t h i r d wor ld people and with the i n t e r e s t of the Na t i ves and we sponsor SPEC and P e o p l e ' s Food Commiss ion, Na t i ve R igh ts and C .C .N .R . in t h e i r endeavours (RCUM 4: 251) . T h i s speaker i d e n t i f i e s the i n t e r e s t s she rep resen ts ( church , world development, e d u c a t i o n ) . In a d d i t i o n , she extends her p o t e n t i a l c o n s t i t u e n t s (those fo r whom she speaks) through d e s c r i p t i o n of her o r g a n i z a t i o n ' s l i a i s o n s . New o r g a n i z a t i o n s may be generated by the t r i b u n a l , as in the case of those groups wi th s i m i l a r i n t e r e s t s who combined f o r c e s i n concurrence wi th the RCUM fund ing c r i t e r i a noted e a r l i e r : Mr. G a r r i c k . Thank you very much. We welcome the e s t ab l i shment and opening of the p u b l i c i n q u i r y i n to uranium development in B r i t i s h Co lumbia . My name i s David G a r r i c k wi th SPEC, whose address f o r the record i s 1603 West Fouth Avenue, Vancouver V6J 2L8. 102 I have been asked to p resent a j o i n t opening statement to the B r i t i s h Columbia P u b l i c I nqu i r y i n to Uranium M i n i n g , on beha l f of the Canadian S c i e n t i f i c P o l l u t i o n & Env i ronmenta l C o n t r o l S o c i e t y , the Western Canada Chapter of the S i e r r a C l u b , the Fede ra t i on of B r i t i s h Columbia N a t u r a l i s t s , the Telkwa Foundat ion and the Greenpeace Founda t i on . We are a l s o represented here by l e g a l c o u n s e l , Ann Rounthwai te , who w i l l o u t l i n e our p r o c e d u r a l recommenda-t i o n s , a f t e r I p resent our recommendations on content (RCUM 1: 84 ) . Some speakers d e s c r i b e t h e i r d e l e g a t i o n as r e p r e s e n t a -t i v e s , e i t h e r through no t ing t h e i r p o s i t i o n in the o r g a n i z a t i o n (as in the e a r l i e r example wi th Dr . Wool lard) or through a d e s c r i p t i o n of the mandate of t h e i r s e l e c t i o n , as in the f o l l o -wing RCUM e x c e r p t . My name i s Wayne McGrath. I r e s i de at 3102 13th S t r e e t , Vernon . My te lephone Number i s 542-7744. I'm here today r ep r e sen t i ng the B.C. Branch of the Canadian P u b l i c Hea l th A s s o c i a t i o n . I p r e s e n t l y serve as V i c e - P r e s i d e n t of that A s s o c i a t i o n . The Canadian P u b l i c Hea l th A s s o c i a t i o n , common-l y r e f e r r e d to as CPHA, i s a n o n p o l i t i c a l , non-government a s s o c i a t i o n , and i t ' s cons ide red to be the major vo i ce of Community Hea l th in Canada. On May 4th of t h i s y e a r , the Annual Genera l Meet ing of the B.C. Branch was he ld at which time a r e s o l u t i o n was presented and c a r r i e d by the membership of the B.C. B ranch . Obv ious l y we haven ' t had much time to prepare a b r i e f and i t i s our i n t e n t i o n , and i t was the s t a t e d i n t e n t i o n of the membership at the Annual Genera l Meet ing to present a more formal or t e c h n i c a l b r i e f t h i s f a l l in Vancouver . . . (RCUM 4: 389-90). Another method of e s t a b l i s h i n g a mandate fo r a s p e a k e r ' s d e l e -ga t i on i s to r e f e r to the o f f i c e , or f u n c t i o n of the speaker w i t h i n the o r g a n i z a t i o n , as in the above example. In the 1978 PCAB h e a r i n g s , fo r i n s t a n c e , the spokespersons fo r the SOEC present themselves as \" I n fo rmat ion D i r e c t o r \" , and \"Research D i r e c t o r \" of tha t o r g a n i z a t i o n . 103 T h u s , s p e a k e r s r o u t i n e l y i n t r o d u c e t h e m s e l v e s , t h e o r g a n i -z a t i o n a n d t h e i n t e r e s t w h i c h t h e y r e p r e s e n t t h r o u g h c o n s t r u c -t i o n o f a s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n . A l t h o u g h t h e p r o c e s s i s f l e x i b -l e a n d i n f o r m a l , i t i s r o u t i n e . H o w e v e r , t h i s c o n s t r u c t i o n o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n d o e s n o t a l w a y s g o u n c h a l l e n g e d . C o n g r u e n t w i t h t h e a d v e r s a r i a l n a t u r e o f t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t r i b u n a l , i t i s s u b j e c t t o c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n . I n t h e f o l l o w i n g e x a m p l e , M r . P a r c h o m c h u k o f t h e O k a n a g a n W a t e r B a s i n B o a r d , ( t h e p r o p o n e n t ) , c r o s s - e x a m i n e s M r . L e w i s , o f t h e S O E C , ( t h e a p p e l l a n t ) , d u r i n g t h e 1 9 8 1 P C A B h e a r i n g s . M r . P a r c h o m c h u k : M r . L e w i s , y o u s t a t e d t h a t t h e E n v i r o n m e n t a l C o a l i t i o n h a s 2 0 0 m e m b e r s . T h e l a t e s t a u d i t e d r e p o r t i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e r e a r e p r e s e n t l y o n l y 32 v o t i n g m e m b e r s a n d 3 2 n o n - v o t i n g m e m b e r s . C a n y o u e x p l a i n t h i s d i s c r e p a n c y ? M r . L e w i s : W e l l , we h a v e a l a r g e n u m b e r o f p e o p l e w h o a r e a c t i v e i n C o a l i t i o n a c t i v i t i e s , who c o m e t o o u r m e e t i n g s a n d s o o n a n d s o o n . A s y o u ' r e p r o b a b l y a w a r e , i f y o u h a v e o u r F i n a n c i a l S t a t e m e n t s a n d s o o n , w e ' v e o n l y b e e n i n c o r p o r a t e d u n d e r t h e S o c i e t i e s A c t f o r o n e y e a r . A n d s o , a l l o f o u r m e m b e r s h i p , a n d o u r m a i l i n g l i s t s , t h a t we m a i n t a i n a c t i v e c o r r e s p o n d e n c e w i t h , h a v e n o t b e c o m e d u e s - p a y i n g m e m b e r s y e t . M r . P a r c h o m c h u k : T h e A n n u a l R e p o r t a l s o s t a t e s t h a t n o n e o f t h e m e m b e r s h a v e p a i d d u e s , a s r e q u i r e d i n t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n . I f t h i s i s p a r t o f t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n , d o e s y o u r S o c i e t y i n f a c t e x i s t ? I f i t d o e s n o t e x i s t , a r e y o u t h e n r e p r e s e n t i n g y o u r s e l f o r t h e S o c i e t y ? M r . L e w i s : T h e S o c i e t y e x i s t s . We h a v e n o w o r d f r o m t h e R e g i s t r a r o f S o c i e t i e s t h a t we d o n ' t e x i s t . M r . P a r c h o m c h u k : B u t t h e m e m b e r s h a v e n o t p a i d t h e i r d u e s a s r e q u i r e d , s o h o w c a n t h e y b e c o n s i d e r e d a s m e m b e r s ? M r . L e w i s : . . . a l l o u r d u e s w e r e p a i d u p b e f o r e o u r l a s t a n n u a l g e n e r a l m e e t i n g . . . . M r . P a r c h o m c h u k : A r e y o u c u r r e n t l y a r e s i d e n t o f t h e O k a n a g a n v a l l e y ? 1 0 4 Mr. Lewis : Yes I am. Mr. Parchomchuk: Your r epor t i n d i c a t e s your address as be ing 3970 West 17th Avenue, Vancouver . Mr. Lewis : Yes , I 've been working down there p a r t - t i m e . In t h i s example, the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of the a p p e l l a n t o r g a n i z a t i o n and the s p e a k e r ' s r e l a t i o n s h i p to the i s sues and a c o n s t i t u e n c y i s que r i ed under c ross-examina -t i o n . The membership of the a p p e l l a n t o r g a n i z a t i o n , and the geograph ic b a s i s of the s p e a k e r ' s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e c a p a c i t y are c h a l l e n g e d . Th i s excerp t i s i n s t r u c t i v e because i t r e v ea l s the p o t e n t i a l f o r c e of any s p e a k e r ' s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e c a p a c i t y . A l -though the p l u r a l i s t model assumes a no t i on of b a l a n c e , there i s no means to assess and compare the weight of any i n t e r e s t v i s - a - v i s o t h e r s . In the above example, the c ross-examina t ion p rocess i s an attempt to d i s c r e d i t the numer i ca l bas i s and the l o c a l cha r a c t e r of the a p p e l l a n t i n t e r e s t group. Th i s p o i n t s to the und i sp l ayed and t aken- fo r-gran ted cha rac t e r of r e p r e s e n -t a t i o n . W i th in the t r i b u n a l s , a l l i n t e r e s t groups are assumed to have the same we ight , and are capable of c h a l l e n g i n g any other i n t e r v e n o r . However, through speake r s ' c o n s t r u c t i o n s of i n t e r e s t , both s t r u c t u r a l and s u b s t a n t i v e , the d i s p a r i t y among i n t e r e s t groups becomes more v i s i b l e . The p a r t i c i p a t i o n of i n d i v i d u a l s and groups i n the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t , a l though f o r m a l l y u n s p e c i f i e d , i s s y s t e m a t i c a l l y produced by speake rs . The c o n s t i t u e n t s , o r g a n i z a t i o n s , and i n t e r e s t s on beha l f of whom submiss ions are made, are taken to i n d i c a t e the p a r t i c i p a t i o n of the p u b l i c . The means by which p u b l i c i n t e r e s t s are de f i ned range from p r e s e n t a t i o n of perso-105 n a l s u b m i s s i o n s t o a m o r e e l a b o r a t e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f r e p r e s e n -t a t i o n . T h i s p r a c t i c e i s c o n g r u e n t w i t h a p l u r a l i s t p e r s p e c -t i v e , w h i c h a s s u m e s t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e n a t u r e o f p u b l i c p a r t i -c i p a t i o n t o b e b o t h a p p r o p r i a t e a n d e f f e c t i v e . 4 . 4 - H e t e r o g e n e i t y a n d P u b l i c I n t e r e s t R e - e x a m i n e d A c c o r d i n g t o t h e p l u r a l i s t m o d e l , t h e h e t e r o g e n e i t y o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e t r i b u n a l c o n t r i b u t e s t o a b a l a n c e a m o n g c o m p e t i n g i n t e r e s t s , a n d r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e p u b l i c i n t e r e s t e n s u r e s t h i s b a l a n c e . E x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e p a r t i c i p a t i o n p r o c e s s h a s r e v e a l e d g e n e r a l a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h i s m o d e l , a l t h o u g h d i f -f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n t h e t r i b u n a l s a n d p a r t i c u l a r f e a t u r e s o f t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n p r o c e s s r a i s e a d d i t i o n a l p r o b l e m s . I n t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e ( P C A B ) h e a r i n g s p a r t i c i p a t i o n w a s d e -f i n e d t h r o u g h t h e a p p e a l p r o c e s s . T h e r e w e r e f e w a p p e l l a n t s , b u t t h e s e r e p r e s e n t e d i n 1 9 7 8 a n u m b e r o f p u b l i c i n t e r e s t s , i d e n t i f i e d n o m i n a l l y a s c o n s u m e r , l o c a l e c o n o m i c , a n d e n v i r o n -m e n t a l a s w e l l a s p e r s o n a l i n t e r e s t s . I n t h e e n s u i n g y e a r s o n l y e n v i r o n m e n t a l i n t e r e s t s w e r e r e p r e s e n t e d , t h e b u l k o f t h e a p p e a l b e i n g c a r r i e d o v e r t i m e b y t h e S O E C . T h i s e x p e r i e n c e d o e s n o t r e f l e c t t h e d i v e r s i t y a s s u m e d b y t h e p l u r a l i s t p e r -s p e c t i v e , b u t i s e x p l a i n e d i n p a r t b y t h e n a t u r e o f t h e t r i b u -n a l . T h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t r i b u n a l b y n a t u r e r e q u i r e s o n l y o n e a p p e a l t o t r i g g e r i t s h e a r i n g p r o c e s s . T h e l a c k o f e x t e n s i v e a p p e a l s may b e e x p l a i n e d b y t h e c o m p l e x s t a t u t o r y r e g u l a t i o n s g o v e r n i n g t h e a p p e a l p r o c e s s , t h e l a c k o f h e a r i n g a n d t r i b u n a l p u b l i c i t y , t h e l a c k o f p u b l i c f u n d i n g , a n d t h e t e c h n i c a l n a t u r e o f t h e i s s u e s . T h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t r i b u n a l i s e s s e n t i a l l y a n 1 0 6 adversa ry forum, and i t s con fo rmi t y to the p l u r a l i s t model i s i n i t s p r o v i s i o n of ba lance to the dec i s ion-mak ing process through p r e s e n t a t i o n of competing i n p u t . The RCUM hea r ings present a much more expans ive p i c t u r e of p a r t i c i p a t i o n , both at community and f o r m a l / t e c h n i c a l h e a r i n g s . The spectrum of i n t e r e s t s covered by the p a r t i c i p a t i n g groups i n c l uded government, i n d u s t r y , l a b o u r , and a v a r i e t y of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t g roups , i n c l u d i n g chu r ch , a n t i - n u c l e a r , h e a l t h , l a -bour , n a t i v e , and env i ronmenta l g roups . The range and number of p a r t i c i p a n t s in t h i s forum are more compat ib le wi th a p l u r a -l i s t concept of h e t e r o g e n e i t y , and p rov ide a v a r i e t y of pro-and an t i -m in ing f o r c e s . A he t e rogene i t y of p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t e r e s t s , and i n t e r v e n -t i o n by p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups d i s p l a y congruence wi th the p l u r a l i s t model . Moreover , the f l e x i b i l i t y and i n f o r m a l i t y of t r i b u n a l procedures i s seen to encourage p u b l i c i n t e r e s t g roups ' i n t e r v e n t i o n . Speakers r o u t i n e l y c a l l upon a s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of the p u b l i c , whether r e p r e s e n t i n g p u b l i c i n t e -r e s t o r g a n i z a t i o n s or a more d i f f u s e and amorphous c o l l e c t i v e i d e n t i t y . M o t i v a t i o n fo r p a r t i c i p a t i o n , in keeping wi th a l i b e -r a l p e r s p e c t i v e , r e f l e c t s c i v i c r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and the e x i s -tence of an open and p u b l i c l y r e c ep t i v e dec i s ion-mak ing p r o -cess . None the l e s s , a p a r t i c i p a t o r y c r i t i q u e of the hea r ing p r o -cess c h a l l e n g e s the extent of he t e rogene i t y and the b a s i s of r e p r e s e n t a t i o n e x h i b i t e d i n the t r i b u n a l . I n t e r e s t s are i n d i v i -d u a l l y and s u b j e c t i v e l y i d e n t i f i e d by p a r t i c i p a n t s . There are no p r o v i s i o n s i n the hea r ing process fo r ensur ing tha t a l l 107 r e l e v a n t i n t e r e s t s b e i d e n t i f i e d a n d r e p r e s e n t e d . T h e t r i b u n a l p r o c e s s f a i l s t o a d d r e s s t h e e x i s t e n c e o f o b j e c t i v e i n t e r e s t s , w h i c h B a l b u s d e f i n e s a s : \" a n e f f e c t b y s o m e t h i n g o n t h e i n d i -v i d u a l w h i c h c a n be o b s e r v e d a n d m e a s u r e d b y s t a n d a r d s e x t e r n a l t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s c o n s c i o u s n e s s \" ( 1 9 7 1 : 1 5 2 ) . T h u s , t h e r e i s n o g u a r a n t e e t h a t i n t e r e s t s w h i c h s t a n d t o be a f f e c t e d b y a p r o p o s e d d e v e l o p m e n t ( e . g . , o u t d o o r r e c r e a t i o n , w o m e n , n a t i v e ) w i l l b e c o n s u l t e d b y t h e t r i b u n a l . A l t h o u g h t h e p r o p o n e n t may b e r e q u i r e d b y l a w t o p a r t i c i p a t e , b o t h t h e i n c e n t i v e a n d t h e m e a n s o f p u b l i c i n t e r e s t p a r t i c i p a t i o n r e m a i n d i s c r e t i o n a r y a n d v o l u n t a r y . T h e g e n e s i s f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s t h u s s t r u c t u r a l l y i m b a -l a n c e d , w i t h t h o s e w i t h a n e c o n o m i c o r b u r e a u c r a t i c i n t e r e s t h a v i n g e c o n o m i c a n d a d m i n i s t r a t i v e i n c e n t i v e . I n c o n t r a s t , n o n - p r o d u c e r i n t e r e s t s t e n d t o b e d i f f u s e , a n d t o l a c k a n e c o n o m i c b a s i s ( T r e b i l c o c k 1 9 7 8 ) . N o t o n l y i s t h e r e a n i m b a -l a n c e i n t e r m s o f m o t i v a t i o n f o r p r e p a r a t i o n , b u t t h e d i f f e r e n -t i a l a b i l i t i e s a n d r e s o u r c e s a v a i l a b l e t o c o m p e t i n g i n t e r e s t s r e s u l t i n a f u r t h e r d i s e q u i l i b r i u m . A n i m b a l a n c e i n r e s o u r c e s o u t s i d e t h e h e a r i n g s i s r e f l e c t e d b y t h e r a n g e a n d d e p t h o f 5 p a r t i c i p a t i o n w i t h i n t h e t r i b u n a l . M o r e o v e r , t h e f o r m o f p u b l i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n p r a c t i c e d i n t h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g g i v e s n o a s s u r a n c e t h a t s p e a k e r s a r e a c c o u n t a b l e t o t h e i r r e p r e s e n t e d o r g a n i z a t i o n s o r c o n s t i t u e n t s . F r o m a p a r t i c i p a t o r y a n d d e v e -l o p m e n t a l p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e p r o c e s s d i s p l a y s a r e p r e s e n t a t i o n w h i c h may e x i s t o n l y o n a f o r m a l p r o c e d u r a l l e v e l . T h e a c t u a l i n v o l v e m e n t o f t h e p u b l i c i n t h e i s s u e ( r e s e a r c h , e d u c a t i o n , 1 0 8 l obby ing ) may be m in ima l . The emphasis , r a t h e r , i s on the i n s t rumen ta l c h a r a c t e r of the hear ing p r o c e s s — t h e nature of the d e c i s i o n to be made. The l ack of formal methods of count ing and weighing the r e l a t i v e c o n s t i t u e n t s and c o n t r i b u t i o n s of p u b l i c and other p a r t i c i p a n t s i s taken to i n d i c a t e the ba lance of p a r t i c i p a n t s w i t h i n the t r i b u n a l . However, i t may i n d i c a t e a f a i l u r e to make v i s i b l e the r e l a t i v e power of p a r t i c i p a n t s . The f i n a n c i a l b a s i s of o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s u p p o r t , and the r e l a t i o n s h i p s between p u b l i c , c o r p o r a t e , and government i n t e r e s t s , do not su r f a ce as r e l e van t i s s u e s . The p o t e n t i a l fo r over- and under- represen ta-t i o n of d i f f e r e n t i n t e r e s t s i s not d i s c l o s e d by hea r ing p r o c e -dures which i n the p l u r a l i s t f a s h i o n , need on l y to p resen t the appearance of a m u l t i p l i c i t y of d i f f e r i n g p o i n t s of v iew. In a s i m i l a r v e i n , not a l l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s are p resent at a l l t imes du r ing the h e a r i n g s . For the PCAB h e a r i n g s , a l though there i s a formal p l u r a l i t y of a p p e l l a n t s , the SOEC dominated the h e a r i n g s , in the amount of time i t took in p r e s e n t i n g i t s s u b m i s s i o n s , c ross-examin ing and be ing c ross-examined , and i n the number and scope of i t s arguments. In the RCUM h e a r i n g s , Abbott notes the f requency of p a r t i c i p a t i o n by a few major p a r t i c i p a n t s — B.C. Med i ca l A s s o c i a t i o n , B .C. C o u n c i l f o r the Un i ted Church of Canada, Union of B.C. Ind ian C h i e f s , South East Kelowna I r r i g a t i o n D i s t r i c t , West Coast Env i ronmenta l Law A s s o c i a t i o n and Env i ronmenta l A l l i a n c e Aga ins t Uranium Mining (1980:49) . Thus , a l though a v a r i e t y of i n t e r e s t s may be o f f i c i a l l y r e p r e s e n t e d , not a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s spend the same amount of time 109 i n p r e p a r i n g a n d s u b m i t t i n g p r e s e n t a t i o n s , i n b e i n g p r e s e n t a t p r o c e e d i n g s , n o r d o a l l h a v e a v a i l a b l e t h e s a m e r e s o u r c e s i n m a k i n g t h e i r s u b m i s s i o n s . W h a t may s e e m f r o m a p l u r a l i s t p e r -s p e c t i v e t o b e a b a l a n c e d a n d h e t e r o g e n e o u s s a m p l e o f p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a n t s may i n p r a c t i c e b e a n u m b e r o f d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y a c t i v e o r p o w e r f u l p a r t i c i p a n t s , w h i c h c h a l l e n g e s t h e p u r p o r t e d b a l a n c e o f t h e f o r u m . W h i l e s o m e o f t h e s e p r o b l e m s , s u c h a s t h e l a c k o f h e t e r o -g e n e i t y i n t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e h e a r i n g , i n d i c a t e t h e i n a d e q u a c y o f t h e t r i b u n a l , o t h e r s p o i n t t o t h e p l u r a l i s t m o d e l i t s e l f a s t h e d i f f i c u l t y . F r o m a c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e r e f o r e , r e p r e -s e n t a t i o n o f t h e p u b l i c may be m i n i m a l a n d r e s t r i c t e d i n p r a c -t i c e t o a p a r t i c i p a t o r y e l i t e w h i c h h a s l i t t l e o r n o a c c o u n t a -b i l i t y t o i t s c o n s t i t u e n t s . T h e c o n f o r m i t y o f t h e h e a r i n g p r o c e s s t o t h e p l u r a l i s t m o d e l i n t e r m s o f i t s p r o v i s i o n f o r p u b l i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c -t i v e o f s t a t e r e l a t i o n s . T h e d i s c r e t i o n a r y m e t h o d s b y w h i c h t h e t r i b u n a l m e d i a t e s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l l o w f o r t h e s t a t e t o c l a i m t h a t a d i v e r s i t y o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n e x i s t s , a n d t h a t t h e p u b l i c i s r e p r e s e n t e d , w h i c h c o n t r i b u t e s t o t h e l e g i t i m a t i o n o f t h e f o r u m . T h e a p p e a r a n c e o f p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n f u r t h e r e n d o r s e s s t a t e a n d i n d u s t r y a c t i v i t y i n t h e a r e a s u n d e r d i s c u s -s i o n ( h e r b i c i d e a p p l i c a t i o n s , u r a n i u m m i n i n g ) . 1 T h e p r o p o n e n t w a s t h e W a t e r I n v e s t i g a t i o n s B r a n c h o f t h e M i n i s t r y o f E n v i r o n m e n t f r o m 1 9 7 8 t o 1 9 8 0 . I n 1 9 8 1 , t h e p r o p o n e n t w a s t h e O k a n a g a n B a s i n W a t e r B o a r d . 2 A u d i e n c e n u m b e r s r a n g e d f r o m z e r o t o t w e l v e , a l t h o u g h t h e m a j o r i t y o f t h e s e s s i o n s a t t r a c t e d o n l y t w o t o t h r e e o b s e r v e r s . 1 1 0 3 Audience F i gu res are approx imate , and from Abbott (1980: 84 ) . Other f i g u r e s are drawn from RCUM t r a n s c r i p t s . 4 See Appendix 2.2 - P a r t i c i p a n t Fund ing , fo r a d e s c r i p t i o n of the fund ing a l l o c a t e d to v a r i ous p u b l i c i n t e r e s t o r g a n i z a -t i o n s . 5 T r e b i l c o c k notes that the t o t a l r esources of 77 p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups are under $5 m i l l i o n , in c o n t r a s t to c o r p o r a t e , t r a d e , and p r o f e s s i o n a l l o b b i e s , who i n Ottawa a lone number 300, wi th budgets t o t a l l i n g more than $120 m i l l i o n a year (Ross 1981:24) . I l l CHAPTER 5 FAIRNESS OF PROCEDURES: PREPARATION AND ORGANIZATION OF INTERVENTION 5 .1- In t roduc t i on Hear ing procedures are assumed by the p l u r a l i s t model to be governed by p o l i t i c a l s tandards of f a i r n e s s . D e s c r i p t i v e accounts of the hea r ing p rocess emphasize i t s o b j e c t i v i t y and ba l ance . However, formal d e s c r i p t i o n s of i n t e r v e n t i o n p r o c e -dures are t y p i c a l l y r e s t r i c t e d to q u a s i - j u d i c i a l a c t i v i t i e s — p r e s e n t a t i o n of submis s i ons , c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n , and summation. They neg l e c t the p rocess and o r g a n i z a t i o n by which p a r t i c i p a n t s prepare to make a c a s e . T h i s i n c l udes assuming a burden of p r o o f , r e s e a r c h , a c c e s s i n g i n f o r m a t i o n , i d e n t i f y i n g and s e c u -r i n g w i t n e s s e s , comply ing wi th r u l e s of e v i dence , and other p rocedu res , some of which are i n i t i a t e d p r i o r to the a c t u a l hea r ing p r o c e s s . These a c t i v i t i e s take p lace w i t h i n a s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n which i s o f t e n temporary , v o l u n t a r y , and e x t e r n a l to p r o f e s s i o n a l and b u r e a u c r a t i c networks. Recogn i t i on and d e s c r i p t i o n of these a c t i v i t i e s and the o r g a n i z a t i o n through which they are produced r e vea l s an imbalance among i n t e r v eno r s i n the p r e p a r a t i o n and p r a c t i c e of the hea r ing p rocess which i s not r e f l e c t e d by the p l u r a l i s t model . 112 In t h i s chap t e r , I w i l l ana lyze the hea r ing procedures of the two case study h e a r i n g s . I w i l l beg in with an overv iew of hea r ing p rocedu re s , r e f e r r i n g to both the l e g a l and p o l i t i c a l l i t e r a t u r e . A d e s c r i p t i o n of procedures of the case study hea r ings f o l l o w s . I then d e s c r i b e the p r e l i m i n a r y a c t i v i t i e s and s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n through which p a r t i c i p a n t s prepare f o r and engage i n i n t e r v e n t i o n , and d i s c u s s the i m p l i c a t i o n s of t h i s a n a l y s i s f o r the p l u r a l i s t model . P rocedura l F a i r n e s s The p l u r a l i s t model of p a r t i c i p a t i o n which I deve loped e a r l i e r i n the D i s s e r t a t i o n addresses the p u b l i c hea r ing p r o -cess from a p o l i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e . The l e g a l approach adopts a p e r s p e c t i v e of the hea r ing process which i s concerned wi th p r o c e d u r a l e n t i t l e m e n t and p rocedu ra l r i g h t s of a f f e c t e d i n t e -r e s t s . The ma jo r i t y of the l i t e r a t u r e on the p u b l i c hea r ing has l e g a l o r i g i n s , and i t i s necessary to unders tand ing the l i m i t a -t i o n s of t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e fo r a s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l a n a l y s i s . In a genera l s ense , the s tudy of procedures i s : . . . . t h e s tudy of the procedures agenc ies are r equ i r ed to use and shou ld use ; more p a r t i c u l a r l y , i t i s the s tudy of the p r o c e d u r a l r i g h t s tha t i n d i v i d u a l s and groups have to p a r t i c i p a t e i n making d e c i s i o n s . . . e s s e n t i a l l y r i g h t s to p resent i n f o r m a t i o n , a n a l y s i s , and o p i n i o n s from other sources ( Evans :1980 :27 ) . There i s no u n i v e r s a l i t y w i th regards to hea r ing p rocedu re s . G e n e r a l l y , the procedures are dec ided through a mixture of the common law, l e g i s l a t i o n , and r e g u l a t i o n s . The law made by l e g i s l a t i o n and r e g u l a t i o n s \" d i f f e r s g r e a t l y among the p r o -v i n c e s , and i n each one i t i s a bew i l de r i ng and d i v e r s e a r r a y , which d e f i e s g e n e r a l i z e d d e s c r i p t i o n \" (Evans: 1980:28 ) . The Law 113 Reform Commission of Canada has recommended tha t \" gene ra l l e g i s l a t i o n shou ld be enacted i n c o r p o r a t i n g minimum a d m i n i s t r a -t i v e procedure sa feguards or p r o v i d i n g the means fo r the deve -lopment of common p r o c e d u r a l g u i d e l i n e s \" (Law Reform Commission of Canada :1980) . The two concepts which I w i l l b r i e f l y exp lo re wi th regards to hea r ing procedures are those of \" n a t u r a l j u s t i c e \" , and \" f a i r n e s s \" . T r a d i t i o n a l l y , f a i r n e s s was a s s o c i a t e d wi th a d m i n i s t r a t i v e ma t t e r s , wh i le the r u l e s of n a t u r a l j u s t i c e a p p l i e d to j u d i c i a l conce rns . The tendency towards j u d i c i a l , as opposed to a d m i n i s t r a t i v e f u n c t i o n s , r e s u l t e d in g rea te r p r o c e -du r a l e n t i t l e m e n t . S ince 1978, that d i s t i n c t i o n has been d i m i -n i s h e d , w i th g r ea t e r emphasis on the second q u e s t i o n , the cho i ce and range of p rocedu res . There has been a tendency to move away from the c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of t r i b u n a l s as e i t h e r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e or j u d i c i a l / q u a s i - j u d i c i a l , which has the e f f e c t of opening up more t r i b u n a l s to cour t review in p r o c e d u r a l ma t t e r s . The d i s t i n c t i o n between j u d i c i a l and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e matters has e roded , and a concern fo r f a i r n e s s i s being i n c r e a -s i n g l y a r t i c u l a t e d , a l though \" f a i r n e s s i s s t i l l i n the d e v e l o p -mental s tage in Canada\" ( Jordan: 1983) . Na tu r a l j u s t i c e i s thus u s u a l l y understood as i n c l u d i n g f a i r n e s s (Evans 1980:32) . P r i n c i p l e s of \" f a i r n e s s \" and \" n a t u r a l j u s t i c e \" are key to a l e g a l concern wi th p rocedu res . They are used in the l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n as a means of f o c u s i n g a t t e n t i o n on p rocedu ra l ma t t e r s—as concepts on the bas i s of which p rocedu ra l i s sues are c o n t e s t e d . The p l u r a l i s t model of p a r t i c i p a t i o n draws on the l e g a l unders tand ing of f a i r n e s s , which i s a concern wi th 114 p r o c e d u r a l e n t i t l e m e n t . N a t u r a l j u s t i c e , or p rocedu ra l due p r o c e s s , addresses two elements pr imary in the p u b l i c h e a r i n g : procedures and b i a s . The two b a s i c r u l e s of n a t u r a l j u s t i c e a r e : \"Audi A l te ram Par tem\" , or \" l e t the other s ide be h e a r d \" , and \"Nemo Judex in Sua C a u s a \" , or \" l e t no man be h i s own j u d g e . \" Thus, in the l e g a l c o n t e x t , r u l e s of n a t u r a l j u s t i c e or f a i r n e s s mean tha t p a r t i c i p a n t s are t r e a t ed e q u a l l y , and that they have c e r t a i n r i g h t s , such as that of an unbiased d e c i s i o n , the o p p o r t u n i t y to hear the o ther s i d e , and the a b i l i t y to c ross-examine . The l e g a l concept of f a i r n e s s does not imply that p a r t i c i p a n t s have the same resources w i t h i n the t r i b u n a l . A p o l i t i c a l unders tand ing of procedures f u r t h e r i n t roduces concepts of compe t i t i on and ba l ance . The p l u r a l i s t model s u g -ges ts that hea r ing procedures are f a i r i n tha t they are n e u -t r a l , o b j e c t i v e and r a t i o n a l . Through p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n these p r o c e d u r e s , c i t i z e n s are engaged in a form of c o m p e t i t i o n , wh i ch , mediated through a mode of n e u t r a l i z e d o p p o s i t i o n , r e -s u l t s in a ba lance of d e c i s i o n s , a compromise. I t i s assumed tha t the n e u t r a l i t y of the hea r ing procedures w i l l e l i m i n a t e , or d i s s o l v e , the i n e q u a l i t i e s among p a r t i c i p a n t s . Cor respond ing to the r u l e s of n a t u r a l j u s t i c e , a p l u r a l i s t model of hea r ings assumes tha t each p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t e r e s t w i l l have a chance to be hea rd , and tha t the p roceed ings w i l l be a r b i t r a t e d by an i m p a r t i a l Board or Commiss ion. However, us ing a c r i t i c a l p o l i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e , one can cha l l enge both the p l u r a l i s t and l e g a l models of the hea r ing p rocess as i nadequa te . A concern wi th p rocedu ra l en t i t l emen t 115 f a i l s t o p r o v i d e a b a s i s f o r a s s e s s i n g a n d c o m p a r i n g p a r t i c i -p a n t s ' r e s o u r c e s f o r i n t e r v e n t i o n . T h e l i b e r a l c h a r a c t e r i z a -t i o n o f i n t e r v e n t i o n a s t r i g g e r e d a n d m e d i a t e d b y a v a r i e t y o f r e l a t i v e l y e q u a l i n t e r e s t s d i s r e g a r d s t h e e c o n o m i c i n t e r e s t s a n d m o t i v a t i o n , a n d d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e a b i l i t i e s o f s o m e i n t e r v e -n o r s . T h e p l u r a l i s t m o d e l c a n b e r e c o g n i z e d a s p r e d i c a t e d o n t h e i n d i v i d u a l i z e d r i g h t s o r i e n t a t i o n o f t h e l e g a l m o d e l . I t s i n a d e q u a c y i s o n l y r e v e a l e d b y e x t e n d i n g t h e a n a l y s i s b e y o n d t h e l e g a l f r a m e w o r k . 5 . 2 - D e s c r i p t i o n o f H e a r i n g P r o c e d u r e s Q u a s i - J u d i c i a l P r o c e d u r e s A l t h o u g h t h e l a c k o f s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n f o r p r o c e d u r a l g u i d e l i n e s h a s l e d t o s o m e d i v e r g e n c e a m o n g t r i b u n a l s , t h e r e a r e c e r t a i n r e l a t i v e l y s t a n d a r d p r o c e d u r e s w h i c h h a v e b e e n a d o p t e d b y a n u m b e r o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a g e n c i e s . T h e n o t i o n s o f b a l a n c e a n d c o m p r o m i s e r e f l e c t e d i n t h e p l u r a l i s t m o d e l a r e e m b o d i e d i n t w o g e n e r a l p r a c t i c e s . T h e h e a r i n g i s h e l d b e f o r e a n d m e d i a t e d b y a B o a r d o r C o m m i s s i o n w h i c h i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d a s a n i m p a r t i a l b o d y . H e a r i n g p r o c e d u r e s c a l l f o r a d u a l s t r u c t u r e o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n , a d i a l o g u e a m o n g p a r t i c i p a n t s . E a c h p a r t i -c i p a n t s p e a k s , a n d i s h e l d r e s p o n s i b l e f o r a n d c r o s s - e x a m i n e d o n t h i s s u b m i s s i o n ; e a c h c r o s s - e x a m i n e s o t h e r s . R u l e s o f p r e -s e n t a t i o n a p p l y e q u a l l y t o a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s . P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g t y p i c a l l y i n v o l v e s t h e f o l l o w i n g s t e p s : 1- P a r t i c i p a n t s p r o d u c e t h e i r w i t n e s s e s . I n a d m i n i -s t r a t i v e h e a r i n g s , t h e p r o p o n e n t i s u s u a l l y t h e f i r s t t o p r e s e n t e v i d e n c e . W i t n e s s e s a r e t y p i c a l l y c h o s e n o n t h e b a s i s o f e x p e r t i s e . T h e w i t n e s s e s p r e s e n t t h e i r e v i -d e n c e , e i t h e r t h r o u g h s t a t e m e n t ( w r i t t e n o r v e r b a l ) , o r 1 1 6 through ques t i on and answer. 2- The wi tness i s c ross-examined . The order of c ross-examina t ion i s s p e c i f i c to the t r i b u n a l . C r o s s -examinat ion may be done by the sponsor ing p a r t i c i p a n t , the Board , other p a r t i c i p a n t s , or the proponent , depen-d ing on the p r o c e d u r a l r u l e s adopted by the t r i b u n a l . 3- Summation of ev idence may be presented by the p a r t i c i p a n t , depending aga in on the p r o c e d u r a l r u l e s adopted by the t r i b u n a l . Then the process i s repeated fo r o ther p a r t i c i p a n t s . 4- The Board or Commission makes a d e c i s i o n or r e -commendations and/or f i l e s a F i n a l Repor t . Through t h i s p rocess i t i s assumed that a l l p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t e r e s t s have a s i m i l a r oppo r tun i t y to p resent t h e i r p o s i t i o n , to query o t h e r s , and to be heard before an a r b i t r a t i n g body. Procedures of the Case Study T r i b u n a l s The P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Appeal Board In Chapter 3 I d e s c r i b e d the appeal p rocedu re , by which the hea r ing p rocess i s f o r m a l l y i n i t i a t e d . P r i o r to the h e a -r i n g s , the Board ma i l s the p r o s p e c t i v e a p p e l l a n t b a s i c p r o c e -d u r a l g u i d e l i n e s (Appendix 1 .5) . S e c t i on 49(4) of the R e g u l a -t i o n s p rov ides t h a t , \" the Board in hea r ing an appeal may d e t e r -mine i t s own procedure and s h a l l n o t i f y the a p p e l l a n t and other i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s of the procedures to be t a k e n \" . A l though the Board must not breach the r u l e s of n a t u r a l j u s t i c e , I have noted tha t these a l l ow much v a r i a t i o n in i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Thus , the Board ho lds d i s c r e t i o n a r y power wi th respec t to i s s u i n g p r o c e d u r a l g u i d e l i n e s . In the f o l l o w i n g , I w i l l d e s c r i be the procedures by which the PCAB appeal hea r ings take p l a c e , and which any a p p e l l a n t must f o l l o w . The procedure i s a m u l t i - s t e p p r o c e s s , as f o l l o w s : 1. A p p e l l a n t s f i r s t produce t h e i r w i t n e s s e s . Witnes-117 s e s g i v e e v i d e n c e t h r o u g h a q u e s t i o n a n d a n s w e r f o r m a t , o r b y s t a t e m e n t . I f a s t a t e m e n t i s r e a d , i t may be t y p e d , w i t h c o p i e s g i v e n t o t h e B o a r d a n d p e r m i t - h o l d e r . 2 . T h e p e r m i t - h o l d e r c r o s s - e x a m i n e s e a c h w i t n e s s , f o l -l o w i n g t h e i r p r e s e n t a t i o n . 3 . T h e n t h e B o a r d c r o s s - e x a m i n e s t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s w i t -n e s s . 4 . T h e a p p e l l a n t s c a n t h e n r e - e x a m i n e i f new i n f o r -m a t i o n h a s b e e n d i s c l o s e d a t s t e p s 2 o r 3 . 5 . F o l l o w i n g t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n s b y t h e a p p e l l a n t s , t h e p e r m i t - h o l d e r c a l l s w i t n e s s e s . 6 . T h e a p p e l l a n t s c r o s s - e x a m i n e t h e p e r m i t - h o l d e r ' s w i t n e s s e s . 7 . T h e B o a r d c r o s s - e x a m i n e s t h e p e r m i t h o l d e r ' s w i t -n e s s e s . 8 . A f t e r a l l w i t n e s s e s o n b o t h s i d e s h a v e b e e n c a l l e d , e a c h s i d e s u m s u p t h e i r e v i d e n c e . T h e p e r m i t -h o l d e r g o e s f i r s t , a n d t h e a p p e l l a n t g e t s t h e \" l a s t w o r d \" . 9 . T h e n , t h e B o a r d m a k e s a d e c i s i o n , w h i c h i s u s u a l l y m a i l e d t o b o t h p a r t i e s w i t h i n a p e r i o d o f o n e t o t w o w e e k s . I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e s e p r o c e d u r e s , t h e r e a r e a n u m b e r o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a c t i v i t i e s w h i c h g o v e r n t h e d o c u m e n t a t i o n o r r e c o r d i n g o f t h e p r o c e e d i n g s . I n t h e P C A B h e a r i n g s , t h e p r o -c e e d i n g s a r e t a p e d b y t h e B o a r d ' s s e c r e t a r y . T h e y a r e n o t t r a n s c r i b e d . A p p e l l a n t s m u s t m a k e r e c o r d s o f t h e p r o c e e d i n g s a t t h e i r o w n t i m e a n d e x p e n s e i n o r d e r t o r e a d i l y a c c e s s p a s t m a t e r i a l . O t h e r p r o c e s s e s s u c h a s t h o s e g o v e r n i n g t h e r u l e s o f e v i d e n c e , a r e e s t a b l i s h e d b y t h e B o a r d a n d a r e l e s s f o r m a l t h a n c o u r t r o o m p r o c e d u r e s . E v i d e n c e s h o u l d b e r e l e v a n t t o t h e c a s e , a n d t h e P C A B a l l o w s s o m e f l e x i b i l i t y i n i t s a c c e p t a n c e o f e v i d e n c e . H e a r s a y i s a c c e p t e d , a s a r e d o c u m e n t s a n d e x h i b i t s a n d l e t t e r s o f o p i n i o n o r f a c t f r o m a b s e n t p e r s o n s ( M c D a d e 1 1 8 1981:3) . Royal Commission of I nqu i r y i n to Uranium Min ing Under the p r o v i s i o n s of the P u b l i c I n q u i r i e s A c t , the Commissioners appo in ted to the I n q u i r y , Mess r s . Ba t es , Murray and Raudsepp, are g i ven wide powers w i t h i n the Terms of R e f e -rence i n de te rmin ing the matters at i s s u e . L i ke the P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A c t , the p u b l i c hea r ing procedures are not a r t i c u l a t e d s p e c i f i c a l l y w i t h i n the s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s of the A c t . The Terms of Reference s p e c i f i e d by the Order-In-Counci1 e s t a b l i s h -ing the RCUM requ i r ed the Commissioners to \" r e c e i v e p u b l i c input on these ma t t e r s \" ( e . g . , uranium m in i ng , worker and p u b l i c h e a l t h and s a f e t y ) . Thus , a l though the powers of the Commission rega rd ing hea r ing procedures were not s t i p u l a t e d by the B.C. P u b l i c I n q u i r i e s A c t , l i k e the PCAB, the Commission had c o n s i d e r a b l e l a t i t u d e to des ign and implement whatever procedures they cons ide red i n o r d e r . The Commission f i r s t he ld an i naugu ra l meeting in Vancou-ver on March 6. T h i s meeting was he ld to g i ve members of the p u b l i c the chance \" . . . t o adv i se us on your views concern ing our terms of r e f e r e n c e , the t im ing and conduct of the I n q u i r y , and to d i s c u s s how you or other members of the p u b l i c may most e f f e c t i v e l y p a r t i c i p a t e in the work we have to do\" (RCUM 1:6) . At t h i s t ime , the Commission announced i t s i n t e n t i o n to ho ld p u b l i c hea r i ngs in communit ies throughout the p r o v i n c e , as we l l as t e c h n i c a l hea r ings in Vancouver . A l though the Commission in tended o r i g i n a l l y to ho ld two se ts of community h e a r i n g s , one p reced ing the t e c h n i c a l h e a r i n g s , and one f o l l o w i n g , the l a t t e r were pre-empted by the c a n c e l l a t i o n of the I n q u i r y . In a d d i t i o n 119 to these h e a r i n g s , the Commission announced i t would accept w r i t t e n b r i e f s . Thus , p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the Inqu i ry would be p o s s i b l e i n one or more of the f o l l o w i n g ways: (a) by coming forward at the Community Hear ings he ld i n the v a r i o u s communit ies where uranium mining was of i n t e -r e s t , or (b) by at tendance at the T e c h n i c a l Hear ings where e v i -dence would be p resented and w i tnesses cross-examined on t h e i r e v i d e n c e , or (c) through w r i t t e n b r i e f s f i l e d wi th the Commission (RCUM 1980:279) . The Commissioners approved p r o c e d u r a l r u l i n g s (which are con ta ined i n Appendix 2 .1 ) , f o r the i n f o rma t i on of p a r t i -c i p a n t s . These r u l i n g s a l so con ta ined the names of Major P a r t i -c i p a n t s and announced the s t r u c t u r e of the T e c h n i c a l Hea r i ngs . I w i l l d i s c u s s the procedures in g rea te r depth below, wi th r e f e rence to the two major hea r ing t y p e s . Community Hear ings The RCUM announced a s e r i e s of \"community\" h e a r i n g s : \" I t i s our i n t e n t i o n to v i s i t fo r as long a p e r i o d of time as i s r e q u i r e d , every community c l o s e to known uranium d e p o s i t s or areas of i n t e r e s t to the uranium mining i n d u s t r y \" (RCUM 1:6) . The hea r ings were in tended \" to he lp the Commissioners b e t t e r understand l o c a l concerns and hear ev idence based on pe r sona l e x p e r i e n c e s . \" (RCUM 1980:279) . S e l e c t i o n of the communit ies i n -c luded the f o l l o w i n g c o n s i d e r a t i o n s : . . . . C o m m u n i t i e s l o c a t e d near uranium e x p l o r a t i o n s i t e s and showings known to the Commission at tha t t ime ; the weight of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t in a p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t in a p a r t i c u l a r r eg ion as expressed in l e t t e r s and te lephone c a l l s to the Commiss ion; the response at the Inaugura l Mee t ings ; and r e g i o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n (RCUM 1980 :3 ) . Dur ing June and J u l y , the Commission v i s i t e d the f o l l o w i n g 120 communi t ies , h o l d i n g hea r ings in each : Kelowna, C l e a r w a t e r , Kamloops, Rock Creek , Grand F o r k s , C a s t l e g a r , W i l l i ams Lake, Vanderhoof , Fo r t Ne lson and A t l i n . The f o l l o w i n g procedures were adopted fo r the community h e a r i n g s : 1. Min ing companies presented s u b m i s s i o n s , d i s c u s s i n g t h e i r i n t e r e s t s in the a r e a . 2. Members of the p u b l i c p resented t h e i r b r i e f s , under o a t h , and a c c o r d i n g to a l i s t drawn up by the Commission from p re v i ous correspondence wi th p a r t i c i p a n t s . 4 3. A f t e r hea r ing each b r i e f , the Commiss ioners , i f they w ished , ques t ioned the w i tness or commented on the b r i e f . There was no p r o v i s i o n fo r c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n . However, i f anyone i n at tendance wished a matter to be c l a r i f i e d , t h i s cou ld be done at the time through the Chairman or l a t e r in the T e c h n i c a l Hea r i ngs . Community hea r ing p a r t i c i p a n t s , as a r u l e , were not r e p r e -sented by l awyers . The p roceed ings were in tended to be as i n fo rma l as p o s s i b l e , \" to permi t and encourage p a r t i c i p a t i o n by o r g a n i z a t i o n s , groups of concerned c i t i z e n s , and i n d i v i d u a l s . Apar t from r u l e s of decorum, there were no formal r u l e s e s t a b -l i s h e d to govern these Hea r i ngs \" (RCUM 1980 :1 ) . A d m i n i s t r a t i v e procedures i n c l ude the documentat ion of the p r o c e e d i n g s . A complete t r a n s c r i p t of the p roceed ings was kep t , r e q u i r i n g the presence of o f f i c i a l r e p o r t e r s and m i c r o -phones. P a r t i c i p a n t s p r e s e n t i n g d e t a i l e d or t e c h n i c a l ev idence at the community hea r ings were encouraged by the Commission to f i l e p r e s e n t a t i o n s in advance wi th the Commiss ion. T e c h n i c a l Hear ings Fo l l ow ing the Community H e a r i n g s , T e c h n i c a l Hear ings were schedu led i n o rder to \" b r i n g before the Commiss ioners , p a r t i c i -121 pan t s , and the p u b l i c the ex tens i ve mass of t e c h n i c a l ev idence hav ing a bear ing on the Commiss ion 's Terms of Re fe rence \" (RCUM 1980 :2 ) . In these h e a r i n g s , t e c h n i c a l , env i ronmen ta l , and h e a l t h problems r e l a t e d to the e x p l o r a t i o n , m in ing , and m i l l i n g of uranium were to be d i s c u s s e d . The T e c h n i c a l Hear ings were he ld from September 25, 1979 through Februa ry , 1980, when the Morator ium on uranium mining was announced. The T e c h n i c a l Hear ings were a l l he ld in Vancouver , at the Ho te l Devonsh i r e . They were he ld on a r egu l a r b a s i s from Tuesdays through F r i d a y s of des igna ted weeks. The hea r ings were o r i g i n a l l y scheduled to run from September 25, 1979 to February 8, 1980. However, they were re-schedu led t w i c e , each time l eng then ing the schedu le to a l l ow fo r c ross-examina t ion of a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s . The time had been extended to June 30, 1980 at the time of the announcement of the morator ium and the hea r ing c a n c e l l a t i o n . The P r e l i m i n a r y Ru l i ngs drawn up by the Commission (and presented in Appendix 2 .1 ) , i d e n t i f i e d 10 d i s t i n c t phases of the hea r ings as a means of o r d e r i n g the s ch edu l i n g of w i tnesses and p r e s e n t a t i o n of e v i d e n c e . These phases were as f o l l o w s : Phase I. Overview Phase I I . E x p l o r a t i o n Phase I I I . Min ing Phase IV. M i l l i n g and Chemica l E x t r a c t i o n Phase V. Waste Management Phase V I . Environment Impact Phase V I I . P u b l i c and Worker Hea l th Phase V I I I . S o c i a l Impact 122 Phase IX. E t h i c a l Quest ions Phase X. J u r i s d i c t i o n , Regu la t i ons and Enforcement In Chapter Fou r , I d i s c u s s e d the formal i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of p a r t i c i p a n t s by the Commiss ion. Anyone a d v i s i n g the Commission tha t they wished to take an a c t i v e pa r t in the p roceed ings was deemed a p a r t i c i p a n t , r e f l e c t i n g the s u b j e c t i v e and vo lun t a r y bas i s of p a r t i c i p a t i o n assumed by the p l u r a l i s t model . Those w ish ing to p a r t i c i p a t e in the p roceed ings on a r egu l a r b a s i s and take an a c t i v e pa r t in c ross-examina t ion were des igna ted \"major p a r t i c i p a n t s \" . A l though there was no c ross-examina t ion at the community h e a r i n g s , a major emphasis of the t e c h n i c a l hea r ings was the c ross-examina t ion of w i t n e s s e s . The number of major p a r t i c i p a n t s f l u c t u a t e d s l i g h t l y throughout the h e a r i n g s , but twenty- f i ve had been named by the t e r m i n a t i o n of the h e a -r i n g s (RCUM 1980 :2 ) . C e r t a i n major p a r t i c i p a n t s — m i n i n g compa-n i es who had ceased uranium e x p l o r a t i o n i n B . C . — withdrew from the Commission because t h e i r i n t e r e s t s were no longer a f f e c t e d . Other p a r t i c i p a n t s , such as the SOEC, withdrew due to i nadequa -cy of f u n d i n g . S t i l l o the r s res igned due to economic and p o l i t i c a l i s s u e s , such as the Greenpeace wi thdrawal f o l l o w i n g the announcement of the Korean n e g o t i a t i o n by Premier Bennett (See Chapter 3 ) . Thus , major p a r t i c i p a n t s were not f i x e d e n t i -t i e s , but the ma jo r i t y of them p a r t i c i p a t e d in a cont inuous manner. A summary of the procedures of the T e c h n i c a l Hear ings f o l l o w s . (See Appendix 2.1 fo r a more complete d e s c r i p t i o n ) . 1. Sworn w i tnesses p resen t t h e i r e v i dence . They are a l lowed 15-20 minutes in which to summarize t h e i r e v i -123 dence . F u l l s tatements have been f i l e d p r e v i o u s l y wi th the Commiss ion. 2. Wi tnesses are then cross-examined by Commission c o u n s e l , then by major p a r t i c i p a n t s , and f i n a l l y , by members of the p u b l i c . 