In the Times Colonist, Les Leyne reacted to a recent BC Hydro report about Site C:
B.C. Hydro has written the blandest, most blameless account possible. When it comes to burying a compelling story in 250 pages of stupefying technical explanations, it is a literary doublespeak masterpiece.
They poured as much obfuscating verbiage over the budget disaster as they did concrete in the Peace River.
The Victoria journalist has been a political columnist for 30 years and a reporter longer than that. Leyne reminds us that utility management designed ineffective oversight of their largest-ever spending project. When independent observers were put in place, they were ignored or handicapped by senior executives.
One of the lessons BC Hydro learned was to improve its communications when a megaproject is going badly. The company understands that secrecy and misinformation can be effective tools for navigating difficult situations. Used correctly, these can minimize damage and ensure survival of a company’s executives.
Overall, Les Leyne’s article is accurate, but he is credulous when accepting BC Hydro’s assertion that $1.6 billion of the massive cost overrun is attributable to COVID-19. Even the gentle BCUC wasn’t prepared to accept that claim without evidence.
Leyne describes Site C as a “brilliant engineering success.” We need to wait at least 20 years before we start thinking like that.
“If the landslide hits the structure of the dam, it will get damaged,” said Vernon Ruskin, who was part of the design team for Site C as well as the W.A.C. Bennett and Peace Canyon dams under the old BC Electric company, which later became BC Hydro.
“It’s fairly flat land, and there’s a lot of people downriver from there. That’s really what I worry about.”
BC Hydro says Site C dam safe from landslides, but engineer calls for review
in-sights.ca 
Yes, what we get from BC Hydro is a lot of techno jargon and doublespeak as they attempt once again obfuscate. And of course there’s no oversight from the BCUC, the agency tasked with acting in the public interest in cases such as this. The problem here is that BCUC has no mandate to investigate and report and hold BC Hydro senior executives to account for their incompetence and playing fast and loose with BCer’s money. The solution is to have BC Hydro executives called before MLAs in a public hearing to justify the massive cost overruns at Site C and to have the public to be able to ask questions of those executives directly.
LikeLiked by 1 person
the burrard thermal already has capacity if site c, and free ,not 16 Billion dollars.
BC demand plateaud basically at 52gwh for past 26 years.?
LikeLike
An analysis of BCUC’s inability to regulate BC Hydro may require context only available elsewhere. As in, how much worse can regulatory capture get?
1/ Consider America. Currently busy abandoning any semblance of regulatory logic and public interest apparently to keep a crop of important billionaires deliriously happy.
2/ The UK. Following decades of Tory cronyism which generated an inevitable electoral backlash Labour was granted a huge majority government. Not surprisingly prior to the election the new admin promised reforms aplenty. Yet to everyone’s surprise not only did Mr Starmer duplicate Tory indifference to curbing corporate excess and refuse to restore trade with Europe to a pre-Brexit level, despite collapsing polls he demonstrated willingness to so aggravate Labour’s base that his Labour Party is all but guaranteed to loose the next election.
Regulatory downside?
With Labour’s self-inflicted loss expect the UK’s already dysfunctional regulatory bodies to face a fate never before seen prior to the Trump admin. Extinction.
The UK Boasts 8 regulatory agencies.
“Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) – Regulates the financial services industry.”
“Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) – Oversees the priudential regulation of banks and insurers”
“Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) – Promotes competition and investigates competitive practices”
“Office of Communications (Ofcom) – Regulates the commu7nications industry.”
“Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem) – Regulates the gas and electricity markets.”
“Office of Rail and Road (ORR) – Regulates the rail and road industries”
“Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) – Regulates the aviation industry.”
“Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) – Regulates the nuclear industry.”
“These regulators play a crucial role in ensuring compliance with laws and regulations across various sectors in the UK.”
Who claims the UK’s regulatory system is sub-par? A better question? Who doesn’t?
https://sustainabilityfirst.org.uk/publications/expert-viewpoints/why-the-failing-energy-sector-is-a-lesson-for-all-regulators/
“Why the failing energy sector is a lesson for all regulators”
“With references to Ofgem being “incompetent”, to criticism of its “negligence” and “systemic failure to effectively regulate”, the House of Commons BEIS’ Select Committee’s latest report[1], on Energy pricing and the future of the Energy Market doesn’t pull any punches, writes Zoe McLeod, Sustainability First’s Policy Director.
