West-east pipeline part 2

120 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport

Nothing like a good ole right-wing Austrlian government
Thank goodness Harper is gone
Canadians need to wake up because THIS ISSUE is of major concern

http://www.thetyee.ca/News/2016/08/29/Trudeau-China-Trip/

Pondering

NorthReport wrote:
Nothing like a good ole right-wing Austrlian government Thank goodness Harper is gone Canadians need to wake up because THIS ISSUE is of major concern
">http://www.thetyee.ca/News/2016/08/29/Trudeau-China-Trip/

This is definitely a big issue which is why I want the NDP to be more critical on them. Having said that, this has no connection to the thread topic.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Canadian Taxpayers Fork Out $3.3 Billion Every Year to Super Profitable Oil Companies

Some of the largest, most profitable companies in Canada are collectively receiving an estimated $3.3 billion in subsidies every year from Canadian taxpayers, according to a new analysis.

The report, released today by the International Institute for Sustainable Development, a Canadian-based think tank, outlines how billions in federal and provincial tax breaks and corporate incentives benefit companies in the oil and gas sector like Imperial Oil, whose earnings in 2015 were CDN$1.1 billion.

The new analysis comes as Trudeau is in China for the G20 Summit. In 2009 G20 leaders committed to a complete phase out of all fossil fuel subsidies over the medium term and Justin Trudeau, while on the campaign trail, made an election promise to fulfill that commitment.  

Fossil fuel subsidies work against Canada’s commendable progress in putting a price on carbon — they give money and tax breaks to the sources of carbon pollution that we’re trying to scale back,” Amin Asadollahi, North American Lead on Climate Change Mitigation at the International Institute for Sustainable Development, said....

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Husky Oil Spill Assessment

Independent Primary Assessment of Husky Energy Oil Contamination into Saskatchewan River Report Released Today

The report is the result of collaboration between Idle No More, the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs, the Council of Canadians, the National Aboriginal People’s Circle, the Public Service Alliance of Canada (Prairie Region), and others, in response to the lack of independent information surrounding the July 20, 2016 Husky Energy oil spill. The report covers basic information on oil spills in waterways, potential risks to health and ecology, interpretation of lab results, and recommendations for future actions and monitoring.

The report was written by independent scientists from E-Tech International and Resurgence Environmental as a response to communities concerned with the secrecy and slow response of Husky Energy after the North Saskatchewan River oil spill. The report provides information on the behaviour and health risks associated with the spill, a critical analysis of the inadequate response by Husky, and sediment sample results that show the contamination has reached at least as far as the Cecil Ferry downstream of Prince Albert....

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

A poke in the ribs:' Group pitches equalization for pipelines to Ottawa

A group that represents oilfield service and supply companies asked Ottawa earlier this year to use equalization payments as leverage to get reluctant provinces onside with pipeline projects.

The Petroleum Services Association of Canada made the pitch last February as part of its federal budget submission, which was obtained by The Canadian Press through an access-to-information request.

The association recommended that the federal government "amend equalization payment criteria such that transfer payments can be reduced or forfeit if a recipient province refuses transit of extra-provincial goods and/or products, or unduly impedes another province's market access, including unreasonable delays to transportation infrastructure projects."....

 

Unionist

epaulo13 wrote:

A group that represents oilfield service and supply companies asked Ottawa earlier this year to use equalization payments as leverage to get reluctant provinces onside with pipeline projects.

Fully agree! That way, the oil barons can keep their oil and their money. For added protection, I would suggest they store them both where damage from direct sunlight can be avoided.

Doug Woodard

kropotkin1951 wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

It's only a matter of time for the energy industry to switch over to renewables but in the meantime I think more than a few Canadians want the jobs

There is that false dichotomy again. What Canadians need is massive capital expenditure in renewables. There are lots of jobs for workers in that scenario however our oil and gas oligarchy controls our capital and they are not willing to invest in alternatives to their planet destroying industry. You seem to think that we should just be bison and plunge over the cliff because the rich assholes and their media friends keep driving us in that direction.

Even more than investment in renewable energy, we need investment in the efficient use of energy, and in conservation. It's cheaper, and like renewables but even more so, it creates more jobs, and jobs where more people live (they don't have to travel to Fort McMurray) for a wider spectrum of skills that more people have, e.g. skills in residential construction. The jobs are created in places where living costs are normal.

 

jjuares

Here is a good article on why the pipelines should be built. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/on-energy-pm-needs-to-lead-with-h...

Unionist

jjuares wrote:
Here is a good article on why the pipelines should be built.
">http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/on-energy-pm-needs-to-lead-with-h...

He doesn't even mention the movement's concern about the safety of the water supply. That, in itself, would suffice to dismiss his piece as tendentious and one-sided.

Then, he treats the opposition of Indigenous people, not from the viewpoint of hereditary and treaty rights, but simply a matter of mercenary electoral calculation on the part of the Liberal government - a popularity contest.

In Québec, you don't need to be a climate change ideologue to take to the streets and oppose sending hazardous goods from Alberta to New Brunswick for export. You only need to be - human.

So, what exactly was "good" about this article?

quizzical

Unionist wrote:
jjuares wrote:
Here is a good article on why the pipelines should be built.
">http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/on-energy-pm-needs-to-lead-with-h...

He doesn't even mention the movement's concern about the safety of the water supply. That, in itself, would suffice to dismiss his piece as tendentious and one-sided.

i still don't know where i come down on all of this.  imv talking about "the water supply" is like using "children". we've had the Transmountain pipeline through here for 50+ years and there's been no problems of a great or even small nature.