3. Where time i s inadequate fo r submiss ion and c ross examina t i on , hea r ings are re-schedu led to cont inue the p r o c e s s . At the T e c h n i c a l Hea r i ngs , the p a r t i c i p a n t s d id not p resen t e v i dence , but ar ranged w i th the Commissioners to have exper t s p resent ev idence on t h e i r b e h a l f . P a r t i c i p a n t s a c t i v e l y c r o s s -examined, however. Thus , in the T e c h n i c a l Hea r i ngs , as com-pared to the Community Hea r i ngs , and, to a l e s s e r e x t e n t , the PCAB h e a r i n g s , the pr imary r o l e of p a r t i c i p a n t s was tha t of c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n . Many of the major p a r t i c i p a n t s were r e p r e -sented by l e g a l c o u n s e l , but not a l l . A d m i n i s t r a t i v e procedures were s p e c i f i e d to a g r ea t e r degree i n the t e c h n i c a l h e a r i n g s , due to the c l o s e r con fo rmi t y of the hea r ings to courtroom p rocedu res . I t was r equ i r ed that ev idence be submit ted to the Commiss ion, and c i r c u l a t e d among major p a r t i c i p a n t s two weeks p r i o r to the appearance of the w i tness p r e s e n t i n g i t . A l l ev idence submit ted or r e f e r r e d to was f i l e d as an e x h i b i t . P roceed ings were documented by cour t r e p o r t e r s and cop i e s of the t r a n s c r i p t s were a v a i l a b l e the f o l l o w i n g day fo r major p a r t i c i p a n t s . P roceed ings were v i d e o -taped as w e l l , and shown in Vancouver and V i c t o r i a on t e l e v i -s i o n . The RCUM thus f o r m a l l y e s t a b l i s h e d procedures through the d e s i g n a t i o n of two types of hea r ings : community/ informal and V a n c o u v e r / t e c h n i c a l . The dichotomy of hea r ing procedures used 124 under t h i s format was not r i g i d . Many of the submiss ions p r e -sented i n the Community Hea r i ngs , most no t ab l y those of mining companies , but a l so those of i n d i v i d u a l s and o r g a n i z a t i o n s , i n c l uded a c o n s i d e r a b l e amount of t e c h n i c a l d a t a . The Commis-s i o n attempted to reduce the t e c h n i c a l / l a y d ichotomy, and f a c i -l i t a t e community p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t e c h n i c a l d i s c u s s i o n s through two mechanisms. I t in tended to ho ld a second set of hea r ings in the communi t ies , f o l l o w i n g the t e c h n i c a l s e s s i o n s , i n which l o c a l concerns cou ld be p r e s e n t e d , informed by the t e c h n i c a l data which had been presented i n the i n t e r i m . I t a l so attempted to d i s semina te the t e c h n i c a l i n f o rma t i on to the communit ies through a r e g i o n a l l i b r a r y system, d i s p e r s a l of v i d e o c a s s e t t e s of each phase of the t e c h n i c a l hea r ings and complete t r a n -s c r i p t s of the p roceed ings as we l l as o ther i n f o r m a t i o n . As I noted e a r l i e r , t e rm ina t i on of the Inqu i r y prevented the second se t of Community Hear ings from t ak ing p l a c e . The above procedures are those cons ide red to be the e s -sence of t r i b u n a l a c t i v i t i e s . They are g e n e r a l l y compat ib le wi th the p l u r a l i s t mode l ' s c r i t e r i a fo r f a i r n e s s . As a means of c o n t r i b u t i n g to g rea te r p u b l i c a c c e s s , procedures are c h a -r a c t e r i z e d as q u a s i - j u d i c i a l , and at tempts may be made by the Board/Commission to r e l ax p rocedures . I n s t r u c t i o n s to p r o s p e c -t i v e a p p e l l a n t s e x p l a i n the p rocess in r e l a t i v e l y s imple and non- l ega l te rms. S t a n d a r d i z a t i o n of these e s s e n t i a l procedures ensures f a i r n e s s in tha t a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s in each forum are f o r m a l l y e n t i t l e d to engage in the same p r o c e s s , i r r e s p e c t i v e of t h e i r i n t e r e s t . The submiss ion—cross-examina t ion—summat ion p rocess c o n t r i b u t e s to a d i a l ogue among p a r t i c i p a n t s , and en-125 sures the p o s s i b i l i t y of a reply to each position. Hearing procedures are thereby considered to mediate and equalize the competition among various interests. 5.3-Making A Case — The Preparation and Organization of Intervention The hearing procedures described above, from the pers-pective of the p l u r a l i s t model, produce a balance of input to the t r i b u n a l . Competing interests, whether the permit-holder and the appellants in the PCAB, or the variety of positions adopted with respect to uranium mining in the RCUM, are enabled to present and defend themselves and to cross-examine their opponents through compliance with these procedures. The plura-l i s t model assumes that d i f f e r e n t groups w i l l engage in compe-t i t i v e strategies which use the various resources and a b i l i t i e s accessible to them. Differences in resources r e f l e c t more than economic bases—they are also related to leadership, commit-ment, organizational strategies and membership. These d i f f e -rent resources, although affecting participants' success to some degree, are balanced by the d i v e r s i t y of intervenors and the ne u t r a l i t y of the hearing process. Thus, the formal proce-dures adopted by the tribunals generally r e f l e c t the p l u r a l i s t model. Participants' preparation for and organization of the intervention process i s largely ignored by these o f f i c i a l de-c r i p t i o n s . Preparation for intervention i s individual and sub-j e c t i v e , which obscures two major aspects of the a c t i v i t y . F i r s t , although unacknowledged and i n v i s i b l e within the formal 126 h e a r i n g p r o c e s s , p r e p a r a t i o n i s e x t e n s i v e . S e c o n d l y , p r e p a r a -t i o n a n d i n t e r v e n t i o n f o r a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s r e q u i r e o r g a n i z a -t i o n a l s u p p o r t , s k i l l s a n d r e s o u r c e s . I n t h i s s e c t i o n o f t h e c h a p t e r , I w i l l d i s c u s s t h i s p r e p a r a t i o n f o r a n d o r g a n i z a t i o n o f i n t e r v e n t i o n . P r e p a r a t i o n f o r t h e h e a r i n g s r e q u i r e s i n t e r v e n o r s ' a c t i v i -t y i n o n e o r m o r e o f t h e f o l l o w i n g : r e s e a r c h ; c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i t h p r o s p e c t i v e w i t n e s s e s ; p r e p a r a t i o n o f a b r i e f / s u b m i s s i o n ; c o m m u n i c a t i o n s w i t h g o v e r n m e n t a g e n c i e s ; o r g a n i z a t i o n o f s p o n -s o r i n g g r o u p ; a n d \" n e t w o r k i n g \" w i t h k i n d r e d o r g a n i z a t i o n s . R e s e a r c h s k i l l s i n c l u d e a v a r i e t y o f p r o c e d u r e s . T h e a p -p e l l a n t s m u s t s e c u r e i n f o r m a t i o n w i t h w h i c h t o d e f e n d t h e i r c a s e . I n t h e h e r b i c i d e c a s e s t u d y , r e s e a r c h r e q u i r e d k n o w l e d g e o f a n d f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h a t e c h n i c a l v o c a b u l a r y , m e t h o d o l o g y , e x p e r i m e n t s , c a s e s , a n d i s s u e s . T h e p r o c u r e m e n t o f s u c h i n f o r -m a t i o n i n v o l v e s c o n s u l t a t i o n o f a v a r i e t y o f s o u r c e s w h i c h i n c l u d e t e c h n i c a l / s c i e n c e l i b r a r i e s ( j o u r n a l s , t e x t b o o k s , e n c y c l o p e d i a s ) , r e s e a r c h e r s o r p r o f e s s o r s e n g a g e d i n t h e p r o -d u c t i o n a n d d i s s e m i n a t i o n o f s u c h i n f o r m a t i o n , a n d l a y i n f o r m a -t i o n n e t w o r k s . I n f o r m a t i o n m u s t b e c o n t i n u a l l y u p d a t e d , e s p e -c i a l l y i n r e o c c u r i n g a p p e a l s , s u c h a s t h e P C A B e x a m p l e . T h e i n t e r v e n e r ' s s u b m i s s i o n p r e s e n t s t h e g r o u n d s , o r e v i d e n c e , a n d t h e l o g i c o f o n e ' s a p p e a l . P r e p a r a t i o n o f a s u b m i s s i o n , w h e t h e r v e r b a l , w r i t t e n , o r b o t h , r e q u i r e s e x t e n -s i v e w o r k . M a t e r i a l s i n s u p p o r t o f o n e ' s p o s i t i o n m u s t be o r g a n i z e d , p r e s e n t e d , a n d d o c u m e n t e d . I r e f e r t o t h i s p r e s e n -t a t i o n o f e v i d e n c e a n d a r g u m e n t i n s u p p o r t o f o n e ' s a p p e a l o r s t a n d a s \" m a k i n g a c a s e \" . I n m a k i n g a c a s e , t h e p a r t i c i p a n t 127 m u s t s u m m o n u p r e s o u r c e s , i n f o r m a t i o n , \" e v i d e n c e \" w h i c h s u p -p o r t s h e r / h i s p e r s p e c t i v e o n a g i v e n i s s u e . I e m p h a s i z e t h e p r o d u c t i o n o f e v i d e n c e ( t h e m a k i n g o f t h e c a s e ) , r a t h e r t h a n t h e s u b s t a n t i v e n a t u r e o f t h e e v i d e n c e a s t h e i m m e d i a t e c o n c e r n h e r e . M a k i n g a c a s e i n c l u d e s a n u m b e r o f a c t i v i t i e s f o r p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a n t s , i n c l u d i n g t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f i s s u e s , r e s e a r c h o f t h e i s s u e s , n e t w o r k i n g w i t h o t h e r p a r t i c i p a n t g r o u p s t o s e c u r e i n f o r m a t i o n a n d c o n t a c t s , c o r r e s p o n d e n c e w i t h g o v e r n m e n t a g e n c i e s a n d t e c h n i c a l s t a f f , c o n t a c t i n g p e r s o n s t o a p p e a r a s e x p e r t w i t n e s s e s , a n d t h e a r t i c u l a t i o n o f s t r a t e g y a r o u n d w h i c h t h e c a s e w i l l b e m a d e . T h u s , i n \" m a k i n g a c a s e \" , p a r t i c i p a n t s e n g a g e i n t h e f o l l o w i n g : t h e y p r e p a r e f o r a n d e n t e r i n t o a c t i v i t i e s w h i c h \" p r o d u c e \" a c a s e ; t h e i r e f f o r t s a r e m e d i a t e d t h r o u g h a n o r g a n i z a t i o n o f p r o c e d u r e s ; a n d f i n a l l y , t h e i r i n t e -r e s t s a r e s u b s t a n t i v e l y p r e s e n t e d a s o r d e r e d b y t h e s e f e a t u r e s . T h e b u r d e n o f p r o o f , t h e r u l e s o f e v i d e n c e , a c c e s s t o i n f o r m a -t i o n , a n d o t h e r f a c t o r s w i l l a f f e c t t h e s u c c e s s o f a n y p a r t i c i -p a n t ' s a b i l i t y t o e n t e r i n t o a n d c o m p e t e i n t h e h e a r i n g p r o -c e s s . A l t h o u g h t h e s e a r e e s s e n t i a l t o t h e o r d e r i n g o f p a r t i c i -p a t i o n , t h e y a r e o b s c u r e d i n t h e m a j o r i t y o f h e a r i n g a c c o u n t s . M a k i n g A C a s e - T h e O r g a n i z a t i o n o f I n t e r v e n t i o n M a k i n g a c a s e r e q u i r e s p a r t i c i p a n t s t o e n g a g e i n a c t i v i t y w h i c h w i l l e n a b l e t h e m t o p r e s e n t e v i d e n c e i n s u p p o r t o f t h e i r v i e w s b e f o r e t h e h e a r i n g . T h i s a c t i v i t y i n v o l v e s a n e x t e n s i v e o r g a n i z a t i o n , w h i c h d o e s n o t j u s t i n v o l v e t h e m a t e r i a l a c t i v i t y o f p r o c u r i n g r e s e a r c h f i n d i n g s a n d w i t n e s s e s , a n d c a r r y i n g o u t t h e b u r e a u c r a t i c r e q u i r e m e n t s o f i n t e r v e n t i o n . I t a l s o r e -128 q u i r e s a s t r a t e g i c and s u b s t a n t i v e o r g a n i z a t i o n , i n c l u d i n g an unders tand ing of the i s s u e s , and a s e c u r i n g of m a t e r i a l s to prove and d i sp rove one ' s p o s i t i o n . In the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e h e a r i n g , the l e g a l concept of the \"burden of p r o o f \" i s a pr imary o r g a n i z a t i o n a l f e a t u r e . I t i s not so in the c o n s u l t a t i v e h e a r i n g , due to the i n v e s t i g a t i v e nature and the s t r u c t u r e of the p r o c e s s . The burden of p roo f r e f e r s to the \"degree to which the pa r t y on which the onus i s p l a ced has to e s t a b l i s h the v a l i d i t y of h i s case \" (UBCIC 1980: 3-4). T y p i c a l l y , \" the onus i s on on l y one of the p a r t i e s to demonstrate tha t i t s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the ev idence has an e s s e n t i a l v a l i d i t y \" (UBCIC 1980 :3 ) . The burden of p r o o f , from a l e g a l p e r s p e c t i v e , i n vo l v e s the judgment of competing v e r -s i ons of the t r u t h , and the attempt to d i s c e r n which i s more l i k e l y to be t r u e . The p r a c t i c a l burden of proof must be d i s t i n g u i s h e d from the l e g a l burden . I t i n v o l v e s produc ing the s t o r y , and i n -c ludes those p rocesses which the i n t e r veno r must engage i n to put toge ther a c o n v i n c i n g argument fo r h i s /he r c a se . Assuming the burden of proof i n v o l v e s c h a l l e n g i n g the s t a t u s quo in these examples—making a case a g a i n s t the cu r r en t r e g u l a t o r y and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r u l e s . In my a n a l y s i s , I am concerned e s p e c i a l l y w i th the assumption of the p r a c t i c a l burden of p r o o f . The P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Appea l Board The burden of proof in the PCAB hea r ings i s p l a ced on the a p p e l l a n t through the t r i b u n a l ' s appea l s t r u c t u r e . As I p o i n -ted out in Chapter Th ree , i n t e r v e n t i o n in t h i s a d m i n i s t r a t i v e 129 hea r ing takes the form of an appeal of the A d m i n i s t r a t o r ' s d e c i s i o n to approve an a p p l i c a t i o n permit f o r p e s t i c i d e a p p l i -c a t i o n s . S e c t i o n Four of the P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Ac t s t a t e s that the A d m i n i s t r a t o r must be \" s a t i s f i e d tha t a p p l i c a t i o n of the p e s t i c i d e w i l l not cause an unreasonable adverse e f f e c t . \" Whi le the onus was on the proponent at e a r l i e r s tages in the dec i s ion-mak ing p rocess to e s t a b l i s h the v a l i d i t y of h i s c a se , the appea l p rocess s h i f t s tha t onus to the a p p e l l a n t . Thus , i n appea l i ng the A d m i n i s t r a t o r ' s d e c i s i o n , the a p p e l l a n t must make a case which w i l l s a t i s f y the Board tha t the p e s t i c i d e w i l l cause an unreasonable adverse e f f e c t . In making a case the a p p e l l a n t i s r equ i r ed to amass e v i -dence which w i l l i n d i c a t e the p o t e n t i a l harmfu l e f f e c t s to be i n c u r r e d through the a p p l i c a t i o n of the p e s t i c i d e . The r e a l p o s s i b i l i t y of harm must be demonst ra ted . . . . . T h o u g h an a p p e l l a n t does not seem to have to go as f a r as p rov ing a c t u a l harm w i l l d i r e c t l y o c c u r , he or she shou ld expect to have to show a r e a l p r o b a b i l i t y tha t the p e s t i c i d e w i l l con tac t the p o t e n t i a l v i c t i m s in concen -t r a t i o n s i n which i t w i l l l i k e l y be h a r m f u l , which i s as c l o s e as one can come b e f o r e - t h e - f a c t to showing tha t harm w i l l o c c u r . Thus , an a p p e l l a n t i s adv i sed to p r e -sent ev idence r e l a t i n g to c o n c e n t r a t i o n s , to r u n - o f f , to deg rada t i on and p e r s i s t e n c e , and s i m i l a r t e c h n i c a l f a c t s (McDade 1981 :4 ) . Thus , i n p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n these appea l h e a r i n g s , the a p p e l l a n t i s r e q u i r e d to assume the p r a c t i c a l and l e g a l burdens of p r o o f . Th i s i n v o l v e s an o r g a n i z a t i o n of i n t e r v e n t i o n through the p r e -s e n t a t i o n of m a t e r i a l i n such a way tha t i t w i l l c o n t r i b u t e to a case fo r an \"unreasonab le adverse e f f e c t \" . The appea l p rocess r e q u i r e s at the ou t se t the a p p e l l a n t ' s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of grounds fo r the a p p e a l , which are submit ted 130 i n gene ra l form with the l aunch ing of the formal a p p e a l . (See Appendix 1.6.) In the case s tudy h e a r i n g s , a l l a p p e l l a n t s engaged in some p repa ra to r y work. A l l i d e n t i f i e d grounds f o r the appea l of the proposed a p p l i c a t i o n , which i n c luded a r i s k to human h e a l t h , f i s h and w i l d l i f e , and a g r i c u l t u r a l c r o p s , economic c o s t s , des ign and/or a p p l i c a t i o n of the program and env i ronmenta l d e g r a d a t i o n . An a n a l y s i s of the temporal s t r u c t u r e of the hea r ings i s one means of examining the hea r ing p rocess as a compe t i t i v e and ba lanced a c t i v i t y . Tab le 5 on the f o l l o w i n g page examines the use of hea r ing t ime , ( i n c l u d i n g submiss ions of e v i dence , c r o s s -examina t i on , and summation) by a p p e l l a n t s and proponents du r i ng the 1978 h e a r i n g s , and here the a p p e l l a n t s ' assumption of the p r a c t i c a l burden of proof i s i l l u s t r a t e d . A l though \" t ime \" a lone cannot be taken to i n d i c a t e the weight and fo r ce of a p a r t i -c i p a n t ' s submi s s i ons , i t p rov ides a rough i n d i c a t i o n of the volume of ev idence submi t t ed , e s p e c i a l l y because the Board does not have to accept i r r e l e v a n t e v i d e n c e . In succeed ing y e a r s , the hea r ings were g r e a t l y reduced i n t ime , due p a r t i a l l y to the SOEC's d im in i shed use of exper t w i t n e s s e s , and the u t i l i z a t i o n of ev idence p resented in p r i o r years w i thout renewed p r e s e n t a t i o n . However, the r a t i o of ap -p e l l a n t / p e r m i t - h o l d e r time cont inued to i l l u s t r a t e the a p p e l -l a n t ' s assumpt ion of the p r a c t i c a l burden of proof throughout the s tudy . For i n s t a n c e , the 1980 hea r ings l a s t e d approx -imate l y two days . The a p p e l l a n t s used about 8 hours of hea r ing time (with about 1/2 hour a l l o c a t e d to Mr. Wors ley , an i n d i v i 131 TABLE 5 - USE OF HEARING TIME - 1978 PCAB 1978 Hear ings 30 May Speaker Approximate Hear ing Time 31 May 6 June 7 June 8 June 9 June 12 June 13 June 14 June Mr. J im Foord Osoyoos Rate-Payers A s s o c i a t i o n Mrs . George P r e t t y Consumers A s s o c i a t i o n of Canada (T. McComas) SOEC (and co-appe l l an t s ) SOEC SOEC SOEC SOEC SOEC WIB (proponent) SOEC WIB 2 hours 2+ hours 1+ hour 3 hours 4 hours (1 hea r ing day) 5 hours (1 hea r ing day) 7-8 hours (1 hear ing day) 5 hours (1 hea r ing day ) 6 hours (1 hea r ing day) 3 hours 5 hours 1 hour 2 hours T o t a l Hear ing Time: 40 hours T o t a l Hear ing T ime, SOEC and c o - a p p e l l a n t s : 32+ hours \" \" Proponent @7 hours dua l a p p e l l a n t ) , wh i le the proponent , the WIB, p resented and was cross-examined on i t s ev idence fo r about 2 1/2 hou r s . In the 1981 h e a r i n g s , which l a s t e d on l y one day, the SOEC r equ i r ed about 4 hours to make i t s c a s e , and be c ross-examined , and an i n d i v i d u a l a p p e l l a n t r equ i r ed approx imate l y 1/2+ hour to do the same. The proponent , in t h i s case the Okanagan Bas in Water 132 B o a r d , u t i l i z e d a b o u t 1/2 h o u r o f t h e h e a r i n g i n m a k i n g i t s c a s e . T h e r a t i o o f h e a r i n g t i m e o c c u p i e d b y t h e SOEC r a n g e s f r o m t h r e e t i m e s t h a t o f t h e p r o p o n e n t ( 1 9 8 0 ) t o e i g h t t i m e s t h a t o f t h e p r o p o n e n t ( 1 9 8 1 ) . T h e i m b a l a n c e c r e a t e d b y t h i s a p p e a l s t r u c t u r e a l s o a f -f e c t s t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s a b i l i t y t o c r o s s - e x a m i n e t h e p r o p o n e n t . I n t h e a p p e a l h e a r i n g , t h e p e r m i t - h o l d e r i s n o t r e q u i r e d t o p r e s e n t a n y e v i d e n c e a s t h e o n u s i s o n t h e a p p e l l a n t t o m a k e a c a s e f o r t h e \" u n r e a s o n a b l e a d v e r s e e f f e c t \" . H o w e v e r , t h e a p p e l -l a n t c a n n o t c r o s s - e x a m i n e t h e p r o p o n e n t u n l e s s s / h e h a s p r o -d u c e d e v i d e n c e . A l s o , u n l e s s t h e p r o p o n e n t h a s s u b m i t t e d e v i -d e n c e , t h e B o a r d m u s t m a k e a d e c i s i o n b a s e d o n t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s e v i d e n c e , b u t w i t h i n t h e c o n t e x t o f p r i o r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d e c i -s i o n s f a v o r i n g t h e p r o p o n e n t . I n t h e 1 9 7 8 h e a r i n g s , t h e WIB d i d n o t i n i t i a l l y p r o d u c e a n y e v i d e n c e , a s t h i s c r o s s - e x a m i n a -t i o n b e t w e e n t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s c o u n s e l ( M c D a d e ) a n d t h e p e r m i t -h o l d e r , r e p r e s e n t e d b y N e w r o t h a n d B u c h a n a n , i l l u s t r a t e s . M c D a d e . . . N o w w h a t w e ' r e t a l k i n g a b o u t h e r e i s e v i d e n c e b e f o r e t h e B o a r d . Now i s t h e r e a n y e v i d e n c e t h a t y o u h a v e t o p r e s e n t t o t h e B o a r d t h a t 2 , 4 - D i s s a f e b e s i d e s t h e f a c t t h a t s o m e b o d y t o l d y o u i t w a s s a f e ? . . . . . . S o t h e r e i s n o e v i d e n c e t h a t y o u c a n g i v e u s — n o s t u d i e s , n o c i t a t i o n s o f a n y m a t e r i a l t h a t s h o w s i t ' s s a f e a t t h e s e l e v e l s ? Y e s o r n o ? B u c h a n a n : I ' m n o t g o i n g t o a n s w e r t h e q u e s t i o n . M c D a d e : I t ' s n o t a n u n f a i r q u e s t i o n , D r . B u c h a n a n . I ' m a s k i n g y o u i f y o u r c a s e , i f y o u h a v e a n y m a t e r i a l t o p r e s e n t t o t h e B o a r d t h a t s h o w s t h a t 2 , 4 - D i s s a f e a t t h o s e l e v e l s . B u c h a n a n : (No a n s w e r ) M c D a d e : N o b o d y ' s a s k i n g y o u t o p r o v e t h a t i t ' s a b s o -l u t e l y s a f e . Do y o u h a v e a n y m a t e r i a l , a n y e v i d e n c e t o s h o w t h a t a t . 0 0 1 p p m . i t s e e m s t o b e s a f e ? . . . 1 3 3 (No answer) McDade: You have n o t h i n g . . . . There are 120,000 people i n t h i s v a l l e y and y o u ' r e t e l l i n g us that you ' ve seen noth ing to i n d i c a t e tha t i t ' s s a f e . Buchanan: I guess s o . McDade: So what, eh? Have you seen any t e s t s showing l a ck of harm in the P r a i r i e s ? T h e r e ' s been a l o t made here about the use of 2,4-D in the P r a i r i e s . . . . I'm sugges t ing tha t i f there had been a s tudy show-ing tha t something was sa fe in the p r a i r i e s we would have seen i t here today but there i s no s tudy . We've brought i n exper t s to show that 2,4-D i s h a r m f u l ; you ' ve had a number of days to p resent ev idence showing that i t ' s n o t . Where i s that ev idence? We're w a i t i n g fo r i t (PCAB 1978 :10 ) . Mr. Warnock, speak ing fo r the SOEC, d i s c u s s e d the i m p l i c a t i o n s of the a p p e l l a n t ' s assumption of the burden of proof f o r the d e c i s i o n to be made by the t r i b u n a l : Warnock: . . .Now as our counse l has po in t ed o u t , we f i n d i t very d i f f i c u l t to imagine how the Board can make a d e c i s i o n when a l l the f a c t s are presented by u s . . . t h a t we d o n ' t have any f a c t s presented by the permit h o l d e r . The permi t ho lde r i s not go ing to be here fo r seven days p r e s e n t i n g t h e i r ev idence and we ' re c ross-examin ing i t . ...We c a n ' t q u i t e comprehend the b a s i s upon which you are go ing to make tha t d e c i s i o n . I f y o u ' r e on l y go ing to c o n s i d e r our e v i dence , you 'd have no a l t e r n a t i v e but to dec ide on our s i d e . Our ev idence i s a l l on one s ide of the q u e s t i o n (PCAB 1978 :8 ) . In response to the a p p e l l a n t ' s submiss ions and c r o s s -examinat ion of the p e r m i t - h o l d e r , the Board dec ided \" t ha t the pe rmi t tee would be r equ i r ed to show that the e x e r c i s e of the permi ts would not cause any unreasonable adverse e f f e c t \" (B.C. Supreme C o u r t : 1978) . The proponent subsequent l y submit ted e v i -dence in the PCAB h e a r i n g s , as Tab le F i ve above i n d i c a t e d . Members of the SOEC have r e f e r r e d to the imbalanced p r e s e n -t a t i o n of ev idence du r i ng the 1978 h e a r i n g s , s t a t i n g tha t 134 a l though they produced the bulk of the i n f o r m a t i o n , the Board dec ided a g a i n s t them: The SOEC presented 6 1/2 days of e v i dence , us ing top e x p e r t s . The WIB t e s t i f i e d f o r 3 hours and gave no e v i dence . People c o u l d n ' t f i g u r e tha t o u t . People th ink these Boards are i m p a r t i a l . They th ink i f they can p rov ide enough e v i dence , the Board w i l l l o g i c a l l y dec ide on t h e i r b e h a l f , and t h e y ' r e stunned when they d o n ' t . . . s i n c e we had a l l the ev idence t h e y ' d have to dec ide fo r us (Warnock 1980: F i l m ) . A p p e l l a n t s have c r i t i c i z e d the PCAB's s t r u c t u r e of a p p e a l , and the o r g a n i z a t i o n a l and t e c h n i c a l burden tha t t h i s p l a ces on the a p p e l l a n t . They c l a im that the onus should be p l a ced wi th the p roponent , who has i n i t i a t e d the s i t u a t i o n , as t h e i r w i t -ness , Dr . Van Se te r s s t a t e s : ....I have grave doubts about the a b i l i t y of the s c i e n -t i f i c community to e s t a b l i s h sa fe l e v e l s . . . I t h ink the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y l i e s wi th those who app ly the chemica l to prove tha t no untoward e f f e c t s w i l l be found at any c o n c e n t r a t i o n , not on l y immedia te l y , but in the decades and f u tu r e gene ra t i ons hence (PCAB 1978) . How would the p l u r a l i s t theory e x p l a i n t h i s apparent imba-lance i n the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t r i b u n a l ? The model , as I e s t a b -l i s h e d e a r l i e r , assumes that the procedures of the hea r i ngs ensure a ba lance between competing i n t e r e s t s . For each formal procedure in the hea r ing ( i . e . , c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n ) , competing i n t e r e s t s have equa l a b i l i t y to take p a r t . In accordance wi th a l e g a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the appea l p r o c e s s , the o r g a n i z a t i o n of i n t e r v e n t i o n i s thus compat ib le w i th p l u r a l i s t no t i ons of ba l ance . The proponent has i n i t i a t e d the permi t p r o c e s s , and has made and won t h e i r case f o r the p e s t i c i d e a p p l i c a t i o n , hav ing conv inced the A d m i n i s t r a t o r and the P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Committee of t h e i r p o s i t i o n . T h i s d e c i s i o n i s being reviewed by the 135 a p p e a l p r o c e s s , a n d n o t t h e p e r m i t - h o l d e r ' s c a s e . T o o p p o s e t h i s p o s i t i o n , a n d t o i n t r o d u c e a c o m p e t i n g v i e w , m a t e r i a l m u s t b e i n t r o d u c e d f r o m t h e a p p e l l a n t . T h u s , w i t h i n t h e g r e a t e r c o n t e x t o f t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p r o c e s s a n d t h e a p p e a l s t r u c t u r e , t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s s u b m i s s i o n s c o u n t e r t h e p r e v i o u s p o s i t i o n o f t h e A d m i n i s t r a t o r . T h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t r i b u n a l u p h o l d s t h e p l u r a l i s t m o d e l t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t t h e l a r g e r d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g s t r u c t u r e p r o v i d e s t h i s a d v e r s a r i a l c o n t e x t . A l t h o u g h t h e l a r g e r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o n t e x t a c c o m m o d a t e s t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s d i f f i c u l t i e s t o a c e r t a i n e x t e n t , t h e r e i s n o n e t h e l e s s a n u n e a s i n e s s i n t h i s p l u r a l i s t e x p l a n a t i o n . F r o m a c r i t i c a l p o l i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e s t r u c t u r e o f i n t e r v e n t i o n w i t h i n t h i s a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t r i b u n a l i s r e c o g n i z e d a s i m b a l a n c e d f o r t h e a p p e l l a n t . T h e l a c k o f p u b l i c a c c e s s t o e a r l i e r d e c i -s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s e s r e v e a l a b u r e a u c r a t i c b i a s f a v o u r i n g t h e p r o p o n e n t . T h e a p p e l l a n t ' s a s s u m p t i o n o f t h e l e g a l b u r d e n o f p r o o f , i s s t y m i e d b y a l a c k o f a c c e s s t o e a r l i e r d e c i s i o n s w h i c h h a v e b e e n a b a s i s f o r t h e d e c i s i o n . I n a d d i t i o n t o t h i s i m b a l a n c e , t h e a p p e l l a n t i n t h e c a s e s t u d i e s s u b m i t t e d a d i s -p r o p o r t i o n a t e a m o u n t o f e v i d e n c e r e l a t i v e t o t h e p r o p o n e n t . T h e s e c r i t i c a l v i e w s c h a l l e n g e t h e p l u r a l i s t a s s u m p t i o n s o f c o m p e t i t i o n a n d b a l a n c e . T h e o r g a n i z a t i o n o f i n t e r v e n t i o n , i n t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e P C A B , a l s o f a i l s t o r e f l e c t a b a l a n c e o f c o m p e t i n g i n t e r e s t s . P u b l i c p a r t i c i p a n t s m u s t t h u s b e a r t h e p r a c t i c a l o n u s o f e x t e n -s i v e p r e p a r a t i o n i n m a k i n g t h e i r c a s e . T h e p r a c t i c a l a s s u m p -t i o n o f t h e b u r d e n o f p r o o f a c c o m p a n y i n g t h e l e g a l o n u s c r e a t e s 136 d i f f i c u l t i e s fo r a p p e l l a n t s who as p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i n t e r v e n o r s , have r e l a t i v e l y l e s s t e c h n i c a l , b u r e a u c r a t i c , and p r o f e s s i o n a l suppor t than t h e i r opponents . Whi le i n the case of the PCAB, the proponent was a c t i v e l y i n vo l ved i n the resea rch and a d m i n i -s t r a t i o n of a q u a t i c p l a n t management, the SOEC and other a p p e l -l a n t s ' e f f o r t s were produced by o r g a n i z a t i o n s or i n d i v i d u a l s whose p r e p a r a t i o n s were v o l u n t a r y , e x t e r n a l to b u r e a u c r a t i c and s c i e n t i f i c networks and sma l l in s c a l e , p e r s o n n e l , and r e s o u r -c e s . F a m i l i a r i t y w i th t e c h n i c a l i s s u e s , r esea rch e x p e r i e n c e , and s t r a t e g i c o r g a n i z a t i o n are fundamental to p a r t i c i p a t i o n in areas of t e c h n i c a l knowledge, such as h e r b i c i d e use . Moreover , t h i s onus r e q u i r e s the a p p e l l a n t ' s expend i tu re of f i n a n c i a l r e s o u r c e s . I t assumes an investment in time and persons to engage i n resea rch a c t i v i t i e s , p r o c u r i n g w i t n e s s e s , and networ -k ing wi th other groups which have adopted s i m i l a r o r g a n i -z a t i o n a l s t r a t e g i e s . Thus , a d e s c r i p t i o n of the p r a c t i c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n and p r e p a r a t i o n of hea r ing a c t i v i t i e s r e vea l s an imbalance among p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t e r e s t s which i s not r evea led by a l e g a l p e r -s p e c t i v e of the p r o c e s s . The con fo rmi t y of the hea r ing p rocess to the p l u r a l i s t model r e f l e c t s an o r i e n t a t i o n to the l a r g e r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e and a f a i l u r e to i n co rpo r a t e \" e x t e r n a -l i t i e s \" of p a r t i c i p a t i o n as c r u c i a l to i n t e r veno r s * success or f a i l u r e . The Royal Commission of I nqu i r y i n to Uranium Min ing The s t r u c t u r e and o r g a n i z a t i o n of i n t e r v e n t i o n i n the RCUM conforms more r e a d i l y to the p l u r a l i s t model i n i t s c h a r a c t e r i -z a t i o n of a ba lance among competing i n t e r e s t s . T h i s i s due to 137 the p r e l i m i n a r y and i n v e s t i g a t o r y nature of the I n q u i r y , and a l s o to the r e l a t i v e n o n - s p e c i f i c i t y of the i s s u e . Dr . Bates no ted , \"Because the i n q u i r y was not ' p r o j e c t - o r i e n t e d 1 , there was no one ' p roponen t ' who would have the onus of p r e s e n t i n g the bulk of the t e c h n i c a l da t a \" (RCUM 1980:279) . The m u l t i -p l i c i t y of p a r t i c i p a n t s and l a ck of a d i r e c t adversary r e l a t i o n among them a l s o tends to c o n t r i b u t e to the image of a ba lanced hea r i ng s t r u c t u r e . In making a c a s e , p a r t i c i p a n t s o rgan ize t h e i r i n t e r v e n -t i o n s both p r a c t i c a l l y and s u b s t a n t i v e l y . The terms of r e f e -rence of the RCUM set out gene ra l parameters which r equ i r ed p a r t i c i p a n t s ' demonst ra t ion of the hea l t h and s a f e t y of uranium mining or i t s dangers , depending on t h e i r i n t e r e s t . A l though no formal and l e g a l burden of proof was e s t a b l i s h e d , p u b l i c p a r t i -c i p a n t s would p l ace the onus of p rov ing t h i s case wi th mining i n t e r e s t s , ra ther than on the p u b l i c : . . . . i t i s imp l i ed that the onus i s upon those advoca -t i n g a more s t r i n g e n t s tandard to e s t a b l i s h i t s n e c e s s i -t y . We cannot accept t h i s p o s i t i o n and i t i s our a s s e r -t i o n tha t the onus must be p l a ced upon i ndus t r y and r e g u l a t o r y agenc ies to defend t h e i r p o s i t i o n (UBCIC 1980:4) . . . . . G i v e n the t e c h n i c a l ev idence p resented to the Commis-s i o n to date concern ing the hazards of uranium, i t s mining and hand l i ng and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n ; the imper fec t \" s t a t e of the a r t \" concern ing long term s torage of t a i -l i n g s . . . w e b e l i e v e the burden of proof c l e a r l y r e s t s at t h i s time on the case fo r mining uranium in B.C. (BCCUCC 1980:20) . The Commission i t s e l f took a pr imary r o l e i n o r g a n i z i n g and med ia t ing i n t e r v e n t i o n . The Commission i d e n t i f i e d i s s u e s , schedu led phases and w i t n e s s e s , and s e l e c t e d and c a l l e d w i t n e s -s e s . I t p resented i t s e l f as the mediator of a c t i v i t i e s which 138 would be c a r r i e d out i n a c o l l e g i a l atmosphere. A l though the Commission noted the p o l a r i t y of oppos ing v iews , i t s assumption of the task of o r d e r i n g the i n v e s t i g a t i o n , in con junc t i on wi th i t s adopt ion wi th q u a s i - j u d i c i a l p rocedu res , presumes to e f f e c t a ba lanced and r e l a t i v e l y ba lanced h e a r i n g . As Chairman Bates s a y s : . . . . T h e Commission found tha t i t was necessa ry to b r i n g two or more w i tnesses be fore i t w i th d i f f e r e n t p e r s p e c -t i v e s based on t h e i r e x p e r t i s e to ensure tha t the i s sue was f u l l y and f a i r l y canvassed , because there was no s i n g l e w i tness who would be regarded as c r e d i b l e by the range of p a r t i c i p a n t s (Bates 1980:279) . C e r t a i n f a c t o r s d i s couraged t h i s ba lanced p a r t i c i p a t i o n of competing i n t e r e s t s . A l though the Commissioners s e l e c t e d w i t -ne s se s , a p p e l l a n t s c la imed tha t these ove r- rep resen ted i n d u s t r y (as I w i l l d i s c u s s i n Chapter S i x ) . The s chedu l i ng of phases and abrupt c a n c e l l a t i o n of the remainder of the hea r ings a l so r e s u l t e d i n an imba lance , in tha t the ma jo r i t y of t e c h n i c a l ( e . g . Min ing) phases had been hea rd , wh i le those of a broader and s o c i a l nature (Env i ronmenta l Impact, P u b l i c and Worker H e a l t h , S o c i a l Impact, E t h i c s and J u r i s d i c t i o n ) had not been. A l though the l a t t e r phases had been schedu led to i n c l ude the appearance of more exper t w i tnesses requested by p u b l i c p a r t i -c i p a n t s , t h i s ev idence was not c ross-examined . N o n e t h e l e s s , the t r i b u n a l a l lowed fo r a ba lance through c ross-examina t i on of a l l w i tnesses by a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s . How-eve r , i f we review the pa t t e rn s of c rossexamina t i on i n the phases which were hea rd , there i s a tendency fo r major p a r t i c i -pants r e p r e s e n t i n g the p u b l i c to p l ay a f a r more a c t i v e r o l e than those r e p r e s e n t i n g government and i n d u s t r y . In the re-139 sea rch compi led by A b b o t t , major p a r t i c i p a n t s are l i s t e d a c c o r -d ing to the f requency of c ross-examina t ion of exper t w i tnesses (1980:183) . Of the 18 major p a r t i c i p a n t s l i s t e d , 5 r ep resen t i n d u s t r y , and on l y 1, government. Of 10 w i t -nesses , c r o s s -examinat ion occurs 66 t imes , an average of 6 1/2 t imes per w i t n e s s . Indus t ry cross-examines 7 t imes w i t h i n t h i s sample , and government, once . Thus , the p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a n t s engage i n by f a r the ma jo r i t y of c ross-examina t ion exchanges, some 58 out of 66. Such a count comp le te l y ignores the q u a l i t y of c r o s s -examina t i on , and may not r e f l e c t redundancy. I t does i n d i c a t e a gene ra l tendency fo r p u b l i c r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s to take on the burden of the p r a c t i c a l a c t i v i t y , as r e f l e c t e d in c r o s s - e x a m i -n a t i o n . In keeping w i th the p l u r a l i s t model , a balance i s thereby r e f l e c t e d , coun t e r i ng the dominance of p r o - i n d u s t r y w i tnesses wi th p u b l i c i n t e r v e n o r s ' c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n . The checks and ba lances of the formal procedures of the hea r ing may thus be s a i d to encourage a ba lance among competing i n t e r e s t s . Making A Case — P r epa r a t i on fo r I n t e r v en t i on P a r t i c i p a n t s ' p r e p a r a t i o n fo r i n t e r v e n t i o n i s assumed by the p l u r a l i s t model to be an i n d i v i d u a l ma t t e r , r e f l e c t i n g the d i f f e r e n t approaches of i n t e r v e n o r s . Y e t , p a r t i c i p a n t s ' a b i l i -t i e s and success in making a case hinge on t h e i r p r e p a r a t i o n and o r g a n i z a t i o n of i n t e r v e n t i o n . P r epa r a t i on r e q u i r e s i n f o r -mation on s e v e r a l l e v e l s , i n c l u d i n g both gene ra l background knowledge of the i s sues and p o s i t i o n s , and c a s e - s p e c i f i c i n f o r -mat ion . Some i n f o r m a t i o n may be i n a c c e s s i b l e due to the gene-140 r a l o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d p r o d u c t i o n o f k n o w l e d g e i n t h e s c i e n t i f i c c o m m u n i t y , w h i l e o t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n may b e s t r a t e g i c a l l y i n a c -c e s s i b l e , d u e t o t h e a d v e r s a r i a l n a t u r e o f t h e h e a r i n g a n d t h e i s s u e . I n t h e c a s e s t u d i e s , a c c e s s t o i n f o r m a t i o n i n c l u d e d a c c e s s t o s c i e n t i f i c r e s e a r c h a n d g o v e r n m e n t d a t a c o n c e r n i n g r e g u l a t i o n s a n d p r o g r a m s . I f i n f o r m a t i o n r e l e v a n t t o t h e c a s e i s i n a c c e s s i b l e , i t w i l l b e a p r o b l e m f o r p a r t i c i p a n t s t o a s s e m b l e a c o g e n t a n d f o r c e f u l a r g u m e n t . I n t h e c a s e s t u d y h e a r i n g s , m u c h o f t h e i n f o r m a t i o n f o r m a l l y a v a i l a b l e w a s s t r a -t e g i c a l l y i n a c c e s s i b l e t o p u b l i c i n t e r e s t p a r t i c i p a n t s , y e t w a s a v a i l a b l e t o o t h e r i n t e r e s t s . T h i s r e v e a l s a n i m b a l a n c e a m o n g p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t e r e s t s , a n d a s t r u c t u r a l d i s a d v a n t a g e t o p u b -l i c i n t e r e s t s . T h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A p p e a l B o a r d T h e i s s u e s o f c o n c e r n t o t h e c a s e s t u d y h e a r i n g s a r e o f a s c i e n t i f i c a n d t e c h n i c a l n a t u r e , a n d a s s u c h , p o s e p r o b l e m s f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n b y l a y p e r s o n s . T h e p e s t i c i d e i s s u e r e -q u i r e s a g e n e r a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f b i o l o g y a n d c h e m i s t r y . B u t , b e y o n d t h e s e b a s i c s , t h e r e a r e a r g u m e n t s i n t h e f i e l d o f p e s t i -c i d e u s e a n d i n t h e s c i e n t i f i c l i t e r a t u r e , c i t a t i o n s o f e x p e r i -m e n t s , p o l i t i c a l d i s c u s s i o n s , c o n t r o v e r s y r e g a r d i n g r e g u l a -t i o n s , t e s t i n g , a n d s o f o r t h w i t h w h i c h a p p e l l a n t s s h o u l d be f a m i l i a r p r i o r t o e m b a r k i n g o n a n a p p e a l . I t i s a s s u m e d b y t h e p l u r a l i s t m o d e l t h a t s u c h i n f o r m a t i o n i s a c c e s s i b l e t o a l l c o m p e t i n g i n t e r e s t s . How d i d t h e a p p e l l a n t s i n t h e P C A B h e a r i n g s a c q u i r e t h e i n f o r m a t i o n n e c e s s a r y t o m a k e t h e i r c a s e ? T h e SOEC e n g a g e d i n r e s e a r c h i n t h e a r e a o f p e s t i c i d e u s e i n t h e y e a r s p r i o r t o t h e 141 h e a r i n g s , and i n 1978 pub l i shed The Other Face of 2,4-D, a book on the phenoxy h e r b i c i d e s and chemica l con tamina t ion of water . The r esea rch i nvo l ved i n w r i t i n g and p u b l i s h i n g t h i s Report prepared C o a l i t i o n members fo r the appea l hea r ing by a c q u a i n -t i n g them wi th the r e s e a r c h , t e rm ino logy , concep t s , and debates i n the f i e l d of phenoxy h e r b i c i d e s . In a d d i t i o n : . . . . t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of the book a l so had two other unexpected f u n c t i o n s . I t a lmost immediate ly connected the SOEC wi th a l a rge number of o ther i n d i v i d u a l s and o r g a n i z a t i o n s working on the same i s sue around the w o r l d . At the same t ime , our o r g a n i z a t i o n became a magnet fo r data be ing deve loped in the f i e l d . . . S o o n the C o a l i t i o n ' s f i l e s con ta ined more c i t a t i o n s on 2,4-D than d id those of the U.S. Env i ronmenta l P r o t e c t i o n Agency (Warnock and Lewis 1982 :34 ) . A l though much t e c h n i c a l i n f o rma t i on i s a v a i l a b l e in the area of p e s t i c i d e r e s e a r c h , i t r e q u i r e s resea rch s k i l l s , t ime , and p h y s i c a l a c c e s s i b i l i t y to secure t h i s m a t e r i a l . Members of the l a y p u b l i c l i v i n g i n r u r a l areas exper i ence d i f f i c u l t i e s i n a c c e s s i n g t h i s m a t e r i a l , as the f o l l o w i n g exce rp t from the 1978 hea r ings i l l u s t r a t e s . In t h i s example, Mr. Warnock of the SOEC i s be ing cross-examined by the p roponen t ' s c o u n s e l . . . . . Y o u have to r ecogn ize that we are f u l l - t i m e in other p r o f e s s i o n s , . . . i n the I n t e r i o r . We d o n ' t have s t a f f mem-b e r s . We d o n ' t have access to l i b r a r i e s . I t ' s very d i f f i c u l t to do a r esea rch p r o j e c t in t h i s type of e n v i -ronment up h e r e . Whenever we had to do r e s e a r c h , we've had to go to Vancouver . I t takes a l o t of e f f o r t , and time and money, to get away from a job and go to Vancouver . To go to M a c m i l l a n . . . L i b r a r y to f i n d out that h a l f the a r t i -c l e s on 2,4-D are checked out and wondering who's got them o u t . So i t ' s d i f f i c u l t to do tha t k ind of work (PCAB: 1978) . In a d d i t i o n to the p h y s i c a l and t e c h n i c a l o b s t a c l e s i n -vo l ved i n o b t a i n i n g i n f o rma t i on on p e s t i c i d e s , o ther d i f f i c u l -142 t i e s r e g a r d i n g i n f o r m a t i o n a r e p r e s e n t e d . I n t h e PCAB h e a r i n g s t h e B o a r d h a s n o t b e e n i n t e r e s t e d i n q u e s t i o n s s u c h a s r i s k , n o r h a s i t b e e n w i l l i n g t o e x p l o r e t h e l a r g e r s c i e n t i f i c c o n -t r o v e r s y w i t h r e g a r d s t o p e s t i c i d e u s e w h e n t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n w a s n o t p r e s e n t e d b y t h e s c i e n t i s t s d i r e c t l y i n v o l v e d ( K . R o b e r t s : 1 9 8 4 ) . R a t h e r , t h e B o a r d h a s b e e n c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e p r o p o s e d a p p l i c a t i o n s o f t h e h e r b i c i d e s p e c i f i e d i n t h e p e r m i t , a n d t h u s , t o s p e c i f i c p r o g r a m s o f t h e W I B . T h i s m a t e r i a l h a s o f t e n b e e n i n a c c e s s i b l e t o t h e p u b l i c . A p p e l l a n t s h a v e n o t e d t h a t i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e p r o -g r a m s o f t h e p r o p o n e n t h a s b e e n d i f f i c u l t t o a c q u i r e , a l t h o u g h t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n h a s b e e n c o n s i d e r e d b y t h e m t o be e s s e n t i a l i n t h e i r p r o d u c t i o n o f a c a s e . I n t h e 1 9 7 9 h e a r i n g s t h e a p p e l -l a n t ' s c o u n s e l , M r . R o b e r t s , a r g u e d t h a t t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n s h o u l d be a v a i l a b l e p r i o r t o t h e h e a r i n g s , a n d t h a t a n a d j o u r n -m e n t w o u l d b e a c c e p t a b l e u n t i l t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n w a s d e l i v e r e d . . . . . t h e r e a s o n t h a t I w a s m a k i n g a r e q u e s t f o r t h i s e v i d e n c e i s s i m p l y t h a t f o r t h e a p p e l l a n t t o m a k e a f a i r a s s e s s m e n t o f t h e 1 9 7 8 a n d 1 9 7 7 p r o g r a m s , a n d m a k e p r e -s e n t a t i o n s b e f o r e t h e B o a r d , i t w o u l d s e e m t h a t i t w o u l d b e i n e v e r y o n e ' s b e s t i n t e r e s t t o h a v e t h a t i n f o r m a t i o n a v a i l a b l e . . . . t h e a p p e l l a n t c a n t h e n m a k e p r e s e n t a t i o n s o n t h e b a s i s o f t h i s d a t a , r a t h e r t h a n s h o o t i n g i n t h e d a r k , b e c a u s e we d o n ' t h a v e t h i s d a t a a v a i l a b l e ( P C A B 1 9 7 9 ) . T h e a p p e l l a n t m u s t b e a b l e t o i d e n t i f y , a s w e l l a s t o s e c u r e , i n f o r m a t i o n r e l e v a n t t o t h e m a k i n g o f h e r / h i s c a s e . I n 1 9 8 0 , t h e WIB a s p e r m i t - h o l d e r a g a i n f a i l e d t o p r e s e n t t o t h e a p p e l l a n t , o r m a k e p u b l i c , t h a t i n f o r m a t i o n w h i c h i t c o n s i d e r e d e s s e n t i a l t o i t s c a s e . I n a l e t t e r d a t e d M a r c h 2 8 , 1 9 8 0 t o a p p e l l a n t ' s c o u n s e l , D r . N e w r o t h o f t h e WIB s t a t e s : . . . . i t i s n o t c u s t o m a r y f o r p e r m i t h o l d e r s t o p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n t o a p p e l l a n t s u n d e r t h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A c t 1 4 3 f o r the purpose of suppo r t i ng the a p p e l l a n t s ' c a se . The P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Appea l Board must presuppose tha t the a p p e l l a n t s have ev idence to support t h e i r c a se , w i thout the pe rmi t t ee p r o v i d i n g i t fo r the a p p e l l a n t (Newroth 1980) . Thus , a l though i n f o rma t i on r e l e van t to a s p e c i f i c i s sue may e x i s t , i t may not have been r e l eased to the p u b l i c in time fo r the a p p e l l a n t ' s p r e p a r a t i o n fo r the h e a r i n g . In the 1979 and 1980 h e a r i n g s , the SOEC made reques ts p r i o r to the hea r ings to the Board , to the WIB, and to the M i n i s t e r of the E n v i r o n -ment to secure r e l e van t i n f o r m a t i o n . A l though most of the i n f o r m a t i o n was p rov ided by the p e r m i t - h o l d e r , i t was on l y presented du r ing the hea r ing i t s e l f , and in the 1979 h e a r i n g s , a f t e r the SOEC had requested an adjournment . In the 1980 h e a r i n g s , the SOEC aga in exper i enced d i f f i c u l t y in s e cu r i ng the i n f o r m a t i o n . The absence of a subpoena to secure necessary i n fo rma t i on thus p l a ces a d d i t i o n a l problems fo r the a p p e l l a n t i n t h i s t r i b u n a l . In a d d i t i o n to the lack of access to r e l e van t program d a t a , o ther s p e c i f i c i n f o rma t i on on which d e c i s i o n s by the A d m i n i s t r a t o r and the P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Committee had been based were u n a v a i l a b l e to the a p p e l l a n t . The i n fo rma t i on on which d e c i s i o n s are made f a vou r i ng the r e g i s t r a t i o n of the p e s t i c i d e by A g r i c u l t u r e Canada has a l s o been u n a v a i l a b l e to the a p p e l l a n t . Thus , i n the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e case s tudy , access to genera l i n f o rma t i on has been more a c c e s s i b l e than has s p e c i f i c program-based m a t e r i a l . The se cu r i ng of background s c i e n t i f i c r esea rch and more gene ra l s c i e n t i f i c i n f o r m a t i o n , a l though pos ing f i n a n -c i a l and s t r a t e g i c problems fo r the a p p e l l a n t , was p o s s i b l e , in 144 k e e p i n g w i t h t h e p l u r a l i s t m odel. N o n e t h e l e s s , f r o m a p a r t i c i p a t o r y c r i t i q u e , t h e i n a c c e s s i b i l i t y o f s p e c i f i c mate-r i a l s p r o v e d a d i s a d v a n t a g e t o t h e a p p e l l a n t , d e t r a c t i n g f r o m t h e i r c o m p e t i t i v e a b i l i t i e s and b r i n g i n g i n t o q u e s t i o n t h e n e u t r a l i t y o f t h e forum. The R o y a l Commission o f I n q u i r y i n t o U ranium M i n i n g F o r t h e u r a n i u m h e a r i n g s , p r e p a r a t i o n f o r i n t e r v e n t i o n was f a c i l i t a t e d by t h e C o m m i s s i o n , whose l i b r a r y , s t a f f , and f a c t -f i n d i n g f u n c t i o n s were a c c e s s i b l e to a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s . P r i o r t o t h e community h e a r i n g s , t h e Commission s e n t a l i a i s o n p e r -s o n , Ms. S t a i r s , t o t h e c o m m u n i t i e s , t o a i d i n c o o r d i n a t i o n and p r e p a r a t i o n o f i n t e r v e n t i o n . N o n e t h e l e s s , a c c e s s t o i n f o r m a -t i o n was a major p r o b l e m , and was r e f e r r e d t o by p a r t i c i p a n t s as s u c h t h r o u g h o u t t h e h e a r i n g s . A c c e s s t o i n f o r m a t i o n was l i m i t e d b e c a u s e o f t h e d e f e n s e n a t u r e o f the n u c l e a r i s s u e , the c o n t r o l s m a i n t a i n e d by t h e A t o m i c E n e r g y C o n t r o l B o a r d , as w e l l as by c e r t a i n c o m p e t i t i v e f e a t u r e s o f t h e i n d u s t r y . The i s s u e o f u r a n i u m m i n i n g , as I o b s e r v e d i n C h a p t e r T h r e e , i s l o c a t e d by p u b l i c i n t e r e s t p a r t i c i p a n t s w i t h i n t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f n u c l e a r power. Lack o f a c c e s s to g e n e r a l i n f o r m a t i o n was c i t e d by major p a r t i c i p a n t s as a p r o b -lem f o r them i n making t h e i r c a s e . The r e g u l a t i o n s and j u r i s -d i c t i o n o f t h i s i s s u e a r e complex, i n t e r d e p a r t m e n t a l , and o f t e n c l a n d e s t i n e . The f o l l o w i n g s t a t e m e n t from t h e West C o a s t E n v i -r o n m e n t a l Law A s s o c i a t i o n ' s F i n a l S u b m i s s i o n d i s c u s s e s t h e p u b l i c ' s r i g h t t o i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e s e i s s u e s . The r e g u l a t o r y r e q u i r e m e n t t h a t ' i n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d by t h e A t o m i c E n e r g y C o n t r o l B o a r d , a r i s i n g o u t o f t h e 145 bus iness and o p e r a t i o n of a nuc l ea r f a c i l i t y * (Vo l .39 ,p .65-67 ) be c o n f i d e n t i a l has a l lowed that agency to make p o l i c y which has f a r - r e a c h i n g e f f e c t s wi thout hav ing to in form the p u b l i c of e i t h e r the p o l i c y or the e f f e c t s . . . . W h i l e t h i s oath of f i d e l i t y and sec r ecy may have had j u s t i f i c a t i o n when the Ac t was f i r s t p romu l -g a t e d , on the now spec ious ground of ' n a t i o n a l s e c u r i t y ' , such j u s t i f i c a t i o n can no longer be a c c e p t e d , i f f o r no o the r reason than the p u b l i c must be informed in order to a c c u r a t e l y assess the r i s k s inheren t i n and p o s s i b l e b e n e f i t s de r i v ed from the f ront-end of the nuc l ea r f u e l c y c l e . . . . W C E L A b e l i e v e s tha t people i n Canada are e n t i -t l e d as of r i g h t to i n fo rma t i on on t h i s ' p e a c e f u l ' use which w i l l c l e a r l y a f f e c t the nature and h e a l t h of s o c i e -ty (WCELA 1980 :15 ) . The i s sue of uranium mining i s de f i ned by t e c h n i c a l and s c i e n t i f i c knowledge. I t i s to p a r t i c i p a n t s ' advantage to have an unders tand ing of c h e m i s t r y , p h y s i c s , and the nuc l ea r f u e l c y c l e to be ab le to r e cogn ize the i s sues a s s o c i a t e d w i th the mining of uranium. Community and t e c h n i c a l p a r t i c i p a n t s r e -qu i r ed some b a s i c grasp of the i s sues i n vo l ved i n order to make a case before the Commiss ion. In a d d i t i o n to t h i s gene ra l f ounda t ion of knowledge, major p a r t i c i p a n t s were r equ i r ed i n p r a c t i c e , to have or secure an unders tand ing of the r e g u l a t i o n and economics of uranium m in i ng , as we l l as to d i g e s t the t e c h n i c a l i n f o rma t i on which was presented i n the course of the h e a r i n g s . Access to i n f o rma t i on was germane to the community hea -r i n g s , both i n a c q u a i n t i n g the p u b l i c wi th the i s sues and the p o s i t i o n s of v a r i ous i n t e r e s t s , as we l l as in p r o v i d i n g m o t i v a -t i o n f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Abbot t notes the inadequacy of Ms. S t a i r s ' community e d u c a t i o n a l and l i a i s o n work, due to lack of time and fund ing (1980). P a r t i c i p a n t s compla ined about the lack of i n f o rma t i on throughout the community h e a r i n g s , as i l l u s -t r a t e d by t h i s exce rp t from the Kelowna h e a r i n g s : 146 M o e l a r t : . . . . T h e o ther po in t and p robab l y one of the most important p o i n t s of concern tha t we have i s the s e c r e c y tha t sur rounds the i n fo rma t i on to which other people have a l l u d e d and no matter how much and how i n -t e n s e l y t h i s may be denied by both government o f f i c i a l s and execu t i v e s of the mining i n d u s t r y , I have prima f a c i e e v i d e n c e . . . tha t shows tha t t h i s i s c o n t i n u i n g . . . . . . . t h e r e p o r t . . . tha t was d e l i b e r a t e l y w i thhe ld from the p u b l i c . . . c o n t a i n s i n f o rma t i on to which I b e l i e v e the p u b l i c i s e n t i t l e d . I do not th ink there i s any mer i t in t r e a t i n g the p u b l i c as a group of imbec i l e s that a r e n ' t i n t e l l i g e n t enough to reach t h e i r own c o n c l u s i o n s . Wher-ever t h e i r h e a l t h and t h e i r environment s tands to be a f f e c t e d a d v e r s e l y or o t h e r w i s e , tha t type of i n f o r m a -t i o n . . . . shou ld be made a v a i l a b l e to them. I can f i n d no reason whatsoever fo r w i t hho ld i ng tha t from them and the reason tha t i s so o f t e n used by g o v e r n -ment departments i s , the p u b l i c may m i s i n t e r p r e t i t or we may unduly a larm him or whatever . I f these r epo r t s are r e l i a b l e and I assume based on what they c o s t , they shou ld be , then t h i s i n f o rma t i on must be made a v a i l a b l e to the p u b l i c (RCUM 4:288-89) . One s p e c i f i c problem in a c c e s s i n g i n f o rma t i on r e l a t e d to mining was the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of s i t e s in which uranium e x p l o -r a t i o n was t ak i ng p l a c e . Under the r e g u l a t i o n s , the s i t e s of uranium e x p l o r a t i o n are on l y made a v a i l a b l e on request one year a f t e r the f i l i n g d a t e . In order to i d e n t i f y these l o c a t i o n s , members of the p u b l i c had to engage in a l engthy search p r o -c e s s . Thus , a l though the Commission had schedu led hea r ings in communit ies i n areas known to be of i n t e r e s t to mining compa-n i e s , the p u b l i c d i d not n e c e s s a r i l y know of the i d e n t i t y and l o c a t i o n of proposed mining s i t e s . In one i n s t a n c e , a p a r t i c i -pant r evea l ed i n f o rma t i on of which the Commission was unaware. Ms. Madsen 's submiss ion i d e n t i f i e d the ex i s t ence of e x p l o r a t i o n fo r uranium of which the Commission i t s e l f had not been i n -formed . Ms. Madsen: . . . T h e r e are some 54,000 people l i v i n g on 147 the west s i de of Okanagan Lake system from Summerland to the b o r d e r . . . w h i c h i s q u i t e a few p e o p l e . Up u n t i l a few weeks ago, I would hazard a guess tha t 99 percent of these people d id not know there was any uranium e x p l o r a t i o n going on i n the immediate a r e a . Those who d i d know were p robab l y p r o s p e c t o r s , mining company o f f i c i a l s , those working f o r the Min ing D i v i s i o n of the P r o v i n c i a l Government and the Fede ra l Government, or o the rs on the f r i n g e . . . Why was such a l a rge segment of the p o p u l a t i o n i gnoran t about uranium e x p l o r a t i o n in the area? Was i t , one , because we were a l l very s t u p i d or u n w i l l i n g to l e a r n a n y t h i n g ; o r , was i t because the B r i t i s h Columbia P r o v i n c i a l Government and/or the Fede ra l Government, and the Min ing F r a t e r n i t y were be ing very c a r e f u l to keep the matter as q u i e t as p o s s i b l e ? I th ink number two i s the answer, and I w i l l t e l l you i n d e t a i l about my e f f o r t s to d a t e . I f t h i s i s the way we ' re supposed to get our i n f o r m a t i o n , I t h ink there shou ld be courses a v a i l a b l e in a l l secondary s c h o o l s , c o l l e g e s , and u n i v e r s i t i e s e n t i -t l e d \"How do you ask ques t i ons when you d o n ' t have a c l ue of what you want to know?