Editing James Bay Project (section)

== History ==

=== Exploration ===
[[File:La Grande Rivière2.jpg|thumb|right|La Grande River, near Radisson, Quebec]]

Between 1950 and 1959, a team led by H. M. Finlayson conducted water surveys of the [[Nottaway River|Nottaway]], [[Broadback River|Broadback]] and [[Rupert River]]s—collectively known by the abbreviation NBR—on behalf of the [[Shawinigan Water & Power Company]], a large investor-owned utility based in [[Shawinigan]], Quebec.<ref name= "Lacasse1983p34">{{harvnb|Lacasse|1983|pp=34–35}}</ref> Among options studied by Shawinigan's engineers was the possible diversion of these rivers to the [[Saint-Maurice River]] watershed in order to increase output at the company's 8 power stations.<ref>{{harvnb|Bellavance|1994|p=181}}</ref>

With the [[History of Hydro-Québec|nationalization of privately owned utilities in 1963]], Hydro-Québec inherited the preliminary studies conducted by Finlayson and his team on the hydroelectric potential of James Bay rivers.<ref name="Bourassa1985p26">{{harvnb|Bourassa|1985|p=26}}</ref><ref name="Siecle1989p257">{{harvnb|Bolduc|Hogue|Larouche|1989|pp=257–258}}</ref> However, other projects, such as the Manicouagan-Outardes project on the [[Côte-Nord|North Shore]] and the possibility of building a large power station at [[Churchill Falls Generating Station|Churchill Falls]] in Labrador proved easier and less expensive and the Crown corporation devoted only minimal resources to the vast potential of northern rivers. In 1965, Hydro-Québec survey program included exploration of the territory and hydrographic surveys of areas between the 52nd and 55th parallel.<ref name="Bolduc2000p112">{{harvnb|Bolduc|2000|p=112}}</ref>

In 1967, the company stepped up the work on the La Grande and [[Eastmain River|Eastmain rivers]]. Dozens, then hundreds of people were sent by helicopter and seaplanes in inaccessible areas of the [[taiga]] to perform surveys and geological studies to identify potential sites for hydropower development.<ref name="Lacasse1983p43">{{harvnb|Lacasse|1983|p=43}}</ref> Faced with budget concerns, Hydro-Québec did cut back exploration budgets between 1968 and 1970, but the company maintained planning and analysis work, since early data showed a large potential for development.<ref name= "Bourassa1985p26-27">{{harvnb|Bourassa|1985|pp=26–27}}</ref>

=== Early steps ===
On December 16, 1969, [[Liberal Party of Quebec|Liberal]] [[Backbencher]] [[National Assembly of Quebec|Member of the National Assembly]] [[Robert Bourassa]] met with the president of Hydro-Québec, [[Roland Giroux]] over lunch at the parliamentary dining room in [[Quebec City]].<ref name="Lacasse1983p97">{{harvnb|Lacasse|1983|p=97}}</ref> After the meeting Bourassa, who was about to launch a leadership bid for the position left vacant by the resignation of former Premier [[Jean Lesage]], became convinced of the probability and suitability of the project<ref name="Lacasse1983p98">{{harvnb|Lacasse|1983|p=98}}</ref> and made the development of James Bay hydroelectricity a major plank of its leadership campaign. Elected as the party leader in January, Bourassa went on to win the [[1970 Quebec general election|general election on April 29, 1970]], and his tenure as Premier of Quebec became closely linked to hydroelectric development in general and with the James Bay project in particular.{{sfn|Bourassa|1985|pp=28–29}}

For Bourassa the development of James Bay project addressed two of his priorities. In ''Energy in the North'', an essay published in 1985, Bourassa, an [[economist]] by profession, argued that "Quebec's economic development relies on the development of its natural resources".{{sfn|Bourassa|1985|pp=27}} Moreover, Bourassa argued his 1969 estimates showed demand for electricity would outstrip supply by 11,000 MW by 1983, concurring with forecasts made at the time by Hydro-Quebec.{{sfn|Bourassa|1985|pp=28–29}}