Quote:
Then, he treats the opposition of Indigenous people, not from the viewpoint of hereditary and treaty rights, but simply a matter of mercenary electoral calculation on the part of the Liberal government - a popularity contest.

i think it's mercenary electoral caculation on the part of the Liberals and he's right on the spot.

Quote:
In Québec, you don't need to be a climate change ideologue to take to the streets and oppose sending hazardous goods from Alberta to New Brunswick for export. You only need to be - human.

So, what exactly was "good" about this article?

he's right about the Liberals being mercenaries????

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

The NEB is awash with people who are corrupt to the core.

Quote:

NEB panelist previously fined for insider trading

Radio-Canada, the French-language public broadcaster, reported that it called Gauthier, but he declined to comment, referring questions to the NEB's media relations department, which said the regulator was reviewing the motions seeking recusal.

Gauthier sold shares of his former company AEER based on privileged information, Quebec's securities regulator, the Autorité des marchés financiers, said in April 2013, at a time when Gauthier was already serving on the National Energy Board. The incident goes back to 2008, after the company lost a competition for new contracts.

"This matter involves a call for tenders regarding wind power launched by Hydro-Québec in 2005," the Quebec regulator said at the time. "Mr. Gauthier allegedly sold his shares of AAER using privileged information that was not generally known, namely, that AAER was not a successful bidder in the call for tenders."

Gauthier later admitted that he had used privileged information when he sold the shares and paid a $9,000 fine, Radio-Canada reported. The broadcaster also reported that his company would go bankrupt in 2010, a few months after receiving a $2.5 million loan from a Quebec government investment fund.

http://www.nationalobserver.com/2016/09/08/news/energy-east-pipeline-pan...

 

 

quizzical

how could it not be when Conservatives and \liberals are corrupt to the core and have been since at least 1867

NorthReport

What's Trudeau's view on the scheme of things? I had heard he was unhappy with the NEB. If that's correct then there is indeed room for optimism. But let's not throw all the babies out with the bathwater. Sometimes the folks with best expertise come from the industry involved as long as they are not just company hacks.  

NEB exceeds CESD pipeline oversight audit commitments

http://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/neb-exceeds-cesd-pipeline-oversight...

NorthReport

Energy sector leads gains on TSX as oil prices surge

http://www.bnn.ca/energy-sector-leads-gains-on-tsx-as-oil-prices-surge-1...

Sean in Ottawa

quizzical wrote:

how could it not be when Conservatives and \liberals are corrupt to the core and have been since at least 1867

I don't share this view.

I think that the Liberals and Conservatives serve the wrong interests, have the wrong ideology and wrong priorities but I do not think any party is inherently more immune than the others from corruption.

The NDP federally is cleaner becuase it never got to power.

I supported the NDP all these years for policy, values, ideals etc. not becuase I think that they would be less likely to have corruption creep in.

NorthReport

Bingo!

Unionist

quizzical wrote:
 imv talking about "the water supply" is like using "children". we've had the Transmountain pipeline through here for 50+ years and there's been no problems of a great or even small nature.

You obviously aren't concerned about the risks. But you're suggesting that the movement in Québec doesn't really care either - that it's just a cover for something else. I'm surprised to see you say that. It's a right-wing talking point here, though I'm sure you don't mean it that way.

I'm glad you haven't had any big or small problems. Lucky you don't live in Saskatchewan, I guess. And Quebecers have a problem with our land being used for Alberta oil to be shipped to New Brunswick to be refined and exported. Why would we agree to that?

Quote:
i think it's mercenary electoral caculation on the part of the Liberals and he's right on the spot.

He says Trudeau shouldn't worry about losing some support among youth and Indigenous people, but just push ahead with the pipeline because it's early in his term. Did you actually read what he said?

Lawrence Martin wrote:
The Trudeau Liberals are early in their mandate. They are in the high 40s in the polls. That’s up from the high 20s a year ago. It’s arguably the steepest climb in Liberal history. The Conservatives are about 20 points behind. What better moment to do the tough stuff? They have political capital to burn.

That's Martin talking. He's telling Trudeau to do a cynical mercenary electoral calculation, to hell with worrying about losing support among youth and Indigenous people, he'll recover.

That's what you call being "right on the spot"?

Honestly, I don't follow what you're saying. You really have to respect people's opposition to pipelines passing through their homes. It's their decision to make. Not yours.

jjuares

Unionist wrote:

jjuares wrote:
Here is a good article on why the pipelines should be built.
">http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/on-energy-pm-needs-to-lead-with-h...

He doesn't even mention the movement's concern about the safety of the water supply. That, in itself, would suffice to dismiss his piece as tendentious and one-sided.

Then, he treats the opposition of Indigenous people, not from the viewpoint of hereditary and treaty rights, but simply a matter of mercenary electoral calculation on the part of the Liberal government - a popularity contest.

In Québec, you don't need to be a climate change ideologue to take to the streets and oppose sending hazardous goods from Alberta to New Brunswick for export. You only need to be - human.

So, what exactly was "good" about this article?


Actually he doesn't "treat" the opposition of indigenous people at all. He states that safeguards can be in place. All of which can be disputed of course. What I believe was " good" about this aricle was the economic argument for these pipelines. I wonder if some of these people from other provinces who object to the pipelines would have the same view if I objected to trains moving through Edmonton carrying products that could be hazrdous especially if the products they were carrying originated in their province We had a lake ruined here because of a train deralied carrying PTO on its way to Vancouver. In that case most of the products came from a community just east of the lake. But we live in a world of NIMBYISM.

quizzical

NIMBYISMs...fking hilarious the east coast doesn't care about tanker traffic in its waters bringing in crude but the west coast does about it leaving.