\" . . . . (RCUM 4:422-23) . The i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of uranium d e p o s i t s had s i g n i f i c a n c e fo r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the h e a r i n g s . P u b l i c knowledge of p o t e n t i a l mining a c t i v i t y in t h e i r area may have prompted a d d i t i o n a l community input to the RCUM p r o c e s s . A l though the s e c u r i n g of i n f o rma t i on was c i t e d by communi-ty p a r t i c i p a n t s as d i f f i c u l t , s e v e r a l major p a r t i c i p a n t s r e -garded the mandate of the Commission i n a l l e v i a t i n g t h i s p r o b -lem dur ing the T e c h n i c a l Hear ings as p o t e n t i a l l y u s e f u l . The Commission c o u n s e l , Mr. Anthony, chose not to use the subpoena powers of the Commiss ion, a l though t h i s was requested s e v e r a l t imes by p a r t i c i p a n t s as a t o o l f o r s e c u r i n g i n f o r m a t i o n . In the f o l l o w i n g example, Mr. P a t e r s o n , counse l f o r Yel lowhead E c o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n requests use of the Commiss ion 's s u b -poena powers, both f o r the s e c u r i n g of s p e c i f i c and gene ra l knowledge. 148 They (the mining companies) are not go ing to g i ve t h i s Commission any more i n f o rma t i on than they f e e l they want t o , and i t w i l l be based on t h e i r h i s t o r i c a l exper ience of approach ing the d i s c l o s u r e of i n f o r m a t i o n . I t w i l l be a t tended to wi th a l l of t h e i r h i s t o r i c a l concerns and c a u t i o n and conse r va t i sm about that i s s u e . Even more so wi th the uranium i n d u s t r y , p a r t i c u l a r l y in the uranium area which i s noted to have a long reco rd of the use of the f a l s e no t i on of c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y f o r commercia l purposes to keep r e l e van t i n f o rma t i on from the p u b l i c . . . . The subpoena shou ld not be l e f t hanging i n the c l o s e t l i k e some k ind of i l l - u s e d , seldom used s k e l e t o n and then t r o t t e d o u t , maybe, a f t e r we go through a few days of warnings and rumbl ings to be used when you know that there i s something they won't g i ve you . You use a subpoena to f i n d out what ' s t h e r e , then you dec ide what ' s r e l e v a n t . . . . ( R C U M 32:4896-7) . A l though requested i n a d d i t i o n a l i n s t a n c e s , as w e l l , the subpoena powers of the Commission were not used . As Abbott no t e s , \"Mr . An thony ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the subpoena power i s time consuming in p r a c t i c e and puts the onus on major p a r t i c i -pants to demonstrate r e l e vancy of a w i tness or document\" (1980:56) . In c o n t r a s t , Mr. Anthony suggested tha t t h i s was unnecessary , as a l l the i n f o rma t i on requested was fo r thcoming wi thout recourse to t h i s } . (RCUM 32:4899-4901) . In a d d i t i o n , as Anthony l a t e r informed A b b o t t : \" . . . t h e Commission i s i n vo l ved i n an on-going compe t i t i v e f i e l d . We are l o o k i n g i n to an i n d u s t r y , not j u s t one company . . . . \"(RCUM 1980 :46 ) . The compe-t i t i v e p o s i t i o n of companies v i s - a - v i s one another was used by the Commission and mining i n t e r e s t s dur ing the hea r ings as a r a t i o n a l e f o r keeping i n d u s t r y i n fo rma t i on c o n f i d e n t i a l . Th i s assumption of a l i b e r a l compe t i t i v e economic framework i s a f u r t h e r i n d i c a t i o n of the Commiss ion 's accordance wi th the p l u r a l i s t framework. 149 Another p rocedu ra l i s sue r e l a t e d to access to i n fo rma t i on i s r e l a t e d to the l e g a l no t i on of d i s c l o s u r e . In accordance wi th P r e l i m i n a r y Ru l i ng No. 1, B . 6 .2 , the Commission was a l -lowed to r e t a i n c e r t a i n p r i v i l e g e d i n f o rma t i on i n c o n f i d e n c e . Ques t ions of p r i v i l e g e arose twice dur ing the h e a r i n g s . The f i r s t concerned a document on young uranium d e p o s i t s ; the second , No r cen ' s c o n t r a c t w i th Korea E l e c t r i c Company. In the h e a r i n g s , the companies i n vo l ved s t a t e d tha t they had the i n f o r m a t i o n , but i n s i s t e d on i t s c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y . Fo l l ow ing reques ts from major p a r t i c i p a n t s , however, the Commission r e -l eased most of t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n . Thus , access to i n fo rma t i on w i t h i n the RCUM has been c i t e d by p a r t i c i p a n t s as a problem in making a c a s e . Acco rd ing to p u b l i c i n t e r v e n o r s , formal p r o c e d u r a l a c t i v i t i e s , i n the form of subpoena and p r i v i l e g e have presented some problems fo r t h e i r a b i l i t y to i n te r vene s u c c e s s f u l l y . These were not r e g a r -ded by Commission counse l as c r i t i c a l to p u b l i c i n t e r v e n t i o n . The major problems fo r p u b l i c i n t e r v e n o r s seem to be a s s o c i a t e d wi th the more gene ra l l a ck of i n f o r m a t i o n , a product of the r e g u l a t o r y s i t u a t i o n and the nuc l ea r i s s u e . Ac co rd ing to the Commiss ion, these problems extend to a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s , r e g a r d -l e s s of t h e i r i n t e r e s t . The Commission d im in i shes the s t r u c t u -r a l i n a c c e s s i b i l i t y of t h i s i n f o rma t i on by r e f e r r i n g to the problem as one of \" commun ica t ion \" . Nonethe less they address access to i n f o rma t i on s p e c i f i c a l l y in the f o l l o w i n g exce rp t from the F i r s t I n te r im Report on Uranium E x p l o r a t i o n : 13. I t has been brought to our a t t e n t i o n at a number of the P u b l i c H e a r i n g s . . . t h a t there have been d i f f i c u l -t i e s w i th communicat ion between a l l l e v e l s i n vo l ved i n 150 uranium e x p l o r a t i o n . Not on l y has the p u b l i c found i t d i f f i c u l t to get i n f o rma t i on to which one would have supposed i t was c l e a r l y e n t i t l e d , . . . . but the extent of i n f o rma t i on d i s t r i b u t e d to l o c a l h e a l t h o f f i c e r s seems to have been exceed ing l y v a r i a b l e ; the communication be -tween mining i n s p e c t o r s and hea l t h o f f i c e r s and the pub -l i c seems to have been d e f i c i e n t ; the communication be -tween the e x p l o r a t i o n companies and the p u b l i c has been v a r i a b l e and in some i n s t ances u n s a t i s f a c t o r y ; and the Atomic Energy C o n t r o l Boa rd , which has been i s s u i n g l i -censes fo r uranium e x p l o r a t i o n , seems to have been too d i s t a n t from the problems in the area to have p rov ided an e f f e c t i v e source of i n f o r m a t i o n . 14. The p u b l i c tes t imony tha t we have heard has p rov ided us wi th a g rea t dea l of ev idence of the f r u s t r a -t i o n encountered by concerned members of the p u b l i c , i n c l u d i n g p h y s i c i a n s , m i n i s t e r s , and r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of c a t t l emen , f r u i t growers or other food p roduce r s . I t i s c l e a r tha t an improvement of t h i s aspect of the p resen t s i t u a t i o n shou ld be a p r i o r i t y (RCUM 1979 :4 ) . Thus , access to i n f o rma t i on i s f o r m a l l y r ecogn ized as p rob lema -t i c , r e v e a l i n g the i n a b i l i t y of the t r i b u n a l to comply wi th the p l u r a l i s t model of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a l l r e s p e c t s . 5 .4-Procedura l F a i r n e s s and The P l u r a l i s t Model In t h i s c h a p t e r , I reviewed the p o l i t i c a l f a i r n e s s of procedures i n the p u b l i c h e a r i n g . I d i s t i n g u i s h e d between formal methods of i n t e r v e n t i o n , those t y p i c a l l y d e s c r i b e d as e q u i v a l e n t to the hea r ing p r o c e s s , and i n fo rma l methods by which p a r t i c i p a n t s prepare to i n te r vene and proceed to o rgan ize t h e i r i n t e r v e n t i o n a c t i v i t i e s . Hear ing p rocedu res , in the exper i ence of the case s t u d i e s , l a r g e l y con f i rm the p l u r a l i s t model , r e f l e c t i n g a c c e s s i b i l i t y to p u b l i c i n t e r e s t p a r t i c i p a n t s and a p r o c e d u r a l ba lance among i n t e r v e n o r s . However, there are excep t i ons to t h i s p a t t e r n , some of which r e f l e c t i nadequac ies of s p e c i f i c t r i b u n a l s , and o the r s which po in t to more genera l problems w i t h i n the p l u r a l i s t model i t s e l f . I have observed i n the formal procedures of the hea r ing a 151 gene ra l compl iance of the case study hea r ings to the concept of a ba lance among competing i n t e r e s t s . Those pr imary procedures of s u b m i s s i o n , c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n , and summation by tu rn- tak ing ensu re , at a p r o c e d u r a l l e v e l , that a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s have a v a i l a b l e the same s t r u c t u r e of i n t e r v e n t i o n . Making a c a s e , however, i n vo l v e s f a r more than compl iance wi th a se t of e s t a b l i s h e d p rocedu res . I t c a l l s i n to p lay a s t r a t e g y of i n t e r v e n t i o n , tha t i s , a p r e p a r a t i o n and o r g a n i z a -t i o n of i n t e r v e n t i o n to which the p l u r a l i s t model does not d i r e c t l y a t t e n d . Ra the r , p r e p a r a t i o n fo r i n t e r v e n t i o n i s r e -garded as the s u b j e c t i v e concern of i n d i v i d u a l a p p e l l a n t s . D i f -f e rences among p a r t i c i p a n t s e x t e r n a l to the hea r ing are r e c o g -n i z e d by the p l u r a l i s t model to have some bea r ing on t h e i r a b i l i t y to i n t e r v e n e . However, these d i f f e r e n c e s do not appear i n random p a t t e r n s , but are a f u n c t i o n of the i n t e r e s t of the i n t e r v e n o r . D i f f e r e n c e s among i n t e r v e n o r s ' r esources and o r g a -n i z a t i o n a l suppor t p o i n t to compe t i t i v e imbalances which w i l l a f f e c t the d e c i s i o n s produced by the t r i b u n a l . P a r t i c i p a n t s ' o r g a n i z a t i o n of i n t e r v e n t i o n i s assumed to r e f l e c t d i f f e r e n c e s among p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t e r e s t s in app roach -e s , conce rns , and a b i l i t i e s . Ye t , i n t e r v e n t i o n i s d i r e c t e d to and mediated by the hea r ing s t r u c t u r e . In the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e h e a r i n g , p u b l i c i n t e r e s t a p p e l l a n t s assumed the l e g a l burden of proof which i n d i c a t e d a s t r u c t u r a l imbalance among p a r t i c i -pan t s . However, the l e g a l e x p l a n a t i o n upholds the p l u r a l i s t model as the a p p e l l a n t ' s onus i s r e q u i r e d to overcome p r i o r d e c i s i o n s i n the p e r m i t - h o l d e r ' s f a vou r . Thus , a s t r u c t u r a l 152 balance in the l a r g e r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e context i s ma in t a ined . The c o n s u l t a t i v e hea r ing i s more c o n s i s t e n t wi th the p l u r a l i s t model . In t h i s c a s e , the Commission assumed much of the onus fo r o r g a n i z i n g and s chedu l i ng phases , s e c u r i n g w i t n e s s e s , i d e n t i f y i n g i s s u e s , and d i r e c t i n g the I n q u i r y . The Commis-s i o n ' s assumption of o r g a n i z a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s , s e c u r i n g and d i s t r i b u t i o n of fund ing fo r the i n t e r v e n o r s , and b u r e a u c r a t i c s u p p o r t , f a c i l i t a t e d p a r t i c i p a n t s ' a b i l i t i e s to make a c a se . None the l e s s , r e l a t i v e l y more p r e p a r a t i o n was r equ i r ed by p u b l i c i n t e r e s t p a r t i c i p a n t s , who l acked a founda t ion of i n f o r m a t i o n , b u r e a u c r a t i c r e l a t i o n s and academic networks from which to draw. Thus , the s t r u c t u r a l d isadvantage of the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t p o i n t s to the imbalance among competing f o r c e s . I observed p a r t i c i p a n t s ' access to i n fo rma t i on as one stage i n the p r e p a r a t i o n fo r i n t e r v e n t i o n . In the a d m i n i s t r a -t i v e h e a r i n g , the a p p e l l a n t s demonstrated t h e i r a b i l i t y to secure a v a r i e t y of gene ra l s c i e n t i f i c i n f o rma t i on wi th respec t to the c a s e , both in p u b l i c a t i o n of a r esea rch s tudy and i n t h e i r s e c u r i n g of exper t w i t n e s s e s . However, l ack of access to s p e c i f i c m a t e r i a l and data from the pe rm i t-ho lde r r ega rd ing the p e s t i c i d e a p p l i c a t i o n program was c i t e d by a p p e l l a n t s as a h i n d r a n c e . The RCUM on the o ther hand ac ted as a f a c i l i t a t o r to p a r t i c i p a n t s r eques t i ng i n f o r m a t i o n . Access to i n f o r m a t i o n , i n t h i s i n s t a n c e , was f o r m a l l y i n co rpo ra t ed in the a d m i n i s t r a -t i v e f u n c t i o n of the Commission ( e . g . , f u n d i n g , l i b r a r y , s t a f f ) . However, in t h i s t r i b u n a l , gene ra l s c i e n t i f i c i n f o r m a -t i o n was l e s s a c c e s s i b l e due to the t e c h n i c a l and defense nature of nuc l ea r p h y s i c s . The i n a c c e s s i b i l i t y of s p e c i f i c 153 i n f o rma t i on was f o r m a l l y r ecogn ized by the t r i b u n a l as r e l a t e d to a compe t i t i v e economic s i t u a t i o n and i n t e r - j u r i s d i c t i o n a l c o m p l e x i t i e s . The emphasis on the formal hea r ing p rocess promotes the con fo rmi t y of the hea r ing p rocess to the p l u r a l i s t model . P u b l i c a c c e s s i b i l i t y to the forum and p r o c e d u r a l ba lance among p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t e r e s t s are g e n e r a l l y i l l u s t r a t e d by the t r i b u -na l e x p e r i e n c e . D ivergence from the p l u r a l i s t model can be ex -p l a i n e d as a b u r e a u c r a t i c and l e g a l prob lem, r e s u l t i n g from a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and and s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s f o r the t r i b u n a l . For i n s t a n c e , the i n a b i l i t y of the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t r i b u n a l as an a d v e r s a r i a l forum to address l a r g e r p o l i t i c a l , p h i l o s o p h i c a l and s c i e n t i f i c i s s u e s , and i t s med ia t ion of s p e c i f i c i s sues e x p l a i n to a c e r t a i n extent the inadequacy of the t r i b u n a l to access and fund a g r ea t e r d i v e r s i t y of p a r t i c i p a n t s . Other problems such as the a p p e l l a n t ' s assumptions of the burden of proof a l s o may be exp l a i ned by the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e contex t of t h i s t r i b u n a l . The p l u r a l i s t model of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the t r i b u -na l has a l i m i t e d u t i l i t y f o r a n a l y s i s of hea r ing p rocedu res . The emphasis on formal procedures obscures access to i n f o r m a -t i o n as an e s s e n t i a l means of hea r ing p r e p a r a t i o n , and f a i l s to r ecogn ize the d isadvantage of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups in s e c u -r i n g i n f o r m a t i o n which i s produced by a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and c o r p o -ra te i n t e r e s t s . The economic and r e g u l a t o r y context of s t a t e i n t e r v e n t i o n i s a f a c t o r in access to i n f o rma t i on which c h a l -lenges the p l u r a l i s t model of s e p a r a t i o n and compe t i t i on among 154 m u l t i p l e i n t e r e s t s . I argue tha t d i f f e r e n c e s among p a r t i c i p a n t s a f f e c t the q u a l i t y of t h e i r i n t e r v e n t i o n , and tha t these d i f f e r e n c e s are not random, but r evea l a s t r u c t u r a l imbalance among p u b l i c and o ther i n t e r e s t g roups . These d i f f e r e n c e s r e f l e c t the nature of the i n t e r e s t , i t s commitment to and i n c e n t i v e fo r p a r t i c i p a -t i n g , i t s o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s i z e , s t a t u s , and r e s o u r c e s , and i t s p r o f e s s i o n a l and t e c h n i c a l l i a i s o n s . A l though there i s a great v a r i e t y among p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups wi th regards to s i z e , r esources and s t a f f i n g , they share a common d isadvantage r e l a -t i v e to t h e i r co rpo ra te and b u r e a u c r a t i c c o u n t e r p a r t s . Common a t t r i b u t e s i n c l ude the l ack of d i r e c t economic i n t e r e s t in the i s sues under d i s c u s s i o n , a l ack of resources and manpower, and t h e i r e x c l u s i o n from b u r e a u c r a t i c and p r o f e s s i o n a l networks. P u b l i c i n t e r e s t g roups , as i l l u s t r a t e d by the exper ience of the case study h e a r i n g s , have no d i r e c t economic i n t e r e s t in the s c i e n t i f i c i s sues under d i s c u s s i o n . Moreover , they are ou t s i de of an i n s t i t u t i o n a l con tex t i n which communicat ions among c o r p o r a t i o n s and government are ongo ing . They are o f t e n suppor ted by inadequate f u n d i n g , and may be temporary in n a -t u r e , generated by i s s u e - s p e c i f i c conce rns . T h e i r sma l l s c a l e and r e l a t i v e l ack of b u r e a u c r a t i c and i n s t i t u t i o n a l connec t ions and c r e d e n t i a l s suggests that making a case fo r them i n v o l v e s d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y g r ea t e r p r e p a r a t i o n than tha t of co rpora te and government p a r t i c i p a n t s . In the PCAB example, s t a f f and resources of the A q u a t i c P l an t Management Program of the M i n i s -t r y of Environment were engaged in r e s e a r c h , p u b l i c r e l a t i o n s , a d m i n - i s t r a t i o n which c o n t r i b u t e d to t h e i r a p p l i c a t i o n . The 155 a p p e l l a n t , as members of the p u b l i c and p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups, were re q u i r e d to v o l u n t a r i l y i n i t i a t e the appeal pro-cess and make a case at t h e i r own cost and i n i t i a t i v e . Prepa-r a t i o n f o r i n t e r v e n t i o n i s made more d i f f i c u l t f o r p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups by the lack of s t a f f and s e r v i c e s , as w e l l as the geographic a l i e n a t i o n from sources of research and informa-t i o n . In a d d i t i o n , the kindred a s s o c i a t i o n of experts, and the p r o f e s s i o n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of in f o r m a t i o n and s k i l l s l a r g e l y excludes l a y p a r t i c i p a n t s from ready access to s k i l l s and in f o r m a t i o n . Government and corporate i n t e r e s t s , on the other hand, have the knowledge, resources, and mo t i v a t i o n ( l a r g e l y i n economic but a l s o i n p r o f e s s i o n a l and b u r e a u c r a t i c terms) to compete from an advantaged p o s i t i o n v i s - a - v i s t h e i r p u b l i c i n t e r e s t opponents. Thus, a n a l y s i s of p a r t i c i p a n t s ' p r e p a r a t i o n and o r g a n i z a -t i o n of i n t e r v e n t i o n i s c o n s i s t e n t with c r i t i c i s m s of the p l u r a l i s t model. Although balance among competing i n t e r e s t s i s assured by formal hearing procedures, p r e p a r a t i o n and o r g a n i z a -t i o n f o r i n t e r v e n t i o n r e q u i r e s resources which are d i f f e r e n -t i a l l y d i s t r i b u t e d . T h i s r e f l e c t s an imbalance among competing i n t e r e s t s , with p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups a d d i t i o n a l l y disadvan-taged by t h e i r lack of economic i n c e n t i v e s and resources. These s o c i a l and economic i n e q u a l i t i e s are obscured by the q u a s i - j u d i c i a l p rocess. Another l i m i t a t i o n of the p l u r a l i s t model stems from i t s i n a b i l i t y to recognize the a l l i a n c e s among competing i n t e r e s t s , most n o t a b l y those among and w i t h i n corporate and b u r e a u c r a t i c 156 i n t e r e s t s . The bureaucratic context and a l l i a n c e s of the ad-ministrative tribunal are i l l u s t r a t e d by an ongoing decision-making process concerning the herbicide application on the basis of proponent and government input. The RCUM, for i n -stance, in i t s reluctance to publicize exploration s i t e s and i t s context of ongoing uranium exploration, upheld the competi-tive l i b e r a l economic framework while claiming a posture of independence. These examples and others have indicated a chal-lenge, not only to the p o l i c i e s and provisions of s p e c i f i c tribunals, but to the legitimacy of the p l u r a l i s t model. 157 CHAPTER 6 FAIRNESS OF PROCEDURES: THE PRACTICE OF INTERVENTION 6 .1- In t r oduc t i on The p r a c t i c e of i n t e r v e n t i o n r e f l e c t s not on l y the p r e l i -minary and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s , but the s p a t i a l o r g a n i z a -t i o n of the hea r ing and the p rocedu ra l and subs t an t i v e expe r -t i s e u t i l i z e d by p a r t i c i p a n t s . Acco rd ing to the p l u r a l i s t model , p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n and a ba lance of competing i n t e -r e s t s are ensured by the p r o v i s i o n of p h y s i c a l and t e c h n i c a l access to the hea r ing p r o c e s s . To some e x t e n t , t h i s e x p e c t a t i o n i s borne out by the exper ience of the case s t u d i e s . Ye t , a p a r t i c i p a t o r y c r i t i q u e of i n t e r v e n t i o n p r a c t i c e s r e vea l s a compe t i t i v e imbalance in which p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups are d i s -advantaged r e l a t i v e to o t h e r s , q u e s t i o n i n g the n e u t r a l i t y of the h e a r i n g . In t h i s chapter I w i l l d e s c r i b e the s e t t i n g i n which the hea r ing o c c u r s , and the a v a i l a b i l i t y of and use of e x p e r t i s e . In summary, I w i l l r e cons ide r the p o l i t i c a l f a i r n e s s of hea r ing p r o c e d u r e s , from the p e r s p e c t i v e s of the p l u r a l i s t models and i t s c r i t i q u e . 6.2-The P a r t i c i p a t o r y S e t t i n g A l though d e s c r i p t i o n of the hea r ings i s neg l e c t ed by the 158 m a j o r i t y o f a c c o u n t s , t h e l o c a t i o n a n d p h y s i c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f t h e h e a r i n g s h a v e i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r t h e i n t e r a c t i o n t h a t t a k e s p l a c e w i t h i n t h e f o r u m , a n d f o r t h e l a r g e r h e a r i n g p r o c e s s . A l t h o u g h t h e s e t t i n g s a r e f o r m a l l y a c c e s s i b l e t o t h e p u b l i c , t h e s p a t i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f t h e h e a r i n g d e m a n d s o r a t o r i a l s k i l l s a n d e x p e r i e n c e w h i c h a r e n o t e q u a l l y a v a i l a b l e t o a l l i n t e r e s t s , w h i c h c h a l l e n g e s c o n c e p t s o f p u b l i c a c c e s s a n d c o m -p e t i t i v e b a l a n c e . T h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A p p e a l B o a r d I n d i s c u s s i n g t h e s e t t i n g o f t h e P C A B h e a r i n g s , I w i l l d e s c r i b e b o t h t h e g e o g r a p h i c a l l o c a t i o n a n d t h e m i c r o - e c o l o g y , o r i m m e d i a t e p h y s i c a l c o n t e x t a n d i n t e r a c t i o n o f t h e h e a r i n g s . T h e g e o g r a p h i c l o c a t i o n o f t h e P C A B h e a r i n g s r e f l e c t e d t h e l o c a t i o n o f t h e p r o p o s e d h e r b i c i d e a p p l i c a t i o n . I n 1 9 7 8 , t h e p r o p o s e d a p p l i c a t i o n s i t e s r a n g e d f r o m O s o y o o s L a k e , i n t h e s o u t h O k a n a g a n , t o K a l a m a l k a L a k e , i n t h e n o r t h . ( S e e A p p e n d i x 1 . 1 ) . T h e h e a r i n g s t o o k p l a c e i n P e n t i c t o n , i n a c o n f e r e n c e r o o m a t t h e P e n t i c t o n I n n , a h o t e l i n t h e d o w n t o w n a r e a . T h e s e t t i n g w a s a c c e s s i b l e t o t h e p u b l i c , a n d s e a t i n g f o r p u b l i c a t t e n d a n c e w a s p r o v i d e d . T h e p h y s i c a l l a y o u t o f t h e c o n f e r e n c e r o o m i s p o r t r a y e d i n t h e d r a w i n g o n t h e f o l l o w i n g p a g e . I n t h e 1 9 7 8 h e a r i n g s , B o a r d m e m b e r s s a t a t a t a b l e i n t h e \" f r o n t \" o f t h e r o o m , f a c i n g t o w a r d s t h e e n t r y . T h e a p p e l l a n t s w e r e s e a t e d a t a t a b l e f a c i n g t h e B o a r d . T h e p e r m i t - h o l d e r s , r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f t h e W a t e r I n v e s t i g a t i o n s B r a n c h o f t h e M i n i s t r y o f E n v i r o n m e n t w e r e s e a t e d a t r i g h t a n g l e s t o t h e a p p e l l a n t s a n d t h e B o a r d , ( a n d i n - b e t w e e n t h e m ) . W i t n e s s e s s a t a d j a c e n t t o t h e a p p e l l a n t . T h e r e w a s n o w i t n e s s s t a n d . 1 5 9 ILLUSTRATION 1 PCAB - 1978 HEARING SETTING o o o • o o o • o o o o o o o o o o o • o o • o W i t n e s s 0 (Si o o o o o o • o o o • o o o o o o o o S O E C \" r o p o n e n t (VVI.B) A p p e l l a n t P C A B P ress Sec re t a r y O - s e a t • - o c c u p i e d seat The audience was located behind the appellant, and facing the Board. During the 1978 hearings, there was intermittent and s l i g h t audience attendance. The press table faced the permit-holder. Although the press was active and v i s i b l e at the beginning of the hearing, the press table was not t y p i c a l l y a 1 source of major a c t i v i t y during the bulk of the proceedings. The 1979 and 1980 PCAB hearings were held in Vernon, in proximity to the proposed application s i t e . The s p e c i f i c set-ting was the V i l l a g e Green Hotel, located in the northern area of the c i t y and on the major highway. Here again, as v i s i b l e in the drawing below, the Board members sat d i r e c t l y facing the appellants. The permit-holder was seated again at right angles 160 and in-between the o t h e r s . The a u d i e n c e , i n which a t tendance was aga in min imal and s p o r a d i c , was sea ted beh ind the a p p e l -l a n t . The drawing below r e f l e c t s the p h y s i c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of the 1979 h e a r i n g . ILLUSTRATION 2 PCAB - 1979 HEARING SETTING • Proponent (WIB) O O O O O O O O O O O O • O O O O O O O O Counsel Appel lant (SOEC) Press P C A B Secretary The 1981 h e a r i n g was he ld aga in i n P e n t i c t o n , a l t hough the proposed a p p l i c a t i o n s i t e was in Osoyoos . In t h i s c a s e , u n l i k e the e a r l i e r examples , the p e r m i t - h o l d e r sa t f a c i n g the a p p e l -l a n t s and at r i g h t ang les to the Boa rd . In suppor t o f the p e r m i t - h o l d e r , the Okanagan Water Ba s i n Boa rd , a group of a p p r o x i m a t e l y 46 members of the So lana Bay Re s i den t s A s s o c i a -t i o n were sea ted beh ind and ad j a cen t to the p e r m i t - h o l d e r , as i l l u s t r a t e d on the f o l l o w i n g page . The p h y s i c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of s o c i a l space which o c c u r r e d w i t h i n these h e a r i n g s e t t i n g s had r a m i f i c a t i o n s f o r the i n t e r -161 a c t i o n of the h e a r i n g s . Access to the p u b l i c was p r o v i d e d by the B o a r d ' s geog raph i c s e l e c t i o n of a s e t t i n g i n p r o x i m i t y to the proposed p e s t i c i d e a p p l i c a t i o n , as w e l l as by i t s l o c a t i o n of the h e a r i n g s w i t h i n \" p u b l i c \" space . S ea t i ng was p r o v i d e d fo r aud ience members d u r i n g a l l h e a r i n g s , but the focus of the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e h e a r i n g i s in the c o u r t y a r d — t h e U-shaped, or r e c t a n g u l a r a rea bounded by a p p e l l a n t s , p e r m i t - h o l d e r , Board members, p r e s s , and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t a f f . ILLUSTRATION 3 PCAB - 1981 HEARING SETTING Proponent Okanogan Water Basin Board PCAB SOEC Appellant Secretary The s e a t i n g arrangement r e f l e c t s the adve r sa r y nature of the p r o c e e d i n g s . P a r t i c i p a n t s are grouped toge the r a c c o r d i n g to t h e i r r o l e as proponent or a p p e l l a n t which r e f l e c t s the o p p o s i t i o n i n h e r e n t in the p r o c e s s . The s e a t i n g arrangement i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by a \" r e l a x e d f o r m a l i t y \" . S e a t i n g at t a b l e s a c -c o r d i n g to o n e ' s p a r t i c i p a t o r y s t a t u s p r o v i d e s p a r t i c i p a n t s 162 with suppor t and feedback among t h e i r \" a l l i e s \" . Wi tnesses appear ing fo r the p a r t i c i p a n t may engage in i n fo rma l d i s c u s s i o n wi th t h e i r sponsor p r i o r to and dur ing the c ross-examina t ion p r o c e s s . The c l o s e p h y s i c a l p rox im i t y and j o i n t common space of the t a b l e a l l ow p a r t i c i p a n t s , t h e i r w i tnesses and counse l ( i f these are present ) to d i s c u s s t h e i r task du r ing the p r o c e e -d i n g s . I t a l so p rov ides r e i n f o r c emen t , and avo ids the i s o l a -t i o n and v u l n e r a b i l i t y which may be imparted by the r e l a t i v e i s o l a t i o n of the w i tness s t a n d . The s e t t i n g s i n which the PCAB case s tudy hea r ings took p lace are thus l e s s formal than a courtroom s e t t i n g , as the \" q u a s i - j u d i c i a l \" d e s c r i p t i o n s u g g e s t s . However, in comparison to o ther forums fo r s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n they are r e l a t i v e l y f o r m a l . The agenda f o l l ows the q u a s i - j u d i c i a l procedures o u t -l i n e d e a r l i e r . The Board c a l l s a p p e l l a n t s , who make t h e i r case through the p r e s e n t a t i o n of submis s i ons , c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n , and summation of t h e i r c a se . Then the pe rmi t-ho lde r f o l l o w s s u i t , and the Board ad journs the hea r i ng to reach t h e i r d e c i -s i o n . Royal Commission of I nqu i r y i n to Uranium Mining Community Hear ings The community hea r ings of the RCUM were he ld throughout the i n t e r i o r of the P r o v i n c e , i n towns and c i t i e s near uranium e x p l o r a t i o n and p o s s i b l e mining development . A l though the s e t t i n g of the community hea r ings v a r i e d c o n s i d e r a b l y , depen-ding on the s i z e of the community and the exact l o c a t i o n of the h e a r i n g , t h e i r p roceed ings were s i m i l a r . I w i l l now d e s c r i b e 163 the Kelowna h e a r i n g s from my own o b s e r v a t i o n s . ILLUSTRATION 4 - RCUM - KELOWNA COMMUNITY HEARING The Kelowna community h e a r i n g s were he l d i n the Sandman Inn., not f a r from the downtown a r e a . The Commiss ioners were sea ted i n f r o n t of the room, be fo re a t a b l e . Behind them, on the w a l l , were pos ted t o p o g r a p h i c maps and o the r d i s p l a y mate -r i a l s . The w i tness s tand was p l a c e d to the r i g h t of the Commis-s i o n e r s . F u r t h e r to the r i g h t was the p r e s s t a b l e , and to the r i g h t s t i l l f u r t h e r , and ad j a cen t to the entry-way, the i n f o r -mat ion o f f i c e r of the Commiss ion . Other Commission s t a f f mem-b e r s , the E x e c u t i v e S e c r e t a r y and Commission c o u n s e l , were sea ted at a t a b l e to the l e f t of the Commiss ione r s . To t h e i r l e f t were the t r a n s c r i p t r e p o r t e r s . The m a j o r i t y of the room was d e d i c a t e d to aud ience s e a t i n g , and there were over 100 peop le in a t tendance on the day of my o b s e r v a t i o n s . Indeed, the 164 room was expanded so as to accommodate the \" o ve r f l ow \" crowds in at tendance at t h i s , the f i r s t of the community h e a r i n g s . Each w i tness was seated a l o n e , add ress ing the Commissioners and the aud i ence . The c o n s i d e r a b l e s i z e of the audience was a dominant f ea tu re of t h i s community h e a r i n g , e s p e c i a l l y in comparison wi th the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e hea r ing d i s c u s s e d above. The Commissioners c h a r a c t e r i z e d the community hea r ings as \" i n f o r m a l \" or \" r e l a t i v e l y i n f o r m a l \" . The Community Hear ings were p lanned to be he ld i n as i n f o rma l a manner as p o s s i b l e to permi t and encourage p a r t i c i p a t i o n . . . A p a r t from r u l e s of decorum there were no formal r u l e s e s t a b l i s h e d to govern these H e a r i n g s . . . . A l l w i tnesses were sworn in and a l lowed to g i ve t h e i r e v i -dence whatever way they found most comfor tab le (RCUM 1980 :1 ) . Ye t , there were c e r t a i n f e a tu r e s which in te r vened to promote a sense of f o r m a l i t y . The f i r s t of these was the s i z e of the aud i ence . Speaking be fore an audience of one hundred or more r e q u i r e s a f o r m a l i t y of i n t e n t and a d d r e s s . A l though one may speak extemporaneously and c o l l o q u i a l l y , l a rge audience s i z e and the r e c o r d i n g of one ' s speech c h a r a c t e r i z e i t as p u b l i c add re s s . Re l a ted to t h i s was the t e c h n i c a l apparatus r e q u i r e d fo r r ende r ing the spoken word a c o u s t i c a l l y c l e a r and i n t e l l i g i -b le to the aud i ence . M ic rophones , c a b l e s , and r e c o r d i n g mecha-nisms crowded the foreground of the s e t t i n g . Speakers were c a l l e d f o l l o w i n g the Commiss ion 's l i s t , and they p resented submiss ions under o a t h . The p roceed ings were a m p l i f i e d and recorded f o r t r a n s c r i p t i o n purposes . They were a l s o documented by the media and v ideotaped fo r the Commiss ion. The Commiss io -ners were f o r m a l l y a t t i r e d ( s u i t s and t i e s ) , a l though audience 165 members were dressed both f o r m a l l y and i n f o r m a l l y . In the view of some p a r t i c i p a n t s , the community hea r ings were f a r from \" i n f o r m a l \" , as a speaker at the Rock Creek hea r ings no t ed : We found o u r s e l v e s in a p h y s i c a l arrangement wh ich , in our o p i n i o n , was not des igned to encourage d i a l ogue or maximize p a r t i c i p a t i o n . The p o s i t i o n of the Commis-s i o n e r s on a r a i s e d p l a t f o r m f a c i n g the assemblage s u g -gested a d v e r s a r i e s r a the r than comrades i n a common sea rch f o r t r u t h . The n e c e s s i t y of being c a l l e d upon and of wa lk ing to a microphone before one cou ld speak d i s c o u -raged spon tane i t y and ove r looked the f a c t tha t many peo -p l e are more comfor tab le wi th speak ing o f f the c u f f than read ing a prepared s t a t emen t . . . .Wha t we are g e t t i n g at i s the p r o c e s s . . . . seems formal enough to i n t i m i d a t e some people (RCUM 9:1282-83) . A l though Dr . Bates as chairman encouraged a r e l axed p a r t i c i p a -t i o n through h i s v e rba l i n f o r m a l i t y , the s i z e , t e chno logy , and s e t t i n g of the hea r ing p rec luded a genuine i n f o r m a l i t y . T e c h n i c a l Hear ings The t e c h n i c a l hea r ings of the RCUM were he ld at the Devon-s h i r e Ho te l i n downtown Vancouver , from September, 1979 through Februa ry , 1980. The p h y s i c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of the hea r ing space remained s i m i l a r throughout t h i s t ime , a l though at tendance v a -r i e d , depending on the Phase and the w i tness be ing examined. The drawing on the next page i l l u s t r a t e s the arrangement of the hea r ing space and the l o c a t i o n of p a r t i c i p a n t s on September 25, 1979. T h i s was the f i r s t day of the t e c h n i c a l h e a r i n g s , and a l though the room i t s e l f was expanded to accommodate g r ea t e r audience p a r t i c i p a t i o n , the genera l s p a t i a l l ayout was ma in -t a i ned through the remainder of the h e a r i n g s . The t e c h n i c a l hea r ings were s p a t i a l l y arranged to accommo-date four p a r t i c i p a t i n g f o r c e s : Commissioners and t h e i r s t a f f ; w i t n e s s ( e s ) ; Major P a r t i c i p a n t s ; and audience and other p a r t i -166 c i p a n t s . The he a r i n g s u t i l i z e d a l a r g e s p a t i a l a r e a . In a d d i -t i o n , d u r i n g c o f f e e breaks, p a r t i c i p a n t s would assemble i n the outer hallway, and d i s c u s s i s s u e s p e r t a i n i n g to the he a r i n g s and the w i t n e s s e s ' testimony. ILLUSTRATION 5 RCUM - TECHNICAL HEARINGS o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o |\"\"| o o o o o o o II Infer L J However, du r i n g the h e a r i n g s , most a t t e n t i o n was o r i e n t e d to the f r o n t of the room. The Commissioners sat at the very f r o n t of the room, f a c i n g a l l other p a r t i c i p a n t s , and backed by maps i l l u s t r a t i n g i d e n t i f i e d uranium d e p o s i t s . Immediately to the Commission's l e f t were Commission support s t a f f , i n c l u d i n g the E x e c u t i v e S e c r e t a r y and two s e c r e t a r i e s . To t h e i r l e f t were the videotap e crew, co u r t r e p o r t e r s , and the media. To the Commission's r i g h t was the witness stand. The i n f o r m a t i o n desk of the RCUM was l o c a t e d to the l e f t , upon e n t e r i n g the room. 167 Fac ing the Commissioners and w i tness were s e v e r a l rows of t ab l e s at which were seated the major p a r t i c i p a n t s . Behind the major p a r t i c i p a n t s , were about twelve rows of c h a i r s fo r a u d i -ence o b s e r v e r s . On September 25, du r ing the morning h e a r i n g , there were approx imate l y one hundred p a r t i c i p a n t s in the hea r i ng/con fe rence room. Of t h e s e , about s i x t y were audience p a r t i c i p a n t s , or o b s e r v e r s . Dur ing the opening day of the forum, about t h r e e - f i f t h s of p a r t i c i p a n t s were p a r t i c i p a n t s , another o n e - f i f t h were Commission s t a f f , and another o n e - f i f t h major p a r t i c i p a n t s . Audience members d e c l i n e d a f t e r the i n i t i a l hea r i ngs and represen ted on l y o n e - f i f t h of t o t a l a t tendance through the ma jo r i t y of the h e a r i n g s . The t e c h n i c a l hea r ings have been c h a r a c t e r i z e d by the Com-m i s s i one r s as \" f o r m a l \" . A l though t h i s d e s i g n a t i o n was d i r e c t e d to the p rocedu re s , the s e t t i n g r e f l e c t e d t h i s f o r m a l i t y as w e l l . The r e l a t i v e i s o l a t i o n of the w i tness s tand and the l i n e a r rows of audience s e a t i n g are examples. However, major p a r t i c i p a n t s were seated at t a b l e s , a l l ow ing some i n fo rma l and unrecorded d i s c u s s i o n du r ing the h e a r i n g s . Tab les were arranged i n rows, but were not e x p l i c i t l y s i t e d so as to encourage or r e f l e c t a d i v i s i o n or o p p o s i t i o n among p a r t i c i p a n t s . P u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups and mining groups were u s u a l l y seated ad jacent to one another du r i ng the h e a r i n g s , r e f l e c t i n g the c o l l e g i a l nature of the p r o c e e d i n g s . The focus of a t t e n t i o n du r i ng the t e c h n i c a l hea r i ngs was d i r e c t e d to the w i tness box, where c ross-examina t ion took p l a c e . The agenda was s p e c i f i e d by the Commiss ion, which schedu led exper t w i tnesses to speak in accor-1 6 8 dance wi th the formal hea r ing p rocedu re s , and in c o n j u n c t i o n wi th schedu led phases of the h e a r i n g . The Hear ing S e t t i n g and P a r t i c i p a t i o n In a comparison of the two t r i b u n a l s , procedures and s e t t i n g v a r y , depending on the number of p a r t i c i p a n t s and the s i z e of the space , the t e chno logy , and the Board/Commiss ion 's i n t e n t and c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of the h e a r i n g . In on l y one of the case s t u d i e s , the community hea r ings of the RCUM, was the audience a s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r n u m e r i c a l l y . Dur ing the o ther two h e a r i n g s , and e s p e c i a l l y in the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e h e a r i n g , the audience was g e n e r a l l y pass i v e and p e r i p h e r a l to the p r o c e e -d i n g s . Indeed, in the t e c h n i c a l hea r ings of the RCUM the major p a r t i c i p a n t s (and the Commissioners) became, in e f f e c t , the aud i ence . Thus , in c h a r a c t e r i z i n g the hea r ings as \" p u b l i c \" , the emphasis of the case s tudy t r i b u n a l s was d i r e c t e d to the immediate p a r t i c i p a n t s , r a the r than to the l a r g e r mass p u b l i c aud i ence . T h i s i s compat ib le w i th the p l u r a l i s t model i n terms of the p r o v i s i o n of p u b l i c access and a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e mode of p a r t i c i p a t i o n . From a c r i t i c a l p a r t i c i p a t o r y p e r s p e c t i v e , however, the f o r m a l i t y of the t r i b u n a l s i s p rob l ema t i c fo r p u b l i c access and a ba lance of p a r t i c i p a t i o n . P u b l i c hea r ings occur in a c u l t u r e i n which p u b l i c speak ing i s r a r e l y undertaken by members of the l ay p u b l i c , but i s con f i ned to \" p u b l i c \" (and l a r g e l y p o l i t i c a l ) f i g u r e s . One cannot reduce the anomalous cha rac t e r of t h i s mode of speech by a p o s t u r e , however genu ine , of \" f r i e n d l i n e s s \" . The s e m i - f o r m a l i t y of the s e t t i n g i s , from t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e , a d e t e r r e n t to widespread \" g r a s s - r o o t s \" popu lar p a r t i c i p a t i o n . 169 The s e t t i n g of the forum can a l so be pe r ce i v ed as a d e t e r -rent to a d i v e r s i t y of p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t e r e s t s . Those i n t e -r e s t s represented by persons wi th l e s s p u b l i c speak ing s k i l l s and e x p e r i e n c e , such as na t i v e groups and women, are p l a ced at a compe t i t i v e d isadvantage in the p u b l i c h e a r i n g , e s p e c i a l l y when the i s sues under i n v e s t i g a t i o n are s c i e n t i f i c and t e c h n i -c a l i n n a t u r e . The p l u r a l i s t model has accommodated t h i s problem by moving towards the expans ion of oppo r tun i t y fo r d i f f e r i n g i n t e r e s t s . A d i v e r s i t y of i n t e r e s t s i s accessed through these t r i b u n a l s and fund ing fo r v a r i ous p u b l i c i n t e -r e s t s i s a v a i l a b l e through t r i b u n a l - s p e c i f i c means, as in the c o n s u l t a t i v e t r i b u n a l , or through s u b s i d i z a t i o n of i n t e r e s t groups and p r o v i s i o n of advocacy s k i l l s by other government mechanisms. None the l e s s , from a c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e , access to the t r i b u n a l i s not e q u a l l y a v a i l a b l e to a l l a f f e c t e d i n t e r e s t s , r e f l e c t i n g t h e i r d i f f e r e n t l o c a t i o n s and exper ience in s o c i e t y . There i s r e l a t i v e l y g r ea t e r access to the t r i b u n a l to bu reau -c r a t i c and co rpo ra t e i n t e r e s t s who operate in a s i m i l a r domain, and whose pe r sonne l and resources are complementary to the t r i b u n a l . The case s t u d i e s r evea l the u n d e r - p a r t i c i p a t i o n of \" m i n o r i t y \" p u b l i c i n t e r e s t g roups , those d isadvantaged by gen -d e r , race and c l a s s . Women, fo r i n s t a n c e , were unde r- rep resen -ted as s p e a k e r s , c o u n s e l , w i t n e s s e s , as we l l as i n the formal r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of womens' i n t e r e s t s . The unde r- r ep re sen t a t i on of women may be exp l a i ned by the t e c h n i c a l and s c i e n t i f i c nature of the i s s u e s , and the d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y low number of 170 women a c t i v e in these f i e l d s . The p a u c i t y of women a l so r e -f l e c t s the p u b l i c nature of the forum, the f o r m a l i t y of the s e t t i n g , and the i nexpe r i ence of women in engaging i n p u b l i c d i s c o u r s e . A l though the t r i b u n a l cannot r e c t i f y the s o c i e t a l imbalance of c l a s s and gender , nor can i t c l a im to have e l i m i n a t e d t h i s i n e q u a l i t y through p r o c e d u r a l p r o v i s i o n s . A c c o r d i n g to the p l u r a l i s t model , the p r o v i s i o n of access to a l l r e l e van t i n t e r e s t s and the a d d i t i o n a l f i n a n c i a l support ac t s to expand and e q u a l i z e the p a r t i c i p a t o r y o p t i o n . The t r i b u n a l s cannot respond to the c u l t u r a l and s o c i a l l i m i t a t i o n s of p a r t i c i p a t i o n except as these are problems fo r p r o c e d u r a l f a i r n e s s . The f o r m a l i t y of the hear ing has been re l axed r e l a -t i v e to o ther j u d i c i a l forums, but must r e f l e c t the s i z e and scope of the t r i b u n a l . The s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n of procedures e n -hances p r o c e d u r a l f a i r n e s s fo r a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s . Thus , in the exper i ence of the case s t u d i e s , the p l u r a l i s t model i s g e n e r a l -l y upheld wi th regards to the p r o v i s i o n and o r g a n i z a t i o n of p h y s i c a l access to the hea r i ng forum. From a c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e , n o n e t h e l e s s , i n e q u a l i t i e s in access o r i g i n a t i n g beyond the hea r ing c o n t r i b u t e to the d isadvantage of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups w i t h i n the forum. 