Making policy amid public pressure

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 23/04/2024 (564 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

It all centred around two orphaned polar bear cubs.

Their future hung in the balance inside a fragile ecosystem between a minister and her department and dominated my attention in December 2017. As a relatively new minister of Sustainable Development, it was the first time I’d found myself offside with departmental policy and wanted to change it on a whim.

The situation began when Manitoba Conservation spotted two unrelated cubs in Churchill, malnourished and alone, and deemed them orphans in early winter of 2017. The policy at the time was to bring orphaned cubs into the Leatherdale International Polar Bear Conservation Centre in Winnipeg for observation before moving them to the Assiniboine Park Conservancy’s Journey to Churchill exhibit. Legislative amendments to accommodate this process had occurred in 2010, with a subsequent creation of the conservation centre and Journey to Churchill exhibit.

The rationale behind the policy was that any orphaned cub under the age of about two or weighing less than a hundred pounds would likely succumb to the realities of the harsh tundra environment and its predators without the protection of a mother. Bringing them into the conservation centre and exhibit would at least give orphaned cubs a chance at survival while offering an opportunity for research, public awareness and education on the beloved but endangered species.

Since 2013, when the province transferred its first orphaned cub born in the wild into the exhibit — the polar bear now known as Storm — this was standard practice. Eight bears came to Winnipeg from Churchill in the four years between Storm’s arrival and the identification of these two orphaned cubs in December 2017.

Manitoba Conservation made the call to bring these cubs in, as per policy. After all, without intervention, they were doomed.

Except, maybe not, according to Churchill Mayor Mike Spence.

With minutes left on the clock, my phone rang off the hook with impassioned pleas not to take them. Spence and many others in the community argued against it, refusing to believe there wasn’t a better alternative.

“We don’t accept sending cubs to captivity,” Spence told the media in between our phone calls. “We need to do something more than just saying ‘Another bear gone to the zoo.’”

It was a fair point. The mayor, along with so many others, wanted the opportunity to do something different to try to save the bears. I listened to all the voices opposing the decision, and then asked my deputy to instruct Manitoba Conservation to stand down.

He looked at me, flabbergasted. I’d overstepped.

Undoubtedly, whatever action the department took, I was accountable. I felt beholden to the public, and part of my job was making tough decisions, yet that didn’t mean I should change policy on the fly — without proper public consultation, analysis, and a thorough decision-making process guided by experts.

Doing so was a mistake. Good governance cannot exist when political overrides are done on a whim.

This conflict between public pressure and government policy is nothing unusual for a minister, and while setting policy direction is part of the job, there is a process. Yet as society moves deeper into an era of protest with demand for immediate action, this process often feels deeply unpopular. As I was about to learn, immediately acquiescing is not always the right answer, either.

The orphaned cubs were ultimately taken, and after a period of observation, became part of the Journey to Churchill exhibit. They were given the names Willow and Baffin. Willow still lives at the Assiniboine Park Conservancy, and Baffin was recently relocated to Calgary.

To date, these are the last two cubs brought down from Churchill. An overseeing advisory committee was enhanced with more opportunity for community voices, and an addendum was struck. It now allows for orphaned cubs to be taken only when the mother’s death is caused by human activity. In all other circumstances, nature runs its course.

Undoubtedly, as polar bears continue down the path of endangerment because of climate change and other human causes, governments need to continually enhance and even change policy. Yet these changes should be guided by investments in research, education, scientific analysis, and advisory input, in addition to public pressure and community voices.

The voice of protest and public pressure will always be part of a government’s agenda. Government direction, misdirection, and even lack of direction will always be addressed in these ways, but there are others, too. Sitting on advisory committees, attending public hearings, and getting involved in public policy is equally, if not more beneficial.

In fact, it’s the best way for lasting change.

Rochelle Squires is a recovering politician after 7 1/2 years in the Manitoba legislature. She is a political and social commentator whose column appears Tuesdays. rochelle@rochellesquires.ca