QC doesn't care about either coast or the St Lawrence and Great Lakes it just wants petroleum products to consume. 

the east coast can get destroyed bringing in tankers to feed QC peoples their petroleum needs.  it's good and okay though !!!! just NO pipeline going fully across their province.

not even going to mention tanker by rail traffic through their province....

because it's all better than pipelines....

quizzical

Unionist wrote:
quizzical wrote:
 imv talking about "the water supply" is like using "children". we've had the Transmountain pipeline through here for 50+ years and there's been no problems of a great or even small nature.

You obviously aren't concerned about the risks. But you're suggesting that the movement in Québec doesn't really care either - that it's just a cover for something else. I'm surprised to see you say that. It's a right-wing talking point here, though I'm sure you don't mean it that way.

I'm glad you haven't had any big or small problems. Lucky you don't live in Saskatchewan, I guess. And Quebecers have a problem with our land being used for Alberta oil to be shipped to New Brunswick to be refined and exported. Why would we agree to that?

Quote:
i think it's mercenary electoral caculation on the part of the Liberals and he's right on the spot.

He says Trudeau shouldn't worry about losing some support among youth and Indigenous people, but just push ahead with the pipeline because it's early in his term. Did you actually read what he said?

Lawrence Martin wrote:
The Trudeau Liberals are early in their mandate. They are in the high 40s in the polls. That’s up from the high 20s a year ago. It’s arguably the steepest climb in Liberal history. The Conservatives are about 20 points behind. What better moment to do the tough stuff? They have political capital to burn.

That's Martin talking. He's telling Trudeau to do a cynical mercenary electoral calculation, to hell with worrying about losing support among youth and Indigenous people, he'll recover.

That's what you call being "right on the spot"?

Honestly, I don't follow what you're saying. You really have to respect people's opposition to pipelines passing through their homes. It's their decision to make. Not yours.

he doesn't need to tell Trudeau anything he is telling the readers what the behind the scenes planners are saying and doing.

i don't have to respect nothing unionist. i have a right to my own opinions and to say them.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..i posted this in the no pipeline thread it might be helpful here.

Is Trudeau testing the waters for a Kinder Morgan approval?

In a column in Vancouver’s 24 Hours newspaper published online Monday afternoon, Bill Tieleman attributes his belief that Trudeau will approve the pipeline to “a more dispassionate look” at the circumstances and to past statements from government officials.

“The Liberals will point to their ‘balanced’ approach on the environment compared to the Conservatives and spend some political capital on Kinder Morgan, betting that after the initial fury dies down, they will not pay a high price.”

He sounds certain, doesn’t he?

Once could always be a hunch. But then this afternoon, the other shoe dropped.

According to my unreliable sources, Trudeau govt. will greenlight Kinder Morgan pipeline but Energy East will die a long slow death.

— Lawrence Martin (@LMartinOttawa) September 7, 2016

Lawrence Martin, a columnist for the Globe and Mail, has it from “unreliable sources” that Trudeau will “greenlight Kinder Morgan.”

Martin is known for good Liberal sources and wrote a two-volume biography of Jean Chrétien some years back. Tieleman is closer to the NDP, but it wouldn’t be a shock if he had a buddy or two on Trudeau’s team. He certainly has friends in Alberta’s NDP government.

quote:

If it is true that Trudeau plans to approve the pipeline, and Martin is also right that the trade-off is a long, slow death for Energy East, then clearly the Trudeau government has been rocked by recent scandals surrounding the National Energy Board process.

Today’s latest revelation that one of two embattled commissioners was found guilty of insider trading in 2014 simply adds to a fraught road for Energy East in Quebec. The conflict scandals coupled with disruptions at the Montreal hearings and renewed calls from local mayors and Indigenous peoples to shut down the process clearly left the government feeling that the problem they would sooner face is hostile residents and First Nations on British Columbia’s coast.

Unionist

quizzical wrote:

i don't have to respect nothing unionist. i have a right to my own opinions and to say them.

Yes, I'm sorry, I didn't mean you didn't have a right to your opinions. All I meant is that if First Nations and progressives and 80 Québec municipalities don't want tar sands filth passing through our land, it will not pass. I do hope you respect the wishes of the people whose lives are affected by it. But you're correct. You don't have to respect nothing.

Unionist

quizzical wrote:

NIMBYISMs...fking hilarious the east coast doesn't care about tanker traffic in its waters bringing in crude but the west coast does about it leaving.

QC doesn't care about either coast or the St Lawrence and Great Lakes it just wants petroleum products to consume. 

the east coast can get destroyed bringing in tankers to feed QC peoples their petroleum needs.  it's good and okay though !!!! just NO pipeline going fully across their province.

not even going to mention tanker by rail traffic through their province....

because it's all better than pipelines....

Hard to express how offensive this is. You know nothing about Québec, whether Indigenous folks here or settlers. You should consider trying to understand people's concerns and protests, rather than mocking them.

Of course, you don't have to do anything you don't want to do. I'm just expressing my opinion. People who don't sympathize with the struggles of others will find themselves alone and cold when the time comes.

quizzical

it's hard to express how offensive NIMBYISM is.

my ancestors and family have already found themselves cold and alone many many times. i don't expect it will be any different for a long time to come. nothing new there. i don't need a lecture on the struggles of "others" thanks.

imv the oil sands should be refined in AB not elsewhere and then shipped.

 

 

jjuares

Well, there is such a thing as eminent domain whereby a government decides it is a national interest to use land in such a way that the owner may find himself/hesrself in disagreement with. For FN this may not or should not happen but for municipalities it can be done.

Unionist

jjuares wrote:
Well, there is such a thing as eminent domain whereby a government decides it is a national interest to use land in such a way that the owner may find himself/hesrself in disagreement with. For FN this may not or should not happen but for municipalities it can be done.