6.3-Expert ise i n P a r t i c i p a t i o n The hea r ing p rocess i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by o r i e n t a t i o n t o , and r e l i a n c e o n , p rocedu ra l and s u b s t a n t i v e e x p e r t i s e . The t r i b u n a l s examined i n the case s t u d i e s are c h a r a c t e r i z e d as \" q u a s i - j u d i c i a l \" forums, but they are none the less pa t t e rned g e n e r a l l y a f t e r the j u d i c i a l p rocess and r e f l e c t a l e g a l cha-4 r a c t e r . The t e c h n i c a l and s c i e n t i f i c nature of the i s sues 171 addressed by both t r i b u n a l s a l so i m p l i e s the r e l i a n c e on and o r i e n t a t i o n to the assessment of s c i e n t i f i c e v i dence . P a r t i c i p a n t s ' use of e x p e r t i s e has c e r t a i n r a m i f i c a t i o n s f o r a d i s c u s s i o n of p rocedu re s . Lega l e x p e r t i s e i s c a l l e d on to d e f i n e , argue and nego t i a t e the formal procedures adopted by a Board/Commiss ion. As these s t u d i e s i l l u s t r a t e , i t i s a l s o r e -l i e d upon in doing c ross-examina t i on and becomes a weapon i n the s t r u g g l e among competing i n t e r e s t s . Subs tan t i ve e x p e r t i s e i n the i s sues ( p e s t i c i d e s , uranium) under d i s c u s s i o n p rov ides the b a s i s and f o r c e of a p a r t i c i p a n t ' s c a s e . Subs tan t i ve e x p e r -t i s e i s p roduced , defended and d i sm i s sed through p a r t i c i p a n t s ' submiss ions and summations, p r e s e n t a t i o n s of exper t w i t n e s s e s , and the c ross-examina t ion p r o c e s s . C ross-examina t ion i s the method by which Board members and proponents or o ther p a r t i c i -pants query the a p p e l l a n t / i n t e r v e n o r concern ing the submiss ion s/he has p r e s e n t e d . In c o n j u n c t i o n wi th the t e c h n i c a l and s c i e n t i f i c nature of the i s sues of these case s t u d i e s , a p l u r a l i s t p e r s p e c t i v e assumes that competing i n t e r e s t s w i l l be ab le to summon up resources such as e x p e r t i s e to a i d in making a c a se . Funding p r o v i s i o n s i n the c o n s u l t a t i v e t r i b u n a l have c o n t r i b u t e d to t h i s a c c e s s . However, the p l u r a l i s t model understands the s p e -c i f i c a c c e s s i n g of e x p e r t i s e by p a r t i c i p a n t s as a d i s c r e t i o n a r y mat te r . E x p e r t i s e i s not addressed by formal p rocedu re s , except i n the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e f u n c t i o n s of the RCUM. Here , the s e l e c -t i o n and p r e p a r a t i o n of exper t w i tnesses were c e n t r a l to the i n v e s t i g a t i v e and f a c i l i t a t i n g r o l e s of the t r i b u n a l . Thus , 172 e x p e r t i s e becomes the m a t e r i a l of c o m p e t i t i o n , the means by which i n t e r e s t s become s u c c e s s f u l or f a i l . I w i l l now d e s c r i b e p a r t i c i p a n t s ' r e l i a n c e on and u t i l i z a -t i o n of e x p e r t i s e , and demonstrate the extent of t h i s r e l i a n c e . For the purposes of t h i s d i s c u s s i o n , I want to c l a r i f y the use of the term \" e x p e r t i s e \" . I am us ing \" e x p e r t i s e \" to denote c e r t a i n s k i l l s , e d u c a t i o n , exper ience which c h a r a c t e r i z e i t s user as a p r o f e s s i o n a l i n he r /h i s f i e l d . E x p e r t i s e i s be ing used i n c o n t r a s t w i th the term \" l a y \" , or non-exper t . The \" p u b l i c \" , i n the case s t u d i e s , i s l a r g e l y represented by l ay r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . A l though r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t g roups , may be p r o f e s s i o n a l s in another f i e l d , they are not g e n e r a l l y regarded by the t r i b u n a l as exper ts in the f i e l d 5 under d i s c u s s i o n . Thus , e x p e r t i s e i s n e g o t i a b l e ; i t i s a po in t of debate and s t r a t e g y for a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s throughout the h e a r i n g s . Lega l Counse l as E x p e r t i s e Lega l counse l ac t as p rocedu ra l exper t s fo r t h e i r c l i e n t s . Both t r i b u n a l s in t h i s s tudy a l l ow f o r , but do not r e q u i r e , l e g a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n w i t h i n t h e i r a r t i c u l a t i o n of p r o c e d u r e s . However, i t i s assumed tha t the p u b l i c can p a r t i c i p a t e w i thout l e g a l counse l i n tha t procedures are exp l a i ned p r i o r to the h e a r i n g s , and are q u a s i - j u d i c i a l in n a t u r e . In the 1978, 1979, and 1980 PCAB h e a r i n g s , l e g a l counse l was r e t a i n e d c o l l e c t i v e l y by the SOEC, SPEC, and Kelowna Greenpeace through the p u b l i c advocacy s e r v i c e s of the West Coast Env i ronmenta l Law A s s o c i a -6 t i o n . I n d i v i d u a l s , and the remainder of the a p p e l l a n t groups were not represented by c o u n s e l . 173 As l e g a l c o u n s e l , the WCELA engaged in s e v e r a l a c t i v i t i e s on beha l f of the a p p e l l a n t . They f i l e d the a p p e a l , communicated wi th the A d m i n i s t r a t o r and the Board , and a ided the a p p e l l a n t s by p r epa r i ng w i t n e s s e s , i n c l u d i n g both exper t w i tnesses and SOEC spokespersons . Th i s i n c l uded the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of areas to be examined in the s u b m i s s i o n , p r e p a r a t i o n fo r c r o s s - e x a m i -n a t i o n , and s t r a t e g i c o r g a n i z a t i o n fo r making a c a se . Dur ing the 1978-1980 h e a r i n g s , c ross-examina t ion was done both by counse l and SOEC spokespersons . However, a p p e l l a n t s have s t a t e d i n i n t e r v i ews tha t l ack of exper i ence was a h i n -drance to the success of t h e i r c a s e . Mr. Warnock has s t a t e d , \" O b v i o u s l y , even though I knew the s t u f f r e a l l y w e l l , I knew h i s m a t e r i a l , I knew how to get at i t , I c o u l d n ' t do i t because I d i d n ' t have the e x p e r i e n c e \" (1982). The spokesperson^for the SOEC, unrepresented by counse l i n 1981, l a t e r s t a t e d in an i n t e r v i ew tha t four major i s sues arose dur ing the course of the hea r ings which might have been n e g o t i a t e d , i f not r e s o l v e d , by the presence of counse l (Lewis 1982) . These i n c luded p r o -c e d u r a l ques t i ons wi th regard to the s t a t u s of o b s e r v e r / w i t -nesses in the h e a r i n g , the s t a t u s of ev idence submit ted to the Board i n p r e v i ous years and the q u e s t i o n of re-submiss ion of t h i s e v i d e n c e , the Boa rd ' s r e s t r i c t i o n of c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n , and the i n t r o d u c t i o n of ev idence by the Board and proponent dur ing c ross-examina t i on (Lewis 1982). Mr. Lewis s t a t e s that the presence of counse l \" a l l ows you to keep your mind on the case and not have to th ink about the p rocedu res \" (1983). Re t en t i on of counse l i s cons ide red to be an o p t i o n ra the r 174 than a n e c e s s i t y . Counse l may be r e t a i n e d , but the a p p e l l a n t must i n d i v i d u a l l y assume the cos t s of t h i s s e r v i c e . In the PCAB example, the WCELA p rov ided i t s s e r v i c e on a g r a t i s b a s i s , but o ther l e g a l p r e p a r a t i o n and support cos t s such as copy ing and co r r espondence , and p r o v i s i o n of c o u n s e l ' s accommodations were borne by the a p p e l l a n t . The SOEC and i t s c o - a p p e l l a n t s r e t a i n e d counse l i n three of the four years of s tudy . The proponent and the Board a l so had counse l f o r the same h e a r i n g s . In 1981, no counse l were p resen t i n tha t c a p a c i t y fo r any p a r t i c i p a n t s dur ing the h e a -r i n g s . T h i s i n d i c a t e s a r e l a t i v e e q u a l i t y of r e s o u r c e s , in that both a p p e l l a n t and pe rmi t-ho lde r as we l l as the Board were \"backed\" by l e g a l r esources du r ing the same p e r i o d of s tudy . In the RCUM h e a r i n g s , the r e t e n t i o n of counse l was l i n k e d to the type of h e a r i n g , as we l l as to f u n d i n g . Dur ing the community h e a r i n g s , p a r t i c i p a n t s were p r i m a r i l y , a l though not e x c l u s i v e l y , l ay spokespersons wi th the uranium i n t e r e s t s r e -p resen ted by c o u n s e l . In the community h e a r i n g s , p a r t i c i p a n t s ' a c t i v i t i e s were l i m i t e d to the p r e s e n t a t i o n of submi s s i ons , wi th some q u e s t i o n i n g by the Commiss ion, and o c c a s i o n a l q u e s -t i o n s from the audience mediated through the Commiss ion. There was no formal c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n . Th i s i s not to say that there was no need f o r l e g a l c o u n s e l . P rocedura l problems d id a r i s e . In the f i r s t of the community h e a r i n g s , f o r example, a p a r t i c i -pant ques t i oned the Commission about t h e i r c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of the hea r ings as \" h e a r i n g s \" , r a the r than \"community mee t i ngs \" . D i smissed by the Cha i rman, he requested tha t h i s counse l be a l lowed to i n t e r v e n e : 175 Mr. Chataway (Okanagan Greenpeace F o u n d a t i o n ) : . . . . I t seems to me acco rd ing to your opening statements t h a t — ...I f e e l tha t t h i s i s not a p u b l i c h e a r i n g , but a commu-n i t y meet ing , and tha t your own correspondence has i n d i -ca ted t h i s to u s . . . a n d w e . . . a r e not prepared at t h i s p o i n t to go through the p u b l i c hea r ing p r o c e s s . We have not f u n d i n g , we have no checks , that i s to do r e s e a r c h , we have not time and i f i t i s a p u b l i c hea r ing may I ask you who i s the hea r ing f o r . . . . . . . . M a y I ask , i s t he—are the companies going to be p r e s e n t i n g r a t i o n a l e and j u s t i f i c a t i o n , or merely data? The Chai rman: The companies w i l l p resen t what they wish to p r e s e n t . . . I must ask you to s i t down p l e a s e . Mr. Chataway: W e l l , cou ld I ask fo r a moment's adjournment, cou ld I get a c l a r i f i c a t i o n from my l e g a l c o u n s e l , because I th ink t h e r e ' s a grave e r r o r t ak i ng p l ace at the p resen t moment. The Chai rman: No, I'm going to p roceed . I would l i k e to ask the P l a ce r Company i f t h e y ' r e ready to p r o -ceed . Mr. Chataway: Could I ask you to a l l ow my l e g a l counse l to make a p r e s e n t a t i o n on my beha l f at t h i s po in t on the p r e l i m i n a r y p rocedu ra l mat ters? The Chai rman: I would l i k e him to c o n s u l t wi th Mr. Anthony (Commission counse l ) . . . ( RCUM 3 :811) . In t h i s example, a l ay p a r t i c i p a n t ' s cha l l enge to p roceed ings was d i sm i s sed by the Commiss ion, and l e g a l counse l was n e c e s -sary to e f f e c t c o n s i d e r a t i o n of an o b j e c t i o n . In the t e c h n i c a l hea r ings of the RCUM, l e g a l counse l were f a r more consp i cuous . Th i s was p a r t i a l l y a f u n c t i o n of the more formal pos ture of the h e a r i n g s , and the ex tens i ve c r o s s -examinat ion which took p l a c e . The presence of l e g a l counse l i s an i n d i c a t o r of the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the procedures fo r the po l i c y-mak ing p r o c e s s . The t e c h n i c a l d i f f i c u l t y of the sub jec t mat te r , and the a d d i t i o n a l va lue of p r o c e d u r a l guidance in areas of t e c h n i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n were other f a c t o r s conduc ive to 176 the r e t e n t i o n of c o u n s e l . Another f a c t o r was the a v a i l a b i l i t y of fund ing to p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a n t s , which p rov ided p u b l i c p a r t i -c i p a n t s wi th the p o s s i b i l i t y of r e t a i n i n g counse l to represent t h e i r i n t e r e s t s . As of Oc tobe r , 1979, many major p a r t i c i p a n t s were r e p r e -sented by c o u n s e l . The t ab l e on the f o l l o w i n g page i n d i c a t e s which i n t e r e s t s were represented by l e g a l counse l and which by l ay speake r s . Of the twenty major p a r t i c i p a n t s , ten of twenty or j u s t s l i g h t l y l e s s than one-ha l f , were represented by l e g a l c o u n s e l . The r a t i o of l ay spokespersons to l e g a l counse l v a r i e d a c co rd ing to the i n t e r e s t r e p r e s e n t e d , as Tab le Seven i n d i -c a t e s . Thus , f o r a l l major i n t e r e s t s , both l ay and l e g a l s p e a -kers were r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . Thus , l e g a l s k i l l s were cons ide red to be necessa ry and were a t t a i n a b l e by h a l f the p a r t i c i p a n t s . N o n e t h e l e s s , r e l a t i v e to other i n t e r e s t s , p u b l i c p a r t i c i -pants are under represented by the l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n . A l though one h a l f of speakers fo r a l l i n t e r e s t s are l e g a l c o u n s e l , l e s s than one qua r t e r of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups were represented by c o u n s e l . The unde r- r ep r e sen t a t i on of lawyers i n p u b l i c i n t e -7 r e s t groups r e f l e c t s both l ack of fund ing and i d e o l o g y . Major p a r t i c i p a n t s have remarked on the amount and b e n e f i t of l e g a l e x p e r t i s e i n the h e a r i n g s . In t h e i r f i n a l r epo r t to the I n q u i r y , the Un i ted Church comments: . . . . t h e r e was no shor tage of l awyers ; in f a c t at t imes there seemed to be a \" L ega l O v e r l o a d i n g . \" Of the 35 people who a t tended the f i n a l meeting of Commissioners and p a r t i c i p a n t s , 12 were l awyers , 2 were graduate l e g a l workers and one an a r t i c l i n g law s t u d e n t . Does each m i n i s t r y of the government r equ i r e i t s own l a w y e r ? . . . . (BCCUCC 1980 :39 ) . 177 T A B L E 6 - RCUM - L E G A L R E P R E S E N T A T I O N OF MAJOR P A R T I C I P A N T S C o u n s e l L a y , C o m m i s s i o n C o m m i s s i o n C o u n s e l G o v e r n m e n t B . C . E n e r g y , M i n e s , & P e t r o l e u m R e s o u r c e s B . C . M i n i s t r y o f E n v i r o n m e n t B . C . M i n i s t r y o f H e a l t h L a b o u r B . C . F e d e r a t i o n o f L a b o u r a n d U n i t e d S t e e l w o r k e r s o f A m e r i c a C o n f e d e r a t i o n o f C a n a d i a n U n i o n s M i n i n g I n t e r e s t s M i n i n g A s s o c i a t i o n o f B . C . R e x s p a r N o r c e n P u b l i c I n t e r e s t G r o u p s A t l i n C o m m u n i t y A s s o c i a t i o n B . C . C o n f e r e n c e o f t h e U n i t e d C h u r c h o f C a n a d a B . C . M e d i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n C a n a d i a n C o a l i t i o n o f N u c l e a r R e s p o n s i b i l i t y E n v i r o n m e n t a l A l l i a n c e A g a i n s t U r a n i u m M i n i n g J o i n t C o m m i t t e e — U r a n i u m T e c h n i c a l H e a r i n g s K o o t e n a y N u c l e a r S t u d y G r o u p S o u t h e a s t K e l o w n a I r r i g a t i o n D i s t r i c t U n i o n o f B . C . I n d i a n C h i e f s W e s t C o a s t E n v i r o n m e n t a l L a w A s s o c i a t i o n Y e l l o w h e a d E c o l o g i c a l A s s n . X (+ 1 s u p p o r t ) X X X X X * X X X X X X X T o t a l 10 11 * - A r t i c l i n g Law S t u d e n t A l t h o u g h m a n y p u b l i c i n t e r e s t p a r t i c i p a n t s l a c k e d t h e i r o w n c o u n s e l , c o u n s e l f o r o t h e r p u b l i c i n t e r e s t g r o u p s a c t e d o n 1 7 8 t h e i r beha l f to nego t i a t e t h e i r demands be fore the Commiss ion. For i n s t a n c e , the WCELA ac ted on beha l f of the A t l i n Community A s s o c i a t i o n i n p u t t i n g f o r t h i t s request fo r the subpoena, and the C o n f e d e r a t i o n of Canadian Unions p resen ted an argument fo r the use of the subpoena on beha l f the Yel lowhead E c o l o g i c a l S o c i e t y . TABLE 7 - RCUM - LEGAL REPRESENTATION BY INTEREST I n t e r e s t Counse l Lay Commission 1 (+ 1 support ) Government 2 1 Labour 1 1 Indust ry 2 1 P u b l i c 3 8 T o t a l 10 11 Given the q u a s i - j u d i c i a l format of the t r i b u n a l , and the l e g a l p r eoccupa t i on wi th p rocedu res , lawyers have c e r t a i n a d -vantages over l a y pe r sons . The t r a n s c r i p t s of the hea r ings document p r o c e d u r a l d i s p u t e s which occur throughout the h e a -r i n g s . A lawyer who represen ted one of the major p a r t i c i p a n t s i n d i c a t e d the f o l l o w i n g advantages : . . . . i f we've had l i t i g a t i o n t r a i n i n g , we ' re t r a i n e d to see tha t h e ' s (the exper t w i tness i s ) pa id fo r what he s a y s . . . We're t r a i n e d to be a g g r e s s i v e , and not to be i n t i m i d a t e d . . . W e have had t r a i n i n g i n l o g i c , in argument, in r e a s o n i n g . You cou ld f o l l o w t h e i r (the e x p e r t ' s ) argument, and say , ' t h a t d o e s n ' t make s e n s e . ' . . . I n a d d i -t i o n , as a l awyer , the s e t t i n g was f a m i l i a r . . . (Boggi ld 1983) . In the t e c h n i c a l h e a r i n g s , the p roceed ings were d i r e c t e d to the accumula t ion and i n v e s t i g a t i o n of i n f o r m a t i o n . The d a i l y 179 a c t i v i t i e s of the hea r ing i n c l uded w i t n e s s e s ' submiss ions and c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n . The pr imary a c t i v i t y of the major p a r t i c i -pants was thus i n c ross-examin ing w i t n e s s e s , a l though they a l so were i n v o l v e d i n p r e l i m i n a r y a c t i v i t i e s such as the s e l e c t i o n and p r e p a r a t i o n of w i t n e s s e s . As l ay w i t n e s s e s , many major p a r t i c i p a n t s were i nexpe r i enced in c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n . . . . . V e r y e a r l y in the t e c h n i c a l h e a r i n g s , when some of us r e a l i z e d how important to the hea r ings was the c r o s s -examinat ion of w i tnesses and how l i t t l e we knew about t h i s p rocedu re , p a r t i c i p a n t s asked Commission Counse l to conduct a workshop on c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n . I t d i d n ' t hap -pen (BCCUCC 1980 :39 ) . Lega l counse l p rov ide s k i l l s , knowledge and exper ience to t h e i r c l i e n t s a p p r o p r i a t e to the p r e p a r a t i o n of exper t w i t n e s -s e s , the submiss ion of e v i dence , c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n , and the request fo r and n e g o t i a t i o n of p rocedu ra l changes or a c t i v i -t i e s . In s p i t e of the Commiss ion 's \" d i s t a s t e fo r the l e g a l mechanism\" (Boggi ld 1983) , the I n q u i r y ' s procedures fo l l owed an i n f o r m a l , but l e g a l and p r o f e s s i o n a l fo rmat . The gene ra l con fo rm i t y of the hea r ing to the p l u r a l i s t model i s i n d i c a t e d by t h i s r e l i a n c e on a s t a n d a r d i z e d q u a s i - j u d i c i a l fo rmat , and formal a c c e s s i b i l i t y to l e g a l c o u n s e l , which t h e o r e t i c a l l y p rov ide any p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t e r e s t w i th means of a c c e s s i n g and p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the t r i b u n a l . From a c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e , however, the r e l a t i v e unde r- r ep re sen t a t i on of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups by counse l f u r t h e r i n d i c a t e s the compe t i t i v e imbalance i n the t r i b u n a l . Expert Wi tnesses In making a c a s e , p a r t i c i p a n t s a l s o draw on s u b s t a n t i v e e x p e r t i s e — k n o w l e d g e , s k i l l s and exper ience r e l e van t to the 180 i s sues under c o n s i d e r a t i o n by the t r i b u n a l . The c o n s i d e r a t i o n of s c i e n t i f i c and t e c h n i c a l i s sues poses p a r t i c u l a r problems fo r p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i n t e r v e n o r s who l ack both gene ra l and s p e c i f i c knowledge i n these domains. In the case s t u d i e s , p a r t i c i p a n t s ' submiss ions r e f e r r e d to research done or c i t e d by o thers i n academic , t r a d e , government, and p o p u l a r / l a y a r t i -c l e s , b i b l i o g r a p h i e s , and r e p o r t s . P a r t i c i p a n t s a l so c a l l e d and or cross-examined exper t w i tnesses as a means of examining t h i s e x p e r t i s e . In these t r i b u n a l s , e x p e r t i s e i s thus both the grounds of c o m p e t i t i o n , the m a t e r i a l be ing debated by va r i ous i n t e r e s t s ( i . e . , hea l t h and s a f e t y of p e s t i c i d e s , or uranium m i n i n g ) , as w e l l as the means by which the compe t i t i on takes p l a c e . ( i . e , d i s c u s s i o n of phenoxy h e r b i c i d e exper iments , d e s -c r i p t i o n of w i t n e s s e s ' c r e d e n t i a l s ) . The c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of a w i t n e s s , or a speake r , as an \" e x p e r t \" i s an a c t i v i t y c e n t r a l to the h e a r i n g . I t i s n e g o t i -a b l e . Much of c ross-examina t i on i s devoted to at tempts to d i s c r e d i t w i t n e s s e s ' e x p e r t i s e . T h i s may i n vo l v e a t t a c k s on the re levance of t h e i r r e s e a r c h , the adequacy of t h e i r t r a i n i n g and e x p e r i e n c e , r esea rch methodology, and the s tandards of t h e i r p u b l i c a t i o n s . I f one ' s e x p e r t i s e i s c h a l l e n g e d , one ' s submiss ions be fore the Commission are s i m i l a r l y rendered s u s -p e c t . Thus , the p r e s e n t a t i o n of any e x p e r t ' s c r e d e n t i a l s are a matter of consequence fo r the success of a p a r t i c i p a n t ' s c a se . From a p l u r a l i s t p e r s p e c t i v e , t h i s e x p e r t i s e i s being debated by and from competing p e r s p e c t i v e s . P a r t i c i p a n t s ' a b i l i t y to make a case and to i n t roduce and use e x p e r t i s e i n d i c a t e s t h e i r compe t i t i v e prowess. 181 In the e a r l i e r d i s c u s s i o n of the PCAB h e a r i n g s , I noted tha t the l e g a l and p r a c t i c a l burdens of proof r e s t w i th the a p p e l l a n t s . Throughout the d u r a t i o n of the h e a r i n g s , the SOEC presented a grea t dea l of ev idence before the Board , in the form of w r i t t e n r e p o r t s , v e r b a l subm i s s i ons , b i b l i o g r a p h i e s , cop ies of r epo r t s they had a cqu i r ed in the course of r e s e a r c h , and the tes t imony of exper t w i t n e s s e s . The two speakers fo r the SOEC r e f e r r e d to themselves as \" l a y - e x p e r t s \" in tha t they cons ide red themselves to have amassed \" e x p e r t \" knowledge on the phenoxy h e r b i c i d e i s s u e , a l though they had no formal q u a l i f i c a -t i o n s , t r a i n i n g or work exper ience i n t h i s a r e a . The SOEC a l s o p resented exper t w i tnesses to t e s t i f y before the Board . In 1978, they presented seven w i t n e s s e s ; in 1979 and 1980, the SOEC presented on l y two exper t w i t n e s s e s , and in 1981 i t p resented none. Throughout the h e a r i n g s , however, the a p p e l -l an t p resented documentat ion of secondary and t e r t i a r y e v i -dence , as noted above. Dur ing t h i s same time span , the permi t-ho lde r p resen ted two exper t w i tnesses and data on a p p l i c a t i o n programs, p u b l i s h e d by the M i n i s t r y of Env i ronment . Thus , the a p p e l l a n t , r e f l e c t i n g t h e i r assumption of the burden of p r o o f , produced the bulk of exper t w i t n e s s e s . In the PCAB h e a r i n g s , the a p p e l l a n t s themselves presented the bulk of the submiss ions made to the Board , u t i l i z i n g e x -pe r t s as a \"backup\" to t h e i r c a se , to supp ly s p e c i f i c e x p e r t i s e on a f i r s t - h a n d b a s i s . The a p p e l l a n t s s e l e c t e d the e x p e r t s , and arranged fo r t h e i r appearance . They pa id fo r the appearance of the a p p e l l a n t s , i n c l u d i n g t r a v e l , room, boa rd , and where appro-182 p r i a t e , h o n o r a r i a . Thus , the a p p e l l a n t assumed the p r a c t i c a l burden of s e cu r i ng ev idence which they thought would support t h e i r p r o d u c t i o n of a c a s e . The p e r m i t - h o l d e r , the WIB (1978-80) and Okanagan Water Bas in Board (1981), a l s o assumed the cos t s of p r e s e n t i n g t h e i r w i t n e s s e s . In the RCUM h e a r i n g s , formal r e c o g n i t i o n of and p r o v i s i o n f o r the submiss ion of \" e x p e r t i s e \" was p rov ided by the d i v i s i o n of the hea r ings i n to community ( non-expert) and t e c h n i c a l h e a r i n g s . As noted e a r l i e r , the community hea r ings d i d not a l l ow fo r the examinat ion of ev idence through a formal c r o s s -examinat ion p r o c e s s . The t e c h n i c a l hea r ings were the major arena f o r the p r e s e n t a t i o n and examinat ion of e x p e r t i s e . In the RCUM h e a r i n g s , the s e l e c t i o n of w i tnesses was done by the Commiss ion, a f t e r d i s c u s s i o n and sugges t ions from major p a r t i -c i p a n t s . A l t h o u g h , as noted e a r l i e r , the Commiss ion 's F i n a l Report s t a t e s tha t i t sought a balance in e x p e r t s , tha t i s , in pro- and an t i-uran ium mining w i tnesses (RCUM 1980:279) , t h i s ba lance was o f f s e t by two s t r u c t u r a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . The f i r s t had to do wi th the s t r u c t u r e of the h e a r i n g s . The phases of the hea r ings were o rgan ized so tha t t e c h n i c a l mining i s s u e s — E x p l o r a t i o n , M i n i n g , M i l l i n g and Chemica l Ex -t r a c t i o n , and Waste Management—were he ld f i r s t , wi th the h e a l t h , env i r onmen ta l , s o c i a l , e t h i c a l , and j u d i c i a l i s sues to be he ld l a t e r . However, wi th the c a n c e l l a t i o n of the Inqu i r y du r ing the Worker and P u b l i c Hea l th Phase, the remainder of these phases were not hea rd . Thus , a l though there were a d d i t i o -na l w i tnesses schedu led to appear on beha l f of the p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a n t s , these were pre-empted by the premature c l o s u r e of 183 the h e a r i n g s . The bulk of the w i tnesses appeared on beha l f of i n d u s t r y and the commiss ion , as the f o l l o w i n g Tab le i l l u s -t r a t e s . TABLE 8 - RCUM - APPEARANCE OF WITNESSES ACCORDING TO INTEREST Phase Commission Indust ry Government Labour P u b l i c 1 6 3 1 1 1 2 1 3 3 3 2 4 2 3 5 2 2 3 1 6 8 1 2 7 8 1 2 1 C o n t i n u a t i o n 5 2 4 of Above T o t a l s \"~35 15\" ~8 ~T ~8 T o t a l W i tnesses—67 The above Tab le i s on l y a p a r t i a l l i s t of the t o t a l of scheduled w i tnesses (and w i tness p a n e l s ) . I t p resen t s the number of w i tnesses who a c t u a l l y appeared p r i o r to the c e s s a -t i o n of the I n q u i r y . Of the t o t a l s i x t y- seven w i t n e s s e s , a lmost h a l f of these were p rov ided by the Commiss ion. Of these t h i r -t y - f i v e w i t n e s s e s , t h i r t e e n were from government, ten from i n d u s t r y , e i g h t from u n i v e r s i t i e s , and the remaining four from h o s p i t a l s and other l o c a t i o n s . Here , there i s a genera l t rend of s e c u r i n g w i tnesses from government and i n d u s t r y . T h i s imbalance i n r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i s p a r t i a l l y accounted fo r by the premature t e r m i n a t i o n of the h e a r i n g s . 184 . . . . s e v e r a l e s s e n t i a l c a t e g o r i e s were not d e a l t w i th p r i o r to the t e r m i n a t i o n of the Hear ings but e s p e c i a l l y because the broad range of p e r s p e c t i v e s i s not w e l l r ep resen ted i n the tes t imony on r e c o r d . Indeed, i t i s f a i r to say tha t i t i s p redominant l y the view of the nuc l ea r i n d u s t r y i n c l u d i n g the mining companies, g o v e r n -ment resea rch and r e g u l a t o r y a g e n c i e s , and t h e i r c o n s u l -t an t s tha t i s r e f l e c t e d (BCCUCC 1980 :12 ) . Another problem in o b t a i n i n g a ba lance among exper t s i s the a v a i l a b i l i t y of c r e d i b l e w i tnesses fo r a g i ven area of e x p e r t i s e . P u b l i c i n t e r e s t speakers noted the l ack of w i tnesses to t e s t i f y a g a i n s t uranium m in ing . They noted the employment of the ma jo r i t y of exper t s by government and i n d u s t r y , and the p r o f e s s i o n a l d isadvantage of t e s t i f y i n g aga in s t t h e i r p e e r s . Dur ing the Bates Inqu i r y i n to uranium m i n i n g , there cou ld have been r e a l d i s b e n e f i t s fo r a f a c u l t y member of a department such as G e o l o g i c a l S c i ences to have appeared as a w i tness fo r a group q u e s t i o n i n g the d e s i r a b i l i t y of mining u r a n i u m . . . t h e s e d i s b e n e f i t s cou ld app ly to the ca ree r o p p o r t u n i t i e s of the f a c u l t y member, the resea rch g ran ts he would r e ce i v e and the employment o p p o r t u n i t i e s fo r h i s s t u d e n t s , inasmuch as mining compa-n i e s p rov ide research g ran ts and employment o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r geology s tudents (BCCUCC 1980:35 ) . With regard to the PCAB h e a r i n g s , the a p p e l l a n t s noted the gene ra l u n a v a i l a b i l i t y of w i tnesses to t e s t i f y on t h e i r b e h a l f : To d a t e , on l y one u n i v e r s i t y p r o f e s s o r in B r i t i s h Columbia has come forward i n support of the p u b l i c i n t e -r e s t r esea rch g roups ' p o s i t i o n . . . Other members of the academic community who were w i l l i n g to lend t h e i r e x p e r -t i s e had to be brought in from the Un i ted S t a t e s . On the o ther hand, there was no r e l u c t ance on the pa r t of a number of p r o f e s s o r s to become i nvo l ved on the government 's s i d e . . . T h e answer to t h i s ques t i on of why there i s p e r s i s t e n t u n i v e r s i t y support of government and i n d u s t r y may be tha t they are not conv inced we are r i g h t . Or they may r e a l i z e tha t p u b l i c i n t e r e s t o r g a n i z a t i o n s have l i t t l e money or power. Fur thermore , we suspec t there i s a f ea r tha t p r o f e s s o r s who s i de wi th a c t i v i s t groups f i n d i t d i f f i c u l t to fund resea rch programs, r e -t a i n graduate s tudents and get t enu r e . In B r i t i s h Colum-b i a , i t i s uncommon to f i n d U n i v e r s i t y f a c u l t y t ak ing a s t rong p u b l i c s tand a g a i n s t a government program. Per-185 haps t h i s s i t u a t i o n i s to be expec ted , but i t i s d i s c o u -r ag ing none the less fo r people s t r u g g l i n g in remote areas on complex i s sues (Warnock and Lewis 1982 :37 ) . From a p l u r a l i s t p e r s p e c t i v e t hen , the t r i b u n a l has i n -c reased the parameters of the dec i s ion-mak ing process by a l l o w -ing f o r p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t e c h n i c a l and s c i e n t i f i c mat-t e r s . In the case s t u d i e s , a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s were capable of a c q u i r i n g e x p e r t i s e and exper t s to t e s t i f y on t h e i r b e h a l f , e s p e c i a l l y in the RCUM where the t r i b u n a l ac ted as a f a c i l i t a -9 tor f o r t h i s p r o c e s s . In the case of the c o n s u l t a t i v e t r i b u -n a l , the Commission has attempted to \" d e m y s t i f y \" the t e c h n i c a l realm of d i s c o u r s e , by encouraging ques t i ons and p r o v i d i n g s t a f f and e x p e r t i s e to a i d p a r t i c i p a n t s . The l ack of compar-ab le e x p e r t i s e among oppos ing i n t e r e s t s i s seen to r e f l e c t a d i f f e r e n c e i n r e s o u r c e s , s t r a t e g i e s , and p e r s p e c t i v e s . However, from a c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e , the dichotomy be -tween l ay and exper t knowledge i s on l y s u p e r f i c i a l l y min imized by the hea r ing p r o c e s s . A l though the case s tudy t r i b u n a l s d i v e r g e d , due to t h e i r separa te s t r u c t u r e s and p r o v i s i o n s fo r f u n d i n g , d i f f e r e n t i a l access to e x p e r t i s e has marked both t r i -b u n a l s . P u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups have been d isadvantaged in a c ces s i ng e x p e r t i s e r e l a t i v e to t h e i r government and co rpo ra te c o u n t e r p a r t s . 6.4 Hear ing P rocedures : Theory and P r a c t i c e P a r t i c i p a t i o n in the p u b l i c hea r ing i s enacted through a number of p rocedures which have been d i s c u s s e d in t h i s and p reced ing c h a p t e r s . The o f f i c i a l d e s c r i p t i o n of hea r ing p r o c e -dures emphasizes c e r t a i n formal f e a tu r e s of the h e a r i n g , i n c l u -d ing s u b m i s s i o n , c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n , and summation, which re-186 f l e e t the q u a s i - j u d i c i a l b a s i s of the forum. These g ive each p a r t i c i p a n t in the hear ing the o c cas i on to p resent h e r / h i s c a s e , and then to be ques t i oned by the Board and the opposing f o r c e s . A n e u t r a l and ba lanced \" c o m p e t i t i o n \" among a v a r i e t y of i n t e r e s t s i s thus d i s p l a y e d by the hear ing p r o c e s s . I have observed that formal hea r ing p rocedu res , as ev idenced by the case s t u d i e s , are c o n s i s t e n t wi th the p l u r a l i s t model . However, I have shown how a d e s c r i p t i o n of formal p r o c e -dures i s i n s u f f i c i e n t as an a n a l y s i s of the hea r ing p r o c e s s . I t f a i l s to address those i n fo rma l and p r e l i m i n a r y p rocesses by which p a r t i c i p a n t s engage in making a c a s e . The l o c a t i o n and s p a t i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of the hea r ings are i n f l u e n c e s which c o n -t r i b u t e to or d e t r a c t from i n d i v i d u a l s ' a b i l i t y to p a r t i c i p a t e . Access to p r o c e d u r a l s k i l l s and e x p e r t i s e on the i s sues under d i s c u s s i o n are c r i t i c a l to any p a r t i c i p a n t ' s success in the forum. These must be i n co rpo ra t ed i n to a d e s c r i p t i o n of hea -r i n g p rocedu re s . I have observed tha t the p l u r a l i s t model a p p l i e s to a l i m i t e d extent to these i n fo rma l p rocedu res . The l o c a t i o n and the p h y s i c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of the hea r ing s e t t i n g are c o n s i s t e n t wi th the p l u r a l i s t expec t a t i ons of p u b l i c access inasmuch as they f o r m a l l y p rov ide f o r members of the p u b l i c to speak before or a t t end the t r i b u n a l . The s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n of procedures a l -lows d i f f e r e n t i n t e r e s t s to compete in the p rocess on s i m i l a r te rms. Access to gene ra l i n f o rma t i on and e x p e r t i s e i s a v a i -l a b l e to a c e r t a i n extent to a l l p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t e r e s t s , and the s u b s i d i z a t i o n of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups by the c o n s u l t a t i v e 187 i n q u i r y c o n t r i b u t e s to the e q u a l i t y of p a r t i c i p a t o r y o p p o r t u n i -ty p rov ided by the t r i b u n a l . However, the exper ience of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t a p p e l l a n t s in c a r r y i n g out p r e l i m i n a r y and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l procedures r e vea l s t h e i r compe t i t i v e d i s a d v a n -tage i n the t r i b u n a l . The p l u r a l i s t model t r e a t s t h i s i n e q u a l i -ty among p a r t i c i p a n t s as i n d i v i d u a l l y and s u b j e c t i v e l y p r o -duced. I t f a i l s to r ecogn ize the imbalance among p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t e r e s t s as s t r u c t u r a l l y l o c a t e d , the r e f l e c t i o n of a l a r g e r s o c i e t a l i n e q u a l i t y . Thus , d i f f e r e n t i a l access to e x p e r t i s e , and s y s t ema t i c unde r- r ep re sen t a t i on of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups must be recogn ized as a f u n c t i o n of the nature and l o c a t i o n of i n t e r e s t s , r a the r than an anomalous and random o c c u r r e n c e . Making a case i s assumed to r e f l e c t the d i f f e r e n t i a l a b i l i t i e s and approaches of p a r t i c i p a n t s . In the PCAB, the r e g u l a t o r y p rocess was l o c a t e d w i t h i n a b u r e a u c r a t i c context in which p u b l i c (non-producer , non-admin i s t r a t i v e ) i n t e r e s t s were s t r u c t u r a l l y d i sadvan taged . In t h i s t r i b u n a l , the a p p e l l a n t assumes the burden of p r o o f . Lack of access to p rev ious b u -r e a u c r a t i c d e c i s i o n s and to cu r r en t program and resea rch i n f o r -mation r e f l e c t s the d isadvantage of non-regu la to ry i n t e r e s t s . Lack of fund ing fo r the a p p e l l a n t f u r t h e r d i s courages an e f f e c -t i v e a p p e a l . The c o n s u l t a t i v e hear ing r e f l e c t s more of a ba lance among i n t e r v e n o r s . As an i n v e s t i g a t i v e t r i b u n a l , the RCUM i t s e l f a c t i v e l y assumed the f u n c t i o n s of c o n t r a c t i n g r e -s e a r c h , s e c u r i n g exper t w i t n e s s e s , and educa t ing p a r t i c i p a n t s and the p u b l i c . The a v a i l a b i l i t y of fund ing fo r p u b l i c i n t e r e s t o r g a n i z a t i o n s i n c r eased p u b l i c access to the forum and c o n t r i -buted to t h e i r a b i l i t y to make a case on beha l f of t h e i r i n t e -188 9 r e s t s . None the l e s s , o b s t a c l e s to p u b l i c access to both gene -r a l and s p e c i f i c i n f o rma t i on c h a r a c t e r i z e d the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t e x p e r i e n c e . Thus , a l though there were d i f f e r e n c e s between the t r i b u n a l s in making a c a s e , b u r e a u c r a t i c and e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l r e l a t i o n s of proponents p resented s t r u c t u r a l advantages not a v a i l a b l e to p u b l i c i n t e r e s t g roups . Hear ing s e t t i n g s , a l though t e c h n i c a l l y a v a i l a b l e to a l l , may be seen from a c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e to d i s courage p a r t i c i -p a t i on by the l ay p u b l i c and c o n t r i b u t e to an imbalance among p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t e r e s t s . The s e t t i n g of the hea r ings o rgan i zes the p rocess of p a r t i c i p a t i o n through r e l a t i v e l y formal means— p a r t i c i p a n t s are r equ i r ed to enter i n to a form of address which can be i n t i m i d a t i n g and a l i e n to those i nexpe r i enced in p u b l i c speak ing . P u b l i c i n t e r e s t p a r t i c i p a t i o n then becomes a p rocess i n which a r e s t r i c t e d number of m idd l e- c l a s s i n d i v i d u a l s take p a r t . T h i s l i m i t s the spectrum of i n t e r e s t s r e p r e s e n t e d , d i s -courages widespread popular use of the forum, and c o n t r i b u t e s to the imbalance in compe t i t i v e i n t e r e s t s , wi th s t a t e and co rpo ra te i n t e r e s t s f i n a n c i a l l y and p r o f e s s i o n a l l y capable of s e cu r i ng more exper i enced p a r t i c i p a n t s . The i s sues of the case study h e a r i n g s , and the s i z e and scope of the c o n s u l t a t i v e hea r ings were f u r t h e r f a c t o r s d i s c o u r a g i n g p u b l i c i n p u t . A l -though the RCUM attempted to i nc rease p u b l i c access to the forum through p u b l i c educa t i on (both s u b s t a n t i v e and p r o c e d u -r a l ) and a pos ture of i n f o r m a l i t y , the f u n d i n g , i s sues and cha rac t e r of the t r i b u n a l l i m i t e d the success of i t s e f f o r t s . Access to p r o c e d u r a l e x p e r t i s e was t r e a t e d by the t r i b u -189 na l s as a compe t i t i v e f e a t u r e , in keeping wi th a p l u r a l i s t mandate. Re l i ance on l e g a l counse l was, a l though p r o c e d u r a l l y a c c e s s i b l e , and p r a c t i c a l l y h e l p f u l , addressed as an i n d i v i d u a l and o p t i o n a l aspect of p a r t i c i p a t i o n . \" L e g a l \" and \" l a y \" s k i l l s are not s h a r p l y d i f f e r e n t i a t e d by o f f i c i a l accounts of hea r ing p rocedu res . A l though the RCUM d i s t i n g u i s h e d between community and t e c h n i c a l h e a r i n g s , D r . Bates s t a t ed that there was no d i f f e r e n t s t a t u s i n the ev idence submit ted at e i t h e r h e a r i n g . A l l the ev idence whether v e r b a l , w r i t t e n or whatever i s accepted by the i n q u i r y on e x a c t l y the same b a s i s . There are no k ind of C l a s s 1 hea r ings and C l a s s 2 h e a r i n g s . A l l the ev idence i s accepted as ev idence i n f r o n t of the Commission on the same b a s i s (RCUM 3 :2 ) . In a s i m i l a r v e i n , s u b s t a n t i v e e x p e r t i s e i s regarded as g e n e r a -l l y a c c e s s i b l e , accessed by research s k i l l s and i n d i v i d u a l m o t i v a t i o n . However, from a c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e , the p r o f e s s i o n a l and t e c h n i c a l nature of the hea r ing p rocess c o n t r i b u t e s to the imbalance among competing i n t e r e s t s . P u b l i c p a r t i c i p a n t s , who l ack resources and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s t r eng th comparable to those of government and i n d u s t r y , are p l a ced at a d isadvantage in a forum p r e d i c a t e d on these s k i l l s . Moreover , the lack of r e c o g -n i t i o n of hea r ing cos t s as a compe t i t i v e f a c t o r a l lows p a r t i c i -p a t i on to be regarded as a c c e s s i b l e to a l l , r a the r than the product of resources which are unequa l l y d i s t r i b u t e d . The a p p e l l a n t must bear the cos t of sponsor ing an exper t in the PCAB c a s e , and even the fund ing measures p rov ided by the RCUM, f a i l to ensure an e q u a l i t y of resources among p a r t i c i p a n t s . Moreover , the a v a i l a b i l i t y of c r e d i b l e exper t w i tnesses w i l l i n g to t e s t i f y on beha l f of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups may be d i m i -190 n ished by o ther f a c t o r s , such as the p r o f e s s i o n a l i n t e r e s t of the e x p e r t , the l i n k s between h e r / h i s p r o f e s s i o n , government and i n d u s t r y , and the lack of p e r s o n a l , f i n a n c i a l , and p r o f e s -s i o n a l remunerat ion fo r an appearance . Thus , from a c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e , the p u b l i c hea r ing remains e s s e n t i a l l y a formal and p r o f e s s i o n a l p r o c e s s . P r o c e -dures may be l e s s s t r i c t than in the courtroom t r a d i t i o n , but they none the less r equ i r e knowledge of l e g a l procedures and i s s u e s . P rocedura l e x p e r t i s e i s d i f f e r e n t i a l l y a v a i l a b l e to competing i n t e r e s t s . P r e l i m i n a r y a c t i v i t i e s , by which p a r t i c i -pants muster t h e i r r e s o u r c e s , o rgan ize t h e i r knowledge, and make t h e i r c a s e , absorb a c o n s i d e r a b l e amount of t ime , yet are l a r g e l y ignored as e s s e n t i a l elements of p a r t i c i p a t i o n . More-o v e r , due to the e x t r a - b u r e a u c r a t i c , i nadequa te l y funded , and temporary cha rac t e r of much p u b l i c i n t e r e s t o r g a n i z a t i o n the p u b l i c has r e l a t i v e l y fewer resources wi th which to p a r t i c i -p a t e . The t r i b u n a l f a i l s to r e cogn ize t h i s inadequacy as s t r u c t u r a l l y produced and s y s t e m a t i c a l l y e f f e c t i n g an imbalance among c o m p e t i t o r s . Thus , the p l u r a l i s t model of p a r t i c i p a t i o n p resen t s a view of hea r ing procedures which i s upheld at a genera l and formal l e v e l . In t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e , competing i n t e r e s t s i n t e r a c t through the i n t e r v e n t i o n p rocess to produce a balance of i n f o r -mation and knowledge upon which d e c i s i o n s and recommendations are made. However, the i d e a l of f a i r n e s s of procedures and p u b l i c access through a ba lance among competing i n t e r e s t s d i f -f e r s c o n s i d e r a b l y from the exper ience of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t p a r t i -191 c i p a t i o n . Rather than a c t i n g as a \" n e u t r a l i z e r \" , the p r o c e -dures may be viewed from a p a r t i c i p a t o r y p e r s p e c t i v e to c o n t r i -bute to the s t r u c t u r a l imbalance through which the p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t e s . The p r o f e s s i o n a l nature of the hear ing which i s r evea led by t h i s a n a l y s i s poses b a s i c problems of i n e q u a l i t y and i n a c c e s s i b i l i t y f o r those ( in t h i s c a s e , p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups) r e l a t i v e l y l a c k i n g in those s k i l l s , or the a b i l i t y to procure those s k i l l s . En thus iasm, a l t e r n a t i v e networks, and hav ing God or the common good on one ' s s ide do not undermine the f o r c e of m a t e r i a l f a c t o r s and o r g a n i z a t i o n of p r o d u c t i o n . The r e l i a n c e on p r o f e s s i o n a l s k i l l s and the l ack of access to r e s o u r c e s , may be viewed to r e f l e c t and perpetuate s o c i e t a l imbalances which are not v i s i b l e in nor remedied by the p l u r a -l i s t model . lMedia at tendance was not a prominent f ea tu re of the case s t u d i e s , e s p e c i a l l y in the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e h e a r i n g . In the PCAB, p ress coverage was on l y s i g n i f i c a n t in 1978. In the RCUM, media at tendance f l u c t u a t e d , i n c r e a s i n g at t imes of economic events r ega rd ing uranium or the at tendance of c o n t r o v e r s i a l speake r s . A l though the c o n s u l t a t i v e hea r ing attempted to a t -t r a c t g r ea t e r news coverage as a means of extend ing p u b l i c access to the d i s c u s s i o n , the t e c h n i c a l nature of the i s sues and s t a n d a r d i z e d format of exchange d i s couraged t h i s . 2 The West Coast Env i ronmenta l Law A s s o c i a t i o n p rov ides advocacy s e r v i c e s fo r p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i n t e r v e n t i o n in e n v i r o n -mental ma t t e r s . 3 In the Kelowna RCUM h e a r i n g , approx imate l y twenty- f i ve women and one-hundred ten men at tended the f i r s t day of the h e a r i n g . There were no daycare f a c i l i t i e s , and s e v e r a l women wi th bab ies and sma l l c h i l d r e n were seated to the rear of the room. Only one schedu led speaker of f i f t e e n was a woman on June 5. For the e n t i r e Kelowna h e a r i n g s , n ine p a r t i c i p a n t s of t h i r t y - e i g h t were women. Dur ing the f i r s t weeks of the t e c h n i c a l h e a r i n g s , about one- th i rd of the audience was composed of women (about f i f t e e n each day ) . Among the major p a r t i c i p a n t s , of whom twenty were present du r ing my o b s e r v a t i o n s , on l y two were represented by 192 women. None of the exper t w i tnesses who appeared before the Commission were women. In the PCAB, three a p p e l l a n t s were, or were represented by, women. The SOEC produced s e v e r a l women as w i t n e s s e s , but there were no women r e p r e s e n t i n g the p e r m i t - h o l d e r . In 1981, two women r e p r e s e n t i n g the Solana Bay P roper ty A s s o c i a t i o n appeared i n support of the Okanagan Water Bas in Board , the p roponent . There were no women on the Board . 4 From a l e g a l p e r s p e c t i v e , the q u a s i - j u d i c i a l procedures of the case s tudy hea r ings d i f f e r markedly from courtroom p r a c t i c e . 5 I adopt the t r i b u n a l s ' l a b e l l i n g of exper t s i n t h i s d i s c u s s i o n , as I am not i n t e r e s t e d in whether or not an exper t i s an e x p e r t , but how e x p e r t i s e i s used i n the hea r ing p r o c e s s . 6 In 1981 the SOEC was not represented by l e g a l c o u n s e l . 7 Not a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s were h indered in s e cu r i ng l e g a l e x p e r t i s e because of f i n a n c e s . Some i n t e n t i o n a l l y chose to \" d e - p r o f e s s i o n a l i z e \" and p o p u l a r i z e the p rocess by us ing l a y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . Others s e l e c t e d speakers wi th app rop r i a t e t e c h n i c a l backgrounds in the i s s u e s . 