Six months after his election, Bourassa began working on the details of the scheme with his adviser, financier Paul Desrochers. The two men met secretly with Roland Giroux and [[Robert A. Boyd]] for an update in September 1970 and the next month he travelled to [[New York City]] in the midst of the [[October Crisis]] to negotiate financing for the project, estimated at the time to cost between $5 billion and $6 billion.{{sfn|Gravel|Vennat|1979b|p=7}}

Bourassa introduced his plan to the provincial cabinet in March 1971 and recommended hiring the [[United States|US]] [[engineering]] firm [[Bechtel]] to oversee the construction.{{sfn|Gravel|Vennat|1979b|p=7}} Liberal strategists then chose to make the announcement before a partisan crowd assembled at Quebec's Little Coliseum as part of the Liberal party gathering celebrating the first year of Bourassa's term, on April 30, 1971. According to journalists witnessing the scene, Bourassa's speech concluded on a scene of indescribable enthusiasm.{{sfn|Gravel|Vennat|1979a|p=6}}

=== Nuclear lobby ===
The announcement quickly generated a public debate on the wisdom to engage the province on such a large-scale project. For several years, a lobby spearheaded by the [[Government of Canada|Canadian government]] and its nuclear venture, [[Atomic Energy of Canada Limited]], promoted the adoption of nuclear energy in Quebec, as a way to "share the benefits of Canada with our fellow francophone citizens", as [[Prime Minister of Canada|Canadian Prime Minister]] [[Lester B. Pearson]] said. The lobby had its supporters within the ranks at Hydro-Québec, and has been vocal when the provincial government made the decision to invest in the Churchill Falls venture with [[British Newfoundland Development Corporation|Brinco]].{{sfn|Bothwell|1988|pp=332–339}} Several [[Parti Québécois]] spokesmen, including energy critic [[Guy Joron]]{{sfn|Lacasse|1983|p=127}} and economic adviser [[Jacques Parizeau]]{{sfn|Bolduc|2000|p=119}} voiced their opposition to the Bourassa scheme. In an interview with [[Montreal]]'s ''[[Le Devoir]]'', the former economist and public servant who later became premier of Quebec commented: "We don't have to dam every single river just because they're French Canadian and Catholic."{{sfn|Bolduc|2000|p=119}}

However, Bourassa himself{{sfn|Bourassa|1985|p=33}} and Hydro-Québec senior management&nbsp;— including President Roland Giroux and commissioners Yvon DeGuise and Robert Boyd{{sfn|Bourassa|1985|p=33}}&nbsp;— were firmly behind the large hydroelectric development to be built in northern Quebec. At the time Giroux, a financier, argued that large international investors "are still wary about nuclear energy. If we bring them a good hydroelectric project, and James Bay is a good one, they'll soon show where their preferences lie".{{sfn|Bolduc|2000|p=113}} As an engineer, Boyd expressed concerns at this early date about the uncertainty of nuclear energy. He recommended maintaining a certain expertise in the field but advocated delaying nuclear expansion as late as possible.{{sfn|Bolduc|2000|p=113}}

The Quebec premier received an unexpected backing when the [[List of Premiers of the Soviet Union|Chairman]] of the [[Council of Ministers (Soviet Union)|Council of Ministers of the USSR]], [[Alexei Kosygin]] visited Montreal in October 1971. Kosygin supported Bourassa's project and expressed concerns regarding his country's own nuclear power, explaining his country had to develop the technology because the USSR lacked suitable rivers to expand its own hydroelectric network of dams and power stations.{{sfn|Denis|2006|p=131}}