I know it "can be done". Our fear is that it will be done. That's why we're protesting.

I suspect that's why our neighbours are doing the same.

So, what do you think? 

Do you think the federal government should impose this pipeline on Québec, even if the Indigenous people and municipalities concerned are opposed? 

 

jjuares

Unionist wrote:

jjuares wrote:
Well, there is such a thing as eminent domain whereby a government decides it is a national interest to use land in such a way that the owner may find himself/hesrself in disagreement with. For FN this may not or should not happen but for municipalities it can be done.

I know it "can be done". Our fear is that it will be done. That's why we're protesting.

I suspect that's why our neighbours are doing the same.

So, what do you think? 

Do you think the federal government should impose this pipeline on Québec, even if the Indigenous people and municipalities concerned are opposed? 

 


Good question. For me I am more concerned about the viewpoint of the FN than the municipalities. I have seen such misinformation coming from those opposing these pipelines as to be beyond description. And yes, I do believe it is right to discuss tankers and the old pipeline that supplies Montreal with its oil. It is also of value to discuss why we are buying oil from Saudi Arabia. So many people were outraged by a arms sale but feel it's fine to buy oil from them that gives them the funds to suppress the Shia as well as people in Yemen. This pipeline should eventually be modified to supply more Canadian needs. Of course that will never happ n until the pipelines get built.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Unionist wrote:

So, what do you think? 

Do you think the federal government should impose this pipeline on Québec, even if the Indigenous people and municipalities concerned are opposed? 

The same question applies to Kinder Morgan. Of course they shouldn't but our oligarchy has bet big on the tar sands so there will be a pipeline. Both pipelines face municipalities that have voted to reject the pipeline. The green lighting of Site C has already shown that this government has the same lack of respect for aboriginal title as their predecessors.

I think that the Liberals if they are doing electoral math know that BC has far fewer seats than Quebec and the party has governed repeatedly with only a few MP's from here. So the question from a political pragmatist view is will Quebec voters make the Liberals pay an electoral price if they stop the West to East pipeline but let the KM pipeline go ahead or will Quebec voters focus on only the protection of the environment of Quebec and lock in the Liberal vote for at least another election.  

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..yet another corrupt process begins.

Feds Appoint Chair of B.C. Industry Group to Panel Reviewing Environmental Assessment Process

The federal government has appointed the founding chair of a vocal B.C.-based industry advocacy group to a four-member panel tasked with reviewing Canada’s environmental assessment process.*

The panel is part of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s attempt to make good on his campaign promise to restore credibility to environmental reviews of major energy projects — but the appointment calls into question the credibility of the panel. 

Resource Works Connection Presents Credibility Risk

Resource Works claims to promote balanced conversations about B.C.’s resource development, but the group takes a consistently pro-industry position on, well, basically everything: mining, LNG development, new pipelines, climate legislation, carbon taxes, raw log exports, environmental opposition, the Site C dam, oil tankers and the National Energy Board.

The overarching message of Resource Works is that continued extraction of natural resources is essential to B.C.’s prosperity and anything that stands in the way of extraction — local opposition, regulations, taxes — is a threat to that prosperity.

It’s a message they repeat over and over and over....

jjuares

epaulo13 wrote:

..yet another corrupt process begins.

Feds Appoint Chair of B.C. Industry Group to Panel Reviewing Environmental Assessment Process

The federal government has appointed the founding chair of a vocal B.C.-based industry advocacy group to a four-member panel tasked with reviewing Canada’s environmental assessment process.*

The panel is part of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s attempt to make good on his campaign promise to restore credibility to environmental reviews of major energy projects — but the appointment calls into question the credibility of the panel. 

Resource Works Connection Presents Credibility Risk

Resource Works claims to promote balanced conversations about B.C.’s resource development, but the group takes a consistently pro-industry position on, well, basically everything: mining, LNG development, new pipelines, climate legislation, carbon taxes, raw log exports, environmental opposition, the Site C dam, oil tankers and the National Energy Board.

The overarching message of Resource Works is that continued extraction of natural resources is essential to B.C.’s prosperity and anything that stands in the way of extraction — local opposition, regulations, taxes — is a threat to that prosperity.

It’s a message they repeat over and over and over....


Yes, he is one of four. But here is the rest of the article. "In all fairness, Horswill is the sole industry-aligned representative on the panel, which also includes Johanne Gélinas, a former Canadian environment commissioner, Rod Northey, an environmental lawyer and Renée Pelletier, an aboriginal rights lawyer." Nothing corrupt about this at all. It is typical of panels to appoint people with different points of view. It looks like on this panel the industry rep is outnumbered 3 to 1.

Unionist

Excellent news! The NEB rubber-stampers for the Oil Barons have been forced to step down (before their offshore account deposits are confirmed, I would imagine):

[url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/neb-panel-steps-down-1.3755872]NEB panel members step down after flurry of criticism[/url]

Quote:
All three panel members of the National Energy Board have stepped down, weeks after a flurry of criticism erupted during hearings in Montreal over the Energy East Pipeline.

Good riddance - get lost! And go huddle with your boss:

Quote:
Protesters stormed the room before hearings were set to begin. There were also calls to dump two commissioners who met with former Quebec premier Jean Charest while he was working for TransCanada, the company heading the Energy East project.

People telling Québecers, Indigenous and others, that we should accept this pipeline for the sake of the "economy" should grow a sense of shame.

jjuares

Unionist wrote:

Excellent news! The NEB rubber-stampers for the Oil Barons have been forced to step down (before their offshore account deposits are confirmed, I would imagine):

[url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/neb-panel-steps-down-1.3755872]NEB panel members step down after flurry of criticism[/url]

Quote:
All three panel members of the National Energy Board have stepped down, weeks after a flurry of criticism erupted during hearings in Montreal over the Energy East Pipeline.