8 See Appendix 2.6 fo r a d e s c r i p t i o n of fund ing a l l o c a t i o n by the Commiss ion. 9 The Commission was r e s p o n s i b l e fo r s e cu r i ng Commission w i t n e s s e s , p r epa r i ng them, d i r e c t i n g ques t i ons to them, and pay ing the c o s t s of t h e i r appearance . The Commission a l s o pa id the cos t s of some major p a r t i c i p a n t s ' w i t n e s s e s , but the p a r t i -c i p an t s e l e c t e d them and arranged fo r t h e i r appearance . ) 193 CHAPTER 7 THE NEUTRALITY OF THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS 7 .1- In t roduc t i on Dec is ion-making i s assumed by the p l u r a l i s t model to be a n e u t r a l a c t i v i t y , performed by an i m p a r t i a l Board/Commission on the b a s i s of i n f o rma t i on brought be fore i t by a number of i n -t e r e s t s , i n c l u d i n g those of the p u b l i c . The exper ience of p a r -t i c i p a n t s in the case s t u d i e s g e n e r a l l y conforms to the p l u r a -l i s t model . Dec is ions/recommendat ions are produced by Boards or Commissions and are seen to r e f l e c t c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the mate-r i a l brought before them. However, the r e g u l a t o r y s t r u c t u r e of the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e dec i s ion-mak ing p r o c e s s , the \" t e c h n o c r a t i c \" compos i t i on of dec i s ion-mak ing bod ies and the l i m i t e d extent of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the a c t u a l dec i s ion-mak ing p rocess i n d i c a t e from a c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e an imbalance i n p a r t i c i -p a t i o n which c r ea t e s a d isadvantage fo r p u b l i c i n t e r e s t s and ques t i ons the independence of the t r i b u n a l from the s t a t e . I w i l l b r i e f l y review the p l u r a l i s t model as i t a p p l i e s to the dec i s ion-mak ing p rocess p r i o r to examining the a d m i n i s t r a -t i v e s t r u c t u r e of the case s tudy h e a r i n g s . The compos i t ion of Board members and t h e i r r o l e in the t r i b u n a l i s next examined, fo l l owed by a summary and a n a l y s i s of the n e u t r a l i t y of the 194 p r o c e s s . A c c o r d i n g t o p l u r a l i s t t h e o r y , t h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g a n d o t h e r e x t r a - e l e c t o r a l f o r u m s a r e m e a n s f o r e x p a n d i n g p u b l i c i n p u t t o t h e r e g u l a t o r y a n d p o l i c y - m a k i n g p r o c e s s e s o f g o v e r n -m e n t , e s p e c i a l l y w i t h r e g a r d t o s c i e n t i f i c a n d t e c h n i c a l i s -s u e s . T h e r o l e o f t h e p u b l i c i n t h e h e a r i n g i s t o p r e s e n t i t s o p i n i o n s a n d i n f o r m a t i o n t o t h e p r o c e s s t h r o u g h t h e a p p e a l o r i n t e r v e n t i o n p r o c e s s . T h e p u b l i c m a k e s s u b m i s s i o n s , c a l l s e x -p e r t s , a n d c r o s s - e x a m i n e s r e g a r d i n g t h e i s s u e s u n d e r d i s c u s -s i o n , a n d i t s p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s a s s u m e d b o t h t o s u p p l e m e n t t h e i n f o r m a t i o n a s s e s s e d b y t h e t r i b u n a l a n d t o c o u n t e r t h e m a t e -r i a l p r e s e n t e d b y c o m p e t i n g i n t e r e s t s . D e c i s i o n s a r e u n d e r s t o o d t o b e made b y a n i m p a r t i a l B o a r d / C o m m i s s i o n , o n t h e b a s i s o f t h i s d i v e r s e i n f o r m a t i o n b r o u g h t b e f o r e t h e m i n t h e h e a r i n g s . 7 . 2 - T h e D e c i s i o n - M a k i n g P r o c e s s i n t h e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e T r i b u n a l : T h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A p p e a l B o a r d T h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A p p e a l B o a r d w a s d e s i g n e d p r i m a r i l y t o h e a r a p p e a l s , a n d e x e r c i s e d i t s r e g u l a t o r y c a p a c i t y i n t h a t w a y . T h e p r o d u c t s o f t h e h e a r i n g p r o c e s s , t h e n , w e r e d e c i s i o n s t o e i t h e r u p h o l d o r d i s a l l o w t h e d e c i s i o n o f . t h e A d m i n i s t r a t o r o f t h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l B r a n c h t o a p p r o v e a p e r m i t a p p l i c a -t i o n . B e f o r e d i s c u s s i n g t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o n t e x t , g r o u n d s , a n d r e a s o n s f o r t h e s e d e c i s i o n s , I w i l l r e v i e w t h e a c t u a l d e c i s i o n s m a d e b y t h e B o a r d r e g a r d i n g t h e c a s e s t u d y h e a r i n g s f r o m 1 9 7 8 - 1 9 8 1 . D e c i s i o n s o f t h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A p p e a l B o a r d One w e e k a f t e r t h e 1 9 7 8 2 , 4 - D h e a r i n g s w e r e c o m p l e t e d , a d e c i s i o n w a s r e a c h e d b y t h e B o a r d . ( S e e A p p e n d i x 1 . 6 ) . T h e 1 9 5 A d m i n i s t r a t o r ' s d e c i s i o n t o a l l o w t h e u s e o f 2 , 4 - D b y t h e W a t e r 1 I n v e s t i g a t i o n s B r a n c h w a s g e n e r a l l y u p h e l d b y t h e B o a r d . O n l y t h o s e p e r m i t s f o r O s o y o o s L a k e w e r e n o t a l l o w e d . I n t h e r e m a i -n i n g y e a r s o f t h e c a s e s t u d y , 1 9 7 9 - 1 9 8 1 , t h e B o a r d ' s d e c i s i o n s a l l f a v o u r e d t h e A d m i n i s t r a t o r ' s d e c i s i o n , t h a t i s , a l l o w i n g t h e p e r m i t s , a n d a g a i n s t t h e a p p e a l s . I n 1 9 7 9 a n d 1 9 8 0 , p e r m i t s w e r e r e q u e s t e d f o r o n l y Wood a n d K a l a m a l k a L a k e s , w h i l e i n 1 9 8 1 , t h e p e r m i t w a s f o r S o l a n a B a y i n O s o y o o s L a k e . T h u s , t h e d e c i s i o n s m a d e b y t h e B o a r d i n t h e c a s e s t u d y h e a r i n g s r e v e a l a t r e n d t o t h e d i s a l l o w i n g , o r r e j e c t i o n o f a p p e a l s , a n d t h e 2 u p h o l d i n g o f t h e A d m i n i s t r a t o r ' s d e c i s i o n . D u r i n g f o u r y e a r s o f a p p e a l s , o n l y i n o n e y e a r ( 1 9 7 8 ) w e r e p e r m i t s d i s a l l o w e d . O t h e r d e c i s i o n s o f t h e P C A B a l s o r e f l e c t a t e n d e n c y t o s u p p o r t t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t a t u s q u o . K e l l e t t e x a m i n e s t h e d e c i s i o n s o f t h e P C A B i n t h e f i r s t t w o y e a r s o f i t s e x i s t e n c e , 1 9 7 8 - 1 9 7 9 3 ( 1 9 8 0 : 1 0 ) . O n l y s e v e n a p p e a l s o u t o f f o r t y - s i x w e r e a l l o w e d . A n a l y s i s o f t h e 1 9 8 1 r e c o r d o f t h e P C A B i n d i c a t e s t h a t o f o n e h u n d r e d s i x t y - f i v e a p p e a l s , a l l w e r e o v e r t u r n e d ( W e s t C o a s t E n v i r o n m e n t a l L aw R e s e a r c h F o u n d a t i o n 1 9 8 3 ) . T h e d e c i s i o n s o f t h e t r i b u n a l t h u s i n d i c a t e t h e i r g e n e r a l s u p p o r t o f t h e a d m i n i -s t r a t i v e s t a t u s q u o , a n d f r o m a c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e , i n d i c a t e a n i m b a l a n c e i n t h e p a r t i c i p a t o r y p r o c e s s f a v o u r i n g b u r e a u c r a -t i c i n t e r e s t s . T h e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o n t e x t o f D e c i s i o n - M a k i n g I n C h a p t e r T h r e e I b r i e f l y e x a m i n e d t h e a p p e a l p r o c e s s w i t h i n w h i c h t h e h e a r i n g t o o k p l a c e . T h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e r e g u l a t o r y s y s t e m a n d t h e r e l i a n c e o n e a r l i e r c l o s e d d e c i s i o n -1 9 6 m a k i n g p r o c e s s e s p o i n t t o a d i s a d v a n t a g e f o r p u b l i c i n t e r e s t a p p e l l a n t s , a n d c h a l l e n g e t h e p l u r a l i s t m o d e l . T h e p r o c e d u r e f o r p e r m i t a p p l i c a t i o n s f o l l o w s t h i s g e n e r a l p a t t e r n : T A B L E 9 - P C A B A P P E A L P R O C E D U R E P e r m i t A p p l i c a t i o n i A d m i n i s t r a t o r , P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l B r a n c h P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l C o m m i t t e e ( R e p r e s e n t a t i v e s f r o m M i n i s t r i e s o f H e a l t h , A g r i c u l t u r e , F o r e s t s , E n v i r o n m e n t , R e c r e a t i o n a n d C o n s e r v a t i o n ) i A d m i n i s t r a t o r , P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l B r a n c h ( A c c e p t / R e j e c t P e r m i t ) ( I f A c c e p t e d ) 1 P u b l i c N o t i f i c a t i o n I A p p e l l a n t s R e g i s t e r A p p e a l r b l P e s t i c i d e C o n t o l A p p e a l B o a r d A p p e a l H e a r i n g I D e c i s i o n ( P e r m i t a l l o w e d , d i s a l l o w e d , m o d i f i e d ) T h e a p p l i c a t i o n i s f i r s t s u b m i t t e d t o t h e A d m i n i s t r a t o r , 1 9 7 who, in con junc t i on wi th the P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Committee, d e -c i d e s whether or not to approve i t . I f approved , the p u b l i c i s n o t i f i e d , and a p p e l l a n t s may i n i t i a t e an a p p e a l . (The p u b l i c i s not n o t i f i e d of r e j e c t e d appea l s . ) F o l l ow ing the appea l h ea -r i n g , the Board makes a d e c i s i o n rega rd ing the A d m i n i s t r a t o r ' s a p p r o v a l . Thus , the hea r ing does not appear at the beg inn ing of the c o n s i d e r a t i o n of p e s t i c i d e use . Ra the r , i t f o l l o w s and counte rs an e a r l i e r d e c i s i o n made by the A d m i n i s t r a t o r of the B ranch , in c o n j u n c t i o n wi th h i s a d v i s o r s . The PCAB, l o c a t ed w i t h i n the same M i n i s t r y i s thus making a d e c i s i o n which w i l l accord w i t h , or n u l l i f y , tha t of the A d m i n i s t r a t o r of that b ranch . P r i o r to t h i s p r o c e s s , a d e c i s i o n has been made at the f e d e r a l l e v e l conce rn ing the r e g i s t r a t i o n of a p e s t i c i d e . A g r i -c u l t u r e Canada has the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the r e g i s t r a t i o n of a p e s t i c i d e , as w e l l as f o r i t s l a b e l l i n g and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . The PCAB f o r m a l l y r e f e r r e d to t h i s r e g u l a t o r y context beg inn ing i n 1981, when i t submit ted the f o l l o w i n g statement to a p p e l l a n t s : A p p e l l a n t s shou ld be aware that the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y fo r r e g i s t e r i n g (and approv ing) chemica l s f o r use as p e s t i -c i d e s i s ves ted wi th the Fede ra l Government in Accordance wi th the Fede ra l Pest C o n t r o l Products A c t . Th i s Act and i t s Regu l a t i ons d e t a i l the procedures and data tha t must be p rov ided by an a p p l i c a n t w ish ing to r e g i s t e r a chemi -c a l f o r p e s t i c i d e use . I t would a l s o be the r e s p o n s i b i l i -ty of the F ede ra l Agency to ensure that the data upon which i t bases i t s d e c i s i o n i s r e l i a b l e . Before a permit i s i s s u e d , the a p p l i c a t i o n i s assessed by a P r o v i n c i a l P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Committee composed of people knowledge-ab le i n a g r i c u l t u r e , f o r e s t r y , o c c u p a t i o n a l h e a l t h , and f i s h and w i l d l i f e . .The P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Appeal Board ac t s to ensure tha t ho unreasonable adverse e f f e c t w i l l r e s u l t from the implementat ion of permi ts tha t are appea l ed . In hea r ing an A p p e a l , the Board i s concerned wi th on-s i t e problems 198 w h i c h may n o t h a v e b e e n i d e n t i f i e d i n p r o c e s s i n g t h e p e r m i t a p p l i c a t i o n . T h e A p p e a l B o a r d d e p e n d s u p o n t h e A p p e l l a n t s t o p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n o n t h o s e p r o b l e m s . T h e B o a r d d o e s n o t h a v e t h e e x t e n s i v e o r g a n i z a t i o n o r b a c k -g r o u n d e x p e r i e n c e a v a i l a b l e t o t h e F e d e r a l G o v e r n m e n t A g e n c y who m a d e t h e d e c i s i o n t o r e g i s t e r t h e c h e m i c a l . T h e B o a r d w i l l g i v e c o n s i d e r a b l e w e i g h t t o t h e d e c i s i o n o f t h e a d m i n i s t r a t o r a n d t h e c o m m i t t e e , a s w e l l a s t o t h e d e c i s i o n s o f t h e F e d e r a l A g e n c y , a n d t h a t s u b s t a n t i a l a n d c o n v i n c i n g e v i d e n c e w o u l d b e r e q u i r e d b e f o r e t h e B o a r d w o u l d (a ) d i s r e g a r d a s a f e t y d e c i s i o n m a d e b y t h e F e d e r a l a u t h o r i t y , o r , (b ) i n t h e a b s e n c e o f new e v i d e n c e o r a r g u m e n t s , i n t e r f e r e w i t h a d e c i s i o n made b y t h e a d m i n i s -t r a t o r o r t h e c o m m i t t e e r e g a r d i n g u n r e a s o n a b l e a d v e r s e e f f e c t ( P C A B 1 9 8 1 ) . T h i s s t a t e m e n t f o r m a l l y r e c o g n i z e s t h e p r i o r i t y o f d e c i -s i o n s m a d e a t t h e F e d e r a l l e v e l c o n c e r n i n g t h e r e g i s t r a t i o n , c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , a n d l a b e l l i n g o f a p e s t i c i d e . I t a l s o s t a t e s t h a t t h e h e a r i n g i s p r i m a r i l y c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e s p e c i f i c p r o b l e m s o f ( o n - s i t e ) p e s t i c i d e a p p l i c a t i o n , r a t h e r t h a n g e n e -r a l q u e s t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t h e p e s t i c i d e . T h u s , t h e e x i s t e n c e o f t w o s e t s o f d e c i s i o n s , a t t h e F e d e r a l l e v e l ( A g r i c u l t u r e ) a n d a t t h e p r o v i n c i a l l e v e l ( t h e A d m i n i s t r a t o r a n d t h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l C o m m i t t e e ) , a p p r o v i n g t h e h e r b i c i d e i n g e n e r a l t e r m s , s u p p o r t s t h e p o s i t i o n o f t h e p e r m i t - h o l d e r , a n d w o r k s t o t h e d i s a d v a n t a g e o f t h e a p p e l l a n t . H o w e v e r , t h i s s t a t e m e n t p r o -v i d e s a p l u r a l i s t r a t i o n a l e f o r t h i s p r o c e s s : t h e a d m i n i s t r a -t i v e s t r u c t u r e i s i t s e l f a s y s t e m o f c h e c k s a n d b a l a n c e s , a n d i t i s a s s u m e d t h a t p r i o r l e v e l s o f g o v e r n m e n t s c r u t i n y a c t a s a r e g u l a t o r y g a u n t l e t ; i n a d d i t i o n , t h e h e t e r o g e n e i t y o f i n p u t 4 a g a i n a s s u r e s b a l a n c e d c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f a n y i s s u e . T h e r e l i a n c e o f t h e B o a r d o n p r i o r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d e c i -s i o n s h a s b e e n c r i t i c i z e d : . . . . t h i s ' S t a t e m e n t ' i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A p p e a l B o a r d i s b i a s e d i n f a v o u r o f t h e A d m i n i s t r a t o r o f t h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A c t a n d t h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l C o m -1 9 9 m i t t e e . The Appea l Board s t a t e s they ' w i l l g i ve c o n s i d e r -ab le weight to the d e c i s i o n of the A d m i n i s t r a t o r and Committee ' even though they do not have before them in e v i d e n c e , any i n fo rma t i on r e ce i ved and ana lyzed by the Committee, nor t r a n s c r i p t s of the Commit tee 's d e l i b e r a -t i o n s . . . . F u r t h e r , the Appeal Board assumes, w i thout ev idence a v a i l a b l e to the Board or to the a p p e l l a n t s , tha t the Fede ra l Agency and the P r o v i n c i a l A d m i n i s t r a t o r and Com-mi t t ee have a b s o l u t e l y accura te i n f o rma t i on a v a i l a b l e to them and they operate e x c l u s i v e l y in the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t whereas ' s u b s t a n t i a l and conv i n c i ng e v i dence ' would have to be p resented to the a p p e l l a n t s before the Board would ' d i s r e g a r d ' or ' i n t e r f e r e ' with d e c i s i o n s by the Fede ra l and P r o v i n c i a l P e s t i c i d e A u t h o r i t i e s ( S ke l l y 1981) . Lega l c r i t i c s have noted tha t the d e c i s i o n made by A g r i c u l t u r e Canada i n r e g i s t e r i n g the p e s t i c i d e i s a c l o s e d p r o c e s s . K. Roberts notes tha t the data a cco rd ing to which t h e i r d e c i s i o n i s made i s p r i m a r i l y produced by the company which i s a t temp-t i n g to r e g i s t e r the p e s t i c i d e . In a d d i t i o n , Roberts has s t a t ed i n a l e c t u r e tha t the a g r i c u l t u r e i n d u s t r y has an i n t e r e s t in p e s t i c i d e s , and i s not an i m p a r t i a l judge of p e s t i c i d e use (1982) . Fu r the rmore , the p u b l i c has no access to these e a r l i e r d e c i s i o n s . T h i s exc ludes the p u b l i c from i n fo rma t i on wi th which to a t t ack the A d m i n i s t r a t o r ' s d e c i s i o n , i n making t h e i r c a s e . When an a p p l i c a t i o n fo r a p e s t i c i d e permi t i s made, there i s no p r o v i s i o n f o r p u b l i c knowledge of t h i s a p p l i c a t i o n . D e n i a l of p u b l i c access to the e a r l y s tages of the a p p l i c a t i o n submiss ion has been c r i t i c i z e d : Under the P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A c t , the A d m i n i s t r a t o r and the P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Committee do not p u b l i s h the f a c t tha t a p p l i c a t i o n s have been made fo r p e s t i c i d e c o n -t r o l pe rmi ts nor are t h e i r meetings p u b l i c . No minutes or t r a n s c r i p t s of these meetings are made a v a i l a b l e to a p p e l l a n t s . I t i s t h e r e f o r e imposs ib l e fo r a p p e l l a n t s to know what i n fo rma t i on was a v a i l a b l e to the P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Committee du r ing t h e i r c o n s i d e r a t i o n of a permit 200 - i f i n f a c t t h e y c o n s i d e r e d a n y m a t e r i a l a t a l l o t h e r t h a n t h a t p r o v i d e d i n t h e a p p l i c a t i o n b y t h e p r o p o n e n t ( S k e l l y 1 9 8 1 ) . D u r i n g t h e 2 , 4 - D h e a r i n g s , G r e g M c D a d e , c o u n s e l f o r t h e a p p e l -l a n t s , n o t e d t h e d i f f i c u l t y o f m a k i n g a c a s e , g i v e n t h i s a d m i n -i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e a n d t h e l a c k o f a c c e s s t o i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g t h e A d m i n i s t r a t o r ' s d e c i s i o n : E v e r y s t e p o f t h i s a p p e a l w e ' v e b e e n f i g h t i n g t h e p r o b l e m t h a t we h a v e n o k n o w l e d g e o f w h a t t h e a d m i n i s t r a -t o r c o n s i d e r e d . W e ' r e f i g h t i n g a s e c r e t d e c i s i o n , a n d we h a v e t o a l w a y s c o m e u p w i t h e v i d e n c e t h a t p r o v e s t h a t s o m e o n e m a d e a w r o n g d e c i s i o n , w i t h o u t k n o w i n g w h a t g r o u n d s t h e y made t h e i r d e c i s i o n o n . I ' m j u s t t r y i n g t o d e t e r m i n e w h a t g r o u n d s t h e d e c i s o n w a s made o n . N o w , i f t h e W IB d o e s n ' t k n o w w h a t g r o u n d s t h e d e c i s i o n w a s m a d e o n — w h o d o e s ? T h e a d m i n i s t r a t o r , m a y b e . B u t t h e B o a r d h a s a l r e a d y r u l e d t h a t we c a n ' t t a l k t o t h e A d m i n i s t r a -t o r . I ' m t r y i n g t o d e t e r m i n e i f t h e WIB d o e s i n f a c t k n o w a n y t h i n g o r w h e t h e r t h e y d o n ' t ( P C A B 1 9 7 8 ) . T h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l B r a n c h w i t h i n t h e M i n i s t r y o f E n v i r o n m e n t i s a l s o p r o b l e m a t i c f r o m a c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e . T h e P e s t i c i d e s B r a n c h , i n w h i c h t h e A d m i n i s t r a t o r a n d t h e P C A B a r e l o c a t e d , a n d t h e W a t e r 5 I n v e s t i g a t i o n s B r a n c h ( t h e p e r m i t - h o l d e r ) a r e p a r a l l e l b r a n c h -e s w i t h i n t h e M i n i s t r y o f t h e E n v i r o n m e n t . I n t h e 1 9 7 8 - 1 9 8 0 2 , 4 - D h e a r i n g s , t h e W a t e r I n v e s t i g a t i o n s B r a n c h o f t h e M i n i s t r y o f t h e E n v i r o n m e n t a p p l i e d t o m a k e a p e s t i c i d e a p p l i c a t i o n t o t h e A d m i n i s t r a t o r o f t h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l B r a n c h , l o c a t e d i n t h e s a m e m i n i s t r y . T h e a p p l i c a t i o n w a s c o n s i d e r e d b y t h e A d m i n i s t r a t o r o f t h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l B r a n c h , w i t h r e v i e w f r o m t h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l C o m m i t t e e , a g a i n w i t h i n t h e s a m e m i n i s -t r y . A l t h o u g h t h e c o n n e c t i o n s a m o n g t h e s e v a r i o u s b o d i e s may b e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l y s e p a r a t e , t h e e x i s t e n c e o f b u r e a u c r a t i c n e t w o r k s a n d p r o f e s s i o n a l a l l i a n c e s , i n d i c a t e s t h e p r o p e n s i t y 2 0 1 of the t r i b u n a l to ac t in accordance wi th these i n t e r e s t s . At the approva l s t a g e , the p l u r a l i s t model would assume that the he t e roge ne i t y i n compos i t i on of the P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Committee guarantees a ba lance of competing p e r s p e c t i v e s through which a d e c i s i o n can be made. Pre-permit i n s p e c t i o n of a proposed p e s t i c i d e t reatment area by the m i n i s t r y most a f f e c -6 ted by the a p p l i c a t i o n can r e s u l t in the p e r m i t ' s r e j e c t i o n . The p l u r a l i s t model would thus d e p i c t the a p p l i c a t i o n p rocess as governed by checks and ba lances w i t h i n the g r ea t e r l e g i s l a -t i v e framework. The P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Commit tee 's watchdog f u n c t i o n , heterogeneous c o m p o s i t i o n , and the s e p a r a t i o n of p r o v i n c i a l and f e d e r a l j u r i s d i c t i o n are f u r t h e r i n d i c a t i o n s of the t r i b u n a l ' s c o m p a t a b i l i t y to the p l u r a l i s t model . In c o n -t r a s t , a c r i t i c a l a n a l y s i s of the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e context o b -serves an imbalance in the dec i s ion-mak ing p r o c e s s , wi th p u b l i c input r e s t r i c t e d to the appea l and s t r u c t u r a l a d m i n i s t r a t i v e b u r e a u c r a t i c a l l i a n c e s f u r t h e r d i sadvan tag ing the p u b l i c . Bas i s of and Reasons fo r the D e c i s i o n There i s no d i r e c t means to a s c e r t a i n the bas i s of the Boa rd ' s d e c i s i o n , due to the c l o s e d cha r a c t e r of the a c t u a l dec i s ion-mak ing p r o c e s s , the l ack of s t a t u t o r y gu idance , and the l a ck of reasons c i t e d in a d e c i s i o n du r ing the f i r s t three years of the t r i b u n a l . The P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Ac t and R e g u l a -t i o n s f a i l to s t i p u l a t e c r i t e r i a wi th which the Board can e v a -l ua te a proposed p e s t i c i d e use . The s t a t ed c r i t e r i a ( s ec t i on 6) i s \"unreasonab le adverse e f f e c t \" , the l a t t e r r e f e r r i n g to \"an e f f e c t tha t r e s u l t s in damage to man or the env i ronment \" . In o ther words, the Board must be s a t i s f i e d tha t the proposed 202 u s e o f t h e p e s t i c i d e w i l l n o t p r o d u c e a n u n r e a s o n a b l e d a m a g e t o man o r t h e e n v i r o n m e n t . I n t h e 1 9 7 8 h e a r i n g , t h e B o a r d s a i d t h a t i t w o u l d m a k e a d e c i s i o n o n t h e b a s i s o f t h e \" u n r e a s o n a b l e a d v e r s e e f f e c t \" w h i c h a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e p e s t i c i d e w o u l d c a u s e . ( T h e 1 9 7 8 d e c i s i o n i s r e p r o d u c e d i n A p p e n d i x 1 . 6 . ) I n t h e 1 9 7 8 h e a r i n g , a l e n g t h y d i s c u s s i o n b e t w e e n c o u n s e l f o r t h e a p p e l -l a n t s , a n d t h e c h a i r m a n o f t h e B o a r d t o o k p l a c e c o n c e r n i n g t h e b a s i s o n w h i c h t h e d e c i s i o n w o u l d b e m a d e . K i m R o b e r t s o f t h e W e s t C o a s t E n v i r o n m e n t a l L aw A s s o c i a t i o n , c o u n s e l f o r t h e a p -p e l l a n t s , s t a t e s : I t h i n k t h a t t h e B o a r d s h o u l d be m a k i n g i t s d e c i s i o n b a s e d o n a l l t h e e v i d e n c e t h a t i s i n t r o d u c e d t h a t i s b e f o r e t h e B o a r d w h e n w e ' r e p r e s e n t t o h e a r i t t o be a b l e t o a n s w e r i t , a n d I t h i n k i t ' s e s s e n t i a l t o a f a i r h e a -r i n g t h a t b o t h s i d e s h a v e a c h a n c e t o r e s p o n d t o i t . A n d I g u e s s w h a t I ' m s a y i n g i s , f o r i n s t a n c e , we p r e s e n t a l l o u r m a t e r i a l d i r e c t e d t o t h e a d v e r s e e f f e c t o f 2 , 4 - D , a n d t h e u n r e a s o n a b l e n e s s o f t h e s e a d v e r s e e f -f e c t s . Now i f y o u d i d n ' t h e a r a n y t h i n g f r o m t h e p e r m i t -h o l d e r , t h e e v i d e n c e y o u h a d b e f o r e y o u w o u l d i n d i c a t e t h a t 2 , 4 - D s h o u l d n ' t be u s e d . T h a t ' s o u r s u b m i s s i o n , t h a t 2 , 4 - D s h o u l d n ' t b e u s e d , a n d i f t h e p e r m i t - h o l d e r d i s a -g r e e s w i t h t h a t , t h e y s h o u l d be c a l l i n g e v i d e n c e w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h a t . . . . M r . R a u d s e p p , y o u ' v e j u s t a g r e e d w i t h me t h a t i t ' s e s s e n t i a l t o a f a i r h e a r i n g t h a t t h e B o a r d m a k e s i t s d e c i s i o n b a s e d o n t h e e v i d e n c e p r e s e n t e d b e f o r e i t . . . . I f w e ' r e g o i n g t o h a v e a f a i r h e a r i n g , i t h a s t o be s i m p l y o n t h e e v i d e n c e p l a c e d b e f o r e t h e B o a r d a t t h i s h e a r i n g . We w e r e n o t r e p r e s e n t e d b e f o r e , a n d we h a v e no i d e a w h a t d o c u m e n t s , e x c e p t t h e R o y a l C o m m i s s i o n R e p o r t t h a t y o u r e f e r r e d t o . . . s o o u r s u b m i s s i o n i s t h a t t h e B o a r d w i l l b e m a k i n g a d e c i s i o n o n l y o n t h e i n f o r m a t i o n p r e s e n t e d b e -f o r e i t . . . . ( P C A B 1 9 7 8 ) . 7 T h r o u g h o u t t h e h e a r i n g s , t h e a p p e l l a n t s r e f e r r e d t o t w o p r o b -l e m s c o n c e r n i n g t h e b a s i s o f t h e B o a r d ' s d e c i s i o n . T h e y w e r e c o n c e r n e d n o t o n l y w i t h t h e i r a s s u m p t i o n o f t h e b u r d e n o f p r o o f , b u t a l s o a b o u t t h e p r i o r k n o w l e d g e w h i c h t h e B o a r d 2 0 3 members might i n t roduce in t h e i r p roduc t i on of a d e c i s i o n . I t i s the p r a c t i c e of many t r i b u n a l s to p rov ide \" r e a s o n s \" i n accordance wi th the r u l e s of n a t u r a l j u s t i c e . The PCAB d id 8 not submit reasons fo r i t s d e c i s i o n u n t i l the 1981 case s tudy . P r i o r to 1981, d e c i s i o n s conce rn ing the appeal s t a t e d : \" tha t the Board i s (not) s a t i s f i e d that the a p p l i c a t i o n of the h e r b i -c ide w i l l not cause an unreasonable adverse e f f e c t r e s u l t i n g from the e x e r c i s e of the f o l l o w i n g p e r m i t s . . . \" ( S e e Appendix 1 .6) . A d d i t i o n a l c o n d i t i o n s were s p e c i f i e d s e p a r a t e l y . The lack of s t a t ed reasons g i ves the Board a d d i t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y . However, i t i s a problem fo r a p p e l l a n t s in tha t i t g i ves them no means of p r epa r i ng fo r another a p p e a l , wh ich , as we have seen i n t h i s c a s e , has been a f a c t of the ongoing appeal p r o c e s s . There i s thus no way of knowing what c r i t e r i a the Board used in e v a l u a t i n g an a p p e a l , and no way of knowing the extent of the onus which r e s t s on the a p p e l l a n t . T h i s i s not on l y c r i t i c a l f o r f u tu re a p p e l l a n t s , i t i s a l so of concern 9 i f the a p p e l l a n t i n i t i a t e s a j u d i c i a l review of the h e a r i n g . In summary, the PCAB conforms to the p l u r a l i s t model through i t s l o c a t i o n in a l a r g e r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e context in which there i s some d i v e r s i t y and ba lance among d e c i s i o n -makers. However, from a c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e , p r i o r c l o s e d d e c i s i o n s and s t r u c t u r a l a l l i a n c e s w i t h i n the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e framework i n d i c a t e the presence of b u r e a u c r a t i c a l l i a n c e s which c rea te an imbalance among compet i to r s and work to the d i s a d v a n -tage of the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t . 7.3 - Dec i s ion-Mak ing i n the C o n s u l t a t i v e T r i b u n a l : 204 The Royal Commission of I nqu i r y i n t o Uranium Min ing The dec i s ion-mak ing process of the RCUM d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i -c a n t l y from that of the PCAB, due to the i n v e s t i g a t i v e f u n c t i o n of the I n q u i r y , the number and scope of the h e a r i n g s , and the Morator ium and premature c a n c e l l a t i o n of the I n q u i r y . The Terms of Reference by which the Inqu i r y was convened (see p.78) were d i r e c t e d to the examinat ion of worker and p u b l i c hea l t h and s a f e t y i n the e x p l o r a t i o n , m in i ng , and m i l l i n g of uranium. They d i r e c t e d the gene ra l o r g a n i z a t i o n and o r i e n t a t i o n of the 10 hea r ings , r e q u i r i n g p u b l i c i n p u t , which was i n t e r p r e t e d by the Commissioners to i n d i c a t e p u b l i c h e a r i n g s . A l though they r e f l e c t a l a r g e l y d i s c r e t i o n a r y o r i e n t a t i o n to the Boa rd ' s p rocedu res , they have d e l i n e a t e d , in genera l p r i n c i p l e s , the i s sues to be addressed by the Commiss ion. These Terms of Reference were summarized by Dr . Bates at the i naugu ra l s e s s i o n of the Commiss ion: The gene ra l ques t i on be fore us i s the f u tu r e of the uranium mining i n d u s t r y in the p r o v i n c e . Our task i s to s tudy a l l of the i s sues in depth and cons ide r the views of the people a f f e c t e d , so that we can l ay be fore the government when our work i s comple ted , recommenda-t i o n s , gene ra l and s p e c i f i c , as to the c o n s t r a i n t s which shou ld be e x e r c i s e d (RCUM 1:4 ) . Some of the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t p a r t i c i p a n t s s t a t e d t h e i r p r e f e -rence fo r an expans ion of the mandate to s tudy other aspec ts of the nuc l ea r f u e l c y c l e . For i n s t a n c e , the Env i ronmenta l A l l i -ance A g a i n s t Uranium Min ing (EAAUM) s t a t ed in t h e i r Opening Statement to the I n q u i r y , \" I t i s our p o s i t i o n tha t uranium mining cannot be viewed ou t s i de the context of the e n t i r e nuc l ea r f u e l c y c l e \" (RCUM 1:89) . Another major p a r t i c i p a n t , 205 the Canadian C o a l i t i o n fo r Nuc lear R e s p o n s i b i l i t y , (CCNR), s t a t e d i n i t s Repor t : In our view the commiss ion ' s terms of r e fe rence as fo rmula ted by the p r o v i n c i a l government, prevented i t from add ress i ng the most important ques t i on on t h i s s u b -j e c t , i . e . , i s uranium mining in the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t ? The B.C. government, in charg ing the commission ' t o make recommendations fo r s e t t i n g and ma in t a i n i ng s tandards fo r worker and p u b l i c s a f e t y and fo r the p r o t e c t i o n of the environment as a r e s u l t of the e x p l o r a t i o n fo r the mining and m i l l i n g of uranium ores in our view c l e a r l y exposes i t s b i a s i n favor of uranium min ing . The terms of r e f e -rence c l e a r l y presuppose tha t uranium mining w i l l be a l lowed by the B.C. government to go ahead in t h i s p r o -v i n c e . The terms of r e fe rence do not a l l ow an in-depth c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the c o s t - b e n e f i t aspec ts of uranium m in i ng , n o r , i ndeed , meaningfu l e t h i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . At l e a s t not to the extent where such c o n s i d e r a t i o n s would permit the commission to recommend aga in s t uranium mining (CCNR 1980:3) . P a r t i c i p a n t s a l s o ques t ioned the independence of the Commission because of the Government 's d e c i s i o n to a l l ow e x p l o r a t i o n f o r uranium to con t inue du r i ng the I n q u i r y . Some requested a mora-to r ium on a l l a spec t s of uranium mining du r ing the I n q u i r y . A l though p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a n t s pe r ce i v ed an in terdependence of t r i b u n a l and government, and an a l l i a n c e among e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l and r e g u l a t o r y i n t e r e s t s , the RCUM none the less regarded i t s e l f as an independent and n e u t r a l agen t . In f a c t , the Government d id c a l l f o r a morator ium on a l l a spec t s of uranium m in ing . Bu t , i t d i d so i n Februa ry , 1980, j u s t over a year a f t e r the I nqu i r y was commiss ioned. In c o n -j u n c t i o n wi th t h i s Mora tor ium, the I nqu i r y was a l s o d i sbanded , a l though a Report was to be produced by the Commiss ion. The announcement of the Mora tor ium, and the a s s o c i a t e d t e rm ina t i on of the RCUM, occas ioned c o n s i d e r a b l e s p e c u l a t i o n concern ing the reasons f o r the Government 's d e c i s i o n . The Premier no t ed , \"The 206 f e a r s expressed by the people of t h i s p rov ince r e l a t i n g to uranium mining and the dangers i n vo l ved i n i t s e x p l o r a t i o n and mining are too r e a l to i g n o r e \" (EAAUM 1980) . The d e c i s i o n was p o p u l a r l y viewed as a v i c t o r y fo r p u b l i c i n t e r e s t g roups . The e f f e c t i v e n e s s of the t r i b u n a l as a v e h i c l e fo r p u b l i c p a r t i c i -p a t i o n , the respons i veness of government to the p ressu res of competing g roups , and the power of the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t as a compe t i t i v e f o r c e are thus r e i n f o r c e d , in c o n j u n c t i o n wi th the p l u r a l i s t model . The Morator ium and Te rmina t i on of the Inqu i ry Order- in-Counc i1 442, announcing the Morator ium on uranium mining and consequent t e r m i n a t i o n of the I n q u i r y , was approved and ordered by the Premier on February 17, 1980. At t h i s t ime , Dr . Bates was t r a v e l l i n g in A u s t r a l i a , on a mining o b s e r v a t i o n t o u r , and the major p a r t i c i p a n t s were i n vo l v ed in p r e p a r a t i o n fo r the next s e s s i o n of the h e a r i n g s . The announcement came as a shock to most p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the I n q u i r y . I t a l s o p r e c i p i -t a t ed a number of arguments regard ing the c l o s u r e of the Com-m i s s i on and i t s w r i t i n g of a Repor t . The t e r m i n a t i o n of the Commission was coupled w i th the Government 's announcement of a Morator ium on uranium mining a c t i v i t y . The Government requested the submiss ion of the Com-m i s s i o n ' s recommendations on or be fore May 31. However, the Commissioners f e l t an extended pe r i od was necessary in order to produce a \" m e a n i n g f u l \" r epor t (RCUM 1 9 8 1 : v i - x i i ) . Meet ings and communicat ions between Government and the Commissioners were r equ i r ed be fo re a mutua l l y a ccep tab l e dead l i ne was agreed upon. The I nqu i r y cont inued to r e ce i ve w r i t t e n submiss ions u n t i l 207 A p r i l 15. Major p a r t i c i p a n t s were requested to submit t h e i r r e p o r t s by May 1, and the Commission was d i r e c t e d to submit i t s Report and Recommendations by October 30, 1980. A l though the Commiss ion 's fund ing was extended u n t i l i t s o f f i c i a l c l o s u r e , that of major p a r t i c i p a n t s exp i r ed as of March 31, a p r e v i ous d e a d l i n e . Thus , as some major p a r t i c i p a n t s no t ed , they were not o f f i c i a l l y funded through the Commission so as to be in a p o s i t i o n to produce t h e i r Reports to the Commission ( B r i t i s h Columbia Con fe r ence , Un i ted Church of Canada 1980:28) . At the time of the t e rm ina t i on of the Inqu i r y on l y Phases I through VII (see pp. 122-123) had been hea rd , and much of t h i s ev idence was i n comp le t e , schedu led fo r cont inued input at f u r t h e r d a t e s . The remain ing Phases, on S o c i a l Impact, E t h i c a l Q u e s t i o n s , and J u r i s d i c t i o n , Regu l a t i ons and Enforcement , do not s imp ly r e f l e c t m iss ing or incomplete ev idence tha t the Commission and major p a r t i c i p a n t s were unable to hea r . They a l so r ep resen t a body of knowledge which p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a n t s f e l t would p resen t a case i n t h e i r i n t e r e s t s , aga in s t uranium m in ing , and an area i n which p u b l i c groups had c a l l e d the ma jo r i t y of t h e i r exper t w i t n e s s e s . Thus , the t e rm ina t i on of the hea r ings at t h i s po in t i n the schedule s i g n i f i e d the e l i m i -n a t i o n , or undermin ing , of the ma jo r i t y of the p u b l i c ' s \" c a s e \" . As the CCNR noted i n a Press Re lease f o l l o w i n g the announcement of the Mora tor ium: The case a g a i n s t Uranium Min ing tha t p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups have been p r e p a r i n g to p resen t before the Bates Commission has been e f f e c t i v e l y censored by t h i s m o v e . . . . We have gone through a l l of the t e c h n i c a l aspec ts so tha t the e t h i c s of supp l y i ng Uranium cou ld be a i r e d . The t e c h n i c a l data i s in but the s o c i a l , env i ronmen ta l , and 208 e t h i c a l concerns of the people of t h i s p rov ince have not been adequate l y heard or understood by Government (1980). The SOEC in i t s r e p l y to the morator ium n o t i c e a l s o notes the imbalance caused by the premature c a n c e l l a t i o n of the I nqu i r y : Whatever incomplete repor t emerges from the h a l f -f i n i s h e d Uranium Min ing I nqu i r y , i t must c l e a r l y acknow-ledge the f a c t tha t a very h igh percentage of the exper t ev idence p resented so f a r has come from sources connected wi th or f a vourab l e to the nuc l ea r i n d u s t r i e s . Major tes t imony has not yet been heard on the s o c i a l , e n v i r o n -menta l , and p u b l i c and worker h e a l t h hazards of uranium p r o d u c t i o n ; the e t h i c a l q u e s t i o n s ; or the d i f f i c u l t p r o b -lems wi th j u r i s d i c t i o n , r e g u l a t i o n and enforcement of r e g u l a t i o n s . . . ( S O E C 1980) . Some p a r t i c i p a n t s f e l t that the Morator ium was to be g r e e t e d , but that i t need not and shou ld not h e r a l d the c l o s u r e of the I n q u i r y . BCCUCC: In view of repeated charges tha t the c r e d i -b i l i t y of the Inqu i r y was being undermined by con t inued e x p l o r a t i o n fo r uranium once a morator ium had been d e -c l a r e d , why d id the Commissioners cons ide r i t i n a p p r o -p r i a t e to conduct f u r t h e r p u b l i c hea r ings (1980:27-28) . BCMA: Whi le we were p leased by the note of c a u t i o n sounded (by the Government 's announcement of the Mora to -r ium and t e r m i n a t i o n of the Commission) we are d i s t u r b e d by the d i s con t i nuance of the Bates C o m m i s s i o n . . . t h e B .C .M.A. f e e l s s t r o n g l y tha t the Bates Commission shou ld not have been so summari ly d i s c o n t i n u e d a f t e r such an e x c e l l e n t s t a r t . . . ( 1 9 8 0 : 1-2 ). Some p a r t i c i p a n t s f e l t that the Commission shou ld not p r e -pare and submit a Report and Recommendations at a l l , g i ven the c a n c e l l a t i o n of the hea r i ngs and the incomplete s t o r e of i n f o r -mation tha t was p roduced . The Morator ium and t e r m i n a t i o n of the hea r ings were seen to a f f e c t the Commiss ion 's a b i l i t y to p r o -duce recommendations in tha t on l y c e r t a i n phases had been comple ted , and tha t c ross-examina t ion on m a t e r i a l submit ted a f t e r the c e s s a t i o n of the hea r ings would not be p o s s i b l e . The t e r m i n a t i o n a l s o meant tha t the second-round community hea r ings 209 would not take p l a c e . P a r t i c i p a n t s adv i sed a g a i n s t the Commis-s i o n ' s a b i l i t y , t h e r e f o r e , to produce a complete r e p o r t . The f o l l o w i n g exce rp t s from l e t t e r s and statements of major p a r t i -c i p a n t s i l l u s t r a t e these i s s u e s : BCCUCC: We are conv inced that the work of the I n q u i -ry shou ld not be f i n a l i z e d at t h i s t ime , when l e s s than h a l f the t e c h n i c a l ev idence tha t was in tended to be heard has been presented and sub jec ted to c ro s s examina-t i o n . . . . (1980:26) . EAAUM: The A l l i a n c e contends tha t the f i n a l r epor t of the Commission cannot c o n t a i n f i n d i n g s s i n ce a l l of the ev idence has not been hea rd . The r epor t can on l y be a summary of ev idence heard to da t e . As such , of c o u r s e , i t w i l l be a u s e f u l , a l though l i m i t e d document (1980:1 ) . JCUTC/SOEC: The SOEC and the J o i n t Committee s t r o n g l y oppose any attempt by the Bates Commission on Uranium Min ing to p a r t i a l l y complete i t s research and produce a r e p o r t . Such an a c t i o n would subver t the i n q u i r y p rocess and produce second ra te work which i s l i k e l y to be adopted as a s tandard fo r uranium mining around the w o r l d . . . The C o a l i t i o n and the J o i n t Committee f e e l tha t the Commission shou ld produce on l y a d e s c r i p -t i v e r epor t cove r i ng the few areas which have been f u l l y e x a m i n e d . . . (1980). The l ack of p a r t i c i p a n t s ' o p p o r t u n i t y to cross-examine ev idence s t i l l fo r thcoming was seen as a c r i t i c a l f a c t o r in the Commi-s s i o n ' s a b i l i t y to fo rmula te a Report on t h i s e v i dence . As p a r t i c i p a n t s s t a t e d : BCCUCC : . . . . Undoub ted l y a l l f a c e t s of any uranium development would be impacted by economics , s o c i a l , e n v i -ronmental and h e a l t h conce rns . However, much of t h i s ev idence has not been r e ce i v ed and tha t which was i n p r e p a r a t i o n and r e c e i v e d . . . i s not be ing sub jec ted to c ross-examina t i on or c r i t i c a l review by a l l Major P a r t i -c i p a n t s . T h e r e f o r e , we f a i l to understand how any k ind of mean ingfu l r epo r t can or shou ld be a t t e m p t e d . . . ( 1 9 8 0 : 2 9 ) . WCELA: The WCELA b e l i e v e s that ' e v i d e n c e ' p resented a f t e r the t e r m i n a t i o n of the h e a r i n g s , hav ing not been p u b l i c l y eva lua ted and t e s t ed through open c ross-examina -t i o n and d i s c u s s i o n , w i l l not be as u s e f u l to the RCIUM in i t s recommendatory f u n c t i o n . . . ( 1 9 8 0 : 1 9 ) . 210 P a r t i c i p a n t s accused the I nqu i r y of n e g l e c t i n g the e t h i c a l i s sues a s s o c i a t e d wi th uranium m in ing , thereby adding to the imbalance r e s u l t i n g from the e a r l y t e r m i n a t i o n . CCNR: We are deep ly concerned tha t the e t h i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , which in our view supersede a l l o ther c o n s i d e r a t i o n s in terms of impor tance , have r e ce i v ed on l y marg ina l a t t e n t i o n du r ing the i n q u i r y p r o c e s s . We are fur thermore d i s t u r b e d by i n d i c a t i o n s that the e t h i c a l a spec t s of mining and uses of uranium w i l l p l ay a very minor r o l e ( i f any r o l e at a l l ) in the f o r m u l a t i o n of the commiss ion ' s f i n a l r e p o r t . . . . I t i s a l a r m i n g l y c l e a r that the i n q u i r y commiss ioners seek answers in the realm of s c i ence r a the r than e t h i c s . Of n e a r l y 10 months of t e c h n i c a l hea r ings on l y four days have been set a s ide to cons ide r the e t h i c a l aspec ts of uranium m i n i n g . . . (1980:15) . Thus , these c o n c e r n s — t h a t the Report r epresented incom-p l e t e d tes t imony w i th regard to the complete and o r i g i n a l i n t e n t i o n of the I n q u i r y , the p ro-nuc l ea r b i a s which the domi -nance of completed tes t imony would b r i ng to bea r , and the lack of c ross-examina t i on on ev idence brought to the Commission a f t e r the hea r i ngs had been t e rm ina t ed—are a l l i s sues which p a r t i c i p a n t s f e l t would impinge on the a b i l i t y of the Commis-s i on to produce n e u t r a l recommendations. The correspondence of the t r i b u n a l to the p l u r a l i s t model of a n e u t r a l d e c i s i o n -making p rocess i s thus cha l l enged by the premature t e r m i n a t i o n of the RCUM. A l though t h i s t e rm ina t i on was p o p u l a r l y i n t e r -p re ted as suppo r t i ng the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t , the dec i s ion-mak ing process was viewed by c r i t i c s to favour i n d u s t r y . None the l e s s , the s t a t u t o r y s e p a r a t i o n of the t r i b u n a l from government, and the formal d i v e r s i t y of i n f o rma t i on and i n t e r e s t s brought be -fo re the Commission uphold the p l u r a l i s t model . 7.4 - S e l e c t i o n and Compos i t ion of the Board/Commission The P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Appea l Board 211 T h e b a s i s o f s e l e c t i o n f o r B o a r d m e m b e r s i s n o t a r t i c u -l a t e d b y s t a t u t e . A c c o r d i n g t o a p l u r a l i s t p e r s p e c t i v e B o a r d m e m b e r s a r e i m p a r t i a l i n t h a t t h e y a r e n o t d i r e c t l y c o n n e c t e d t o o r a f f i l i a t e d w i t h t h e s p e c i f i c i s s u e s t h e y w i l l b e e x a m i -n i n g . H o w e v e r , t h e y may h a v e s o m e g e n e r a l e x p e r i e n c e i n o r k n o w l e d g e o f t h o s e a r e a s w h i c h w o u l d i n c r e a s e t h e i r c o m p e t e n c e i n m a k i n g d e c i s i o n s . Some d i v e r s i t y o f e x p e r t i s e a m o n g B o a r d m e m b e r s i s a l s o e x p e c t e d . T h e R o y a l C o m m i s s i o n o f I n q u i r y i n t o t h e U s e o f P e s t i c i d e s a n d H e r b i c i d e s r e c o m m e n d e d t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t a n d c o m p o s i t i o n o f t h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A p p e a l B o a r d . I t w a s e n v i s a g e d p r i m a r i l y a s a b o a r d h a v i n g t h e \" c a p a b i l i t y t o h e a r a n d a s s e s s t h e m e r i t o f t e c h n i c a l a r g u m e n t s b r o u g h t b e f o r e i t \" ( R C I U P H 1 9 7 5 1 : 2 6 8 ) . T h e R o y a l C o m m i s s i o n h a d s u g g e s t e d t h e f o l l o w i n g c o m p o s i t i o n o f t h e B o a r d : a p r i v a t e c i t i z e n i n t e r e s t e d i n e n v i r o n m e n t a l m a t -t e r s , a f a r m e r o r r a n c h e r , a p h y s i c i a n , a l a w y e r , a f o r e s t e r , a n e n g i n e e r , a b i o l o g i s t , a n i n d i v i d u a l w i t h e x p e r t i s e i n t h e p e s t i c i d e i n d u s t r y , a f o o d s c i e n t i s t , a w e e d s c i e n t i s t o r a p l a n t p a t h o l o g i s t , a n a g r o l o g i s t o r a v e t e r i n a r i a n , a n d a n e n t o m o l o g i s t ( R C I U P H 1 9 7 5 ) . D r . M a c k e n z i e , o n e o f t h e C o m m i s -s i o n e r s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r w r i t i n g t h i s R e p o r t , s a y s , \"We s a w i t a s a m i x e d B o a r d , w i t h b o t h e x p e r t s a n d l a y m e m b e r s \" ( 1 9 8 3 ) . H o w e v e r , o t h e r o b s e r v e r s h a v e c o m m e n t e d t h a t , \" T h e b o a r d ' s c o m p o s i t i o n i s c l e a r l y t e c h n i c a l a n d d o e s n o t i n c l u d e a l a w y e r o r e n v i r o n m e n t a l i s t , b o t h o f w h i c h w e r e r e c o m m e n d e d b y t h e R o y a l C o m m i s s i o n \" ( T . R o b e r t s 1 9 8 1 : 3 7 ) . T h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A p p e a l B o a r d w a s a p p o i n t e d b y t h e 2 1 2 p r o v i n c i a l c a b i n e t i n M a r c h , 1 9 7 8 , i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t h e a p p r o v a l o f t h e P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A c t . T h e B o a r d w a s i n i t i a l l y c o m p o s e d o f s e v e n m e m b e r s , b u t i n 1 9 8 0 w a s e x p a n d e d t o n i n e . T h e f o l l o w i n g e x c e r p t f r o m a N e w s R e l e a s e o f J a n u a r y 4 , 1 9 8 0 a n n o u n c i n g t h i s a p p o i n t m e n t r e v i e w s t h e \" c r e d e n t i a l s \" o f B o a r d m e m b e r s : A new a n d e x p a n d e d P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A p p e a l B o a r d f o r B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a h a s b e e n a n n o u n c e d b y t h e H o n o u r a b l e S t e p h e n R o g e r s , M i n i s t e r o f E n v i r o n m e n t . A p p o i n t e d f o r a t w o - y e a r p e r i o d , J a n u a r y 1 , 1 9 8 0 t o D e c e m b e r 3 1 , 1 9 8 1 a r e : D r . F r a n c i s M u r r a y , C h a i r m a n , P h . D . , P . E n g , P r o f e s s o r , D e p t . o f C h e m i c a l E n g i n e e r i n g , U n i v e r s i t y o f B . C . ( f o r m e r v i c e - c h a i r m a n o f t h e B o a r d ) D r . W i l l i a m G o d o l p h i n , P h . D . , P r o f e s s o r , D e p t . o f P a t h o l o g y , U n i v e r s i t y o f B . C . , a n d D i r e c t o r o f R e s e a r c h a n d D e v e l o p m e n t , V a n c o u v e r G e n e r a l H o s p i t a l . ( f o r m e r b o a r d m e m b e r ) M r . J a m e s E . H a r r i s , D i r e c t o r o f t h e B . C . F e d e r a t i o n o f A g r i c u l t u r e , a n d S e c r e t a r y , F r a s e r V a l l e y P e a G r o w e r s ' A s s o c i a t i o n . He i s a D e l t a v e g e t a b l e g r o w e r . ( f o r m e r b o a r d m e m b e r ) M r . R o b e r t G . H o l t b y , B . A g . S c i e n c e s , M . S c , a c o n s u l -t i n g a g r o l o g i s t f r o m P r i n c e G e o r g e , (new b o a r d m e m b e r ) M r . E . E . ( T e d ) J e f f r e y s , P r e s i d e n t o f C a s c a d e C h e m i c a l C o m m o d i t i e s , L t d . o f V a n c o u v e r . H i s e x p e r t i s e i s e x t e n -s i v e i n t h e i n d u s t r i a l a n d a g r i c u l t u r a l c h e m i c a l f i e l d s r e l a t e d t o p a i n t s , p l a s t i c s a n d p u l p a n d p a p e r i n d u s -t r i e s . M r . J e f f r e y ' s c o m p a n y n e i t h e r m a n u f a c t u r e s o r d i s t r i b u t e s p e s t i c i d e s , (new b o a r d m e m b e r ) M r . V a l t e r R a u d s e p p , f o r m e r c h a i r m a n o f t h e B o a r d a n d r e t i r e d D e p u t y M i n i s t e r o f W a t e r R e s o u r c e s f o r B . C . D r . N i c h o l a s S c h m i t t , M . D . , a n e n v i r o n m e n t a l h e a l t h c o n s u l t a n t a n d c h i e f i n s t r u c t o r , D e p t . o f H e a l t h C a r e a n d E p i d e m i o l o g y , U n i v e r s i t y o f B . C . ( f o r m e r b o a r d m e m b e r ) D r . D a l e A l s a g e r , M . S c , Z o o l o g y . He i s o w n e r - o p e r a -t o r o f t h e G a n g R a n c h i n t h e C a r i b o o a n d h a s s e v e r a l y e a r s ' e x p e r i e n c e w i t h t h e p e s t i c i d e c o n t r o l b r a n c h w i t h t h e g o v e r n m e n t o f A l b e r t a ( new b o a r d m e m b e r ) . ( B . C . M i n i -s t r y o f E n v i r o n m e n t 1 9 8 0 ) . 