Northern Gateway Pipeline
January 12, 2012 - 5:30am
In the government press releases they contend that the enviromnetal groups will derail the construction of the pipline. It is my contention that this indicates the govermnet has already decided the pipeline project is a go regardless of the issues put forward at the hearings.
My question to the public is:
If this is the attitude of the government then what is the point of the hearing.
First Nations Accuse Harper Govt of Flouting Its Own Laws by Predetermining Pipeline Review Outcome
Press Release: January 11, 2012
Integrity of any review process has been permanently botched
NADLEH WHUT'EN, BRITISH COLUMBIA--(Marketwire - Jan. 11, 2012) - The Yinka Dene Alliance, a group of five First Nations who are leading opponents of the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline project, are outraged by statements by Prime Minister Harper and Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver attacking opponents of the pipeline as foreign "radicals" who are fighting against Canada's national interest.
The First Nations are accusing the federal Minister of Natural Resources of disrespecting the federal government's own laws and the rights of First Nations in his attack on opposition to the pipeline.
"The fix is in with this government. How can any Canadian trust that the Enbridge review process will be conducted fairly and independently with Harper breathing down the review panel's neck?" said Chief Larry Nooski of Nadleh Whut'en First Nation, a member of the Yinka Dene Alliance. "We have had deep concerns about this Enbridge review process from the very beginning, because it doesn't respect First Nations rights - that's why we're not intervening at the review panel."
"It is ludicrous for the federal minister to parrot tar sands lobbyists by directly attacking our communities that have decided the Enbridge project is too dangerous, and against our laws," said Nooski. "We're not foreign - these are our lands. To imply that our decision against Enbridge has been manipulated is deeply disrespectful of First Nations people, and our many neighbours who have joined our cause and support our decision to refuse this pipeline."
First Nations are also offended at the suggestion by the Prime Minister, Minister Oliver, and petro-lobbyists that foreign money is interfering in the process, Chief Nooski added, saying: "First Nations people are so opposed to this pipeline that we're pulling money out of our own pockets and community members are doing everything that we can so that our voices are heard. We are also proud of the wide-ranging support we've received from our neighbours across the north, and from environmental groups - whether their funding comes from Canada or the U.S. Non-First Nations communities are joining with us like never before. We have made a decision, in our Save the Fraser Declaration, to ban these pipelines and tankers. Tens of thousands of British Columbians have signed petitions specifically supporting our decision. The Enbridge project has unified us and we are not going to stop until we win this together."
The Save the Fraser Declaration has been signed by 66 First Nations, and more than 130 First Nations resolutely oppose the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines and tankers.
Also being discussed already in this thread: http://rabble.ca/babble/environmental-justice/tar-sands-hell-3
This government has already declared those against this pipeline "radicals", wth is that anyhow? Is it a lead up to declaring those resiting it physically `terrorists'? Is it just a simple sidelining those against it in the hearts and minds of other people?
Northern Gateway hearings on move to Terrace, B.C.
Kitimat area residents were almost unanimous in their rejection of the proposed Northern Gateway oil pipeline project during two days of public hearings, and now it's time for other northwest B.C. communities to provide their views on the development.
The Northern Gateway project joint review panel assessing the environmental effects of the proposed project moves to Terrace today and Smithers on Monday.
Hundreds of people gathered at a community hall in the aboriginal community of Kitamaat Village to address the three-member panel, with all but one of the more than one dozen individuals and groups denouncing the project on environmental, social and cultural grounds.
Kitamaat Village aboriginal chiefs, representing generations of leadership in the sea-going community, said the risk of an oil spill along their coast or a pipeline rupture in their territory is akin to pointing a loaded double-barrelled shotgun at their heads....
http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/Environment/2012/01/12/Northern-Gateway-...
From the Toronto Star:
This government has already declared those against this pipeline "radicals", wth is that anyhow? Is it a lead up to declaring those resiting it physically `terrorists'? Is it just a simple sidelining those against it in the hearts and minds of other people?
This thought had not occured to me but the very idea that a Canadian government might play the terrorist card against it's own citizens for the sake of the oil companies is scary. Such a move could destroy the country.
Radical Ideological Agenda Easy to Spot from Downtown Toronto - by Rod Mickleburgh
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/nations/british-columbia/rod-mickleb...
"From the depths of his pipeline free riding in the heart of Toronto, National Resources Minister Joe Oliver has lashed out at 'environmental and other radical groups' for [threatening] to hijack our regulatory system to radical ideological agenda.' I haven't heard environmental activists smeared like that since Glen Clark labelled Greenpeace campaigners against old-growth logging 'enemies of British Columbia.'