Good riddance - get lost! And go huddle with your boss:

Quote:
Protesters stormed the room before hearings were set to begin. There were also calls to dump two commissioners who met with former Quebec premier Jean Charest while he was working for TransCanada, the company heading the Energy East project.

People telling Québecers, Indigenous and others, that we should accept this pipeline for the sake of the "economy" should grow a sense of shame.


Of course they aren't entitled to their opinion. They should be ashamed of having a different opinion than yours. The nerve of them.

Unionist

jjuares wrote:
Of course they aren't entitled to their opinion. They should be ashamed of having a different opinion than yours. The nerve of them.

I think the pipeline should spiral through Saskatchewan, then cross the U.S. border. And I don't really care what the people of Saskatchewan think. That's my opinion, and I have oh such a sacred right to my opinion.

Keep your bitumen out of our back yard. Not in our back yard. Hope that's very clear.

 

jjuares

Unionist wrote:

jjuares wrote:
Of course they aren't entitled to their opinion. They should be ashamed of having a different opinion than yours. The nerve of them.

I think the pipeline should spiral through Saskatchewan, then cross the U.S. border. And I don't really care what the people of Saskatchewan think. That's my opinion, and I have oh such a sacred right to my opinion.

Keep your bitumen out of our back yard. Not in our back yard. Hope that's very clear.

 


Well, we know that you believe that youhave a right to your opinion. No one would question that. But as for others...

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..more on the neb panel

Pipeline panel recuses itself, chairman reassigned from Energy East duties

quote:

The hearings have been adjourned and Peter Watson, the chairman and chief executive of Canada's National Energy Board has also recused himself from any duties related to the review of Energy East.

But the Board also said that there would now be no need for a full investigation, as requested by several stakeholders. It also said it was no longer necessary to release additional information about the private meetings that have prompted a public outcry.

The NEB decisions were announced Friday on the regulator's website following legal motions and public controversy over a private meeting that panel members held with former Quebec premier Jean Charest in January 2015, while he was under contract with pipeline company TransCanada Corp.

Charest gave political advice to the Board about navigating approval for the Energy East project, according to internal notes released through access to information legislation. Critics say this demonstrated that the review was tainted since NEB rules require all meetings and discussions about a project under review to be public and transparent.

The hearings on Energy East have been adjourned until the government names new bilingual board members who can serve on the panel.

The stunning decision comes after a series of legal motions and letters, launched by environmental lawyers in Ontario, Quebec and Alberta, who called for the recusal of Board members from the Energy East process over the appearance of bias. First Nations leaders across the country have also demanded that the review process for Energy East restart from the beginning.

 

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

epaulo13 wrote:

But the Board also said that there would now be no need for a full investigation, as requested by several stakeholders. It also said it was no longer necessary to release additional information about the private meetings that have prompted a public outcry.

If I understand correctly, they are saying that all the board members who took part in the probably illegal meetings have recused themselves from dealing with the issue, and therefore all further information about the very embarrassing and potentially criminal details of those illicit meetings can now be suppressed. Sounds like a classic cover up to me. It will be interesting to see whether they get away with this ploy.

Unionist

Quote:
First Nations leaders across the country have also demanded that the review process for Energy East restart from the beginning.

Which "First Nations leaders across the country" would those be? Kind of a strange generalization. Energy East should be shut down. But so much money will be shoved up the ass of so many people, that that seems unlikely.

 

 

Unionist

[url=http://www.nationalobserver.com/2016/09/09/opinion/editorial-harper-lega... legacy defeated in Energy East fiasco[/url]

Quote:

The ground is shaking beneath the foundation of Canada's Calgary-based pipeline regulator, the National Energy Board.

Bowing to mounting pressure over scandals exposed by National Observer, the NEB’s Energy East panelists have all stepped down and NEB chief executive Peter Watson will not be allowed any further role in the pipeline review.

The Energy East hearings themselves have been “adjourned” until someone can figure out what to do. That “someone” would normally be the same chairperson who is no longer permitted to make any decisions on the matter.

It’s an object lesson in the importance of independent investigative journalism. The NEB has long had a serious problem with its public credibility. But it is only because of reader-supported investigations by Mike De Souza that we know the chairman and two of the panelists met privately with Jean Charest to discuss the pipeline proposal while he was on contract to TransCanada.

[...]

Energy East is the biggest pipeline proposal in Canadian history. It cannot be put back in the hands of a regulator that is so discredited.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

jjuares wrote:
epaulo13 wrote:

..yet another corrupt process begins.

Feds Appoint Chair of B.C. Industry Group to Panel Reviewing Environmental Assessment Process

The federal government has appointed the founding chair of a vocal B.C.-based industry advocacy group to a four-member panel tasked with reviewing Canada’s environmental assessment process.*

The panel is part of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s attempt to make good on his campaign promise to restore credibility to environmental reviews of major energy projects — but the appointment calls into question the credibility of the panel. 

Resource Works Connection Presents Credibility Risk

Resource Works claims to promote balanced conversations about B.C.’s resource development, but the group takes a consistently pro-industry position on, well, basically everything: mining, LNG development, new pipelines, climate legislation, carbon taxes, raw log exports, environmental opposition, the Site C dam, oil tankers and the National Energy Board.

The overarching message of Resource Works is that continued extraction of natural resources is essential to B.C.’s prosperity and anything that stands in the way of extraction — local opposition, regulations, taxes — is a threat to that prosperity.

It’s a message they repeat over and over and over....