1 1 T h e P r e s s R e l e a s e a l s o s t a t e d : 2 1 3 The appointment of new members . . . a long w i t h . . . t h e former b o a r d . . . g i v e s the appea l body an e x c e l l e n t ba lance of academic e x p e r t i s e , p r a c t i c a l bus iness and landuse e x p e r i e n c e , and more ex tens i ve knowledge of B r i t i s h C o l -umbia 's v a r i o u s r e g i o n a l needs (B.C. M i n i s t r y of E n v i r o n -ment 1980). The PCAB pu rpo r t s to represent a d i v e r s i t y of o c c u p a t i o n -a l t r a i n i n g and exper ience rega rd ing p e s t i c i d e use . The l ack of d i r e c t a f f i l i a t i o n between Board members and p e s t i c i d e p r o -d u c t i o n i n f e r s i m p a r t i a l i t y . Of ten board members reviewed above, four are UBC p r o f e s s o r s , three have a g r i c u l t u r a l o c c u p a -t i o n s , one i s a ca ree r c i v i l s e r v a n t , one a f o r e s t e r , and one , p r e s i d e n t of a chemica l company. The number of Board members, d i v e r s i t y of o c c u p a t i o n a l backgrounds, and p r o f e s s i o n a l / t e c h n i -c a l exper i ence c o n t r i b u t e to the p l u r a l i s t c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of the t r i b u n a l . However, a c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e would cha l l enge the p l u r a -l i s t v e r s i o n as e l i t i s t and b i a s e d . Members of the a p p e l l a n t o r g a n i z a t i o n s have charged tha t the Board i s composed s o l e l y of e x p e r t s , that \" the re are no l a y people on the Board\" (Warnock 1981 : I n t e r v i ew ) . They have s t a t e d that lay r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i s r equ i r ed i n the dec i s ion-mak ing p r o c e s s , e x p e c i a l l y in areas of r i s k assessment . The a p p e l l a n t c la imed tha t the Board g e n e r a l -l y r ep resen ted a t e c h n i c a l o r i e n t a t i o n , r a the r than a genuine p l u r a l i t y of i n t e r e s t s . A g r i c u l t u r a l and academic q u a l i f i -c a t i o n s together account fo r rough ly 70% of the Boa rd ' s member-s h i p . Moreover , members are seen to represen t p r o f e s s i o n a l and manager ia l i n t e r e s t s , r a the r than those of l a b o u r . A l though the Board was viewed as r e p r e s e n t i n g some occupa -t i o n a l and geograph ic d i v e r s i t y , c e r t a i n i n t e r e s t s were per-214 ce i ved as hav ing been den ied r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . The most obv ious i s a d i v i s i o n by gender : there were no women on the board . Warnock notes that t h i s i s c r i t i c a l g i ven the p o t e n t i a l adverse e f f e c t s of p e s t i c i d e s on women, due to t h e i r r ep roduc t i v e c a p a b i l i t i e s . He a l s o notes tha t t rade unions are not r e p r e s e n -ted by the Board , a l t h o u g h , \" f o r e s t r y workers are h e a v i l y exposed to p e s t i c i d e s , and t h e i r t rade unions have a major concern about workers ' h e a l t h and s a f e t y \" (1981: I n t e r v i ew ) . A l though the Board does not purpor t to represen t a l l i n t e r e s t s , 12 p u b l i c i n t e r e s t s a f f e c t e d by h e r b i c i d e , such as na t i v e and env i ronmenta l i n t e r e s t s , l ack r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . Thus , a l though the Board pu rpo r t s to represen t a d i v e r s i t y of i n t e r e s t s , the e x c l u s i o n of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t s and the p re f e r ence fo r p r o f e s s i o -na l and l a r g e l y t e c h n i c a l o c c u p a t i o n a l c r e d e n t i a l s c h a r a c t e r -i z e s i t s c o m p o s i t i o n . C r i t i c i s m has a l so been d i r e c t e d to the i m p a r t i a l i t y of the Board , and members of the SOEC have suggested tha t an i n s t i t u t i o n a l p ro-chemica l b i a s e x i s t s : . . . . T h e p resen t Board was recommended by the M i n i s t e r of the Environment and i n c l u d e s s e v e r a l members whose d i s c i -p l i n e s or o r g a n i z a t i o n s i m p l i c i t l y or e x p l i c i t l y endorse the widespread use of a g r i c u l t u r a l c h e m i c a l s . The a r g u -ment has o f t e n been made that these people have a grea t dea l of e x p e r t i s e i n the f i e l d and are t h e r e f o r e best q u a l i f i e d to make these d e c i s i o n s . No doubt foxes know a l o t about c h i c k e n s , but we d o n ' t s t a t i o n them in our hen houses fo r s e c u r i t y \" (Warnock and Lewis 1982 :37 ) . The a p p e l l a n t s have po in t ed to c e r t a i n a l l i a n c e s among Board members and the p e s t i c i d e i n d u s t r y . They suggest that commercial a g r i c u l t u r a l i n t e r e s t s have supported p e s t i c i d e use . S p e c i f i c b i as has been a t t r i b u t e d to the chemica l company 215 p r e s i d e n t who i s a B o a r d m e m b e r . I n a d d i t i o n , W a r n o c k n o t e s t h a t : . . . . o n e o f t h e m e d i c a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o n t h e B o a r d h a s w r i t t e n a n a r t i c l e s a y i n g 2 , 4 - D a n d o t h e r p e s t i c i d e s d o n o t c a u s e p r o b l e m s t o h u m a n s a t l o w l e v e l s , a n d c o n t r a r y t o e s t a b l i s h e d m e d i c a l a n d s c i e n t i f i c p o s i t i o n s , a r g u e s t h a t t h e r e i s a t h r e s h o l d l e v e l f o r a l l p e s t i c i d e s , i n c l u d i n g c a r c i n o g e n s . T h a t i s a s t r o n g b i a s \" ( 1 9 8 1 ) . M e m b e r s o f t h e SOEC h a v e s t a t e d t h a t a n i n s t i t u t i o n a l , p r o -p e s t i c i d e b i a s h a s s u r f a c e d i n t h e i r c r o s s - d e x a m i n a t i o n b y t h e B o a r d , w i t h B o a r d m e m b e r s s u b m i t t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n t o t h e d e t r i -m e n t o f t h e i r c a s e ( L e w i s 1 9 8 1 : I n t e r v i e w ; W a r n o c k 1 9 8 1 I n t e r -v i e w ) . P l u r a l i s t t h e o r y w o u l d r e s p o n d t o t h e s e c h a r g e s i n a n u m b e r o f w a y s . T o t h e \" e l i t i s t \" c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n o f t h e B o a r d , t h e p l u r a l i s t p o s i t i o n w o u l d r e c o g n i z e t h e n e c e s s i t y f o r c o m p e t e n c e a n d e x p e r i e n c e n e c e s s a r y t o a d d r e s s t h e i s s u e s . T h e d i v e r s i t y o f m e m b e r s h i p m i t i g a t e s a g a i n s t a n y u n i l a t e r a l d e c i s i o n a n d e n s u r e s c o m p r o m i s e . H o w e v e r , a c r i t i c a l p a r t i c i -p a t o r y p e r s p e c t i v e q u e s t i o n s t h e d i v e r s i t y o f t r i b u n a l c o m p o s i -t i o n , p o i n t i n g t o t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l , t e c h n i c a l , a n d m a n a g e r i a l b a c k g r o u n d s o f B o a r d m e m b e r s a s p o s i t i o n s j o i n t l y u p h o l d i n g t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l a n d a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t a t u s q u o . I m p a r t i a l i t y i s a l s o s u s p e c t , d u e t o t h e n a t u r e o f m e m b e r s ' i n v o l v e m e n t i n a n d e x p e r i e n c e w i t h p e s t i c i d e i s s u e s . T h e R o y a l C o m m i s s i o n o f I n q u i r y i n t o U r a n i u m M i n i n g T h e p r o v i n c i a l g o v e r n m e n t a n n o u n c e d i n S e p t e m b e r , 1 9 7 8 t h a t t h e r e w o u l d b e a n i n q u i r y i n t o u r a n i u m m i n i n g / m i l l i n g i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . T h e n o n J a n u a r y 1 8 , 1 9 7 9 , i t w a s a n n o u n c e d b y O r d e r i n C o u n c i l N u m b e r 1 7 0 - 7 9 t h a t t h r e e C o m m i s s i o n e r s h a d 2 1 6 been appo in ted to i n q u i r e i n t o : \" the adequacy of e x i s t i n g measures to p rov ide p r o t e c t i o n i n a l l aspec ts of uranium mining in B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . \" The Commissioners and t h e i r c r e d e n t i a l s were p u b l i c i z e d as f o l l o w s : (1) Dr . Dav id V. Bates (cha i rman) , p r o f e s s o r of med i -c ine and p h y s i o l o g y and a s s o c i a t e member of the De-partment of Hea l th Care and Ep idemio logy , F a c u l t y of M e d i c i n e , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia (UBC) wi th a c o n s i d e r a b l e knowledge of occupa t ion and env i ronmenta l h e a l t h h a z a r d s ; (2) Dr . James W. Murray , p r o f e s s o r , Department of Geo-l o g i c a l S c i e n c e s , F a c u l t y of G e o l o g i c a l S c i e n c e , UBC; (3) Mr. V a l t e r Raudsepp, P. E n g . , C i v i l Eng inee r , f o r -mer Deputy M i n i s t e r in the B r i t i s h Columbia Department of Lands, F o r e s t s and Water Resources , and former chairman of the P o l l u t i o n C o n t r o l Board and the P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Appeal Board (PCAB) in B r i t i s h Co lumbia , w i th a thorough knowledge of water resources and h y d r a u l i c eng inee r i ng (RCUM Uranium Inqu i ry D iges t 10 ) . There was no formal p r o v i s i o n fo r p u b l i c input r ega rd ing the terms of r e f e r e n c e , or the s e l e c t i o n of Commissioners and procedures of the t r i b u n a l . Some p u b l i c groups had presented the government wi th recommendations fo r the fu tu re i n q u i r y , but there was no means to a s c e r t a i n i f and how t h i s was u t i l i z e d . Dur ing the three-month i n t e r v a l (between the p r e l i m i -nary and o f f i c i a l announcements) a number of groups throughout the p rov ince met and prepared a p o s i t i o n paper r ega rd ing s e l e c t i o n of Commiss ioners , terms of r e fe rence and suggested procedures fo r the I n q u i r y , e t c . Acco rd ing to i n f o rma t i on p rov ided to u s , there were numerous unsuc -c e s s f u l e f f o r t s , by v a r i ous groups which had endorsed the p o s i t i o n pape r , to meet wi th the M i n i s t e r of Energy , M ines , and Petroleum Resources . E v e n t u a l l y a meeting was a r r anged , but not u n t i l a f t e r the Commissioners had been named and the terms of r e f e -rence e n s h r i n e d . . . . W e had not had any pa r t in p r e p a r i n g the p o s i t i o n paper , but were i n v i t e d to be pa r t of the d e l e g a t i o n . S u r p r i s i n g l y , there were s t i l l hope fu l peo -p l e , w i l l i n g to take the time and pay the cos t s of t r a -v e l l i n g to V i c t o r i a fo r a p r e d i c t a b l y f r u i t l e s s meeting wi th the M i n i s t e r of the Env i r onmen t . . . and the M i n i s t r y of Energy , M ines , and Petro leum Resources (BCCUCC 217 1980 :32 ) . Of the three Commissioners appo in ted to the Commiss ion, two were UBC p r o f e s s o r s and the t h i r d , Mr. Raudsepp had exper i ence as an eng ineer and as t r i b u n a l cha i rman. Dr . Bates was p resented as e s p e c i a l l y q u a l i f i e d , as the Fact Sheet of the RCUM i n d i c a t e s : D r . Ba t es , former Dean of the F a c u l t y of Med ic ine at U . B . C . , i s h i g h l y q u a l i f i e d in the f i e l d of o c c u p a t i o n a l and env i ronmenta l hea l t h and was the Chairman and author of the r e c e n t l y pub l i shed r epor t of the Sc ience C o u n c i l on ' P o l i t i c s and Po i sons ' i n the environment and the working p l ace (RCUM 1979). The s e l e c t i o n of Commissioners wi th t e c h n i c a l and p r o f e s s i o n a l backgrounds was t r e a t ed as app rop r i a t e to the sub jec t matter of the h e a r i n g s , which had been c h a r a c t e r i z e d as h i g h l y t e c h n i c a l . Dr . Ba tes ' worker and env i ronmenta l hea l t h knowledge, Dr . Mur-r a y ' s g e o l o g i c a l e x p e r t i s e , and Mr. Raudsepp 's t e c h n i c a l and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e exper i ence p resented them as w e l l - q u a l i f i e d to review the i s sues of uranium m in ing . A l though the p l u r a l i s t model would support the cho i ce of these three Commissioners as r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of a range of e x p e r t i s e , some p a r t i c i p a n t s were c r i t i c a l . The CCNR s t a t ed in i t s F i n a l Repor t : The B.C. Government 's narrow p e r s p e c t i v e i s f u r t h e r i n d i c a t e d by i t s cho i ce of commiss ioners . I t i s our view tha t i t i s not in the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t to l i m i t the cho i ce of commiss ioners to people whose t r a i n i n g and exper i ence l i e p r i m a r i l y in the f i e l d of s c i e n c e ; nor do we see any j u s t i f i c a t i o n fo r l i m i t i n g the cho i ce of commiss ioners to men on l y (CCNR 1980 :3 ) . Some p a r t i c i p a n t s f e l t that the compos i t ion r e f l e c t e d a s c i e n -t i f i c and t e c h n i c a l b i a s which was r e f l e c t e d i n the p roceed ings and i n i t s recommendations: 218 . . . .we are not s u r p r i s e d tha t the hea r ings have been s t r u c t u r e d so l o p s i d e d l y in favor of s c i e n t i f i c d a t a . A f t e r a l l , the commission i s made up of a p h y s i o l o g i s t , a g e o l o g i s t and an eng inee r . As the Kelowna Conference p o s i t i o n p a p e r . . . p o i n t s o u t , the i s sues in uranium mining go f a r beyond the realm of s c i ence and shou ld t h e r e f o r e have been addressed by a commission not made up e x c l u -s i v e l y of people t r a i n e d in s c i ence (CCNR 1980 :15 ) . In rev iewing the r o l e of the Commission i n the RCUM, s e v e r a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the dec i s ion-mak ing process emerge. The d i s c r e t i o n a r y power of the Commission and the i n v e s t i g a t i v e nature of the i n q u i r y have produced ex t ens i v e dec i s ion-mak ing powers on the pa r t of the Board . The b a s i s fo r the s e l e c t i o n of Commissioners i s not a r t i c u l a t e d , a l though i t i s p resented as p r e d i c a t e d on the c r i t e r i a of s c i e n t i f i c and t e c h n i c a l o c c u p a -t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e . In accordance wi th the p l u r a l i s t model , t h i s e x p e r t i s e i s app rop r i a t e fo r the assessment of t e c h n i c a l i s sues such as uranium m in ing . Fu r the rmore , i n t e r v e n o r s are exc luded from the a c t u a l dec i s ion-mak ing p r a c t i c e , and there i s no means to assess t h e i r f o r ce i n the p r o c e s s . 7.5-The N e u t r a l i t y of the Dec i s ion-Mak ing Process A p l u r a l i s t model of the dec i s ion-mak ing process i n the p u b l i c hea r ing emphasizes c e r t a i n f ea tu res c o n t r i b u t i n g to the n e u t r a l i t y of t h i s p r o c e s s . The independence of t r i b u n a l s from government, the i m p a r t i a l i t y of and d i v e r s i t y among Board/-Commission members, and the ba lanced i n p u t , from m u l t i p l e ( i n -c l u d i n g p u b l i c ) p a r t i c i p a n t s , are pr imary t ene ts of t h i s model . In rev iew ing the case s t u d i e s , I have found tha t the data support these f e a tu r e s to some e x t e n t . The dec i s ion-mak ing process i s f i r s t de f i ned by i t s s t a t u -to r y p r o v i s i o n s and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o n t e x t . T r i b u n a l s are re-219 garded by the p l u r a l i s t model to be r e l a t i v e l y independent from other agencies of government. The s t r u c t u r e of decision-making has important r a m i f i c a t i o n s f o r the n e u t r a l i t y of the process. The a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t r i b u n a l does not e x i s t i n i s o l a t i o n , e i t h e r o r g a n i z a t i o n a l l y (within the M i n i s t r y of the Environment), or s u b s t a n t i v e l y , from previous d e c i s i o n s . F e d e r a l l e g i s l a t i v e precedents, recommendations of c o n s u l t a t i v e i n q u i r i e s , and the advice of i t s own P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Committee provide d e c i s i o n s regarding p e s t i c i d e use which are a b a s i s f o r the c u r r e n t d e l i b e r a t i o n s of the committee. P l u r a l i s t theory assumes an independence between these separate l e v e l s and agents of d e c i -sion-making which i s provided by t h e i r formal d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n . The l o c a t i o n of the appeal process w i t h i n t h i s more extensive r e g u l a t o r y context c o n t r i b u t e s to i t s c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n as ba-lanced. As f o r the c o n s u l t a t i v e t r i b u n a l , a d i f f e r e n t set of s t r u c t u r a l and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c r i t e r i a e x i s t . The Royal Commis-s i o n of I n q u i r y i s f o r m a l l y and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l y l o c a t e d i n , and r e s p o n s i b l e to the M i n i s t r i e s of Health and Energy, Mines, and Petroleum Resources. However, u n l i k e the PCAB, the ad hoc and temporary b a s i s of the RCUM and i t s i n t e r d e p a r t m e n t a l a c c o u n t a b i l i t y d i f f u s e i t s b u r e a u r a t i c base and provide i t with g r e a t e r autonomy, thus suggesting i t s g r e a t e r conformity to the p l u r a l i s t model. The p l u r a l i s t model a l s o assumes the appointment of an i m p a r t i a l Board/Commission which has r e l e v a n t e x p e r t i s e and r e f l e c t s a h e t e r o g e n e i t y of p e r s p e c t i v e s . In the t r i b u n a l s s t u d i e d , Board and Commission members r e f l e c t e d a d i v e r s i t y of t e c h n i c a l and o c c u p a t i o n a l e x p e r t i s e . 220 In accordance wi th the p l u r a l i s t model , s c i e n t i f i c d e c i -s ion-making p rocesses have been expanded to i n c o r p o r a t e p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n . None the l e s s , the p u b l i c , as one of many p a r t i c i -pa t i ng i n t e r e s t s , i s understood to be r e s t r i c t e d from p a r t i c i -p a t i o n i n the p roduc t i on of the f i n a l d e c i s i o n s . The p u b l i c p layed a more ex tens i ve r o l e i n the RCUM ( input concern ing Terms of Re f e r ence , o r g a n i z a t i o n of h e a r i n g s , p rocedu ra l r u -l i n g s ) than i t d i d in the PCAB. Indeed, the conf inement of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n to the appea l in the r e g u l a t o r y process r e f l e c t s a more r e s t r i c t e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the p l u r a l i s t model . However, in s p i t e of the genera l con fo rmi t y of the case s tudy t r i b u n a l s to the p l u r a l i s t model , c r i t i c i s m s of the dec i s ion-mak ing p rocess have been made by many p a r t i c i p a n t s . P u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups have noted problems which I w i l l address from a c r i t i c a l democra t i c p e r s p e c t i v e . From t h i s s t a n c e , the s t r u c t u r e and nature of the hea r ing p rocess favour the p r o p o -nent , and counter the p l u r a l i s t no t i on of a compe t i t i v e b a l -ance . The e x i s t e n c e and weight of p rev ious d e c i s i o n s , and the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l o c a t i o n and b u r e a u c r a t i c in terdependence of the t r i b u n a l e s p e c i a l l y in the PCAB c a s e , i n d i c a t e the t r i b u n a l ' s p r o p e n s i t y to favour the proponent . The appointment of Board or Commission members by g o v e r n -ment i n d i c a t e s f u r t h e r tha t the autonomy of the t r i b u n a l from the s t a t e i s q u e s t i o n a b l e . The t e c h n i c a l , p r o f e s s i o n a l , and manager ia l compos i t i on of the Board d e t r a c t s from the assumed d i v e r s i t y of the Board , and p o i n t s to the interdependence of 221 s t a t e a n d e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l i n t e r e s t s . F r o m e l i t i s t a n d i n s t r u -m e n t a l p o i n t s o f v i e w , d e c i s i o n s a r e t h e p r o d u c t o f t e c h n i c a l , s c i e n t i f i c , b u r e a u c r a t i c , a n d p r o f e s s i o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s . T h e r e l a t i v e l y l a r g e n u m b e r o f a c a d e m i c a n d a d m i n i s t r a t i v e B o a r d m e m b e r s , i n d i c a t e s t h e i m b a l a n c e a m o n g m a t e r i a l c l a s s i n t e -r e s t s . I n c o n t r a s t t o a n i m p a r t i a l d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s , a c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e n o t e s p r o f e s s i o n a l a l l i a n c e s w i t h i n a n d a m o n g t r i b u n a l m e m b e r s a n d p r o p o n e n t s , a s t r u c t u r a l p r e d i s p o s i -t i o n i n f a v o u r o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e i n t e r e s t s , a n d a g e n e r a l a n d s u b s e q u e n t d i s a d v a n t a g e t o p u b l i c i n t e r e s t s . A l t h o u g h t h e l i m i t e d r o l e o f t h e p u b l i c i s v i e w e d b y t h e p l u r a l i s t m o d e l a s a p p r o p r i a t e , t h i s i s c h a l l e n g e d b y c r i t i c a l d e m o c r a t i c a r g u m e n t s . I n t h e c a s e s t u d i e s , i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e m o d e l , t h e p u b l i c i s g e n e r a l l y l i m i t e d t o i n t e r v e n t i o n i n t h e h e a r i n g s , w h i l e t h e B o a r d / C o m m i s s i o n , r e c o g n i z e d a s a n i n d e p e n d e n t b o d y , t a k e s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e a c t u a l p r o d u c -t i o n o f d e c i s i o n s . Some p a r t i c i p a n t s h a v e b e e n c r i t i c a l o f t h i s r e s t r i c t e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n . F o r e x a m p l e , t h e R C U M ' s F i r s t I n t e r i m R e p o r t w a s c r i t i c i z e d b y o n e p u b l i c g r o u p i n t h a t p u b l i c i n p u t h a d n o t b e e n r e q u e s t e d s p e c i f i c t o i t s r e l e a s e : . . . . t h e C o m m i s s i o n i s s u e d i t s ' F i r s t I n t e r i m R e p o r t o n U r a n i u m E x p l o r a t i o n w i t h o u t i n v i t i n g a n y s u b m i s s i o n f r o m p a r t i c i p a n t s . T h e A l l i a n c e b e l i e v e s t h a t i t w o u l d h a v e b e e n a p p r o p r i a t e f o r t h e C o m m i s s i o n t o a n n o u n c e t h a t i t c o n t e m p l a t e d i s s u i n g s u c h a r e p o r t a n d r e q u e s t s u b m i s -s i o n s f r o m p a r t i c i p a n t s b e f o r e f i n a l i z i n g t h a t r e p o r t ( E A A U M 1 9 8 0 : 1 2 ) . I h a v e o b s e r v e d t h a t t h e p u b l i c i s n o t r e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e s e l e c t i o n o f B o a r d m e m b e r s , n o r i n t h e a r t i c u l a t i o n o f t e r m s o f r e f e r e n c e . A n a p p a r e n t e x c e p t i o n t o t h i s e x c l u s i o n o f t h e 2 2 2 p u b l i c from p r o c e d u r a l d e c i s i o n s i s the exper ience of the RCUM, i n i t s i naugu ra l hea r ings in Vancouver and Kelowna, which were he ld ( accord ing to Dr . Bates) f o r the f o l l o w i n g p u r p o s e s , : . . . . t h e purpose of t h i s i naugu ra l meeting i s not to hear formal submiss ions on s u b s t a n t i v e i s sues be fore us , but to g i ve you an o p p o r t u n i t y to adv i se us on your views conce rn ing our terms of r e f e r e n c e , the t im ing and conduct of the i n q u i r y and to d i s c u s s how you or other members of the p u b l i c may most e f f e c t i v e l y p a r t i c i p a t e in the work we have to do (RCUM 1:6 ) . From a deve lopmenta l p e r s p e c t i v e , the r e s t r i c t e d concept of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n as on l y i n t e r v e n t i o n or appea l m i n i -mizes the exper i ence and knowledge to be ga ined by the p u b l i c . In the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t r i b u n a l , the p u b l i c has no input to and i s not p r i v y to the many d e c i s i o n s p r i o r to the a p p e a l . Nor have p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups had any say in the f o r m u l a t i o n of the s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s fo r h e a r i n g s . They are not informed on a r ou t i ne b a s i s conce rn ing p e s t i c i d e d e c i s i o n s . They are not consu l t ed r ega rd ing the appointment of the Board , and they have very l i t t l e access to the b a s i s f o r the Boa rd ' s d e c i s i o n s — i n f o r m a t i o n which w i l l d i r e c t l y a f f e c t t h e i r next a p p e a l . The r o l e of the p u b l i c i s r e a c t i v e , r a the r than a n t i c i p a t o r y . The consequences of t h i s r e s t r i c t e d embodiment of p a r t i c i -p a t i o n f o r the p u b l i c are s e v e r a l . The expans ion of p u b l i c unders tand ing and a b i l i t y to p a r t i c i p a t e in dec i s ion-mak ing are r e s t r i c t e d to the l a r g e l y formal and p r o f e s s i o n a l context of i n t e r v e n t i o n . Access to l e g a l counse l and e x p e r t i s e , a l though important to the success of a c a s e , may r e s t r i c t the d e v e l o p -ment of p u b l i c s k i l l s , and encourage an i n c r eased r e l i a n c e on p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e . The p u b l i c thereby f a i l s to a cqu i r e 223 the s k i l l s and knowledge which are features of these additional decision-making processes. Of greater consequence is the im-p l i c a t i o n of this under-representation of the public interest for the decisions produced by the tr i b u n a l . The systematic under-representation of the public interest in the larger ad-ministrative process, and the lack of public interest represen-tation in the decision-making body indicate a structural imba-lance to the detriment of the public interest. The experience of the case study tribunals thus supports to a limited extent the p l u r a l i s t model regarding the role and extent of public involvement. While the public is considered to play a primary role in the bringing forth of information and perspectives, the actual production of decisions is allocated to the Board or Commission. From a participatory democratic perspective, however, this practice of public p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s perceived as r e s t r i c t i v e and e l i t i s t . The role and power of public interest groups in the case study tribunals is viewed as minimal. The appointment of Board members by government, and the professional and technical composition of Board members brings into question the autonomy of the state, and points instead to the dominance and interdependence of state and entrepreneurial influences. lOf f i f t e e n permits for pesticide applications, four were disallowed, while eleven were upheld. In addition, five permit dates were also extended by the decision. 2 The decision to extend the permit dates was rejected by the j u d i c i a l review of the hearing. 3 Of f o r t y - s i x appeals before the Board, twenty-one were dismissed, seven were allowed, and two were allowed in part. In sixteen appeals, the Board did not reach a decision, due to 224 v a r i o u s c i r cumstances ( e . g . , w i thdrawal of a p p l i c a t i o n by p e r -m i t - h o l d e r , exemption of c e r t a i n areas from h e r b i c i d e a p p l i c a -t i on ) . 4 In a speech presented at a 1982 Conference on P e s t i c i d e s at Simon F r a se r U n i v e r s i t y , W. Ormrod of A g r i c u l t u r e Canada noted the c o n t r i b u t i o n s of d i f f e r e n t p e r s p e c t i v e s in the r e g u -l a t i o n of p e s t i c i d e s , i n c l u d i n g those Fede ra l Departments of Env i ronment , Hea l th and We l f a r e , and A g r i c u l t u r e . 5 In 1981, the pe rm i t-ho lde r was the Okanagan Water Bas in Board , a r e g i o n a l p l ann ing body. 6 T . Roberts (1981) c i t e s the 1979 example of the d e n i a l of e l even f o r e s t r y permi ts due to p o s s i b l e e f f e c t s on the salmon f i s h e r y . 7 In response to the above cha rges , as noted in the p r e -v i ous c h a p t e r , the WIB d i d produce e v i dence . 8 A c c o r d i n g to the a p p e l l a n t s , the reasons cont inued to demonstrate the Boa rd ' s b i a s : The SOEC presented three researched documents (68 pages t o t a l ) and 46 separate s t u d i e s , i n t h e i r submis -s i o n s to the Board . T h i s ev idence was summarized i n three paragraphs i n the Boa rd ' s d e c i s i o n , which took one page. The p roponent , the Osoyoos landowners, p resented one three-page statement to the Board , which was r e p r o -duced word-for-word i n the A p p e a l ' s d e c i s i o n . Moreover , the Boa rd ' s d e c i s i o n i n c l uded data a g a i n s t the SOEC's case which was not p resented at the h e a r i n g . And, whi le over the p rev ious years the a p p e l l a n t had presented numerous documents on the e f f e c t i v e n e s s and the low cos t of h a r v e s t i n g , in t h e i r 1981 d e c i s i o n , the Board conc luded tha t h a r v e s t i n g was 'no t e f f e c t i v e * , and tha t 'no reasonab le a l t e r n a t i v e to 2,4-D e x i s t e d ' , a l though no ev idence on t h i s had been presented at the 1981 hea r ings (Warnock 1982: Speech ) . 9 The SOEC requested a j u d i c i a l review of the 1978 PCAB d e c i s i o n on two grounds : tha t they had been denied a f a i r and proper h e a r i n g ; and tha t the ex tens ion of the exp i r y date on f i v e of the permi ts was not w i t h i n the power of the Board . They l o s t the fo rmer , but won the l a t t e r , w i th the e f f e c t that f u r t h e r hea r i ngs were necessary l a t e r in the summer. 10 A c t i v i t i e s of the RCUM inc luded o r g a n i z a t i o n a l t asks such as s t a f f i n g , s chedu l i ng of h e a r i n g s , and arrangements fo r media and p u b l i c i t y . Other a c t i v i t i e s , i n c l u d i n g the i d e n t i f i -c a t i o n of i s sues and a r t i c u l a t i o n of \" q u e s t i o n s \" to be a sked , s e l e c t i o n of exper t w i t n e s s e s , and commiss ioning of a d d i t i o n a l r esea rch were a l s o of s i g n i f i c a n c e to the p r o d u c t i o n of recom-mendations by the Commiss ion. 225 HThe announcement overlooked the appointment of Dr. Ren-ney, U.B.C., Professor of Weed Science and former Board member. 12 Appellants claimed that native land adjoining the Okana-gan lakes would be affected by the proposed applications. 226 CHAPTER 8 CONCLUSIONS 8.1 I n t r o d u c t i o n I have examined the p rocess of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n in two env i ronmenta l hea r ings as a p p l i e d v e r s i o n s of p l u r a l i s t demo-c r a t i c t heo r y . The p r a c t i c e of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n g e n e r a l l y conforms to the p l u r a l i s t model , and the p u b l i c hea r ing i s a c c o r d i n g l y understood to p rov ide p u b l i c access to r e g u l a t o r y and po l i cy-mak ing a c t i v i t i e s of government. The i n a b i l i t y of the t r i b u n a l s to comply wi th a l l the expec t a t i ons of the model r e v ea l s shor tcomings which to some extent are remediable w i t h i n the mainstream l i b e r a l p o l i t i c a l framework. In c o n t r a s t , the a p p l i c a t i o n of a p a r t i c i p a t o r y c r i t i q u e of p l u r a l i s t theory to the exper ience of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t p a r t i -c i p a n t s poses a cha l l enge to the f a i r n e s s and i m p a r t i a l i t y of the hea r i ng p r o c e s s . D i f f i c u l t i e s c i t e d by p u b l i c i n t e r e s t p a r t i c i p a n t s , such as inadequate f u n d i n g , are from a c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e understood to r e s u l t in a compe t i t i v e d isadvantage f o r p u b l i c i n t e r e s t g roups , and to be rooted i n s ys t emat i c s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l i n e q u a l i t i e s which the model f a i l s to a d d r e s s . A s t r u c t u r e of a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h i n the s t a t e , and between s t a t e and e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l i n t e r e s t s , a l -227 though obscured by the p l u r a l i s t c l a im to s t a t e autonomy, cha l l enges the concept of a ba lance among competing i n t e r e s t s and b r i n g s i n to q u e s t i o n the n e u t r a l i t y of the p r o c e s s . T h i s p e r s p e c t i v e p o i n t s to r e c o g n i t i o n of the t r i b u n a l as an i n s t r u -ment of s t a t e hegemony, and p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i n t e r v e n t i o n in the hea r ing becomes i n t e r p r e t e d as an inst rument of s o c i a l c o n t r o l and l e g i t i m a t i o n . In c o n t r a s t to those who hear the p u b l i c vo i ce as e f f e c t i v e c i v i c invo lvement , a c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e views the p r o d u c t i o n and o r c h e s t r a t i o n of a p u b l i c vo i ce as sub j e c t to the ongoing requi rements and r e l a t i o n s of a l i b e r a l and c a p i t a l i s t s o c i e t y . In t h i s f i n a l chapter I summarize the f i n d i n g s of the D i s s e r t a t i o n and draw c o n c l u s i o n s fo r p l u r a l i s t t heo r y , the p u b l i c h e a r i n g , and the p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s . 8.2-The P l u r a l i s t Model and the P u b l i c Hear ing I have demonstrated tha t the concept of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a -t i o n i n a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and c o n s u l t a t i v e t r i b u n a l s i s a r t i c u -l a t e d from the p e r s p e c t i v e of p l u r a l i s t t heo r y . Competing i n t e r e s t groups p a r t i c i p a t e as a p p e l l a n t s and/or i n t e r v e n o r s in the t r i b u n a l by p r e s e n t i n g i n f o rma t i on in support of t h e i r p e r s p e c t i v e . From a p l u r a l i s t p o s i t i o n , r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of a d i v e r s i t y of i n t e r e s t s , i n c l u d i n g those of the p u b l i c , ensures a ba lance of p e r s p e c t i v e s r ega rd ing any i s s u e . P rocedura l f a i r -ness i s assured by adherance to a s t a n d a r d i z e d , symmetr ica l and q u a s i - j u d i c i a l format fo r a l l i n t e r v e n i n g i n t e r e s t s . Moreover , p u b l i c access to l e g a l advocacy , t e c h n i c a l e x p e r t i s e , f u n d i n g , and o ther r esources i n d i c a t e s an e q u a l i t y of o p p o r t u n i t y among p a r t i c i p a n t s . A l though p l u r a l i s t theory r e cogn izes that there may be d i f f e r e n c e s among p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t e r e s t s in power and 228 e x p e r t i s e , these are o f f s e t by the t r i b u n a l ' s e g a l i t a r i a n mea-sures and the unique c a p a b i l i t i e s of each p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t e -r e s t . F i n a l l y , the n e u t r a l i t y of the dec i s ion-mak ing process i s assured through the formal s e p a r a t i o n of the dec i s ion-mak ing body from other f o r c e s (government, i ndus t r y ) and the h e t e r o g e -n e i t y and i m p a r t i a l i t y of i t s members. He te rogene i t y of P a r t i c i p a t i o n In the exper ience of the P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Appea l Board and the Royal Commission of I nqu i r y i n to Uranium Min ing h e a -r i n g s , there i s gene ra l con fo rmi t y to the p l u r a l i s t model of hea r ing p a r t i c i p a t i o n . The p u b l i c i s r e p r e s e n t e d , or i s seen to be r e p r e s e n t e d , in both se t s of h e a r i n g s , ensur ing a p l u r a -l i t y of input to the t r i b u n a l , and p r o v i d i n g a ba lance among d i v e r s e and competing f o r c e s ( e . g . , i n d u s t r y , l a b o u r , s t a t e and p u b l i c i n t e r e s t s ) . P a r t i c i p a t i o n takes p lace to a l i m i t e d ex -tent through d i r e c t i n t e r v e n t i o n by i n d i v i d u a l s but p r i m a r i l y through the r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of o rgan ized i n t e r e s t s . Th i s i s c o n s i s t e n t wi th the p l u r a l i s t emphasis on r e p r e s e n t a t i o n as both e f f i c i e n t ( access ing a g rea te r number of people) as we l l as e f f e c t i v e (through the u t i l i z a t i o n of those q u a l i f i e d wi th a p p r o p r i a t e knowledge and s k i l l s ) . F a i r n e s s of Procedures The procedures of both t r i b u n a l s i n d i c a t e d a gene ra l c o n -fo rm i t y to a p l u r a l i s t p e r s p e c t i v e of f a i r n e s s . Procedures were s t a n d a r d i z e d so as to grant un i form access to a l l i n t e r v e -n o r s , and were c h a r a c t e r i z e d as q u a s i - j u d i c i a l , or r e l a t i v e l y i n f o r m a l , to accommodate g r ea t e r p u b l i c a c c e s s . Hear ing proce-229 dures i n both t r i b u n a l s fo l l owed a s tandard format which i n -c luded submiss ion of e v i d e n c e , c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n , and summa-t i o n , which a l lowed p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t e r e s t s to present t h e i r c a s e s , and query a l l o t h e r s . A l l i n t e r v e n o r s , r e g a r d l e s s of i n t e r e s t , f o l l owed s i m i l a r p rocedu res . P l u r a l i s t theory ma in -t a i n s that d i f f e r e n c e s i n compe t i t i v e a b i l i t i e s among i n t e r -venors w i l l be min imized to a c e r t a i n extent through t h i s p r o c e s s . In p r epa r i ng fo r i n t e r v e n t i o n , the p l u r a l i s t model assumes that p a r t i c i p a n t s engage in d i v e r s e s t r a t e g i e s which are i n d i -v i d u a l l y de te rmined , a c co rd ing to the r e s o u r c e s , s k i l l s and a b i l i t i e s of the i n t e r v e n o r s . In the c o n s u l t a t i v e h e a r i n g , fund ing fo r p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups was p rov ided as a means of expanding p u b l i c access and a s s u r i n g a compe t i t i v e p o s i t i o n . D i f f e r e n c e s in i n t e r v e n o r s ' a b i l i t i e s are not seen as j e o p a r d i -z i ng an i n t e r v e n e r ' s chances of success in the compe t i t i v e rea lm, but ra the r as elements of d i v e r s i t y and p o t e n t i a l s u c -cess . A l though the exper ience of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups conforms to the gene ra l requi rements of the p l u r a l i s t model , c e r t a i n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the t r i b u n a l s de t r a c t ed from a balance among p a r t i c i p a n t s . The hea r ing s e t t i n g was f o r m a l l y a c c e s s i b l e to the p u b l i c i n both t r i b u n a l s , but the i s s u e s , and the s i z e and t e c h n o l o g i c a l requi rements of the RCUM hea r ings imposed c e r t a i n l i m i t a t i o n s to l ay i n t e r v e n t i o n . E x p e r t i s e was f o r m a l l y a v a i -l a b l e to and u t i l i z e d by a l l i n t e r v e n o r s in both hea r ings in the form of l e g a l counse l and exper t w i t n e s s e s . However, fund ing fo r p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups was p rov ided on l y in the 230 c o n s u l t a t i v e t r i b u n a l . In a d d i t i o n , the a p p e l l a n t ' s assumption of the burden of proof in the r e g u l a t o r y t r i b u n a l r equ i r ed them to make a case which was not d i r e c t l y countered by the p r o p o -nen t , d e t r a c t i n g from the ba lance of the forum. N e u t r a l i t y of the D e c i s i o n Making Process The p l u r a l i s t model p o s i t s an o b j e c t i v e , n e u t r a l , d e c i -s ion-making p rocess mediated by an i m p a r t i a l and independent Board or Commiss ion. D e c i s i o n s are made on the r a t i o n a l a s s -essment of the i n fo rma t i on brought before the Board . Board members r e f l e c t d i v e r s i t y and competence through t h e i r v a r i e d p r o f e s s i o n a l and t e c h n i c a l backgrounds. The d i s c r e t i o n a r y powers a l l o t t e d to the Board r e f l e c t the t r i b u n a l ' s autonomy and the c a p a b i l i t i e s of Board members i n e x e r c i s i n g t h e i r a u t h o r i t y . Thus , the dec i s ion-mak ing process appears to f o l l o w the c r i t e r i a of the p l u r a l i s t model . The gene ra l con fo rmi t y of the case s tudy t r i b u n a l s to the p l u r a l i s t model r e a f f i r m s the l i b e r a l s o c i a l and economic i d e o -l o g y . A c a p i t a l i s t economy which accommodates s t a t e c o r p o r a -t i o n s and i s r egu l a t ed by s t a t e i n t e r v e n t i o n i s the founda t ion fo r l i b e r a l t heo r y . I f a b e r r a t i o n s to the p l u r a l i s t model e x i s t , they are seen as remediable w i t h i n t h i s c o n t e x t . A c c o r -d i n g l y , i n c reased fund ing f o r p u b l i c i n t e r v e n o r s , and geo -g r aph i c d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of hea r ings have expanded p a r t i c i p a t o -ry a c c e s s . The e x i s t e n c e of independent t r i b u n a l s s t a f f e d by i m p a r t i a l Board members concurs w i th the concept of s t a t e autonomy. P u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n po l i cy-mak ing and r e g u l a t o r y i s sues i s taken to be compat ib le wi th the i n d i v i d u a l , compet i-231 t i v e , and i n c r e a s i n g l y i n t e r v e n t i o n i s t t endenc ies of t h i s c o n -temporary l i b e r a l framework. P roduc t i on of the p u b l i c vo ice i s compat ib le wi th the l i b e r a l framework, in tha t i t i s v o l u n t a r i l y i n i t i a t e d by those wi th a c i v i c s p i r i t and i n t e r e s t i n the i s s u e , mediated by independent t r i b u n a l s , and e f f e c t i v e i n i n f l u e n c i n g government. 8.3 - The P a r t i c i p a t o r y C r i t i q u e and the P l u r a l i s t Model A n a l y s i s of the case s tudy h e a r i n g s , however, r e vea l s a major shor tcoming of the p l u r a l i s t model . The model f a i l s to r e f l e c t the a c t u a l exper i ence of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t p a r t i c i p a t i o n , and i t obscures the d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e power among competing i n t e r e s t s through the t r i b u n a l s ' gu i se of f a i r n e s s , o b j e c t i v i -t y , and i m p a r t i a l i t y . From a p a r t i c i p a t o r y c r i t i q u e , c h a r a c t e -r i s t i c s of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n c l u d e : the s u b j e c t i v e d e f i n i -t i o n and vo l un t a r y m o t i v a t i o n of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t r e p r e s e n -t a t i o n ; the non-product i ve economic cha r a c t e r of the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t ; the l ack of formal r e c o g n i t i o n of hea r ing p r e p a r a t i o n and o r g a n i z a t i o n ; and the l i m i t e d extent of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a -t i o n in the dec i s ion-mak ing p r o c e s s . From t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e , the h e a r i n g ' s c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of \" p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n \" i s r e -s t r i c t i v e and e l i t i s t in n a t u r e . The p u b l i c hea r ing process i s seen to be marked by a s y s t ema t i c and s t r u c t u r a l d isadvantage to the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t which r e f l e c t s the s o c i a l i n e q u a l i t i e s embedded in the c a p i t a l i s t founda t ions of the s o c i e t y . More-o v e r , a c r i t i c a l a n a l y s i s p o i n t s to the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a l l i a n -ces of the t r i b u n a l and the compos i t ion of i t s s t a f f as p r o b -lems fo r both ba lance and autonomy. A c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e sugges ts tha t p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s generated and mediated by 232 t h e s t a t e f o r p u r p o s e s o f s o c i a l c o n t r o l a n d l e g i t i m a t i o n . H e t e r o g e n e i t y o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n -R e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e P u b l i c I n t e r e s t F r o m d e v e l o p m e n t a l a n d a n t i - e l i t i s t p e r s p e c t i v e s , r e p r e -s e n t a t i o n o f t h e p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i s r e s t r i c t e d t o a s m a l l n u m b e r o f p e r s o n s o r g r o u p s who l a c k f o r m a l a c c o u n t a b i l i t y t o a c o n s t i t u e n c y . T h e r e i s n o p r o v i s i o n f o r t h e k n o w l e d g e a n d s k i l l s a c q u i r e d b y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s \" t r i c k l i n g d o w n \" t o a b r o a -d e r p u b l i c . I n d e e d , i n t e r v e n t i o n b y s p e a k e r s o r r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s r e m o v e s t h e m a s s o f t h e p u b l i c f r o m t h e b u l k o f t h e d e c i s i o n -m a k i n g p r o c e s s . A l t h o u g h t h i s i s n o t i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e p l u r a l i s t m o d e l , a c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e w o u l d n o t e a s p r o b l e m a -t i c t h e p o s s i b l e e m e r g e n c e o f a n e l i t e o f h e a r i n g t e c h n o c r a t s , a n d t h e p e r p e t u a t i o n o f t h e i n a c c e s s i b i l i t y o f d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g w h i c h n o w c h a r a c t e r i z e s m u c h o f t h e p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s . F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e g e n e r a l o r i e n t a t i o n o f t h e h e a r i n g t o a d e p e n d e n c e o n l e g a l a n d t e c h n i c a l s k i l l s f o r c e s t h e p a r t i c i p a n t t o r e l y e x t e n s i v e l y o n e x p e r t i s e . L e g a l s k i l l s a r e a c o m p e t i -t i v e w e a p o n w h i c h a v a i l s p a r t i c i p a n t s o f p r o c e d u r a l k n o w l e d g e ; e x p e r t w i t n e s s e s a r e s e c u r e d t o d e f e n d o n e ' s s u b s t a n t i v e p o s i -t i o n . H o w e v e r , t h e s e r e s o u r c e s a r e r o u t i n e l y l e s s a v a i l a b l e t o p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a n t s . \" M a k i n g a c a s e \" i n t h e t r i b u n a l s w h i c h I h a v e e x a m i n e d i n v o l v e s a s u b s t a n t i v e c h a l l e n g e t o t h e p r o f e s -s i o n a l a n d a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t a t u s q u o , a n d p u b l i c i n t e r e s t g r o u p s h a v e n o t e d t h e l a c k o f e x p e r t s c a p a b l e a n d w i l l i n g t o t e s t i f y t o t h i s p o s i t i o n . W h e n w i t n e s s e s a r e a v a i l a b l e , t h e y c a n b e c o s t l y , a n d t h e d i f f e r e n t i a l r e s o u r c e s o f p a r t i c i p a n t s 233 i n d i c a t e a compe t i t i v e d isadvantage fo r the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t . F u r t h e r , the he t e rogene i t y assumed by the p l u r a l i s t model i s viewed from a c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e as inadequate to a f u l l spectrum of a f f e c t e d i n t e r e s t s . Formal r e p r e s e n t a t i o n by s o -c i a l c l a s s , r e g i o n , sex , and other fundamental demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i s absen t . A Ma rx i s t read ing of hea r ing r e p -r e s e n t a t i o n would note the s u b j e c t i v e and d i s c r e t i o n a r y d e f i n i -t i o n of \" i n t e r e s t \" , which r e s u l t s i n the unde r- r ep re sen t a t i on of uno rgan i zed , or disempowered i n t e r e s t s . The l ack of economic i n c e n t i v e and l ack of formal o r g a n i z a t i o n a l support ( f und ing , c o n t i n u i t y , membership) f o r p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups r e vea l s an imbalance i n the mo t i v a t i on and resources among competing i n t e -r e s t s . A l though labour i n t e r e s t s have an i m p l i c i t economic base , they are represented m in ima l l y in the case study h e a -r i n g s . There i s l i t t l e formal r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of na t i v e and women's i n t e r e s t s , f o r i n s t a n c e , both of which stand to be a f f e c t e d by the i s sues of the two t r i b u n a l s . What becomes v i s i b l e as \" r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of the p u b l i c \" , e s p e c i a l l y in the adve rsa ry con tex t of the r e g u l a t o r y t r i b u n a l , i s i n t e r v e n t i o n i n the hea r ing by a person or o r g a n i z a t i o n r e p r e s e n t i n g o ther than o f f i c i a l i n d u s t r y or government i n t e r e s t s — a symbol i c counterwe ight to the i n t e r e s t s of the p roponent . A l though p a r t i c i p a n t s c l a i m and are g e n e r a l l y acknowledged to represent p u b l i c i n t e r e s t s , t h i s d e l e g a t i o n i s based on i n d i v i d u a l and i n fo rma l c o n s t r u c t i o n of a s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of r e p r e s e n t a -t i o n . There i s no formal means of a s s e s s i n g the weight and fo r ce of a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e ' s c o n s t i t u e n c y . A l though the f l e x i -b i l i t y of t h i s form of r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i s g e n e r a l l y approved , 234 the ambiguity of the p r a c t i c e a l s o p o i n t s to the lack of over-a l l power of c i t i z e n s ' o r g a n i z a t i o n s i n the hearing process, and, on a more general l e v e l , i n the p o l i t i c a l process. F a i r n e s s of Procedures The p a r t i c i p a t o r y c r i t i q u e recognizes an imbalance i n p a r