The case of the disappearing FAQ

Sometime between when I wrote this post last night and 10:30am this morning when a reader alerted me to the issue, Transport Canada’s FAQ for the Navigable Waters Protection Act disappeared from the Internet.

I asked the office of Transport Minister Denis Lebel to explain and received the following response.

For years, the Transport Canada website has consistently said “The Navigable Waters Protection Act (NWAP) is an act respecting the protection of the public right to navigate.” The Act ensures a balance between the public right to navigate and the need to build works in navigable waters. That has never changed. Some pieces of inaccurate information have been removed. This link now contains correct information.

The FAQ has now reappeared. It appears to me that there are now no references to the “environment” within it.

Update 3:51pm. There now appear to be two references to the word “environment,” both in a single sentence.

Several federal departments and agencies have additional responsibilities to review the environmental impacts of tailings areas, including Environment Canada.

Here and here are apparently copies of the previous version of the FAQ.

Update 4:14pm. The previous version had a section entitled “Questions about the Amendments to Navigable Waters Protection Act.” That section has been shortened and is now titled, “Questions about the 2009 Amendments to Navigable Waters Protection Act.” One of the questions that has been deleted was as follows.

Do these changes mean there will be a decline in environmental assessments?

Transport Canada is committed to a healthy and sound environment.

Before the Act was changed, many routine projects required detailed navigational reviews and environmental assessments – even when they involved waters that could not be practically navigated. The effort required to perform these assessments was not proportionate to the actual navigational and environmental risks associated with the project.

The revised Act will reduce the level of review of these minor projects and allow for more in-depth reviews of the substantial projects that are of greater concern to the Canadian public.




Browse

The case of the disappearing FAQ

  1. Ha! Megan Leslie is (now, retroactively) wrong! Burn!

    • Question is did she keep a copy of the old FAQ? It isn’t really that easy to erase history, even for conbots.

      • Ha, it isn’t that they necessarily want to ‘erase’ history: they want to make it inaccessible to the public by cutting public archives services, and then select and present it to us in our new museum. Soon we will hold our hands over our hearts and salute while singing our national anthem. The one they also tried to revise.

        • That’s why they’re changing the name of the Museum of Civilization. Any institution housing artifacts and collections relating to, you know, civilized human behaviour would include no evidence of these political barbarians.

  2. Our govt is apparently being run by people who read… and took notes….on all those books in high school.

    1984…Brave New World…The Time Machine….and today it’s the turn of…..Animal Farm….

    • Someone should’ve told these neo-con-men those books were not meant to be used as instruction manuals…

  3. wow! removing information BEFORE laws are passed. i guess fascism is a quicker method to suppress the feeble masses….

  4. AW, is it possible to get a copy of the old FAQs posted? Just so we can admire them like a rather nice Emily Caar that has now apparently ceased to serve a function.

    • See new links above.

      • thankyou.

  5. Thanks to google cache here are some of the questions that have been omitted:
    -What is CEAA?
    -Why did the government make changes to the Navigable Waters Protection Act?
    -Do these changes mean there will be a decline in environmental assessments?
    -Were stakeholders consulted on the changes to the Act?
    -Will there be future opportunities for all stakeholders to have a say in the new rules?

    • As I write this, you have 2 minus votes and 0 plus votes. The designated thumber from the PMO has help on this file.

      And Vic Toews just found $155 million in an austerity budget to beef up internet security so stuff like this does not happen again.

      +1 and **** Vic Toews.

      • Or “gasp” 2 people who disagree with his comment. Why do leftists not get that not everyone agrees with them? We don’t work for the PMO – we damn well elected it though!

  6. You can still see the old FAQ, or a version of it, from 2010 on the Internet Archive Wayback Machine. It even mentions the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act by name, and links to it.

    It’s very hard to bury things on the Internet Mr Harper.

  7. A thank-you to mikedesouza for copying the Google archive to scribd. An excellent item to exhibit in the new Canadian Museum of History.

Sign in to comment.