Yes, he is one of four. But here is the rest of the article. "In all fairness, Horswill is the sole industry-aligned representative on the panel, which also includes Johanne Gélinas, a former Canadian environment commissioner, Rod Northey, an environmental lawyer and Renée Pelletier, an aboriginal rights lawyer." Nothing corrupt about this at all. It is typical of panels to appoint people with different points of view. It looks like on this panel the industry rep is outnumbered 3 to 1.

..yes it is a corruption because major decisions have already been made. the direction is set. the fix is in. what will change that is grassroots politics and not this panel's report even if it were to give an honest report which it won't.

quote:

  • Failure to clarify what, exactly, Canada’s GHG emissions target should be if we are to play our part in meeting the COP21 goal of limiting climate change to an increase of less than 20C.  There is a looming gap between Environment Canada’s 2030 GHG emissions estimate of 817 megatonnes and the Copenhagen target of 524 millions. Nobody in McKenna’s remit (or Energy Minister Carr’s) seems to wants to grasp that 300 megatonne nettle, nor venture an estimate of what further reductions will be needed to meet COP21 commitments
  • Maintaining the Harper Government’s unambitious and inadequate GHG emission targets of 17% reduction by 2030, which, without swift action, we have no hope of meeting
  • Bowing to the desires of a few Premiers to kick the carbon-tax proposal down the road and (they hope) out of sight
  • Inaction on the review of the Oil & Gas industry emissions that successive Environment Ministers in the Harper Government had promised year after year. This industry contributes over 26% of Canada’s GHG emissions. Singling it out for inaction suggests that this Government is also a “captive regulator”
  • A decision to continue the 30% accelerated capital cost allowance for LNG facilities – a fossil-fuel subsidy granted by the Harper Government in 2014
  • Approval of the Woodfibre LNG plant in Howe Sound, despite its almost 1 million tonnes of annual GHG emissions. This puzzling and highly-unpopular decision also belied another Trudeau promise – that of “politicians may issue permits, but only communities can grant permission”
  • Cabinet’s approval of NEB’s decision to approve Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain pipeline extension, LNG Canada’s 40-year license extension for its Kitimat plant and Steelhead LNG’s 5 export licenses – each of which represents a vast expansion of Canada’s GHG emissions
  • Publicly supporting the Keystone XL and Energy East pipeline proposals
  • Silence and inaction on repealing any of the Harper Government’s egregious environmental legislation – particularly the omnibus Bill C-38, which shredded environmental protections in the Species at Risk Act, Navigable Waters Act, NEB Act and 60+ others
  • Promises to reform the National Energy Board and its farcical review process replaced with nominating yet another dubious set of second-guessers. This is hardly the stuff of meaningful reform to “restore public confidence” in the NEB;
  • Not one concrete legislative or regulatory action on Liberal energy efficiency promises – boosting renewable alternatives, setting tighter automobile emission standards, elevating building insulation standards, promoting public transit initiatives, and inaction on the PM’s lofty promise to the U.N. that “Climate change will test our intelligence, our compassion and our will. But we are equal to that challenge. I encourage other signatories to move swiftly to follow through on their commitments”. Since then – nothing, nada, zilch.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Quebec group calls on Trudeau to intervene after pipeline regulator's "illegal" decision

Canada's pipeline regulator made an "illegal" decision to shut down a probe into its private dealings with oil industry advocates in the midst of a major pipeline review, a Quebec environmental group said on Monday.

The regulator, the National Energy Board, made this decision on Friday as it adjourned hearings on the controversial Energy East pipeline project and announced that several high-ranking officials, including chief executive Peter Watson, were recusing themselves from the process due to concerns about conflicts of interest.

quote:

André Bélisle, president of the Association québécoise de lutte contre la pollution atmosphérique, said he was pleased that the NEB admitted its mistakes, but questioned why Watson and Mercier were trying to shut down an investigation. He said it didn't make sense for the Board to be recusing itself about Energy East issues, while still making decisions about the process.

"This is illegal," said Bélisle in an interview. "What they're saying contradicts itself."

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Defending Land Defender and Community Scholar Vanessa Gray

An Open Letter from Graduate Students regarding Vanessa Gray’s court case.

Vanessa Gray is a 23 year-old Anishinaabe’kwe from the Aamjiwnaang First Nation, located in Canada’s Chemical Valley, near Sarnia, Ontario. She has been working with community members to bring awareness to environmental racism and health issues resulting from her reserve’s toxic surroundings. She is an organizer with Aamjiwnaang and Sarnia Against Pipelines (https://aamjiwnaangsolidarity.com/).

This past December Gray was arrested for shutting off a valve of Line 9  – an Enbridge pipeline carrying Alberta bitumen through her traditional territory. She had notified Enbridge about what she planned to do before she took this action. She was protecting her home and her community from the well documented, proven risks that pipelines and the fossil fuel industry pose. She now faces criminal charges of mischief over $5000 and mischief endangering the lives of others. This could mean 25 years to life in prison.

In a press release shortly after Vanessa’s arrest, she said, “It’s clear that tar sands projects represent an ongoing cultural and environmental genocide….I defend the land and water because it is sacred”. This perspective is what led the Economics for the Anthropocene (https://e4a-net.org/)–a group of scholars dedicated to rethinking economics, law, and governance in ways that take into account the wellbeing of people and ecosystems–to invite Vanessa to the project as a Community Scholar. She has contributed significantly to our project and taught us a great deal about Indigenous leadership on energy issues. As we have got to know Vanessa and learn about her story and the prison sentence she faces, we have been moved to support her.

quote:

We have entered a time in earth’s history – the Anthropocene – that is characterized by massive disruption in the ecological life support systems by human activity. This is also a time when we are slowly waking up from massive injustices of colonial exploitation of people and land. This is a time for honouring and empowering the heroic individuals who stand up and defend the rights and wellbeing of human communities and ecosystems. It is not a time to be treating such courageous and revolutionary people as criminals. Our future depends on people like Vanessa Gray.

