Re: 鈥淟ocal councils are right to sue the fossil-fuel industry,鈥� column, Feb.聽10.
The weekly columns by Trevor Hancock usually contain a modicum of common sense and intelligent thought, but he blew it in Sunday鈥檚 piece in which he endorsed Victoria council鈥檚 decision to join others in suing the fossil-fuel industry for perceived costs incurred due to climate change.
He indirectly draws parallels between fossil fuels and the tobacco industry. This is not even like comparing apples and oranges 鈥� it鈥檚 more like comparing apples and elephants 鈥� nothing in common. Why?
Governments could have shut down the tobacco industry overnight, and the world would still have functioned without a blip. Shutting down the fossil-fuel industry would be so devastating as to be unimaginable 鈥� no transportation, no trade, no food imports, reduced heating and so on.
Hancock then lists the so-called 鈥渂enefits鈥� resulting from filing a lawsuit, all of which are somewhat nebulous, but fails to mention the one big negative: the legal costs and the likelihood of failure.
Then there is the philosophical question. Should the industry that provides essential goods and services to the entire world be penalized for providing them? It鈥檚 almost like suing your doctor for the cost of drugs that he prescribed to keep you alive.
Bryan Holmes
North Saanich