t i c i p a n t s * experience of the hearing process which works to the disadvantage of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups r e l a t i v e to e n t r e -p r e n e u r i a l and s t a t e i n t e r e s t s . In t h i s a n a l y s i s , p r e p a r a t o r y and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l f e a t u r e s of p a r t i c i p a t i o n are d e s c r i b e d and recognized as s i g n i f i c a n t to p a r t i c i p a n t s ' competitive a b i l i -t i e s . Systematic i n e q u a l i t i e s among competing i n t e r e s t s e x t e r -n a l to the hearings are seen to be c o n s e q u e n t i a l to t h e i r performance w i t h i n the t r i b u n a l . P u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups are f r e q u e n t l y represented by members of the lay p u b l i c . For them, the s e t t i n g of the hearings may be formal and p o t e n t i a l l y i n t i m i d a t i n g . The p h y s i c a l i s o l a t i o n of speakers, the formal arrangement of s e a t i n g , and the stance of p u b l i c address, although r e q u i r e d f o r documentary and b u r e a u c r a t i c purposes, pose problems f o r members of the p u b l i c who lack s k i l l s , c o n f i -dence, and experience i n p u b l i c speaking. T h i s r e s u l t s i n a c ompetitive disadvantage f o r p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups. Moreover, the p r o f e s s i o n a l c h a r a c t e r of hearing s k i l l s f o s t e r s p u b l i c r e l i a n c e on s k i l l s not d i r e c t l y a c c e s s i b l e to them, and c o n t r i -butes to t h e i r a l i e n a t i o n from the forum. From a developmental p e r s p e c t i v e , the process of i n t e r v e n -t i o n i s p r o f e s s i o n a l and t e c h n i c a l i n nature. When l a y p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a n t s engage i n the process without l e g a l advocacy, ( e i -235 ther because they are under-funded or because they choose to do so) they are at a competitive disadvantage in that they are less experienced and prepared than their opponents. When they retain counsel, however, the s k i l l s and knowledge which are acquired within the tribunal experience accrue only to these representatives, and not to public, or lay members. The educa-t i o n a l and s o c i a l benefits (e.g., learning substantive and procedural s k i l l s , group cohesion) which are derived from the process are not expanded to a general membership. Preparation for the hearing places a disproportionate burden on the public interest intervenor, who lacks the resour-ces of state and entrepreneurial interests. I have described a considerable amount of additional work prior to and during the hearing which is unreported by formal accounts of the hearing. Although these a c t i v i t i e s , such as the establishment and main-tenance of networks, organization, research, lobbying, and public education, are not d i r e c t l y v i s i b l e in the hearing pro-cess, they are essential to the making of any case. These a c t i v i t i e s are mediated for state and entrepreneurial interests through professional and regulatory a c t i v i t i e s . The lack of public interest access to, and force i n , these ongoing r e l a -tions results in a disadvantage to public organizations in comparison to corporate and government intervenors. From the perspective of the participatory c r i t i q u e , the public interest is perceived as economically anomalous, exter-nal to both the entrepreneurially-motivated and bureaucratical-ly-regulated force of i t s fellow participants. The disadvan-taged position of the public interest rel a t i v e to other compe-236 t i n g f o r c e s i s a l s o a f u n c t i o n of i t s i n s t i t u t i o n a l l y anomalous p o s i t i o n . The l a ck of i n t e g r a t i o n wi th s t a t e o r g a n i z a t i o n s , and the f r equent l a ck of b u r e a u c r a t i c suppo r t , (which extends from use of d u p l i c a t i n g equipment, p r o f e s s i o n a l connec t ions among s t a f f , to access to research sources and in fo rmat ion ) p resents s e r i o u s o b s t a c l e s to the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t group seen by p l u r a -l i s t s to be competing on a r e l a t i v e l y equal b a s i s wi th i ndus t r y and government opponents . In a d d i t i o n , the common t i e s among p r o f e s s i o n a l s who share a common vocabu l a r y , e d u c a t i o n , work e x p e r i e n c e , and s o c i a l s t a t u s , suggest a l l i a n c e s w i t h i n and among s t a t e and co rpo ra te i n t e r e s t s which f u r t h e r depr i ve the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t from a p o s i t i o n of power. In a d d i t i o n to the unequal d i s t r i b u t i o n of resources r equ i r ed f o r i n t e r v e n t i o n , the dominat ion of the forum by s t a t e and co rpo ra t e i n t e r e s t s i s i n d i c a t e d by the p r o f e s s i o n a l and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e compos i t i on of Board members, and the s c i e n t i f i c and p r o f e s s i o n a l nature of the hea r ing p rocedu re s . The s t r u c t u r e of the hea r ing f u r t h e r b e n e f i t s a d m i n i s t r a -t i v e and co rpo ra t e i n t e r e s t s . The p u b l i c i n t e r e s t p a r t i c i p a n t as a p p e l l a n t assumes the burden of proof (as i n the PCAB), oppos ing an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t a t u s quo. T h i s means that the p u b l i c i n t e r v eno r must prepare an o f f e n s i v e s t r a t e g y on an i ssue i n which s/he l a c k s i n s t i t u t i o n a l c l o u t , suppo r t , and networks. The l a ck of access to i n fo rma t i on as we l l poses a s i g n i f i c a n t o b s t a c l e to the i n t e r v e n e r ' s a b i l i t y to engage i n a s u c c e s s f u l i n t e r v e n t i o n . I noted tha t there are two l e v e l s of i n f o rma t i on i n vo l v ed in making a c a se : gene ra l background i n -237 f o r m a t i o n , and s p e c i f i c t e c h n i c a l d a t a . The p u b l i c i s at a d i sadvantage i n both of t h e s e , but e s p e c i a l l y the l a t t e r , due to d i f f i c u l t i e s in p r o f e s s i o n a l and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a c c e s s . The N e u t r a l i t y of the Dec is ion-Mak ing Process A p a r t i c i p a t o r y c r i t i q u e of the dec i s ion-mak ing process q u e s t i o n s the i m p a r t i a l i t y of Board/Commission members as we l l as the l i m i t e d power of the p u b l i c in the a c t u a l d e c i s i o n -making p r o c e s s . Board members in both case s t u d i e s were a l l male , and were r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of manage r i a l , p r o f e s s i o n a l , and t e c h n i c a l i n t e r e s t s . In c o n t r a s t to the d i v e r s i t y of member-sh i p which a p l u r a l i s t approach would c l a i m , Ma rx i s t and s t a t e i n s t r u m e n t a l i s t c r i t i q u e s would note the dominat ion of the forum by bourgeo is i n t e r e s t s and the power and extent of p r o f e s s i o n a l a l l i a n c e s among Board members, a d m i n i s t r a t o r s , and co rpo ra te p e r s o n n e l . The s t r u c t u r e of the dec i s ion-mak ing process i s a l s o p r o b -l e m a t i c , in tha t p u b l i c involvement in dec i s ion-mak ing i s p r i -m a r i l y con f i ned to s u b s t a n t i v e input in the hea r ings them-s e l v e s . The s t r u c t u r e of p r i o r d e c i s i o n s , a l though c o n t r i b u t i n g to the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t a t u s quo, exc ludes p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a -t i o n . The o r g a n i z a t i o n of the hea r ings and a r t i c u l a t i o n of terms of r e f e r e n c e , s e l e c t i o n of Board members/Commissioners, p r o c e d u r a l d e c i s i o n s , and f i n a l p roduc t i on of a d e c i s i o n ex -c lude the p u b l i c . The p a r t i c i p a t o r y c r i t i q u e a l so p o i n t s to the d e c i s i o n -making p rocess as a c t i n g i n accordance w i th the i n t e r e s t s of the s t a t e . The s t r u c t u r e of the dec i s ion-mak ing process and the compos i t i on of the Board can be seen to produce d e c i s i o n s 238 congruent wi th s t a t e i n t e r e s t s , and i t s r e l a t i o n s among va r i ous f a c t i o n s . The tendency fo r d e c i s i o n s to favour the proponent ( in the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e h e a r i n g ) , and fo r s t a t e c o n t r o l of the agenda ( e . g . , terms of re fe rence ) can be understood from s t a t e i n s t r u m e n t a l i s t and s t r u c t u r a l i s t p o s i t i o n s . Thus , from the economic background m a t e r i a l p resented in Chapter 3, one can r ecogn ize i n the PCAB d e c i s i o n s a tendency fo r the t r i b u n a l to a f f i r m a d m i n i s t r a t i v e as we l l as i n d u s t r y i n t e r e s t s . A l though t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s a p p r o p r i a t e to the d e c i -s i ons of the PCAB, which g e n e r a l l y upheld the proponent , the morator ium and c l o s u r e of the RCUM suggest s e v e r a l p o s s i b l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . The d e c i s i o n appears to favour p u b l i c i n t e -r e s t s at the expense of those of i n d u s t r y ( e . g . uranium m i -ning) . P l u r a l i s t t h e o r i s t s would argue that t h i s r e f l e c t s the i m p a r t i a l i t y of the t r i b u n a l , and i t s autonomy from s t a t e and e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l i n t e r e s t s . S ta te hegemony t h e o r i s t s such as Mahon however, would argue that there i s c o n f l i c t w i t h i n the power b loc (1974:169) , thus c h a l l e n g i n g a u n i l a t e r a l and d i r e c t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the d e c i s i o n , and con f i rm ing the s t r u g g l e among and w i t h i n b u r e a u c r a t i c s t r u c t u r e s . Ex tens i ve s t a t e i n -t e r v e n t i o n i n the uranium i n d u s t r y in the c a r t e l , n a t i o n a l i z a -t i o n and i n c e n t i v e s i n d i c a t e the m u l t i - f a c e t e d nature of s t a t e r e l a t i o n s and i n t e r e s t s . The RCUM's c l o s u r e cou ld a l s o be argued to be to the long run advantage of the i n d u s t r y , because the c o n t i n u a t i o n of the t r i b u n a l might have r e s u l t e d in p u b l i c and/or o f f i c i a l r e c o g n i t i o n of hea l t h and s a f e t y haza rds , which cou ld have p l a ced severe burdens on the i n d u s t r y . The morato-239 r ium and i n q u i r y c l o s u r e can a l s o be viewed as a l e g i t i m a t i o n a c t i v i t y , i l l u s t r a t i n g the r e l a t i v e autonomy and n e u t r a l i t y of the t r i b u n a l , but upho ld ing the long-term r e g u l a t o r y and c a p i -t a l accumula t ion f u n c t i o n s of the s t a t e . I have used the p a r t i c i p a t o r y c r i t i q u e as a means of unders tand ing the l i m i t a t i o n s and b i a ses of p l u r a l i s t t heo ry . I have demonstrated tha t a l though a p l u r a l i s t model of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n appears to be an a p p r o p r i a t e guide fo r the p r a c -t i c e of t r i b u n a l i n t e r v e n t i o n , i t f a i l s to r e f l e c t the l a r g e r s o c i a l , p o l i t i c a l and economic context in which i t i s l o c a t e d . The c a p i t a l i s t cha rac t e r of p l u r a l i s m i s t y p i c a l l y obscured by the l i b e r a l i d e o l o g y , which r e s u l t s in the understatement of the power and fo r ce of e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l i n t e r e s t s as pr imary p o l i t i c a l f o r c e s , and the l ack of popu lar r e c o g n i t i o n of the extent of s t a t e i n t e r v e n t i o n i n co rpora te a c t i v i t i e s . The p a r t i c i p a t o r y c r i t i q u e r e d i r e c t s a t t e n t i o n to t h i s l a r g e r p o l i t i c a l and economic framework as c o n s e q u e n t i a l f o r the a c t i v i t i e s that t r a n s p i r e w i t h i n i t . Thus , the apparent he t e rogene i t y and compe t i t i on of the p l u r a l i s t model i s r e -p l aced i n the p a r t i c i p a t o r y account by r e c o g n i t i o n of an imba-lance of power among competing i n t e r e s t s and the ex tens i ve i n t e r e s t s and a l l i a n c e s of the s t a t e . From a p a r t i c i p a t o r y c r i t i q u e , t h e r e f o r e , p u b l i c i n t e r e s t p a r t i c i p a n t s are at a compe t i t i v e d i sadvantage in the h e a r i n g , r e f l e c t i n g t h e i r e c o -n o m i c a l l y non-product i ve and p o l i t i c a l l y power less c h a r a c t e r . The p a r t i c i p a t o r y c r i t i q u e ' s r e c o g n i t i o n of ex tens i ve s t a t e i n t e r v e n t i o n i n e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l a c t i v i t y a l s o views the t r i b u -na l as l e s s than independent , and he lps to e x p l a i n the l ack of 240 e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f p u b l i c i n t e r e s t c o m p e t i t o r s . T h u s , p r o b l e m s o f p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i n t e r v e n o r s a r e p e r c e i v e d n o t a s i d i o s y n c r a -t i c , b u t a s r o o t e d i n l a r g e r s t r u c t u r a l i n e q u a l i t i e s w h i c h p e r m e a t e t h e t r i b u n a l . I n s p i t e o f t h e e x p a n s i o n o f p u b l i c a c c e s s a n d t h e m o v e m e n t t o w a r d s a n e q u a l i t y o f o p p o r t u n i t y i n t h e t r i b u n a l , t h e l a r g e r s o c i a l a n d e c o n o m i c o r d e r i s t h u s s e e n t o l i m i t i t s d e m o c r a t i c p o t e n t i a l . W i t h i n t h e p a r t i c i p a t o r y c r i t i q u e , I h a v e i n c l u d e d s e v e r a l c o m p l e m e n t a r y c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e s , w h i c h r e f l e c t b o t h t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f my own v i e w s , a s w e l l a s t h a t o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e . T h e d e v e l o p m e n t a l c r i t i q u e h a s b e e n u s e d t o c h a l l e n g e t h e r e s t r i c t e d n a t u r e o f t h e p l u r a l i s t c o n c e p t o f p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a -t i o n . M a r x i s t a n d e l i t i s t c r i t i q u e s h a v e b e e n u s e f u l t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l b i a s o f t r i b u n a l c o m p o s i t i o n a n d p r o c e s s . T h e m o r e r e c e n t l i t e r a t u r e o n t h e s t a t e p r o m i s e s t o f u r t h e r e x p l a i n t h e p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n p r o c e s s , a s I h a v e i n d i c a t e d i n t h e a n a l y s i s . A s t r u c t u r a l s t a t e c r i t i q u e o f t h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g p o i n t s t o t h e i n c r e a s e d r o l e a n d p o w e r s o f t h e s t a t e , a n d t o t h e f u n c t i o n s o f p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n f o r t h e s t a t e a s m e a n s o f e x p l a i n i n g p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n . T h e i n c r e a s i n g p o w e r a n d r e l a -t i o n s o f t h e s t a t e d e s c r i b e d b y a n u m b e r o f C a n a d i a n w r i t e r s ( P a n i t c h 1 9 7 7 ; D o e r n 1 9 7 8 ) , a n d t h e e x p a n d i n g a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p o w e r s o f t h e s t a t e a r e r e l e v a n t t o t h e t r i b u n a l e x p e r i e n c e : . . . w i t h t h e m o v e t o ' d e p o l i t i c i z e ' a n d ' r e n d e r m o r e e f f i c i e n t ' t h e a c t i v i t i e s o f t h e s t a t e , t h e a d m i n i s t r a -t i v e a p p a r a t u s h a s c o m e t o p l a y a k e y r o l e , n o t o n l y i n t h e ' i m p l e m e n t a t i o n ' b u t a l s o i n t h e ' f o r m a t i o n ' o f p u b -l i c p o l i c y ( M a h o n 1 9 7 7 : 1 7 2 ) . 2 4 1 Other s t a t i s t l i t e r a t u r e promises to p rov ide f r u i t f u l e x p l a n a t i o n s of t r i b u n a l a c t i v i t y when a p p l i e d to p u b l i c i n t e -r e s t i n t e r v e n t i o n . For i n s t a n c e , p u b l i c i n t e r e s t p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s seen by some as an e x e r c i s e in \" d i s s e n t management\" which he lps the s t a t e to ma in ta in s o c i a l c o n t r o l , and to con t inue to p rov ide l e g i t i m a t i o n f o r i t s p o l i c y . Loney would observe p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i n t e r v e n t i o n as a measure of s o c i a l and i d e o l o g i c a l c o n t r o l f a c i l i t a t e d through s t a t e fund ing p r a c t i c e s : What Canada has w i tnessed i s not a genuine i n c r ease i n g r a s s - r o o t s democracy but a move to i n c r e a s i n g l y s o -p h i s t i c a t e d s t r a t e g i e s fo r r e i n c o r p o r a t i n g p o t e n t i a l l y d i s s i d e n t groups in to the mainstream of s o c i e t y . S i m u l -t a n e o u s l y , government fund ing has ensured the dominat ion of ideas and p r a c t i c e s which s u s t a i n the e x i s t i n g s o c i o -economic o rde r e i t h e r d i r e c t l y or by ma in t a i n i ng the i l l u s i o n of a genuine p l u r a l i s m (1977:446) . T h i s i s not to say tha t p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups have no power i n the p u b l i c h e a r i n g , nor tha t they are an i n s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r i n the d e c i s i o n s produced by the t r i b u n a l . Indeed, there i s some i n d i c a t i o n tha t they are of consequence to the d e c i s i o n s of the case s t u d i e s as we l l as in o ther t r i b u n a l s , such as the no tab le Berger Commiss ion. P u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups exer t c o n s i d e r a b l e i n f l u e n c e through the media . A l though media coverage of the two case s tudy t r i b u n a l s was not e x t e n s i v e , the a d v e r s a r i a l or o p p o s i t i o n a l nature of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t p e r s p e c -t i v e s c o n t r i b u t e s to the p u b l i c i t y of the i s s u e s . N o n e t h e l e s s , I have demonstrated in t h i s a n a l y s i s that the p l u r a l i s t concept of democracy, and the p r a c t i c e of p u b l i c t r i b u n a l i n t e r v e n t i o n , are l i m i t e d by the s o c i a l and economic c o n s t r a i n t s of l i b e r a l c a p i t a l i s m . The c r i t i c a l p a r t i c i p a t o r y p e r s p e c t i v e of the hea r ing p rocess t h e r e f o r e e x p l a i n s the d i s -242 advantage of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups w i t h i n the t r i b u n a l as a f u n c t i o n of t h e i r o p p o s i t i o n to and e x c l u s i o n from a d m i n i -s t r a t i v e and e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l power. P roduc t i on of the p u b l i c vo i ce i s thus r ecogn ized as generated and mediated by the s t a t e in i t s o r c h e s t r a t i o n of numerous r e l a t i o n s and f o r c e s . 8.4 - Towards a P a r t i c i p a t o r y Democracy A l though the p l u r a l i s t model i s l i m i t e d fo r use as a p a r t i -c i p a t o r y democra t i c c o n s t r u c t , i t has none the less c o n t r i b u t e d to the expans ion of p u b l i c access to government. The p r o v i s i o n of p u b l i c access to r e g u l a t o r y and po l i cy-mak ing a c t i v i t i e s through t r i b u n a l i n t e r v e n t i o n has been a means of expanding the i n f o r m a t i o n eva lua ted by t r i b u n a l s , and of f o c u s i n g and \" p u b l i -c i z i n g \" p e r s p e c t i v e s and i n f o rma t i on which may c o n t r a d i c t the s t a t u s quo. W i th in the parameters of a l i b e r a l p l u r a l i s t f rame-work, the t r i b u n a l p rov ides a r e l a t i v e l y autonomous means of p r o v i d i n g p u b l i c access to the dec i s ion-mak ing p r o c e s s . The p l u r a l i s t r a t i o n a l e fo r p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s upheld by the p rocess of d e m o c r a t i z a t i o n . Increased d i v e r s i t y of i n f o r m a t i o n , g r ea t e r government respons i veness to c i t i z e n s , a ba lance among competing i n t e r e s t s and s o c i a l and p s y c h o l o g i c a l b e n e f i t s remain c e n t r a l j u s t i f i c a t i o n s of p u b l i c i n p u t . Demo-c r a t i z a t i o n of the t r i b u n a l p rov ides the p u b l i c w i th a genuine vo i ce wi th which to counter dominant f a c t i o n s of power. But t h i s a n a l y s i s suggests that p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n must become more ex t ens i v e and more power fu l in o rder to r e c t i f y the imba-lance in the p resen t f o rmu l a t i on of the h e a r i n g . There are two approaches to the d e m o c r a t i z a t i o n of the hea r ing p r o c e s s . One e x i s t s w i t h i n the parameters of p l u r a l i s t democra t i c t heo r y , 243 w h i l e t h e o t h e r r e q u i r e s m o r e f u n d a m e n t a l c h a n g e s t o t h e l a r g e r s o c i a l a n d e c o n o m i c s t r u c t u r e . P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n a n d t h e P l u r a l i s t M o d e l A d m i n i s t r a t i v e a n d c o n s u l t a t i v e t r i b u n a l s h a v e i n c r e a s e d p u b l i c a c c e s s t o p o l i c y - m a k i n g a n d r e g u l a t i o n i n a r e a s o f s c i e n t i f i c a n d t e c h n i c a l d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g . T h e r e i s f o r m a l p r o v i s i o n f o r p u b l i c i n t e r v e n t i o n i n t h e p r o d u c t i o n a n d a p p e a l o f d e c i s i o n s , a n d f u n d i n g f o r p u b l i c i n t e r e s t g r o u p s h a s e f f e c -t e d a g r e a t e r d i v e r s i t y i n p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t e r e s t s . T h e e f f e c -t i v e n e s s o f p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n h a s b e e n d e m o n s t r a t e d i n s u c h i n q u i r i e s a s t h e B e r g e r C o m m i s s i o n , i n w h i c h t h e r e c o m m e n d a -t i o n s c o n c u r r e d l a r g e l y w i t h p u b l i c i n t e r e s t p o s i t i o n s . Y e t , w i t h i n t h e c o n t o u r s o f a p l u r a l i s t f r a m e w o r k , t h e p u b l i c h e a -r i n g f a i l s t o d i s p l a y t h e b a l a n c e w h i c h w o u l d r e s u l t f r o m a n e q u a l i t y o f a c c e s s a n d o p p o r t u n i t y a m o n g p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t e -r e s t s . T h e f o r u m may be f u r t h e r d e m o c r a t i z e d w i t h i n t h e p a r a m e -t e r s o f p l u r a l i s m s o a s t o e x p a n d p u b l i c a c c e s s a n d t o f u r t h e r b a l a n c e t h e c o m p e t i t i v e f r a m e w o r k . T h e h e t e r o g e n e i t y o f t h e t r i b u n a l s h a s c o m p l i e d w i t h p l u -r a l i s t e x p e c t a t i o n s , e s p e c i a l l y i n t h e c o n s u l t a t i v e t r i b u n a l . I n t h e r e g u l a t o r y t r i b u n a l , t h e a p p e a l s t r u c t u r e p r o v i d e s f o r a n a d v e r s a r i a l f o r m a t w h i c h c o r r e s p o n d s t o p l u r a l i s t n o t i o n s o f c o m p e t i n g i n t e r e s t s . H o w e v e r , p r i o r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d e c i s i o n s e x c l u d e p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n a l t h o u g h t h e y a r e f a c t o r s i n t h e t r i b u n a l ' s a s s e s s m e n t o f a n a p p e a l . T h i s i m b a l a n c e c o u l d b e a d d r e s s e d t h r o u g h p u b l i c a c c e s s t o t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p r o c e s s p r i o r t o t h e a p p e a l . 244 In a s i m i l a r v e i n , \" s u n r i s e \" l e g i s l a t i o n i n the Un i ted S t a t es r e q u i r e s p u b l i c involvement p r i o r to the hear ing stage of de c i s i on-mak ing : the p u b l i c i s i n vo l ved in the d e f i n i t i o n of terms of r e f e r e n c e , s e l e c t i o n of p rocedu ra l r u l e s , and other b a s i c d e c i s i o n s p r i o r to the h e a r i n g . Access to i n fo rma t i on l e g i s l a t i o n such as tha t passed in the Un i ted S t a t es would expand p u b l i c access to a d m i n i s t r a t i v e programs and d e c i s i o n s , thereby enab l i ng p u b l i c i n t e r v e n o r s to be t t e r research t h e i r case and to p rov ide a b e t t e r ba lance to o ther p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the p r o c e s s . The formal procedures of the t r i b u n a l s have been d e s c r i b e d as c o n c u r r i n g wi th p l u r a l i s t expec t a t i ons of f a i r n e s s . How-e v e r , d e s c r i p t i o n of the p r epa r a to r y and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l f e a -t u r e s of hea r ing p a r t i c i p a t i o n r e vea l s an imbalance among p a r t i c i p a n t s . Democ ra t i z a t i on of the hea r ing p rocess would r e q u i r e r e c o g n i t i o n of the d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y g rea te r burden of i n t e r v e n t i o n p l a ced on p u b l i c i n t e r e s t g roups , c a l l i n g f o r a g r ea t e r e q u a l i z a t i o n of p a r t i c i p a t o r y o p p o r t u n i t y . In the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t r i b u n a l , some c r i t i c s have requested that the onus be s h i f t e d from the a p p e l l a n t to the proponent , as the i n i t i a t o r of the a c t i v i t y . In the d e m o c r a t i z a t i o n of the h e a r i n g , access to resources such as p r o c e d u r a l and s u b s t a n t i v e e x p e r t i s e must be recogn ized as f a c t o r s i n the success of any i n t e r v e n t i o n . Attempts to enhance p u b l i c access to the forum through l e g a l advocacy or p a r a - l e g a l t r a i n i n g would have to be ensured . Educa t ion of the l ay p u b l i c , and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t e c h n i c a l i s sues in l ay terms and vocabu la ry would a l s o promote p u b l i c access to the t r i b u n a l 245 p r o c e s s , and c o n t r i b u t e to a genera l unders tand ing of p u b l i c i s sues and p o l i c y . A l though the RCUM attempted the l a t t e r , i t s fund ing and time parameters prevented i t s success (Abbott 1980) . However, the major method of expanding p u b l i c access and an e q u a l i t y of o p p o r t u n i t y has been through s u b s i d i z a t i o n of the p a r t i c i p a t o r y e x p e r i e n c e . In the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t r i b u n a l , the l ack of fund ing f o r p u b l i c i n t e r e s t a p p e l l a n t s i s a d e t e r r e n t to p a r t i c i p a t i o n . In the c o n s u l t a t i v e t r i b u n a l , a l though f u n -d ing was p rov ided fo r i n t e r v e n o r s , the l i m i t e d amount of funds was p e r c e i v e d by p u b l i c groups to hamper t h e i r e f f o r t s . One means of p r o v i d i n g fo r p u b l i c i n t e r e s t p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the r e g u l a t o r y and dec i s ion-mak ing p rocesses i s the e s t ab l i shment of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t advocacy cen te rs which p rov ide advocacy 1 s k i l l s f o r p u b l i c i n t e r e s t g roups . Beyond the P l u r a l i s t Model A c c o r d i n g to the p a r t i c i p a t o r y c r i t i q u e , the d e m o c r a t i z a -t i o n of the t r i b u n a l p rocess r e q u i r e s r e c o g n i t i o n of the c o n -s t r a i n t s of the p l u r a l i s t i d e o l o g y . I have i n d i c a t e d tha t from a c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e , p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the t r i b u n a l i s l i m i t e d and e l i t i s t . The s o c i a l and economic i n e q u a l i t y of the l a r g e r c a p i t a l i s t s o c i e t y i s r ecogn ized to be perpe tua ted w i t h -i n the t r i b u n a l , a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t i n g the compe t i t i v e a b i l i t i e s of i n t e r e s t s e x t e r n a l to dominant s t a t e and e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l conce rns . A c r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e r e cogn izes the imbalance of the t r i b u n a l as de r i v ed from and r e f l e c t i n g the l a r g e r c a p i t a -l i s t economic s t r u c t u r e . The p a r t i c i p a t o r y c r i t i q u e adopted i n 246 t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n i n d i c a t e s tha t a more genu ine l y e g a l i t a r i a n s o c i e t y , ach ieved p a r t i a l l y through s o c i a l i z a t i o n of the econo-my i s necessary to a f u l l d e m o c r a t i z a t i o n of the hear ing p r o -c e s s . Moreover , r e c o g n i t i o n of the t r i b u n a l as an ex tens ion of the s t a t e , i f r e l a t i v e l y autonomous, r e q u i r e s r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the f u n c t i o n s of the t r i b u n a l . A pr imary c r i t i c i s m r a i s e d by t h i s a n a l y s i s has been d i r e c t e d to the nature and fo r ce of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t r e p r e s e n t a -t i o n w i t h i n a c a p i t a l i s t c o n t e x t . The anomalous economic and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p o s i t i o n of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups has been recogn ized to de te r t h e i r e f f e c t i v e n e s s i n the t r i b u n a l p r o -c e s s . Depr i ved of adequate funding and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l base , and e x t e r n a l to the i n fo rma t i on and networks of the dominant power s o u r c e s , the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t must be r ecogn ized as r e l a -t i v e l y power l ess , i n comparison to i t s t r i b u n a l opponents . A l though the p l u r a l i s t model r e cogn izes d i f f e r e n t i a l a b i l -i t i e s among competing i n t e r e s t s , i t f a i l s to take i n to account s y s t ema t i c d i f f e r e n c e s among competing i n t e r e s t s and to see these as a f a c t o r a f f e c t i n g i n t e r v e n o r s ' compe t i t i v e a b i l i t i e s . A r e c o g n i t i o n of the d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e access to resources now enjoyed by s t a t e and co rpo ra t e i n t e r e s t s ( e . g . , tax advantages , b u r e a u c r a t i c s u p p o r t , access to in fo rmat ion ) c o n t r i b u t e s to an unders tand ing of the d isadvantage of the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t i n t e r -vener . Thus , the l a ck of economic v i a b i l i t y of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t s i n a c a p i t a l i s t c o n t e x t , t h e i r i n a b i l i t y to s u s t a i n themselves e c o n o m i c a l l y , and t h e i r dependence on inadequate s t a t e s u b s i d i -z a t i o n r a i s e problems fo r t h e i r empowerment in the p o l i t i c a l 247 process and cont inue to mute t h e i r v o i c e . Support of the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t through s t a t e f i n a n c i n g however i s regarded by many o r g a n i z a t i o n s to j e o p a r d i z e t h e i r independence as a f o r ce of s o c i a l change. W i th in the c a p i t a l i s t c o n t e x t , the p u b l i c i n t e -r e s t o r g a n i z a t i o n cou ld a l t e r n a t i v e l y be funded through i t s own means, as the S i e r r a C l u b ' s success in p u b l i c a t i o n s has demon-s t r a t e d , which would grant them more autonomy and a s t ronge r economic base . However, i n a p a r t i c i p a t o r y model which moves beyond the c o n s t r a i n t s of c a p i t a l i s m ( e . g . , the gene ra t i on of p r o f i t ) , the v i a b i l i t y of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t o r g a n i z a t i o n s cou ld be l e s s d i r e c t l y sub j e c t to cu r r en t economic c o n s t r a i n t s . The p o t e n t i a l l y g rea te r p o l i t i c a l and economic f o r c e of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups w i t h i n a p o s t - c a p i t a l i s t s o c i e t y suggests a more e g a l i t a r i a n p a r t i c i p a t o r y exper ience w i t h i n the t r i b u n a l . The d e m o c r a t i z a t i o n of the p u b l i c hea r ing s t r u c t u r e i n a p a r t i c i p a t o r y s c e n a r i o would expand the scope and nature of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n by i n c o r p o r a t i n g s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s fo r r ou t i ne and extended p u b l i c i n p u t . P u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n w i t h i n a l a r g e r p a r t i c i p a t o r y p o l i t i c a l framework cou ld assume a g r e a -t e r advocacy r o l e , r e d r e s s i n g the unequal s t r u c t u r e of r e p r e -s e n t a t i o n and i n s u f f i c i e n t d e f i n i t i o n of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t s which now e x i s t . P u b l i c involvement through a l l s tages of the p o l i c y and dec i s ion-mak ing p rocesses cou ld be l e g i s l a t e d to ensure tha t concerns of the p u b l i c are vo i ced in the f o r m u l a t i o n of p o l i c y , and not on l y i n r e a c t i o n to s p e c i f i c development. For i n s t a n c e , v a r i o u s p u b l i c i n t e r e s t o r g a n i z a t i o n s (SPEC, WCELA, Telkwa Founda t i on , S i e r r a Club) have c a l l e d fo r a p u b l i c t r i b u -248 na l i n to p r o v i n c i a l energy p o l i c y , as a means of a n t i c i p a t i n g and perhaps c i r cumven t ing hea r ings i n to s p e c i f i c energy d e v e l -opment p r o j e c t s . These would i n c l ude p u b l i c involvement i n the d e f i n i t i o n of Terms of Re f e r ence , s e l e c t i o n of Board/ Commis-s i o n members, a r t i c u l a t i o n of fund ing mechanisms, r u l i n g s on p r o c e d u r e s , and p u b l i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n on Boards/Commiss ions . Yet these recommendations r e q u i r e acceptance of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t o r g a n i z a t i o n s as a l e g i t i m a t e soc io-economic f o r c e , which i s u n l i k e l y in the contemporary c a p i t a l i s t framework. In response to deve lopmenta l and e l i t i s t c r i t i q u e s , the ex tens ion of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n beyond the l i b e r a l p l u r a l i s t model would be accompanied by s o c i a l i z a t i o n p r a c t i c e s which would in form the l ay p u b l i c about hea r ing procedures and f a m i -l i a r i z e them wi th i s sues and r e s e a r c h . P u b l i c educa t i on i n hea r ing s k i l l s would be necessary fo r the more popu la r u t i l i z a -t i o n and unders tand ing of the forum e s s e n t i a l to a democra t i c i n s t i t u t i o n . The p o p u l a r i z a t i o n of the hea r ing forum would b e n e f i t members of the p u b l i c , through t h e i r educa t ion i n s u b s t a n t i v e and p r o c e d u r a l ma t t e r s , an i n c r ease i n s k i l l s and knowledge, and p o s s i b l y g rea te r s o c i a l c o h e s i o n . From a p r a c t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e , the above recommendations r ega rd ing the d e m o c r a t i z a t i o n of the hea r ing stand l i t t l e chance of imp lementa t ion . The cu r r en t (1984) economic r e c e s -s i o n , i n c r e a s i n g unemployment, and p o l i t i c a l l y conse r v a t i v e c l ima t e (as w i tnessed i n the 1983 S o c i a l C r e d i t v i c t o r y ) do not augur a s h i f t to the p o p u l a r i z a t i o n of the hea r ing forum. The B r i t i s h Columbia Government has r e s t r i c t e d i n t e r veno r fund ing as pa r t of i t s 1983 r e s t r a i n t program. Trends w i t h i n the 249 hea r i ngs themse lves , wi th the dependence on t e c h n i c a l and s c i -e n t i f i c e x p e r t i s e , and the assessment of appea l cos t s ( Env i r on -mental Appeal Board) i n d i c a t e a decrease in the r o l e of the p u b l i c in the hea r ing p r o c e s s . The t h r e s h o l d of a c cep tab l e changes to the p u b l i c hea r ing p rocess r e f l e c t s the l i m i t s of the l a r g e r c a p i t a l i s t economy and the expans ion of the s t a t e , as w e l l as the p a r t i c u l a r s of the c u r r e n t r e c e s s i o n . While i t i s argued tha t fund ing fo r p u b l i c i n t e r e s t a c t i v i t i e s i s beyond the means of a s t r i c k e n economy, the extent of cu r r en t government fund ing in the i n t e -r e s t s of development, such as the Uranium Reconnaisance Program (a $50 m i l l i o n program to i d e n t i f y p o t e n t i a l uranium-bear ing areas f o r i ndus t r y ) must be acknowledged (CIRG 1980 :21 ) . The s t a t e cou ld p rov ide i n c reased employment through an i n c r ease i n advocacy fund ing and t r i b u n a l - r e l e v a n t s k i l l s and resources to p u b l i c i n t e r e s t g roups . A d d i t i o n a l problems wi th an i n c r ease in the scope and p a r t i c i p a t i o n of hea r ings would be a s s o c i a t e d wi th the i n -c reased b u r e a u c r a t i z a t i o n of the i n s t i t u t i o n , both w i t h i n and beyond the p l u r a l i s t model . I have p r e v i o u s l y noted the expan-s i o n i n the ranks of hea r ing \" t e c h n o c r a t s \" — t h o s e wi th e x p e r -t i s e i n the o r g a n i z a t i o n and management of the p u b l i c h e a r i n g . T h i s problem would be not on l y one of i n s t i t u t i o n a l expans ion and e x t r a expense. The b u r e a u c r a t i z a t i o n and accommodation of those i n vo l v ed i n the p rocess are a l so tendenc ies which w i l l a f f e c t the nature and goa l s of the p r o c e s s . As p u b l i c i n t e r e s t spokespersons have n o t e d , s u b s i d i z a t i o n of i nc reased p a r t i -250 c i p a t i o n would thus be even more sub jec t to c o n t r o l by the s t a t e . Other problems f o r a democrat ized hea r ing p rocess are rooted i n the t e c h n i c a l and s c i e n t i f i c nature of the i s s u e s . The dichotomy between l ay and p r o f e s s i o n a l knowledge and expe -r i ence may be made l e s s abrupt by some of the p r a c t i c e s men-t i oned above ( e . g . , p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n , l e g a l advocacy ) , but i t remains as a s t r u c t u r a l and c l a s s d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n perpe tua ted by i n s t i t u t i o n a l p r a c t i c e . Thus , p u b l i c i n t e r e s t access to i n c r eased advocacy resources would be seen by many p u b l i c i n t e r e s t c r i t i c s as a c o n t i n u a t i o n of the s o c i e t a l imbalance which a l r e ady c o n f i n e s p r o f e s s i o n a l a c t i v i t y to the work of the few. There are a l so problems of s i z e and s c a l e fo r contemporary democra t i c p r a c t i c e which have not yet been r e s o l v e d , e i t h e r in theory or i n p r a c t i c e . From a p a r t i c i p a t o r y p e r s p e c t i v e a r t i -c u l a t e d by c l a s s i c a l democra t i c t h e o r i s t s , some ideas promise a c e r t a i n u t i l i t y . Fo l l ow ing the ideas of J e f f e r s o n and Rous -seau , one cou ld argue fo r p u b l i c exp re s s i on concern ing a l l matters of c i v i c i n t e r e s t in a d i r e c t democrat i c framework. (The e q u a l i t y of c o n d i t i o n assumed by these e a r l y t h e o r i s t s must be noted as a f a c t o r i n a more ba lanced form of p a r t i c i p a -t i on ) . Mansbr idge argues a long the same l i n e s , tha t a sma l l e r s c a l e , \" u n i t a r y \" democracy, would be a p p r o p r i a t e f o r c i v i c and workplace government (1979). The i s s u e s , c o n t e x t s , and bases of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n have been expanded as a means of i n c r e a -s i ng p u b l i c access to the p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s . 8 .5-Conc lud ing Remarks 251 \\ From the p a r t i c i p a t o r y c r i t i q u e , t h e r e f o r e , c e r t a i n p r o b -lems in the p u b l i c h e a r i n g , as revea led by the a n a l y s i s of the case s t u d i e s , must be add ressed , not as problems of i n d i v i d u a l t r i b u n a l s , but as l a r g e r i s sues of s o c i a l c l a s s and s t a t e i n t e r v e n t i o n . A p a r t i c i p a t o r y model would r ecogn ize the c o n -t r i b u t i o n s of the p u b l i c as even more e s s e n t i a l , to o f f s e t the dominance of s t a t e / e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l i n t e r e s t s . The i nc rease i n s t a t e i n t e r v e n t i o n and l e g i t i m a t i o n a c t i v i t i e s such as the p u b l i c hea r ing has been noted by a number of t h e o r i s t s . Whi le t h i s a n a l y s i s has demonstrated the inadequacy of the p l u r a l i s t model , f u tu r e a n a l y s i s of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n r e q u i r e s i n -depth a n a l y s i s of the s t a t e ' s involvement in p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a -t i o n , as Loney s t a t e s : I t i s c l e a r tha t in E n g l i s h Canada i n c r eased d i s s i -dence poses no immediate t h r ea t to the s t a t u s quo. But i n the long term as governments seek to r e so l ve the economic c r i s i s by i n c r e a s i n g s t a t e management of the economy, wh i le c o n t i n u i n g to t r y to secure t h e i r p o l i t i -c a l c o n s t i t u e n c y , a con t inued growth in the s t a t e ' s l e g i -t i m a t i o n a c t i v i t i e s can be a n t i c i p a t e d . One of the very r e a l consequences of t h i s must be a s u b s t a n t i a l t r a n s f o r -mation of the p o l i t i c a l system i t s e l f . As the s t a t e moves i n to new areas of s o c i e t y the n o t i o n tha t i t i s the c i t i z e n s who govern through t h e i r e l e c t e d r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s must s u r e l y g i ve way to a more thorough e x p l o r a t i o n of how the govern ing apparatus of the s t a t e i t s e l f c o n t r o l s the c i t i z e n s and moulds and determines t h e i r p o l i t i c a l behav iour (1977:470) . In c o n c l u s i o n , I have d e s c r i b e d the p r o d u c t i o n of the p u b l i c vo i c e through the a n a l y s i s of p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the hea r ing p rocess as an e x e r c i s e of contemporary democracy. I have demonstrated the f a i l u r e of p l u r a l i s t theory to ensure the f u l l d e m o c r a t i z a t i o n of t h i s p r o c e s s . The p u b l i c vo i ce c r ea ted through hea r ing p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s r ecogn ized to l ack 252 APPENDIX 1 - PESTICIDE CONTROL APPEAL BOARD APPENDIX 1.1 - MAP OF OKANAGAN VALLEY THE OKANAGAN BASIN Source : Okanagan Bas in Implementat ion Board 1980 254 power and c o n t r o l w i t h i n the boundar ies of the t r i b u n a l . I argue tha t the i n e q u a l i t y of compe t i t i on w i t h i n the t r i b u n a l r e f l e c t s the l a r g e r s o c i a l i n e q u a l i t i e s and economic bas i s of the s o c i e t y . A p a r t i c i p a t o r y c r i t i q u e of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t p a r -t i c i p a t i o n suggests tha t the s p o r a d i c e f f e c t i v e n e s s and appa -rent f o r c e of the p u b l i c vo i ce c o n t r i b u t e to the l e g i t i m a t i o n of the t r i b u n a l and the s t a t e . From t h i s a n a l y s i s , the p u b l i c vo i ce i s seen to remain a minor pa r t in an ongoing drama d i r e c -ted and produced by o t h e r s . 1 A l though Enge lha r t and T r e b i l c o c k begin to g rapp le w i th these c o s t s , they f a i l to r ecogn ize the c o n s t r a i n t s of the c a p i t a l i s t economic s t r u c t u r e , and the r e l a t i v e economic bases of i n t e r v e -nors as c r i t i c a l f a c t o r s (1981). A l s o , see McCallum and Watkins (1975) and E s t r i n (1979) f o r f u r t h e r d i s c u s s i o n of f u n d i n g . 253 APPENDIX 1.2 - PERMIT APPLICATION, 1978 HEARINGS PROVINCE OT B.C. REQUIREMENTS WHEN SUBMITTING APPLICATIONS TO APPLY PESTICIDES Seven copies of proposed treatment (Including seven naps showing treatment ereaa) sre required. Seven copies of proposed treatment must be supplied to the Chairman, B.C. Interdepartmental Pesticide Committee. B.C. Department of Agriculture, P.O. Box 1173, Sta. A, Surrey, B.C. V3S 4P9 at least sis weeks prior to treatment date. We w i l l forward one copy to Environment Canada for their comment to you. Proposed Treatmenti Herbicide 2.4-D Insecticide Other Pesticide (specify) _ . Ministry of the Environment Name of Applicant (Company Name)t Water Investigations Branch, Environmental Studies Division Addresst Parliament Buildings, Victoria, B.C. Name of Applicator Contractor ( i f applicable) i Address t Project Location - a) general (i.e. nearest town) i Pentlcton b) specif i c i Skaha Lake - northwest side Project Numberi 139-14-78 Purpose of Project i Eurasian water m i l f o i l control (e.g. alder seed tree control, conifer ' release, range improvement, right-or-way maintenance) Total Acreage of Projecti 33 Estimated Acreage Actually Receiving Treatmenti 27 - 35 acres Name of Postlcldoi (e.g. Esteron 99, malathioa) Aqua-Kleen 20 Pesticide Control Products Act No. (as on container): 9907 Active Ingredient! (e.g. 2.4-S-T amine or 2.4-0 iao-octyl ester) 2,4-D butoxyethenol ester Concentration to be used (express In lbs, of active ingredient per acre) • as per covering document Total chemical used on project (express In lbs, of active Ingredient)i Maximum 1,400 lbs. Carrier or Diluenti (e.g. water, o i l ) attaclay granules Application Meth-Jdi (e.g. basal notch, mist blower, helicopter, fixed wing, boom sprayer) spin spreader Approximate Dates of Application! April 15th • September 31st (state as close as possible expected time of application) Target Speciesi (e.g. mosquitoes, competing cedar-healock, red alder) Myrlophyllum spicatum Are lakes, rivers, streams or other water bodies involved? Yes No If \"yes\" are they used for municipal Yes or other domestic water supply Yes Please not covering document for situations involving water intakes. Maps Attached? Yes No The above treatments w i l l be conducted under the supervision of (name and t i t l e ) Government Certified Supervisor - not appointed at this time whose telephone number i s ' Pesticide Applicator C e r t i f i c a t e (number and type). Contact Person! P.O. B e l l l i e - 387-5221 - 3a Non-Aq.-Mon-Fos. Vegetation Central Certificate #5137 Pete February 15, 1979 Signed (name) Chemical Treetment Coordinator (title) Aquatic Plant Management Program (SEE REVERSE FOR \"BASIC REQUIREMENTS OT B.C. GOVERNMENT TO SATISFY STATUTES AMD SAFE USE OF PESTICIDES\"). Sou r ce : T Rober ts 1981 :45 . 255 APPENDIX 1.3 - PERMIT APPROVAL, 1978 HEARINGS Province of British Columbia Ministry of Environment Pesticide Control Branch 1S326— IMA Avenue Surrey Brilnh Columbia VSR 7 A? Phone: 584-8822 April 19, 1978 Your Fi le: 0316583 Dr. P.R. Newroth, Project Manager Aquatic Plant Management Program J . Water Investigations Branch British Columbia Ministry of the Environment Parliament Buildings VICTORIA, B.C. V8V 1X4 Dear Dr. Newroth: Re: Pesticide Control Act Herbicide Use (Aqua-Kleen 20) Permit for Control of Eurasian Water Milfoil -Skaha Lake. Northwest Side The Pesticide Control Branch in consultation with the British Columbia Inter-Ministry Pesticide Committee and the Advisory Committee to the Minister of the Environment on the Control of Eurasian Water Milfoil in the Okanagan Lake System has completed its review of the above project as outlined in your pesticide use permit application of February 15, 1978, and you are herewith advised that the project may be carried out subject to the following conditions: 1. That al l herbicide applications be made under the direct supervision of an individual who possesses a current B. C. Pesticide Applicator Certificate. 2. That i f a contractor is hired to carry out the work that he possess a current B. C. Pest Control Service Licence. 3. That this project not be undertaken until such time as the federal pesticide regulatory authorities have approved the use of Aqua-Kleen 20 in areas where herbicide treated water may subsequently be used for irrigation, livestock watering, or potable purposes. Please contact the Control Products Section, Plant Products Division, Agriculture Canada, Ottawa in this regard. 4. That the size of this project be reduced in size from the proposed 14 hectares to 4 hectares. Consideration wil l be given upon written request to amending this permit to provide for additional treatments once the initial 4 hectare treatment has been completed in a manner that complies with the provisions of this permit. 5. That the project not be undertaken until such time as the Fish and Wildlife Branch has been contacted regarding the specific location of mountain whitefish spawning beds in the proposed treatment area. Herbicide use must not be undertaken in these specified areas as herbicide use may adversely effect the l i fe cycle of this species. Please contact R. L. Morley of the Fish and Wildlife Branch, Victoria (387-1493) on this matter. 6. That the effective date of this permit is May 5, 1978 and that the project be carried out within the period June 1 to September 30, 1978. 256 APPENDIX 1.5 - BASIC APPEAL PROCEDURES OF THE PESTICIDE CONTROL APPEAL BOARD 1. The h e a r i n g of the appea l w i l l be p u b l i c . No t r a n s c r i p t of the h e a r i n g w i l l be made by the Boa rd . 2. Each a p p e l l a n t w i l l p resen t the reasons fo r the a p p e a l , e i t h e r p e r s o n a l l y or through a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e and w i t n e s s e s . 3. The ev idence g i v en by each a p p e l l a n t w i l l be f o l l o w e d by q u e s t i o n s put to the a p p e l l a n t and w i t n e s s e s , i f any, by the permi t h o l d e r . 4. T h i s may be f o l l o w e d by q u e s t i o n s put to the a p p e l l a n t by the members of the Board and t h e i r a d v i s e r s , i f any. 5. In case the permi t h o l d e r wishes to b r i n g forward r e l e v a n t ev idence or does so i n r espond ing to q u e s t i o n s from the members of the Boa rd , the a p p e l l a n t w i l l have an o p p o r t u n i t y to put q u e s t i o n s to the Permit H o l d e r . 6. At the c o n c l u s i o n of c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n of the ev idence p resen ted at the h e a r i n g , the Board w i l l g i v e (a) the permi t h o l d e r and (b) the a p p e l l a n t an o p p o r t u n i t y to summarize the arguments . Ten c o p i e s of a l l submiss ions are reques ted f o r the i n f o r -mat ion of Board membrs and a p p e l l a n t / p e r m i t h o l d e r . 7. T h i s w i l l conc lude the hea r i ng of the a p p e a l . The Board w i l l r e se r ve i t s d e c i s i o n . The Board may or may not g i ve reasons fo r i t s d e c i s i o n which w i l l be forwarded to the a p p e l -l a n t and the Permit Ho lder as soon as the d e c i s i o n has been made. 259 APPENDIX 2 - THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF INQUIRY INTO URANIUM MINING APPENDIX 2.1 - PRELIMINARY RULINGS, NUMBER 1 Province of British Columbia R O Y A L C O M M I S S I O N O F I N Q U I R Y H E A L T H A N D E N V I R O N M E N T A L P R O T E C T I O N U R A N I U M M I N I N G e O H M I I U O N I D t l O A V I O V . • A T M . a.o.ic.»T.