We are co-presenting an event at McGill on September 27th in support of Vanessa. Please join us:

https://www.facebook.com/events/1094076750674418/

To learn more about the case and about how you can help Vanessa: http://line9shutdown.ca/the-case/

Please share this article far and wide!

Signed by,

Janica Anderzén , PhD Candidate, University of Vermont

James Arruda, MES, York University

Matthew Burke, PhD Candidate, McGill University

Caleb Gingrich, MSc Candidate, McGill University

Kesha Fevrier, PhD Student, York University

Jennifer Gobby, PhD Candidate, McGill University

Emery Hartley, MSc Candidate, McGill University

María A. Juncos, PhD Candidate, York University

Alia Karim, PhD Candidate, York University

Anna Kusmer, MSc Candidate, McGill University

Professor Patricia Perkins, York University

Sophia Sanniti, MES Candidate, York University

Romain Svartzman, PhD Candidate, McGill University

Unionist

[url=https://ricochet.media/en/1423/one-pipeline-is-too-many-its-time-for-a-u... pipeline is too many: It’s time for a united east-west opposition[/url]

Quote:

The activist offensive against Energy East has quickly become the most successful climate campaign in the country. The coordinated and creative activism happening in Manitoba, Ontario, the Maritimes, and especially Quebec is blowing the rest of the country’s (and the world’s) mind, and providing TransCanada and the corrupt National Energy Board with a formidable opponent. [...]

I’ve been a senior advisor on the campaign to shut down the tar sands for almost five years. When the massive Energy East project first reared its head we were already knee-deep in alligators. Between Northern Gateway, Keystone XL, and Kinder Morgan, not to mention the profound problems at the centre of the world’s biggest industrial project in northern Alberta, I can’t say we were excited to have yet another pipeline to fight.

Then something amazing happened. In only a few short years, TransCanada, a massive Alberta-based company that you’d think would have learned a few tricks after getting its ass kicked on Keystone XL, managed to passionately and permanently piss off and unify la belle province. If there were a playbook on how a remote, English, colonial-minded company could screw up branding, messaging, and relationships, TransCanada’s leaders studied it hard.

They are done in Quebec, and they know it.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Feeling neglected by Husky, First Nation crowdfunds to clean up after oil spill

A First Nation in Saskatchewan whose waters were contaminated after a major Husky Energy oil spill in July has started a crowdfunding campaign to clean up oil damage to its territory.

Since the Calgary-based energy company's 19-year-old pipeline leaked more than 200,000 litres (roughly 1,570 barrels) of oil and other chemicals into the North Saskatchewan River on July 21, members of the James Smith Cree Nation have watched in horror as foam, oil sheen, dead crayfish, and tar have washed up along their portion of the river bank. They say birds, frogs, butterflies, and other wildlife that used to be seen around the river have disappeared from its banks since July 25, and are attributing the damage directly to Husky.

After the oil spill: community scrambles to respond

Husky Energy has been aware of their plight since early August. But according to Chief Wally Burns, the company has not offered any financial or boots-on-the-ground assistance to tackle cleanup in his community. The James Smith Cree Nation Council has already spent more than $140,000 on booms, independent water quality testing, and other measures to mitigate the damage — money that was intended for flooding safeguards and other community operations in the months to come.

The Indiegogo campaign, which aims to raise $50,000 to cleanup and restore the territory, is a last-ditch effort to recoup the funds that they poured into cleanup, and fund the restoration of the territory, said Chief Burns.

"The way I see it, it's our livelihood that's on the river," he told National Observer. "I took it into my own hands as a chief to protect my community, my reserve and my people."

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Six Nations ceases talks with Enbridge, signs historic treaty to resist pipelines

Six Nations Elected Council released a statement Monday, saying effective September 12, 2016 all current and future consultations with Enbridge have ceased.

According to SNEC, Six Nations Consultation and Accommodation Process (CAP) team were in discussions with Enbridge regarding how the company could accommodate the community for their proposed Line 10 replacement project, which is seeking to replace a 35 kilometre section of the pipeline that currently crosses over Haudenosaunee territory.

Six Nations Lands and Resources Director Lonny Bomberry said the CAP team got involved in discussions with Enbridge as a result of Canada’s ‘duty to consult’ process between proponents — the corporation seeking to make a development, in this case Enbridge — and First Nations communities, in this case Six Nations.

Bomberry said Enbridge is required by the federal government to contact and enter discussions with Six Nations on any projects along the Haldimand Tract and 1701 Treaty territories, also known as the Nanfan Treaty or Dish with One Spoon area.

“We didn’t really start a formal process of becoming involved in anything to any great degree. But with the Line 10 replacement project we became more involved,” said Bomberry.

Bomberry said Six Nations applied for intervenor status with the National Energy Board (NEB) when Enbridge submitted their application for the Line 10 replacement project.

“We discussed with Enbridge that the Line 10 replacement is an impingement on our treaty rights; that we have a right to be accommodated if the line is going to be refurbished and so the issue was how are we gong to be compensated or mitigated,” said Bomberry.

Bomberry said the CAP team and Enbridge “couldn’t reach a satisfactory resolution on that”, and thus the statement was issued declaring as of September 12 all current and future engagements with Enbridge and Six Nations Elected Council have ceased....

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

First Nation reimbursed for Husky oil spill, but nature expected to clean up rest

After weeks of feeling abandoned by Husky Energy in the wake of a massive oil spill, the James Smith Cree Nation of central Saskatchewan has finally been reimbursed for the cash it spent cleaning up the company's chemicals from its land and water.

