Statement On Sentencing For Obstructing The Trans Mountain Pipeline

[Arrested on March 17, Burgess was sentenced to a $3000 fine on June 28 after a 5 day trial.]

I wish to first say something about myself, and then propose a sentence.

I have been found guilty of breaching a Court order to not obstruct access to part of the Trans Mountain Pipeline, and for bringing the administration of justice into disrepute by doing this in a public way.

I am 63 years old. I retired last year from teaching geography at Kwantlen Polytechnic University. Seven weeks ago I became a grandfather. I have never previously been convicted of a criminal offence.

I know we are governed by statutory and common law. But I would be a fraud if I did not also act on what I told my students for many years, that we are also subject to the laws of physics and chemistry. They say that when carbon molecules are added to our atmosphere the earth absorbs more heat and the global climate system changes. There is now more CO₂ in the atmosphere than ever before experienced by our species.

The Trans Mountain Pipeline exports Tar Sands bitumen. This is one of most carbon-emitting sources of ‘oil’ there is. Our province is already North America’s largest exporter of combusting carbon.

The Court has said that any defense of necessity for violating its injunction lacks an “air of reality”. But this is because the law has not absorbed the scientific facts regarding climate change. What enjoys the ‘air of reality’ is instead the right to profit by vandalizing the world’s climate.

My grand-daughter’s future depends on whether we act in conformity with the laws of physics and chemistry, and even when human law remains willfully blind. My actions on March 17 are no different than what almost everyone will have to do, in one way or other, as we face the effects of climate change and a wrenching transition off fossil fuels.

This brings me to my sentence.

I first propose that the Court be more moderate than the Crown’s proposal, which is largely based on sentences imposed on protectors of Clayoquot Sound in 1993. Respect for the administration of justice is not enhanced when an injunction is seen as favouring a corporate polluter while an even larger range of citizens than in 1993 - seniors, faith leaders, professionals, indigenous persons and young people, all exhibiting the best of motives - are sharply penalized.

Second, if you do follow the Crown’s position, I propose that you group me with those arrested before April 16 and making ‘late’ guilty pleas, i.e., a fine of $1500 or 75 hours community service rather than the Crown’s $3000 fine or 150 hours community service. Understanding legal options has been difficult for those of us unrepresented by lawyers. You declined to rule on a motion before the trial that would have clarified the legal issues. The plea deadlines were not adjusted in response to what has been a fluid, confusing trial process and schedule.

Third, I propose that my sentence be time in jail, if that time is short. The Crown proposes 14 days for convictions after trial of ‘Category 3’ people arrested after May 8. An early guilty plea under ‘Category 3’ entails a $5000 fine. That is 10 times the corresponding $500 fine for ‘Category 1’ early guilty pleas. Applying this ratio to jail time indicates that in my case jail time should be 1.4 days.

I can pay a fine. My pension income will not cover it, so this amount will come from retirement savings.

I prefer not being sentenced to community service. I am committed to spending time to help my son, who started a business this year in Tofino and just had a baby. A drawn out schedule of community service work here in Vancouver would prevent me from being much help.

Finally, I appeal to you to not impose additional penalties on some of my fellow protectors for being carried away after arrest rather than walking themselves. Every young person deserves a few breaks, as I myself have enjoyed.  If need be, shift some of their additional penalty to me.