“But while it’s Ofgem’s turn in the spotlight, there are important lessons to be learned, and a warning, for all regulators and governments who oversee them. Time and time again, consumers and the environment are being failed by poor monitoring, slow enforcement and weak protections with often the most vulnerable worst impacted. This benefits no-one and leaves good companies tarred by the same filthy brush.”
“The cross-party Committee calls for Ofgem to improve “its regulatory oversight, its decision-making processes, the use of its enforcement powers, and the quality of its governance.” With this we agree. A number of other regulators should also follow suit.”
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ineffective-watchdogs-policy-analysis-ico-sra-fca-uk-john-barwell-wd8xe/
“Ineffective Watchdogs: A Policy Analysis of the ICO, SRA, and FCA in the UK”
“Regulatory bodies are often dubbed society’s ‘watchdogs’ – independent enforcers meant to protect the public interest from abuses of power and breaches of law. In the United Kingdom, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), and the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) were each established to uphold crucial standards – respectively, information rights and data privacy, professional ethics in the legal sector, and integrity in financial markets. Yet these regulators have increasingly drawn criticism as ‘toothless watchdogs’ that fail to hold powerful actors to account, respond inadequately to systemic misconduct, and even discourage or harm whistleblowers who bring wrongdoing to light.[^1]”
“This paper argues that the ICO, SRA and FCA have become ineffective regulators and makes a public policy case for dismantling or radically reforming them in favour of more forceful, accountable frameworks. The discussion will first provide historical context on the creation and purpose of each body. It will then examine patterns of regulatory failure – including chronic under-enforcement, regulatory capture, procedural opacity and inaction on credible complaints – and the resulting damage to whistleblowers and public trust. Recent scandals and case studies are analysed to illustrate these failings. The paper compares the UK situation with better-functioning regulatory regimes in other democracies (such as EU countries, Australia, Canada, and Scandinavia) to highlight alternative models. Finally, it offers recommendations for replacement frameworks grounded in transparency, public accountability and enforceable oversight mechanisms. The overarching goal is to strengthen institutional accountability so that regulators serve the public interest with real ‘teeth’ rather than merely bark without bite.”
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp9z332j4npo
“MPs brand UK financial regulator ‘incompetent’”
“The UK’s main financial regulator, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), has been condemned in a scathing report from a group of MPs and peers.”
“Describing it as “incompetent”, they say the FCA is “too often failing” to perform its functions and are calling for it to be overhauled.”
“The regulator has been heavily criticised by several independent reviews in recent years.
“The FCA did not see the full report ahead of publication but a spokesperson told the Financial Times: “We sympathise with those who have lost out as a result of wrongdoing in financial services, however we strongly reject the characterisation of the organisation.””
““We have learned from historic issues and transformed as an organisation so we can deliver for consumers, the market and the wider economy,” it added.”
“The report comes after a series of scandals in which financial services firms have been accused of mistreating consumers and small businesses, and the FCA has been “blamed for doing too little too late – or nothing” to prevent wrongdoing, said Bob Blackman, co-chair of the group.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/nursing-midwifery-council-nurses-uk-psa-b2772428.html
“Scandal-hit nursing regulator wrongly approved hundreds of nurses to work in UK, damning report reveals”
“Fraudulent applications from centres in India, Nigeria and Pakistan were approved by the watchdog in error
“A scandal-hit regulator wrongly approved more than 350 “fraudulent” or “underqualified” nurses to work in the UK, amid a “dysfunctional” culture exposed by The Independent.”
“The Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC), which regulates more than 800,000 nurses and midwives, is also failing to spot workers who could pose a serious risk to patient safety and to prioritise investigating them.”
“These are just two of a series of failings uncovered in a review by the Professional Standards Authority (PSA), which regulates the NMC. That was prompted by The Independent’s exposé, which revealed that the organisation’s “toxic” culture had allowed nurses to work unchecked after whistleblower concerns were ignored.”
LikeLike