=== Options ===
Two options were considered when Bourassa unveiled his plan for the construction of several large hydroelectric power stations on the rivers flowing into James Bay, either on the [[Nottaway River|Nottaway]], [[Broadback River|Broadback]], [[Rupert River|Rupert]] and [[Harricana River]]s in the south (NBR Project), or on the La Grande and Eastmain Rivers to the north. The northerly rivers were selected in May 1972, various studies conducted by engineering firms having concluded the La Grande option would be more cost effective, while having a lesser impact on forestry and would require less flooding, thus minimizing impacts on First Nations fishing and hunting.<ref>{{harvnb|Bolduc|Hogue|Larouche|1989|p=263}}</ref> Another area of concern was the [[silt]]y nature of the terrain in the NBR area, which would have complicated the damming.<ref>{{harvnb|Bolduc|2000|p=115}}</ref>

The project, as described at the time, would involve the construction of four generating stations on the La Grande River and the diversion of the Eastmain and [[Caniapiscau River|Caniapiscau]] rivers into the La Grande watershed. Responsibility for the project would be overseen by the [[James Bay Energy Corporation|Société d'énergie de la Baie-James]], a newly created mixed corporation (public/private) controlled by Hydro-Québec, headed by [[Robert A. Boyd]].
<!--Here, they miss the internal conflict between Hydro-Québec and the SDBJ, the removal of its president, Pierre Nadeau and his replacement by Boyd, who stayed "en réserve de la République", so to say, according to Bolduc (2000). -->
[[Image:JamesBayProject.PNG|thumb|right|260px|Affected watersheds]]
As environmental assessments were not then required under Quebec law, construction of the {{convert|700|km|mi|-1}} [[James Bay Road]] to the La Grande River was begun in 1971 and completed by October 1974 at a cost of about $400 million. In 1973 and 1974, a temporary winter ice road was used to bring in the heavy equipment required for the construction of the roadbed and some 13 major bridges spanning the many rivers of the region.

Construction had boomed in Montreal for [[Expo 67]], leading to an inflated workforce. In the following years, the decreased demand for labor meant that times were tough for the construction industry in Montreal.<ref name= WPeople>{{cite book| last= Morton| first= Desmond |title= Working People| place= Montreal| publisher= McGill University Press| year= 1998 |page= 298}}</ref> As Bourassa had promised in the 1970 election that his government would create 100,000 jobs in the construction industry, there was much violent competition between various construction unions to have their workers engaged in the James Bay Project.<ref name= WPeople /> Canadian historian [[Desmond Morton (historian)|Desmond Morton]] noted that there were 540 different incidents between the two main construction unions in Quebec on sites associated with the James Bay Project between 1970 and 1974, many of them "very bloody".<ref name= WPeople /> In the 1973 election, after the [[Fédération des travailleurs et travailleuses du Québec]] (FTQ) union had donated generously to the ''Parti libéral du Québec'', Bourassa announced that only companies employing workers from the FTQ-affiliated ''Conseil des métiers de la construction'' headed by [[André Desjardins|André "Dédé" Desjardins]] would work on the James Bay project.<ref name= WPeople /> In March 1974, when one sub-contractor refused to fire two workers belonging to the rival [[Confédération des syndicats nationaux|CSN]] union, the FTQ workers destroyed the LG-2 site, causing $35 million in damage.<ref name= WPeople /><ref name= CedilotNoel431>{{cite book| last1= Cedilot |first1= André |last2= Noel| first2= André | title= Mafia Inc: The Long, Bloody Reign of Canada's Sicilian Clan| place= Toronto| publisher= Random House| year= 2012| page= 431}}</ref> On 21 March 1974, the workers on the LG-2 site rioted and used their bulldozers to destroy the site that they were working on while other workers set buildings afire.

