Frontier Centre for Public Policy talks NB expropriation

Western Canadian think tank Frontier Centre for Public Policy analyst Joseph Quesnel questioned the strength of New Brunswick’s expropriation law in the Telegraph Journal today. 

The Frontier, whose focus is on the western provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba works on policy issues related to:

“High-Performance Government - Creating high-productivity public services and institutions based on the principles of transparency, neutrality and separating elected officials from day-to-day operations; government as a purchaser, not provider of services.

Social Policy Renewal - consumer-sensitive health care and education systems; the post- welfare state; aboriginal policy based on empowerment, not dependency.

The Open Economy - achieving the optimum size of government; adjusting with globalization; the emerging technology-driven rural renaissance, creating the value-added agriculture economy.”

Mr. Quesnel  suggested that a number of provinces including the three his organization focuses on, as well as New Brunswick have too much ambiguity written into their expropriation laws.

The TJ article summarizes his thoughs as such:

“For his part, Quesnel said the New Brunswick legislation needs to be revamped and safeguards put in place to protect landowners. He suggested a land owner's bill of rights complete with the clause stating a land owner can appeal any expropriation to an independent body. Another idea is a clause in expropriation legislation clearly identifying what municipalities may or may not take.”

Further, the article which focuses on the use of expropriation as it relates to the Rothesay recreation campus development proposed for Scott Avenue says this about Quesnel’s thoughts on expropriation:

expropriation is normally used for "a clearly identified public purpose," such as highway or other road construction that is deemed crucial. However, in New Brunswick he said the broad language used in the document could allow for abuse of the legislation.

The article makes Quesnel out to be a proponent for “the little guy” quoting him as saying “Most people don't have the resources of a government to continue the fight forever and you have to give in or settle for a lesser amount than what (the land) is worth.” 

While expropriation legislation allows for compensation based on fair market value, the non-quantifiable aspects (such as emotional attachment to a place or a home) of expropriation are not always seen as being fairly accounted for.

I have talked to some folks from Rothesay who seem pretty set on the idea that Scott Avenue is the place to build, and others who think the city is going down the wrong path (due to cost issues as well as perceived justice issues).

Hopefully fair compensation is delivered (or another plan is struck).  More importantly, I hope affordable homes that provide a reasonable quality of life can be found by the residents of Scott Avenue if this goes ahead. 

A third hope is that our expropriations legislation is used fairly in this case.