The cheque for more than $145,000 came in early September after Husky was flooded with negative press over its slow response to the community's concerns, and refusal to acknowledge publicly — despite several media requests — that its oil had washed up on the shores of the reserve. Dogs that are specially trained to recognize the scent of Husky's oil recently confirmed the connection as part of a Shoreline Cleanup Assessment Technique (SCAT) survey of James Smith's territory.

The First Nation may have won the immediate cash battle, but according to community leaders, the cleanup war is far from over.

At least 27 oily log piles remain on their reserve, and even more lie just outside the reserve boundaries within the nation's traditional territory. Earlier this week, an official report from Husky Energy's SCAT advisor, Owens Coastal Consultants, recommended that the debris be left over the winter for "natural weathering."

In a call with Husky on Thursday afternoon, James Smith Cree Nation categorically rejected this recommendation, demanded that Husky clean up everything, and further condemned the process of developing recommendations without any First Nations input.

Husky Energy could not be reached for comment on this story, and has not responded to National Observer's phone calls or emails since August....

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Quebec group prepared to take pipeline regulator to court for hiding documents

A Quebec environmental group says it plans to take legal action against Canada’s pipeline regulator if it continues to withhold information from the public about its private meetings with industry.

In a newly-released letter, l’Association québécoise de lutte contre la pollution atmosphérique has asked the regulator, the National Energy Board (NEB), to revise its September decision to prevent an investigation into the meetings.

André Bélisle, the president of the anti-pollution group, said he would “absolutely” bring the matter before the Federal Court of Appeal, if the regulator fails to act.

“We want answers to our questions,” Bélisle told National Observer in an interview on Wednesday.

Legal action against the NEB could further disrupt its ongoing reviews of major projects such as the Energy East pipeline, proposed by Calgary-based TransCanada Corp. This review has been in limbo since September when all three panelists recused themselves over evidence uncovered by National Observer that revealed two panelists had met privately with a representative of TransCanada in January 2015....

Sean in Ottawa

epaulo13 wrote:

Quebec group prepared to take pipeline regulator to court for hiding documents

A Quebec environmental group says it plans to take legal action against Canada’s pipeline regulator if it continues to withhold information from the public about its private meetings with industry.

In a newly-released letter, l’Association québécoise de lutte contre la pollution atmosphérique has asked the regulator, the National Energy Board (NEB), to revise its September decision to prevent an investigation into the meetings.

André Bélisle, the president of the anti-pollution group, said he would “absolutely” bring the matter before the Federal Court of Appeal, if the regulator fails to act.

“We want answers to our questions,” Bélisle told National Observer in an interview on Wednesday.

Legal action against the NEB could further disrupt its ongoing reviews of major projects such as the Energy East pipeline, proposed by Calgary-based TransCanada Corp. This review has been in limbo since September when all three panelists recused themselves over evidence uncovered by National Observer that revealed two panelists had met privately with a representative of TransCanada in January 2015....

Excellent. This is what we need -- opposition based on evidence.

We need people demanding and evaluating evidence.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Nearly 90 per cent of Quebecers want pipeline hearings stopped pending environmental reform

Quebecers have overwhelmingly lost confidence in the National Energy Board and want pipeline hearings stopped until Canada’s environmental laws have been reformed, according to new statistics from French poller, Sondage Omnibus Téléphonique (SOM).

Seventy-three per cent of respondents to the recent survey say they don't have confidence in the NEB's ability to evaluate the Energy East pipeline proposal following the “Charest Affair,” exposed by National Observer earlier this year. Nearly 90 per cent of them further believe that hearings for the major oilsands expansion proposal shouldn't continue until Canada's environmental assessment procedure has been reformed.

While the Trudeau government currently has processes underway to reform the NEB and environmental assessments, many conservation and environmental groups say the changes aren't coming fast enough. The National Energy Board has not yet commented on the polling results.

The public opinion findings come from a survey of 1,020 Quebecers conducted by SOM and commissioned by a coalition of environmental groups, including Équiterre, the Coule pas chez Nous foundation, the David Suzuki Foundation, Greenpeace Canada, Nature Québec and Regroupement vigilance hydrocarbures Québec....

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Federal government appoints three new bilingual NEB members

The federal government has appointed three new bilingual members to the National Energy Board (NEB) in a move that could get the stalled Energy East pipeline review back on track.

The temporary appointments by Natural Resources Minister Jim Carr fill a void left when the previous panel examining TransCanada Corp.’s proposed 4,500−kilometre pipeline stepped down in September due to perceptions of a potential conflict of interest. Peter Watson, the NEB's chair and chief executive officer, also recused himself from choosing the next panel over the same conflict concerns.

Carr did not specifically name the new members — one each from New Brunswick, Ontario and Quebec — to the Energy East review panel because it’s up to the acting chair of the NEB to assign duties. But the government news release Monday pointedly noted the two men and one woman are all qualified to be considered for the pipeline review.

"The National Energy Board now has all the temporary members they need," Carr told reporters outside of the House of Commons on Monday. "They will determine — because they are, after all, (at) arm’s length from government — what panels they’ll appear on. So we’ve now appointed seven (temporary members). I’m very pleased about these three all fluently bilingual from Ontario, New Brunswick and Quebec and now it will be up to the National Energy Board to determine how they’ll be deployed."

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs to challenge Trudeau in federal court over Line 3 pipeline approval

The Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs is challenging the Trudeau government's approval of the Line 3 pipeline.

Grand Chief Derek Nepinak has posted on Facebook, "Today our legal team has filed an appeal to the federal court of appeal to challenge the approval of the Enbridge Line 3 replacement expansion project. Many thanks to the good people at the public interest law centre for working with us over Christmas to get this in on time..!!"...

Pages