In response to the riot at the LG-2 site, Bourassa created a royal commission headed by Judge [[Robert Cliche]], the union official [[Guy Chevrette]] and a prominent Montreal labor lawyer [[Brian Mulroney]] to examine the question of freedom of expression within Quebec construction unions.<ref name= Curran>{{cite web
  | last = Curran
  | first = Peggy
  | title = Trip back in corruption time machine
  | work = The Montreal Gazette
  | date = 10 May 2012
  | url = https://montrealgazette.com/news/trip+back+corruption+time+machine/7328187/story.html
  | access-date = 2017-12-07
  | archive-date = 2019-08-27
  | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20190827025003/http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/trip%20back%20corruption%20time%20machine/7328187/story.html
  | url-status = dead
  }}</ref> The Cliche commission as it became known found widespread corruption within the construction unions as the columnist Peggy Curran wrote that the Cliche commission uncovered "...tales of nepotism, bribery, sabotage, blackmail and intimidation; charges of union organizers with criminal records who gave lessons in how to break legs; thugs-for-hire who would happily beat up a rival union organizer’s teenager or strangle their dog."<ref name= Curran /> Desjardins was called before the Cliche commission several times starting in November 1974, where it was established that he was closely associated with the Montreal Mafia, and engaged in thuggish practices as president of the ''Conseil des métiers de la construction'' union.<ref name= CedilotNoel431 />

Although the [[Indigenous peoples of the Americas|Aboriginal]] [[Cree]]s had traditional hunting and trapping areas in the region, no seasonal or permanent roads existed at the time. Opposition to the project, however, was strong among the 5,000 Crees of James Bay, the 3,500 [[Inuit]] to the north and several environmental groups. They believed the government of Quebec was acting in violation of treaties and committing unlawful expropriation and destruction of traditional hunting and trapping lands. Furthermore, the Cree and Inuit had not been informed of the hydroelectric project until after construction of the access road had begun. The federal Indian affairs minister [[Jean Chrétien]] intervened on the side of the Cree and the Inuit, hiring lawyers to argue their case in the courts.<ref name= Will>{{cite book| last= Martin| first= Lawrence | title= Chrétien: The Will to Win| location= Toronto| publisher= Lester Publishing| year= 1995}}</ref>{{rp|224}} Both Bourassa and the Prime Minister, [[Pierre Trudeau]] were Liberals and federalists, but relations between the two were very strained at best as the French-Canadian nationalist Bourassa was a "soft federalist" who favored devolving the powers of the federal government down to the provinces while the Canadian nationalist Trudeau was a "hard federalist" who favored concentrating power in the hands of the federal government. Relations between Quebec City and Ottawa were brought to the breaking point in 1971 when Bourassa vetoed the Victoria charter for patriating the British North America Act to give Canada its own constitution on the grounds that if the British North American Act was going to be changed, then the federal government should cede more powers to the provinces. The willingness of the Trudeau government to intervene on the side of the Cree and Inuit against the Quebec government was at least in part caused by the feud between Bourassa and Trudeau.<ref name= Will />{{rp|224}}

In a speech championing the Cree, Chrétien said Bourassa "could go to hell", charging that he did not have the right to build on or flood the land claimed by the Cree.<ref name= Will />{{rp|224}} In 1973, the federal government's lawyers won a court injunction ordering the James Bay project stopped until a treaty could be signed with the Cree and Inuit, but an appeals court overturned the ruling days later.<ref name= Will />{{rp|224}} However, Bourassa agreed to negotiate with the First Nations as the federal government announced it was willing to take the matter to the Supreme Court.<ref name= Will />{{rp|225}} In later years, the Cree and Inuit were given a settlement of $150 million, negotiated by Cree chief Billy Diamond.<ref name=ptc>{{cite web|url= http://www.powertochange.ie/changed/bdiamond.html |title=Billy Diamond |access-date= 2008-02-03|publisher=Power To Change |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20080127111027/http://www.powertochange.ie/changed/bdiamond.html |archive-date= 2008-01-27 }}</ref>

In November 1975, the governments of Canada and Quebec signed the [[James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement]] with the Cree of the James Bay region and the Inuit of northern Quebec, affirming exclusive hunting and fishing rights to about 170,000&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup> of territory and about $250 million in financial compensation in return for the right to develop the hydroelectric resources of Northern Quebec. The planned La Grande-1 power station would be built about 50&nbsp;km further away from the Cree village of Chisasibi than originally planned. The Agreement also provided for an extensive environmental follow-up of all aspects of the hydroelectric development on the La Grande and Eastmain rivers and the establishment of a joint environmental assessment process for any future hydroelectric project involving other rivers of Northern Quebec.