«i. r.m.c.'.. ».«. ,Cr».lC>. .-A-C»- F..ICI* CMAIMM AH V A L T C I I o u o i f r r . » . C M . E X E C U T I V E • C C K C T A R V t • * I O ~ C E N . C . O . OAH»T I f t C T i a c S ) May H , 1979 C O M M I S S I O N C O U N f C U ftUSSSl*. J . A N T H O N T . . . . . . LU.B.. PRELIMINARY RULINGS NO. 1 RULES OF PROCEDURE In f u l f i l l i n g i t s Terms of Reference as out l i n e d i n Order i n C o u n c i l No. 170 dated January 18th, 1979, the Royal Commission of Inquiry Into Uranium Mining m i l l hold p u b l i c hearings throughout the Province of B r i t i s h Columbia. To ensure maximum p a r t i c i p a t i o n the Commission w i l l gather evidence and r e c e i v e p u b l i c comments regarding the matters d e s c r i b e d i n i t s Terms of Reference by holding p u b l i c hearings, con-s i s t i n g of formal hearings and l o c a l hearings, and by r e c e i v i n g w r i t t e n briefs-. 262 A. PROCEDURE FDR LOCAL HEARINGS L. The Commission u i l l . through the Executive Secretary, advise the various communities l i k e l y to be affected by proposed uranium exploration, mining or milling in B r i t i s h Columbia and the major participants of the locations and times for l o c a l hearings. The dates, location and time of the commun-i t y public hearings u i l l be advertised through the lo c a l media u e l l i n advance of the hearings. 2. Apart from rules of decorum and courtesy there u i l l be no formal rules governing the lo c a l hearings. Those uho have something to say u i l l be asked to come forward and be suiorn and then can give their evidence in whatever uay they are most comfortable. Several persons may make their present-ation i n a group rather than individually i f they so\" wish. Individuals presenting detailed or technical evidence are encouraged to f i l e their presentations uith the Commission i n advance. 3. The Commission members u i l l be entitled to ask questions of persons making presentations but no one else u i l l be accorded th i s privilege. If someone uishes a matter c l a r i f i e d he may request the Commission to seek such c l a r i f i c a t i o n of the person making the presentation or request the attend-ance of such uitness at the formal hearings uhere the evi-dence can be tested under cross-examination. 263 B. PROCEDURE FDR FORMAL HEARINGS 1. P a r t i c i p a n t s 1.1 Any person uho advises the Commission i n w r i t i n g of h i s i n t e n t i o n to appear and give evidence at any formal hearing or uho a c t u a l l y appears, g i v e s h i s name and address to the Commission and s t a t e s h i s i n t e n t i o n to give evidence u i l l be deemed a p a r t i c i p a n t . 1.2 The Executive Secretary s h a l l maintain a l i s t of p a r t i -cipants and the l i s t s h a l l be a v a i l a b l e f o r p u b l i c i n -spe c t i o n at the Commission's o f f i c e . 1.3 The Commission s h a l l , from time to time, i d e n t i f y c e r -t a i n p a r t i e s as \"major p a r t i c i p a n t s \" i n the proceedings i n the sense that they e i t h e r have i n d i c a t e d an i n t e n t i o n to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the proceedings an a more or l e s s r e g u l a r b a s i s br have been i d e n t i f i e d as possessing information of p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t and relevance to the uork of the Commission. The p a r t i c i p a t i o n of these major p a r t i c i p a n t s s h a l l be governed by f u r t h e r procedural r u l e s of the Commission. 2. Phasing of Formal Hearings 2.1 The formal hearings s h a l l be div i d e d i n t o the fol l o w i n g phases: 2 6 4 Phase It Overvieu This phase u i l l consist of evidence called by.Commission Counsel designed to deal generally uith the occurrence and geochemistry of uranium and the physical environ-ment of id e n t i f i e d uranium deposits in B.C.; describe exploration, mining, milling, transport, and disposal techniques and outline the jurisdiction and authority o f monitoring and regulating bodies. The purpose of this Overvieu is to present information o f a background and introductory nature and i s designed primarily as a public information session. For that reason cross-examination, except for questions by the Commissioners themselves, u i l l not be allowed. A l l issues raised i n the Overvieu u i l l be reviewed at the appropriate i time during the subsequent formal hearings of the Commission and, at that time, further evidence and cross-examination u i l l be allowed. A copy of the witnesses' statements sh a l l be circulated for comment before the uitnesses appear. This phase of the Inquiry u i l l be held i n . Vancouver. Phase l i t Project Descriptions Included u i l l be a description of the geology and physical environment at specific sites; a description 265 of the present.and proposed project development plans, including consideration of the design, engineering and construction techniques proposed and an examination o r alternatives* Phase I I I : Impact of Uranium Exploration, Mining and Milling on the Physical and Living Environment This phase m i l l examine the impact on the environment of each of the major a c t i v i t i e s associated uith uranium mining - exploration, mining, milling, processing, t a i l i n g s and urate disposal and transportation; identify the impacts on the atmosphere, biosphere, hydrosphere and terrasphere, in both the short and long term; review the techniques available for environmental pro-tection, conservation and reclamation and examine the adequacy of environmental monitoring and regulation* Phase IV: Impact of Uranium Exploration, Mining and M i l l i n g on the Human Environment This phase u i l l examine the potential impact on indiv-iduals and society at large of the various aspects of uranium exploration, mining and m i l l i n g . This u i l l include an identification of hazards to workers, the effects on the public at large particularly the com-munities adjacent to uranium sites, an analysis of the 266 proposed monitoring and p r o t e c t i v e measures respecting the human environment and the s o c i a l and economic impact of proposed uranium mining. 2.2 The d i v i s i o n of the formal .hearings i n t o phases i s f o r purposes of convenience only. Commission Counsel u i l l i n v i t e p a r t i c i p a n t s to consult u i t h him from time to time to determine whether there should be any f u r t h e r d i v i s i o n s of the hearings u i t h i n each phase, whether a d d i t i o n a l phases are required or otherwise determine the most e f f i c i e n t and f a i r e s t uay to have a l l the r e l e v a n t evidence presented before the Commission. 2.3 The Commission u i l l determine the pla c e and date f o r the commencement of hearings f o r each of the phases as soon as i t i s i n a p o s i t i o n to do so. A f t e r the date and place f o r a p a r t i c u l a r phase are determined the Executive Secretary u i l l send to each p a r t i c i p a n t a n o t i c e of hearing. In a d d i t i o n , the Executive Sec-r e t a r y u i l l . through the neus media, advise the p u b l i c g e n e r a l l y of the commencement date of each phase, the p l a c e of hearing and the matters to be considered during such phase. Production of Studies, Reports; and Other Documents . 3.1 Commission Counsel u i l l be respo n s i b l e f o r requesting th a t r e p o r t s and documents of i n t e r e s t to the Commission i n the possession or pouer of the government of B r i t i s h Columbia, the Federal Government and various boards and agencies, both provincial and federal, are made available* To that end, Commission Counsel u i l l com-municate uith these various governments and boards and arrange for them to provide the Commission uith the documents and reports required* 3*2 A l l of the major participants and the Commission Counsel s h a l l , no later than June 15, 1979, f i l e uith the Commission and circulate to the other major p a r t i c i -pants a l i s t of the reports, studies and other docu-ments ui t h i n their possession or pouer uhich are re-levant to the subject matter before the Commission, including those for uhich privilege may be proposed to be claimed* 3*3 Supplementary l i s t s are to be f i l e d from time to time as further reports, studies or other documents come to the attention of major participants* 3*<* Each l i s t of reports shall to the extent possible identify the study, report or document by stating, (a) the name of the person or persons uho made or compiled i t ; -(b) The date i t uas made or compiled; (c) A brief description of the subject matter uith uhich i t i s concerned; 268 (d) Whether the study, report or document i s available to the general public and, i f i t i s , the name and address of the publi-sher or distributor; The l i s t s h a l l also contain the name, address and phone number of the person to be contacted to review the documents l i s t e d . 3.5 The l i s t of documents sha l l be available for inspec-tion by any participant and, upon notice to Commis-- sion Counsel and to the major participant f i l i n g the l i s t , any participant may demand production of any document on the l i s t for review. 3.6.. Upon.reasonable notice .being, given, to the Commission arid to Commission Counsel, any participant may bring before the Commission an application for production of any l i s t e d document i f production has been refused or for a further or better l i s t of documents. A par-ticipant may, in addition, request production of any reports, study or document relevant to the subjet matter before the Commission known to them and i n the possession or power of any of the participants. 3.7 If any dispute arises as to any claim of privilege or confidentiality made respecting a document, such d i s -pute s h a l l be referred to the Commission for a ruling. 269 3.8 For purposes of Rule 3 only (Production of Studies, Reports and Other Documents) the f o l l o w i n g s h a l l be regarded as major p a r t i c i p a n t s required to f i l e L i s t of documents: (1 (2 (3 (4 (5 (6 (7 (8 (9 (10 ( U (12 (13 C l * (15 (16 (17 (18 (19 (20 (21 (22 (23 (2<» (25 (26 (27 (28 .(29 (30 Commission Counsel, on behalf of the Commission s t a f f and Government Departments and Agencies; A l l i a n c e Against Uranium Mining The A t l i n C o u n c i l Boundary Environment and Outdoor Club (Grand Forks) B r i t i s h Columbia & Yukon Chamber of Mines Canadian C o a l i t i o n f a r Nuclear R e s p o n s i b i l i t y (Kelowna) Canadian K e l v i n Resources L i m i t e d Committee f o r a Clean K e t t l e V a l l e y Consolidated Rexspar Minerals & Chemicals L t d * E.& B Ex p l o r a t i o n s L t d . The Greenpeace Foundation (Vancouver) Greenpeace (Okanagan) Foundation Indigenous Peoples of the Western Hemisphere The Kootenay Nuclear Study Group The Mining A s s o c i a t i o n o f B r i t i s h Columbia Noranda E x p l o r a t i o n Company L i m i t e d Norcen Energy Resources L i m i t e d P l a c e r Development L t d . PNC E x p l o r a t i o n (Canada) Co. L t d * S h e l l Canada Resources Limited South Okanagan Environmental C o a l i t i o n Union df B.C. Indian Chiefs The United Church of Canada - The B r i t i s h Columbia Conference United Fishermen and A l l i e d Workers' Union West Coast Environmental Lau Research Foundation Yellouhead E c o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n - Clearwater Yellowhead E c o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n -.Kamloops Chinook Con s t r u c t i o n & Engineering Ltd.' Stampede I n t e r n a t i o n a l Resources L t d . S o l a r A l t e r n a t i v e s to Nuclear Energy 270 N o t i c e of Evidence to be Presented U . l Every p a r t i c i p a n t before giving evidence or c a l l i n g witnesses on i t s behalf at the formal hearings s h a l l f i l e u i t h the Commission ( 5 copies) and c i r c u l a t e to the major p a r t i c i p a n t s and Commission Counsel, at l e a s t tuo weeks before g i v i n g or c a l l i n g such evidence, a text or f u l l synopsis of that evidence, a t e x t or f u l l synopsis of that evidence together u i t h a l i s t of any r e p o r t s , s t u d i e s or other docu-ments to uhich the witness may r e f e r or upon uhich he may r e l y and a b i o g r a p h i c a l note on the witness. I».2 Uhere a witness i s c a l l e d by subpoena the p a r t i c i p a n t requesting the subpoena s h a l l comply u i t h Rule *V.l as much as p o s s i b l e i n d i c a t i n g the i s s u e the witness i s expected to address and h i s q u a l i f i c a t i o n s . U.3 I f a p a r t i c i p a n t cannot comply u i t h the tuo week r u l e that u i l l not n e c e s s a r i l y preclude the talcing of evidence of the witness i n question but i t may mean the witness u i l l have to be r e c a l l e d l a t e r f o r cross-examination. Examination of Witnesses 5*1 The p a r t i c i p a n t c a l l i n g a uitness s h a l l be permitted to- examine him f i r s t . The uitness s h a l l then be cross-examined by Commission Counsel -and by the other p a r t i c i p a n t s . The p a r t i c i p a n t c a l l i n g the ui t n e s s s h a l l be e n t i t l e d to re-examine. 5*2 The order f o r presenting evidence and cross-exam-i n i n g u i l l be determined by the Commission from time to time as the nature of the evidence r e q u i r e s . G e n e r a l l y . Commission Counsel u i l l l e a d o f f the cross-examination to be followed by Counsel f o r oth e r major p a r t i c i p a n t s and f i n a l l y by any other p a r t i c i p a n t . 5.3 Witnesses may give evidence i n d i v i d u a l l y or as p a r t of a group or panel t e s t i f y i n g c o n c u r r e n t l y . In the Commission's d i s c r e t i o n , any u i t n e s s or witnesses may be c a l l e d mare than once. Documentary Evidence 6.1 Any study, report or other document r e l i e d upon i n the evidence of any u i t n e s s s h a l l be f i l e d as an * e x h i b i t at the hearing unless the Commission o t h e r -wise d i r e c t s . 6.2 Uhere appropriate, the Commission may seek informa-t i o n from p a r t i e s , uhether they are p a r t i c i p a n t s or not, by having Commission Counsel communicate u i t h them. The questions posed and the answers re c e i v e d s h a l l then farm part of the evidence before the Commission. The Commission may, i n i t s d i s c r e t i o n , r e q u i r e t h a t the person providing such answers appear at a hearing to v e r i f y h i s evidence and be cross-examined. 6*3 Uhere a p a r t i c i p a n t claims that a study, report or other document, or any part thereof, i s of a -c o n f i d e n t i a l or p r i v i l e g e d nature, the p a r t i c i p a n t s h a l l produce such study, report or other document f o r i n s p e c t i o n by the Commission and the Commission, without d i s c l o s i n g the contents thereof, s h a l l r u l e upon the c l a i m . 6«*» The Commission may, i n t h e i r d i s c r e t i o n and i f they think i t j u s t and necessary f o r c a r r y i n g out t h e i r Terms of Reference, consider as part of the evidence before there any study, report or document or any p a r t thereof though i t may be ruled to be c o n f i d e n t i a l o r p r i v i l e g e d . A p p l i c a t i o n s to the Commission 7*1 Subpoenas may be issued by the Commission, at i t s d i s c r e t i o n , upon a p p l i c a t i o n by any p a r t i c i p a n t pro-vided such p a r t i c i p a n t has demonstrated he has attempted t o obtain the attendance of the witness or the docu-mentary evidence without success, that a subpoena i s necessary to obtain the witness or document, and tha t the witness or document i s necessary and r e l e v a n t to the Terms of Reference of the Commission. 7.2 Notice of an a p p l i c a t i o n f o r a subpoena to o b t a i n the attendance of a p a r t i c i p a n t or an employee of or consultant to a p a r t i c i p a n t or f o r production of a document i n the possession or power of a par-t i c i p a n t s h a l l be given to that p a r t i c i p a n t . 273 7*3 An a p p l i c a t i o n may be made by a p a r t i c i p a n t to the Commission f o r any r e l i e f whatsoever provided i t i s made upon reasonable n o t i c e to the Commission, Com-mission Counsel and the major p a r t i c i p a n t s as w e l l as any other p a r t i c i p a n t s t h a t may be a f f e c t e d * I 8* Changes i n These Rules 8*1 The Commission r e t a i n s the power to add to, a l t e r or modify these r u l e s , to suspend the operation of any or part of them or to r e q u i r e any p a r t i c i p a n t not already bound by them to comply i n whole or i n part, as w e l l as the power to exempt any p a r t i c i p a n t from complying with these r u l e s i n whole o r i n p a r t , as the J u s t i c e of the s i t u a t i o n demands* C* RULES RELATING TP UR ITT Efl BRIEFS 1* The Commission s h a l l at any time accept w r i t t e n b r i e f s from anyone, whether a p a r t i c i p a n t i n the proceedings or not* I f p o s s i b l e , the b r i e f should be typewritten and f i v e copies provided* 2* The Commission may request that the person or group pre-s e n t i n g a w r i t t e n b r i e f attend before i t so that the issues r a i s e d i n the written b r i e f may be explored before a p u b l i c hearing* 274 APPENDIX 2.2 - PARTICIPANT FUNDING ROYAL COMMISSION OF INQUIRY INTO URANIUM MINING PARTICIPANT FUNDING—$225,000.00 Atlin Community Association Atlin, B .C. Beaverdell Community C u b Kelowna, B.C. $12,000 $3,700 Boundary Environment and Outdoor Club $3,400 Grand Forks, B .C . British Columbia Conference, United $8,000 Church of Canada Vancouver, B .C. British Columbia & Yukon Chamber $4,000 of Mines Vancouver, B .C. Canadian Coalition for Nuclear $7,000 Responsibility Kelowna Branch Kelowna, B .C. Canadian Coalition for Nuclear $4,000 Responsibility Vancouver Branch Vancouver, B .C. Canadian Public Health Association $2,500 Kelowna, B .C. Committee for a Clean Kettle Valley $5,000 Rock Creek, B .C . Smithers Conservations Centre $6,000 Concerned Citizens Coalition of Bulkley-Nechako Telkwa. B.C. Solar Alternatives to Nuclear Energy $1,000 Crofton, B.C. South East Kelowna Irrigation District $3,700 East Kelowna, B .C . South Okanagan Environmental Coalition $5,000 Penticton, B .C. Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs Vancouver, B .C. $19,500 Environmental Alliance Against $45,000 Uranium Mining Vancouver, B .C. Greater Victoria Environmental Centre $2,000 Victoria, B .C. Greenpeace Foundation (Okanagan) $6,500 Kelowna, B.C. Greenpeace Foundation (Vancouver) $2,000 Vancouver, B .C. Indigenous Peoples of the Western $500 Hemisphere Vancouver, B .C. Joint Committee—Uranium Technical $25,000 Hearings Rock Creek, B .C . Kamloops Honey Producers' Association $500 Kamloops, B.C. Kootenay Nuclear Study Group $24,000 Nelson, B.C. Pulp, Paper and Woodworkers of Canada $3,150 Vancouver, B .C. Saltspring Society for Educational $2,500 Alternatives Fulford Harbour, B .C . United Fishermen & Allied Workers' $2,000 Union Vancouver, B .C. West Coast Environmental Law $10,300 Research Foundation Vancouver, B .C. Yellowhead Ecological Association $8,000 Clearwater Branch Clearwater, B .C. Yellowhead Ecological Association $8,000 Kamloops Branch Kamloops, B.C. Sou rce : Roya l Commission 1980:281-282. of I nqu i r y i n t o Uranium Min ing 275 B I B L I O G R A P H Y A b b o t t , R e b e c c a J . 1 9 8 0 - A n E v a l u a t i o n o f t h e E f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t h e R o y a l C o m m i s s i o n o f I n q u i r y i n t o U r a n i u m M i n i n g . M a s t e r ' s T h e -s i s , U B C . A l m o n d G . a n d S . V e r b a 1 9 6 3 - T h e C i v i c C u l t u r e . P r i n c e t o n : P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r -s i t y P r e s s . A n d e r s o n , T . 1 9 8 3 - E t h i c s , U r a n i u m M i n i n g , a n d P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n D e v e l o p m e n t D e c i s i o n s . U n p u b l i s h e d p a p e r . A n d r e w , C a r o l i n e a n d R e j e a n P e l l e t i e r 1 9 7 8 - T h e R e g u l a t o r s . I n B . D o e r n e d . , T h e R e g u l a t o r y P r o c e s s i n C a n a d a . T o r o n t o : M a c m i l l a n . 1 4 7 - 1 6 4 . A r p n , R a y m o n d 1 9 6 8 - M a i n C u r r e n t s i n S o c i o l o g i c a l T h o u g h t , V o l u m e I. G a r d e n C i t y : D o u b l e d a y . B a l b u s , I . D . 1 9 7 1 - T h e C o n c e p t o f I n t e r e s t i n P l u r a l i s t a n d M a r x i a n A n a l y s i s . P o l i t i c s a n d S o c i e t y . 1 : 1 5 1 - 1 7 7 . B a y , C . 1 9 6 7 - P o l i t i c s a n d P s e u d o p o l i t i c s : A C r i t i c a l E v a l u a t i o n o f Some B e h a v i o r a l L i t e r a t u r e . I n M c C o y a n d P l a y f o r d , A p o l i t i c a l P o l i t i c s . New Y o r k : C r o w e l l 1 2 - 3 8 . B e r e l s o n , B . R . e t a l . 1 9 5 4 - V o t i n g . C h i c a g o : U n i v e r s i t y o f C h i c a g o P r e s s . B e r g e r , T . 1 9 7 6 - T h e M a c k e n z i e V a l l e y P i p e l i n e I n q u i r y . Q u e e n ' s Q u a r t e r l y , 8 3 : 1 - 1 2 . 1 9 7 7 - N o r t h e r n F r o n t i e r , N o r t h e r n H o m e l a n d : T h e R e p o r t o f t h e M a c k e n z i e V a l l e y P i p e l i n e I n q u i r y , V o l . 1 . O t t a w a : M i n i s t r y o f S u p p l y a n d S e r v i c e s . B l o c k , F . 1 9 7 7 - T h e R u l i n g C l a s s D o e s N o t R u l e . S o c i a l i s t R e v o l u -t i o n 7 : 6 - 2 8 . 1 9 8 0 - B e y o n d R e l a t i v e A u t o n o m y : S t a t e M a n a g e r s a s H i s t o r i c a l S u b j e c t s . T h e S o c i a l i s t R e g i s t e r : 2 2 7 - 2 4 2 . B o g g i l d , K . 1 9 8 3 - L e g a l c o u n s e l , W C E L A . I n t e r v i e w 3 / 8 3 . B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a R o y a l C o m m i s s i o n o f I n q u i r y i n t o U r a n i u m M i -2 7 6 nmg 1 9 7 9 - F a c t S h e e t 9 / 3 1 / 7 9 1 9 7 9 - U r a n i u m I n q u i r y D i g e s t #10 1 9 7 9 - 8 0 - P r o c e e d i n g s 1 9 8 0 - F i n a l R e p o r t . V i c t o r i a : Q u e e n ' s P r i n t e r . B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a R o y a l C o m m i s s i o n o f I n q u i r y i n t o P e s t i c i d e s a n d H e r b i c i d e s 1 9 7 5 - F i n a l R e p o r t B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a C o u n c i l o f t h e U n i t e d C h u r c h o f C a n a d a 1 9 8 0 - E t h i c s a n d U r a n i u m M i n i n g : R e p o r t t o R o y a l C o m m i s s i o n o f I n q u i r y i n t o U r a n i u m M i n i n g . V a n c o u v e r . B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a M i n i s t r y o f E n v i r o n m e n t . A q u a t i c P l a n t M a n -a g e m e n t P r o g r a m . 1 9 7 8 - Some F a c t s A b o u t 2 , 4 - D . B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a S u p r e m e C o u r t 1 9 7 8 - J u d i c i a l R e v i e w . P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A p p e a l B o a r d D e c i s i o n , J u n e 2 1 , 1 9 7 8 . B r o o k s , D . 1 9 8 1 - Z e r o E n e r g y G r o w t h f o r C a n a d a . T o r o n t o , M c C l e l l a n d a n d S t e w a r t . B r o o k s , D . a n d J . R o b i n s o n 1 9 8 3 - L i f e A f t e r O i l . O t t a w a , M i n i s t r y o f E n e r g y , M i n e s , a n d R e s o u r c e s . B u r t o n , T . L . 1 9 7 9 - A R e v i e w a n d A n a l y s i s o f C a n a d i a n C a s e s i n P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n . I n B . S a d l e r , e d . , E d m o n t o n : E n v i r o n m e n t C o u n c i l o f C a n a d a . 2 : 3 - 1 6 . C a n a d i a n C o a l i t i o n f o r N u c l e a r R e s p o n s i b i l i t y 1 9 8 0 - U r a n i u m M i n i n g i s N o t i n t h e P u b l i c I n t e r e s t . K e l o w n a , B . C . C h a p i n , H . a n d D . D e n e a u 1 9 7 8 - A c c e s s a n d t h e P o l i c y - M a k i n g P r o c e s s . O t t a w a , C a n a d i a n C o u n c i l o n S o c i a l D e v e l o p m e n t . C h e c k o w a y , B a r r y a n d J o n V a n T i l 1 9 7 8 - W h a t Do We K n o w A b o u t C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n ? A S e l e c t i v e R e v i e w o f R e s e a r c h . I n S . L a n g t o n , C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n A m e r i c a . L e x i n g t o n , M a s s . : D . C . H e a t h . 1 9 8 3 - T h e P o l i t i c s o f P u b l i c H e a r i n g s . I n T h e J o u r n a l o f A p p l i e d B e h a v i o r a l S c i e n c e , V o l . 1 7 , N o . 4 : 5 6 6 - 5 8 1 . C h r i s t i a n s e n - R u f f m a n , L . a n d B . S t u a r t 1 9 7 8 - A c t o r s a n d P r o c e s s e s i n C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n : N e g a t i v e A s p e c t s o f R e l i a n c e o n P r o f e s s i o n a l s . I n B . S a d l e r , e d . , I n v o l v e m e n t a n d E n v i r o n m e n t . E d m o n t o n , E n v i -r o n m e n t C o u n c i l o f C a n a d a . 1 : 7 7 - 1 0 2 . 2 7 7 Clement , W. 1975 - The Canadian Corpora te E l i t e : An A n a l y s i s of E co -nomic Power. T o r o n t o : M c C l e l l a n d and S tewar t . Community In fo rmat ion Research Group 1980 - Uranium Min ing and the Nuc lear I ndus t r y . C o r c o r a n , P. 1983 - The L i m i t s of Democrat ic Theory . In Duncan, Democrat ic Theory and P r a c t i c e . Cambridge: Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y Press 13-24. C u r t i s , M 1968 - The Great P o l i t i c a l T h e o r i e s , Volume 2. New York : Avon Books. D a h l , R.A. 1956 - A P re face to Democrat ic Theory . Ch i c ago : U n i v e r -s i t y of Chicago P r e s s . 1970 - Modern P o l i t i c a l A n a l y s i s . Englewood C l i f f s , N . J . : P r e n t i c e - H a l l . 1982 - The Dilemmas of Democrat ic P l u r a l i s m . New Haven: Ya le U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . D a v i s , Lane 1967 - The Cost of Rea l i sm : Contemporary Restatements of Democracy. In McCoy and P l a y f o r d . A p o l i t i c a l P o l i t i c s . 185-198 Doern , G. Bruce 1976 - The Atomic Energy C o n t r o l Board . Ottawa: Law Reform Commission of Canada. 1978 - The Regu la to ry P rocess i n Canada. To ron to : M a c m i l l a n . 1979 - Regu la to ry P rocesses and Regu la to ry Agenc i e s . In G. B. Doern and P. A u c o i n , P u b l i c P o l i c y in Canada. T o r -on to : M a c m i l l a n , 158-189. Doern , G.B. and P. Auco in 1979 - P u b l i c P o l i c y in Canada. T o r o n t o : Macmi l l an . Domhoff, G.W. 1967 - Who Rules America? Engelwood C l i f f s : P r e n t i c e -H a l l . 1970 The Higher C i r c l e s . New York : V i n t a g e . Domhoff, G.W. and H.B. B a l l a r d , eds . 1968 - C. Wright M i l l s and The Power E l i t e . Bos ton : Bea -con . D rape r , J . 1978 - The E v o l u t i o n of C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n in Canada. In B. S a d l e r , ed . Involvement and Env i ronment . Edmonton: Environment C o u n c i l of Canada. 26-42. 278 D u n c a n , G . , e d . 1 9 8 3 - D e m o c r a t i c T h e o r y a n d P r a c t i c e . C a m b r i d g e : C a m -b r i d g e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . D u n c a n , G . a n d L u k e s , S . 1 9 6 7 - T h e New D e m o c r a c y . I n M c C o y a n d P l a y f o r d , A p o l i t i -c a l P o l i t i c s . New Y o r k : C r o w e l l . 1 6 0 - 1 8 4 . E b b i n , S . a n d R. K a s p a r 1 9 7 4 - C i t i z e n G r o u p s a n d t h e N u c l e a r P o w e r C o n t r o v e r s y : U s e s o f S c i e n t i f i c a n d T e c h n o l o g i c a l I n f o r m a t i o n . C a m b r i d g e : M . I . T . P r e s s . E l d e r , P . S . 1 9 7 5 - e d . , E n v i r o n m e n t a l M a n a g e m e n t a n d P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a -t i o n T o r o n t o : C a n a d i a n E n v i r o n m e n t a l L a w A s s o c i a t i o n . 1 9 7 6 - P u b l i c H e a r i n g s i n E n v i r o n m e n t a l P l a n n i n g a n d M a n -a g e m e n t . I n W. T . P e r k s a n d I . M . R o b i n s o n . U r b a n a n d R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g i n a F e d e r a l S t a t e . T o r o n t o : M c G r a w -H i l l . E m o n d , D . P . 1 9 7 5 - P a r t i c i p a t i o n a n d t h e E n v i r o n m e n t : A S t r a t e g y f o r D e m o c r a t i z i n g C a n a d a ' s E n v i r o n m e n t a l P r o t e c t i o n L a w s . O s g o o d e H a l l Law J o u r n a l 1 3 : 7 8 4 8 3 7 . 1 9 7 8 - E n v i r o n m e n t a l A s s e s s m e n t L aw i n C a n a d a . T o r o n t o : E m o n d - M o n t g o m e r y . E n g e l h a r t , K . G . a n d M . J . T r e b i l c o c k 1 9 8 1 - P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e R e g u l a t o r y P r o c e s s : T h e I s s u e o f F u n d i n g . W o r k i n g P a p e r # 1 7 . O t t a w a : E c o n o -m i c C o u n c i l o f C a n a d a . E n v i r o n m e n t a l A l l i a n c e A g a i n s t U r a n i u m M i n i n g 1 9 8 0 - F i n a l S u b m i s s i o n , R C U M . V a n c o u v e r . E s t r i n , D . 1 9 7 9 - T h e P u b l i c i s S t i l l V o i c e l e s s : Some N e g a t i v e A s p e c t s o f P u b l i c H e a r i n g s . I n B . S a d l e r , e d . , I n v o l v e -m e n t a n d E n v i r o n m e n t . E d m o n t o n : E n v i r o n m e n t C o u n c i l o f C a n a d a . 8 3 - 8 7 . E v a n s , J . M . , J a n i s c h , M u l l a n a n d R i s k 1 9 8 0 - A d m i n i s t r a t i v e L a w , C a s e s , T e x t a n d M a t e r i a l s . T o r o n t o : E m o n d - M o n t g o m e r y . E v e r s , A d a l b e r t a n d J u a n R o d r i g u e s - L o r e s 1 9 8 0 - P a r t i c i p a t i o n a n d L o c a l P o l i t i c s i n M a r x i s t T h e o r y a n d P r a c t i c e . I n C . R. F o s t e r e d . , C o o p e r a t i v e P u b l i c P o l i c y a n d C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n . New Y o r k : P e r g a m o n . F o x , D . 1 9 7 9 - P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e P r o c e s s . O t t a w a : L a w R e f o r m C o m m i s s i o n o f C a n a d a . 2 7 9 F r a n s o n , R . T . a n d A . R. L u c a s 1 9 7 5 - E n v i r o n m e n t a l D e c i s i o n - M a k i n g i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . I n P . E l d e r , E n v i r o n m e n t a l M a n a g e m e n t a n d P u b l i c P a r t i c i -p a t i o n . T o r o n t o : C a n a d i a n E n v i r o n m e n t a l L aw A s s o c i a t i o n . 8 4 - 1 0 0 . F r a s e r , B . 1 9 8 0 - B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a M i n i s t r y o f F o r e s t s P u b l i c I n -v o l v e m e n t H a n d b o o k . D r a f t . V i c t o r i a . F r e e d m a n , A . a n d C . S m i t h 1 9 7 2 - V o l u n t a r y A s s o c i a t i o n s : P e r s p e c t i v e s o n t h e L i t e r -a t u r e . C a m b r i d g e : H a r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . G i b s o n , R . B . 1 9 7 5 - T h e V a l u e o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n . I n P . E l d e r , e d . , E n v i r o n m e n t a l M a n a g e m e n t a n d P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n . T o r o n -t o : C a n a d i a n E n v i r o n m e n t a l L aw A s s o c i a t i o n . 7 - 3 9 . G o r m l e y , W. 1 9 8 1 - P u b l i c A d v o c a c y i n P u b l i c U t i l i t y C o m m i s s i o n P r o c e e d i n g s , i n J o u r n a l o f A p p l i e d B e h a v i o r a l S c i e n c e , V o l . 1 7 , N o . 4 : 4 4 6 - 4 6 1 . G u t m a n n , A . 1 9 8 0 - L i b e r a l E q u a l i t y . C a m b r i d g e : C a m b r i d g e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . H a d d e n , S . 1 9 8 1 - T e c h n i c a l I n f o r m a t i o n f o r C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n . I n J o u r n a l o f A p p l i e d B e h a v i o r a l S c i e n c e . V o l . 1 7 , N o . 4 : 5 3 7 - 5 4 7 . H a r d i n g , B . 1 9 7 9 - N u k e n o m i c s : T h e P o l i t i c a l E c o n o m y o f t h e N u c l e a r I n d u s t r y . R e g i n a : R e g i n a G r o u p f o r a N o n N u c l e a r S o c i e t y . H a r t , D . K . T h e o r i e s o f G o v e r n m e n t R e l a t e d t o D e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n a n d C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n . P u b l i c A d m i n i s t r a t i o n R e v i e w 3 2 : 6 0 5 - 2 1 . H e b e r l e i n , T . A . 1 9 7 6 - M e c h a n i s m s f o r P u b l i c I n v o l v e m e n t : t h e H e a r i n g , P u b l i c O p i n i o n P o l l , t h e W o r k s h o p a n d t h e Q u a s i - E x p e r i -m e n t . N a t u r a l R e s o u r c e s J o u r n a l 1 6 : 1 9 7 - 2 1 2 . H o w a r d , R. 1 9 8 0 - P o i s o n s i n P u b l i c : C a s e S t u d i e s o f E n v i r o n m e n t a l P o l l u t i o n i n C a n a d a . T o r o n t o : L o r i m e r a n d C o m p a n y . H u n n i u s , C . , e d . 1 9 7 1 - P a r t i c i p a t o r y D e m o c r a c y f o r C a n a d a : W o r k e r s ' C o n -t r o l a n d C o m m u n i t y C o n t r o l . M o n t r e a l : B l a c k R o s e B o o k s . 2 8 0 J o rdan , D. 1983 - L e c t u r e , A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Law 2/2/83. Vancouver : UBC. K a r i e l , H .S . , ed . 1970 - F r o n t i e r s of Democrat ic Theory . New York : Random House. K e l l e t t , S. 1978 - An E v a l u a t i o n of the Performance of the B r i t i s h Columbia P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Appea l Board . Paper w r i t t e n fo r Law 415, Env i ronmenta l C o n t r o l Techn iques , UBC. Kootenay Nuc lear Study Group 1980 - Summary Report to the RCUM. K rouse , R. 1983 - ' C l a s s i c a l * images of democracy in Amer i ca : M a d i -son and T o c q u e v i l l e . In G. Duncan, Democrat ic Theory and P r a c t i c e . Cambridge: Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y Press 58-78. Law Reform Commission of Canada 1980 - Working Paper #25. Ottawa, Law Reform Commission of Canada. Lee , J . 1978 - P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l in B r i t i s h Co lumb ia . West Coast Env i ronmenta l Law A s s o c i a t i o n . Lega l In fo rmat ion S e r v i c e s 1980 - P e s t i c i d e s : The Hidden A s s a s s i n s . Lega l S e r v i c e s S o c i e t y . Vancouver . Lenny, David M. 1976 - The Case fo r Funding C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the A d m i n i s t r a t i v e P r o c e s s . A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Law Review 28: 490-494. L e v i n , M. 1983 - Marxism and Democrat ic Theory . In G. Duncan, Democrat ic Theory and P r a c t i c e . Cambridge: Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . 79-95. Lewis , J . 1978-1983 - I n t e r v i ews . L i p s e t , S. M. 1960 - P o l i t i c a l Man. New York . Loney, M. 1977 - A P o l i t i c a l Economy of C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n . In L. P a n i t c h , e d . , The Canadian S t a t e . T o r o n t o , U. of T o r o n -to P r e s s . 281 L o v i n s , A. 1977 - So f t Energy Pa ths . Cambr idge, B a l l i n g e r . Lowrance, W. W. 1976 - Of Accep tab l e R i s k . Los A l t o s : Kaufmann . Lucas , A .R . 1976 - Lega l Foundat ions fo r P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n in Env i ronmenta l Dec i s i on-Mak ing . Na tu ra l Resources J ou rna l 16:73102. 1978 - Fundamental P r e r e q u i s i t e s fo r C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a -t i o n . In B. S a d l e r , ed , Involvement and Env i ronment . E d -monton: Environment C o u n c i l of Canada. 43-57. Lucas , A .R . and T . B e l l 1977 - The N a t i o n a l Energy Board : P o l i c y , Procedure and P r a c t i c e . Ottawa, Law Reform Commission of Canada. Lysyk , K.M. 1977 - A l a ska Highway P i p e l i n e I n q u i r y . Ottawa: Supply and S e r v i c e s Canada. 1978 - P u b l i c I n q u i r i e s and the P r o t e c t i o n of the P u b l i c Input in Resources Development P r o j e c t s . J ou rna l of N a t u -r a l Resources Management and I n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y S tud ies 3: 29. McCal lum, S.K. and G. Watkins 1975 - C i t i z e n s ' Cos ts Before A d m i n i s t r a t i v e T r i b u n a l s . C h i t t y ' s Law J o u r n a l . V o l . 23 ,6 : 181-190. McCoy, C A . and J . P l a y f o r d 1967 - A p o l i t i c a l P o l i t i c s : A C r i t i q u e of B e h a v i o r a l i s m . New York : C r o w e l l . McDade, G. 1978 - C o u n s e l , SOEC et a l . , PCAB Hear ings 1981 - P r a c t i c e and Procedure Before the P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l Appea l Board . Vancouver : West Coast Env i ronmenta l Law A s s o c i a t i o n . Mackenz ie , C. 1983 - Regu l a t i ng the R e g u l a t o r s , L e c t u r e , UBC, 2/10/83. McLach lan , M. 1971 - Democra t i z ing the A d m i n i s t r a t i v e P r o c e s s : Toward Increased Respons i veness . A r i z o n a Law Review. 13:835-856. Macpherson, C B . 1977 - The L i f e and Times of L i b e r a l Democracy. O x f o r d : Oxford U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . Mahon, R. 1977 - Canadian P u b l i c P o l i c y : The Unequal S t r u c tu r e of R e p r e s e n t a t i o n . In L. P a n i t c h , e d . , The Canadian S t a t e . T o r o n t o , U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto P r e s s . 165-198. 282 1 9 7 9 - R e g u l a t o r y A g e n c i e s : C a p t i v e A g e n t s o r H e g e m o n i c A p p a r a t u s e s . S t u d i e s i n P o l i t i c a l E c o n o m y . 1 : 1 6 2 - 2 0 0 . M a n k o f f , M . 1 9 7 0 - P o w e r i n A d v a n c e d C a p i t a l i s t S o c i e t y : A R e v i e w E s s a y o n R e c e n t E l i t i s t a n d M a r x i s t C r i t i c i s m o f P l u r a l i s t T h e o r y . S o c i a l P r o b l e m s . 1 7 : 4 1 8 - 3 0 . M a n s b r i d g e , J . 1 9 7 9 - B e y o n d A d v e r s a r y D e m o c r a c y . M a r c h a k , M . P . 1 9 8 1 - I d e o l o g i c a l P e r s p e c t i v e s o n C a n a d a . T o r o n t o : M c G r a w - H i l l . M a r x , K . 1 9 4 0 - T h e C i v i l W a r i n F r a n c e . New Y o r k : I n t e r n a t i o n a l . M i l b r a t h , L . W . 1 9 6 5 - P o l i t i c a l P a r t i c i p a t i o n . C h i c a g o : U n i v e r s i t y o f C h i c a g o P r e s s . M i l i b a n d , R a l p h 1 9 8 3 - S t a t e P o w e r a n d C l a s s I n t e r e s t s . New L e f t R e v i e w . 1 3 8 : 5 7 - 6 8 . M i l l , J . S . 1 9 6 1 - E s s e n t i a l W o r k s . New Y o r k : B a n t a m . M i l l s , C . W . 1 9 5 6 - T h e P o w e r E l i t e . New Y o r k : O x f o r d . M i s h l e r , W. 1 9 7 9 - P o l i t i c a l P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C a n a d a : P r o s p e c t s f o r D e m o c r a t i c C i t i z e n s h i p . T o r o n t o : M a c m i l l a n . M o r r i s - J o n e s , W. H . 1 9 5 4 - I n D e f e n s e o f A p a t h y . P o l i t i c a l S t u d i e s . V o l . i i : 2 5 - 3 7 . N a t i o n a l F i l m B o a r d o f C a n a d a 1 9 7 8 - T h e I n q u i r y F i l m . N e l k i n , D o r o t h y 1 9 7 7 - T e c h n o l o g i c a l D e c i s i o n s a n d D e m o c r a c y . B e v e r l e y H i l l s : S a g e . 1 9 7 9 - C o n t r o v e r s y : P o l i t i c s o f T e c h n i c a l D e c i s i o n s . B e v e r l e y H i l l s : S a g e . N e w a l l a n d H a m e l - G r e e n 1 9 8 0 - T h e R a n g e r I n q u i r y . T o d a y M a g a z i n e . V i c t o r i a . N e w r o t h , P . R . 1 9 7 9 - B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a A q u a t i c P l a n t M a n a g e m e n t P r o g r a m . J o u r n a l o f A q u a t i c P l a n t M a n a g e m e n t . 1 7 : 1 2 - 1 9 . 2 8 3 O k a n a g a n B a s i n I m p l e m e n t a t i o n B o a r d 1 9 8 0 - F o u r t h A n n u a l R e p o r t . P e n t i c t o n . O n o , S . 1 9 6 7 - T h e L i m i t s o f B o u r g e o i s P l u r a l i s m , i n M c C o y a n d P l a y f o r d . A p o l i t i c a l P o l i t i c s . New Y o r k : C r o w e l l . 9 9 - 1 2 3 . O r g a n i z a t i o n f o r E c o n o m i c C o o p e r a t i o n a n d D e v e l o p m e n t , C o m -m i t t e e f o r S c i e n t i f i c a n d T e c h n o l o g i c a l P o l i c y . 1 9 7 8 P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n D e c i s i o n - M a k i n g R e l a t e d t o S c i e n c e a n d T e c h n o l o g y . P a r i s . O r m r o d , W. 1 9 8 2 - L e c t u r e , C o n f e r e n c e o n P e s t i c i d e U s e i n U r b a n E n v i r o n m e n t s . V a n c o u v e r : S i m o n F r a s e r U n i v e r s i t y 1 1 / 4 / 8 2 . P a n i t c h , L . 1 9 7 7 - e d . , T h e C a n a d i a n S t a t e : P o l i t i c a l E c o n o m y a n d P o l i t i c a l P o w e r . T o r o n t o : U n i v e r s i t y o f T o r o n t o P r e s s . 1 9 7 7 - T h e R o l e a n d N a t u r e o f t h e C a n a d i a n S t a t e . I n P a n i t c h . T h e C a n a d i a n S t a t e . T o r o n t o : U . o f T o r o n t o P r e s s . P a p e , A . 1 9 7 8 - T h e I n q u i r i e s A c t : P r o p o s e d R e v i s i o n s . U n p u b -l i s h e d P a p e r . P a t e m a n , C a r o l e 1 9 7 0 - P a r t i c i p a t i o n a n d D e m o c r a t i c T h e o r y . C a m b r i d g e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . 1 9 8 3 - F e m i n i s m a n d d e m o c r a c y . I n G . D u n c a n . T h e o r y a n d P r a c t i c e . C a m b r i d g e : C a m b r i d g e P r e s s . 2 0 4 - 2 1 7 . P e a r s e , P . H . 1 9 7 6 - T i m b e r R i g h t s a n d F o r e s t P o l i c y i n B . C . : R e p o r t o f t h e R o y a l C o m m i s s i o n o n F o r e s t R e s o u r c e s . V i c t o r i a . P e n n o c k , J . R . 1 9 7 9 - D e m o c r a t i c P o l i t i c a l T h e o r y . P r i n c e t o n : P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . P e s t i c i d e C o n t r o l A p p e a l B o a r d 1 9 7 8 - 1 9 8 1 - P r o c e e d i n g s , O k a n a g a n 2 , 4 D H e a r i n g s . P e n t i c -t o n , V e r n o n , B . C . P o r t e r , J . 1 9 6 5 - T h e V e r t i c a l M o s a i c . T o r o n t o : U n i v e r s i t y o f T o r o n -t o P r e s s . P o u l a n t z a s , N . 1 9 7 8 - S t a t e , P o w e r , S o c i a l i s m . L o n d o n : V e r s o . P r e s t h u s , R. C a m b r i d g e : D e m o c r a t i c U n i v e r s i t y 2 8 4 1 9 7 0 - T h e P l u r a l i s t F r a m e w o r k . I n K a r i e l , H . S . , F r o n -t i e r s o f D e m o c r a t i c T h e o r y . New Y o r k : R a n d o m H o u s e . 2 7 4 -3 0 4 . R a t n e r , R . S . 1 9 8 4 - C a p i t a l , S t a t e a n d C r i m i n a l J u s t i c e . R a t n e r , R . S . , J . M c M u l l a n a n d B . B u r t c h 1 9 8 3 - T h e P r o b l e m o f R e l a t i v e A u t o n o m y a n d C r i m i n a l J u s -t i c e i n t h e C a n a d i a n S t a t e . P a p e r P r e s e n t e d t o t h e C S A A M e e t i n g s . V a n c o u v e r . R a w l s , J . 1 9 7 1 - A T h e o r y o f J u s t i c e . C a m b r i d g e : H a r v a r d U n i v e r s i -t y P r e s s . R e g i n a G r o u p f o r a N o n - N u c l e a r S o c i e t y 1 9 8 0 - T h e E c o n o m i c s o f N u c l e a r P o w e r . R e g i n a . R e s n i c k , P . 1 9 7 3 - T h e P o l i t i c a l T h e o r y o f E x t r a - P a r l i a m e n t a r i s m , C a n a d i a n J o u r n a l o f P o l i t i c a l S c i e n c e . 6 , 1 : 6 5 - 8 8 . R i c h , R. a n d R o s e n b a u m , W . , e d . 1 9 8 1 - C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n P u b l i c P o l i c y . T h e J o u r n a l o f A p p l i e d B e h a v i o r a l S c i e n c e . V o l . 1 7 : 4 . R o b e r t s , K . 1 9 7 8 - 1 9 8 0 - C o u n s e l , SOEC e t a l . , P C A B h e a r i n g s . P e n t i c -t o n , V e r n o n . 1 9 7 9 - I n t e r v i e w s 1 9 8 0 - I n t e r v i e w s 1 9 8 1 - I n t e r v i e w 1 1 / 1 2 / 8 1 1 9 8 3 - L e c t u r e : R e g u l a t i n g t h e R e g u l a t o r s . V a n c o u v e r : UBC 2 / 1 0 / 8 3 1 9 8 4 - I n t e r v i e w 5 / 2 3 / 8 4 R o b e r t s , T . 1 9 8 1 - P e s t i c i d e s : T h e L e g a l Q u e s t i o n s . V a n c o u v e r , L e g a l S e r v i c e s S o c i e t y . R o b i n s o n , J . B . 1 9 8 1 - P o l i c y , P i p e l i n e s , a n d P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n : T h e N a t i o n a l E n e r g y B o a r d ' s N o r t h e r n P i p e l i n e H e a r i n g s , i n O . P . D w i v e d i , e d . R e s o u r c e s a n d t h e E n v i r o n m e n t : P o l i c y P e r s p e c t i v e s f o r C a n a d a . T o r o n t o : M c C l e l l a n d a n d S t e w a r t . R o g e r s , J . 1 9 8 3 - I n t e r v i e w R o m a n , A . J . 1 9 7 7 - G u i d e b o o k o n How t o P r e p a r e C a s e s f o r A d m i n i s t r a -t i v e T r i b u n a l s . T o r o n t o : C o n s u m e r s ' A s s o c i a t i o n o f C a n a -d a . 1 9 7 9 - T r a i n i n g f o r M o r e E f f e c t i v e P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n : 2 8 5 T h e C a s e o f t h e C l u f f L a k e H e a r i n g s . I n B . S a d l e r , e d . , I n v o l v e m e n t a n d E n v i r o n m e n t . E d m o n t o n : E n v i r o n m e n t C o u n -c i l o f C a n a d a . 2 9 - 3 7 . R o s e , A . M . 1 9 6 7 - T h e P o w e r S t r u c t u r e . New Y o r k , O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . R o s s , V . 1 9 8 1 - C a n c e l l e d D u e t o L a c k o f I n t e r e s t . M a c l e a n ' s . J u l y 6 . 4 2 - 4 3 . R o u n t h w a i t e , A n n 1 9 8 3 - I n t e r v i e w R o u s s e a u , J . J . 1 9 6 8 - T h e S o c i a l C o n t r a c t . New Y o r k : P e n g u i n B o o k s . S a d l e r , B . 1 9 7 8 - 1 9 7 9 e d . , I n v o l v e m e n t a n d E n v i r o n m e n t : P r o c e e d i n g s o f t h e C a n a d i a n C o n f e r e n c e o n P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n , V o l . 1 , 2 . E d m o n t o n : E n v i r o n m e n t C o u n c i l o f A l b e r t a . 1 9 7 8 - B a s i c I s s u e s i n P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n : A B a c k g r o u n d P e r s p e c t i v e . I n B . S a d l e r , e d . , I n v o l v e m e n t a n d E n v i r o n -m e n t . E d m o n t o n : E n v i r o n m e n t C o u n c i l o f A l b e r t a . 1 - 1 2 . S a l t e r , L . 1 9 7 7 - P u b l i c I n t e r v e n t i o n P r o j e c t : I n t e r v e n t i o n i n B r o a d c a s t R e g u l a t o r y P r o c e e d i n g s . ( U n p u b l i s h e d P a p e r . ) 1 9 7 8 - On t h e N a t u r e o f I n q u i r i e s : R o l e s a n d P r a c t i c e s o f C u r r e n t I n q u i r i e s i n t h e P o l i c y F o r m a t i o n P r o c e s s . ( U n p u b l i s h e d p a p e r ) 1 9 7 9 - P u b l i c P r o c e s s a n d t h e P u b l i c I n t e r e s t . ( U n p u b -l i s h e d p a p e r ) . V a n c o u v e r . 1 9 8 1 - P u b l i c I n q u i r i e s i n C a n a d a . S c i e n c e C o u n c i l o f C a n a d a . H u l l : S u p p l y a n d S e r v i c e s C a n a d a . 1 9 8 2 - F a i r n e s s i n t h e C a n a d i a n I n q u i r y . U n p u b l i s h e d P a p e r . S c h a t t s c h n e i d e r , E . E . 1 9 6 0 - T h e S e m i s o v e r e i g n P e o p l e . New Y o r k . S c h m i t t , D . 1 9 7 9 - T h e B . C . U r a n i u m I n q u i r y . U n p u b l i s h e d p a p e r . V a n -c o u v e r . S c h u m p e t e r , J . A . 1 9 4 2 - C a p i t a l i s m , S o c i a l i s m , a n d D e m o c r a c y . New Y o r k : H a r p e r a n d R o w . S k e l l y , R . E . 1 9 8 1 - L e t t e r t o M i n i s t e r o f t h e E n v i r o n m e n t . 4 / 2 4 / 8 1 . S o u t h O k a n a g a n E n v i r o n m e n t a l C o a l i t i o n 1 9 7 8 - 1 9 8 1 - S u b m i s s i o n s t o P C A B . 2 8 6 C o r r e s p o n d e n c e w i t h P C A B . 1 9 7 9 - 1 9 8 0 - C o m m u n i c a t i o n w i t h R C U M . S p e c t r u m 1 9 7 9 - U r a n i u m M i n i n g C o n t r o v e r s y . 2 / 2 2 / 7 9 S u s s k i n d , L . a n d E l l i o t t , M . 1 9 8 1 - L e a r n i n g f r o m C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n a n d C i t i z e n A c t i o n i n W e s t e r n E u r o p e . J o u r n a l o f A p p l i e d B e h a v i o r a l S c i e n c e , V o l . 1 7 , N o . 4 : 4 9 7 - 5 1 6 . S w a r t z , D . 1 9 8 1 - W o r k e r P a r t i c i p a t i o n a n d C o r p o r a t i s m . S t u d i e s i n P o l i t i c a l E c o n o m y . 1 : 7 9 - 1 0 6 . T a t a r y n , L . 1 9 7 9 - D y i n g f o r a L i v i n g : T h e P o l i t i c s o f I n d u s t r i a l D e a t h . T o r o n t o : D e n e a u a n d G r e e n b e r g . T o r r i e , R. 1 9 8 2 - U r a n i u m M i n e T a i l i n g s . A l t e r n a t i v e s , 1 0 : 1 5 - 2 6 . U n i o n o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a I n d i a n C h i e f s 1 9 8 0 - I n t e r i m S u m m a r y A r g u m e n t t o t h e R C U M . V a n c o u v e r S u n 1 9 7 9 - A 1 3 . 1 1 / 2 4 / 7 9 . 1 9 8 1 - A 8 1 0 / 6 / 8 1 . W a l k e r , J . L . 1 9 6 7 - A C r i t i q u e o f t h e E l i t i s t T h e o r y o f D e m o c r a c y . I n M c C o y a n d P l a y f o r d . New Y o r k : C r o w e l l . 1 9 9 - 2 1 9 . W a r n o c k , J . W . 1 9 7 8 - 1 9 8 3 - I n t e r v i e w s 1 9 8 1 - T h e P o l i t i c s o f t h e E n v i r o n m e n t a l M o v e m e n t . P r e s e n t e d a t \" S o c i a l i s m f o r t h e 1 9 8 0 s \" , U B C . U n p u b l i s h e d P a p e r . 1 9 8 2 - \" P e s t i c i d e R e g u l a t i o n : T h e P e r m i t a n d A p p e a l S y s -t e m i n B . C . \" , P e s t i c i d e U s e i n U r b a n E n v i r o n m e n t s , C o n f e -r e n c e , V a n c o u v e r 1 1 / 4 / 8 2 . 1 9 8 3 - E n v i r o n m e n t a l P r o b l e m s i n S o c i a l i s t S t a t e s , U n p u b -l i s h e d P a p e r p r e s e n t e d a t L e a r n e d S o c i e t i e s C o n f e r e n c e , U B C , 6 / 4 / 8 3 . W a r n o c k , J . W . a n d L e w i s , J . P . 1 9 7 8 - T h e O t h e r F a c e o f 2 , 4 - D . P e n t i c t o n , B . C . 1 9 8 2 - T h e P o l i t i c a l E c o l o g y o f 2 , 4 - D . A l t e r n a t i v e s 1 0 : 3 3 - 4 0 . W e n g e r t , N o r m a n 1 9 7 6 - C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n : P r a c t i c e i n S e a r c h o f a T h e o r y . N a t u r a l R e s o u r c e s J o u r n a l , 1 6 : 1 , 2 3 - 4 0 . W e s t C o a s t E n v i r o n m e n t a l L a w A s s o c i a t i o n 2 8 7 1978 - L e t t e r of Appeal to A d m i n i s t r a t o r , P e s t i c i d e Con -t r o l B ranch . 1979 - Submiss ion to RCUM. 1980 - In te r im Summation to RCUM. West Coast Env i ronmenta l Law Research Foundat ion 1983-84 - N e w s l e t t e r , W in te r . Cases in B r i e f , p. 5. Wigmore, Judy 1981 - The West Coast O i l Por ts I n q u i r y . M a s t e r ' s T h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of V i c t o r i a . W i l s o n , V. Seymour 1971 - The Role of Royal Commissions and Task F o r c e s , in G.B. Doern and P. A r c o i n e d s . , The S t r u c tu r e of P o l i c y -Making i n Canada. T o r o n t o : Macmi l l an . 288 "@en ; edm:hasType "Thesis/Dissertation"@en ; edm:isShownAt "10.14288/1.0096409"@en ; dcterms:language "eng"@en ; ns0:degreeDiscipline "Sociology"@en ; edm:provider "Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library"@en ; dcterms:publisher "University of British Columbia"@en ; dcterms:rights "For non-commercial purposes only, such as research, private study and education. Additional conditions apply, see Terms of Use https://open.library.ubc.ca/terms_of_use."@en ; ns0:scholarLevel "Graduate"@en ; dcterms:title "Production of the public voice : public participation in the hearing process as contemporary democracy"@en ; dcterms:type "Text"@en ; ns0:identifierURI "http://hdl.handle.net/2429/25302"@en .