Would that be the same one now working for one of those 'enemies' and a true-blue member of the 1% ruling class - Billionaire Jimmy Pattison?
Well, subsequent to Glen Clark's premiership, the election that wiped out Dosanjh and the NDP saw a lot of voters park their votes in the Green Party (not that it managed to elect any). That's what you get when the NDP lashes out against the environment. I think they're finally trying to take that lesson to heart.
SIGN THE PETITION
http://dogwoodinitiative.org/no-tankers/petition
Russia Agrees to Re-route World's Longest Oil Pipeline Sparing the Last Remaining Habitat of the Endangered Amur Leopard 2007
So why can't our own corrupt stooges in Ottawa re-route a shorter pipeline?
The Harpers aren't very big but they sure are stupid. And corrupt.
My thanks to all those who replied to my question.
The National Pest weighs in
In the government press releases they contend that the enviromnetal groups will derail the construction of the pipline. It is my contention that this indicates the govermnet has already decided the pipeline project is a go regardless of the issues put forward at the hearings.
My question to the public is:
If this is the attitude of the government then what is the point of the hearing.
If they don't got through the hearing, the government is breaking its own laws. It's a federal requirement. What is disgusting is that the government is supposed to be a neutral arbitrator and not a co-proponent, which is what the Harper Government™ seems to be doing.
B.C. (Liberal) Premier Christy Clark on QP today was echoing the Oliver line that American environmentalists and their money need to butt out of Canadian decision making. Not one mention of all the foreign money invested into seeing the pipeline go ahead. The show started with an excellent interview with John F. Kennedy Jr. who defended the environmentalists, saying this is an international concern - and he took umbrage at all the foreign money invested into seeing the pipeline going through. Christy Clark is scary in how far right wing she is.
This government has already declared those against this pipeline "radicals", wth is that anyhow? Is it a lead up to declaring those resiting it physically `terrorists'? Is it just a simple sidelining those against it in the hearts and minds of other people?
This thought had not occured to me but the very idea that a Canadian government might play the terrorist card against it's own citizens for the sake of the oil companies is scary. Such a move could destroy the country.
You know I had not thought about it in a serious way mainly cause I hate the whole 'Conservatives are bogeymen' thing. Then I was listening to some elders who are concerned about the Conservatives "radical" language use and why they would start with such inflammatory language because they would have no where to go when things really got started against the pipeline but to the word terrorist. And that they seem to really want to only use that language against brown people.
***
Tree spikers were an enemy to BC forestry workers and their families. Friends too. My parents who were environmentalists, well still are, were pretty angry about the tree spiking and they worried about their friends safety who worked in the bush even though they did not agree about logging. I remember being worried about it as a kid protesting clear cuts with parents and grandparents. I didn't want my friends to lose their dads so it was very confusing for me. And grandpa worked at Harmac which just made it all more confusing and worrying for me and my friends too.
ETDTA
Missed the post above this about Christie's scariness. She has to be cause she is losing voters to the new Conservative Party and needs the business vote to maybe stay in power.
Watched some polical show late the other night and they had a woman on from something called the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives and she called BS on this foreign investment propaganda. And said the whole other side of the equation is foreign investment lobbying for the pipeline. They also talked about removing charity status from environmental groups. Wish I could remember her name as she impressed me lots. Now I think about it I could go look for her at the group she represents website.
Looks like the review process is over.
Harper said last night that he wouldn't commit to following the recommendation of the panel regardless of what they decided.
After all, have to protect Canadians from people who want to turn this country into one big national park.
I did not see the interview, but I still have a couple of observations.
1. Asking the 'interviewee' to commit is a poor technique because that person - Harper in this instance - can use it to his advantage by simply not responding, thereby manipulating the outcome of the interview.
2. BC has a provincial election coming up before the review process is over, and it's just possible that the NDP will be the next government, and a Dix government can veto the whole thing especially if he has a good mandate to back him up. There's no way that the feds can push this project through BC if the provincial government says 'no'.
3. If, however, Christy Clark manages an electoral miracle and wins re-election, the people of BC can still make their views known in the form of popular protest, and there are ways of stalling the pipeline through non-violent protest and blockages.
So, even if Harper overrides the review process, it's not the end of the matter.
@ Boom Boom
Yes, I agree.
And there is also First Nations land that it will be going through.
It will be interesting if the situation last month - of the RCMP refusing to play private security guards and step in and enforce a court injunction - is repeated.
http://www.timescolonist.com/news/Enbridge+pipeline+showdown+RCMP+Gitxsa...
Harper isn't the only one with discretionary powers.
Yes, I was thinking that 'popular protest' will be mainly from the BC aboriginal community, or certainly led by them, because it's mostly their land that will be impacted by the proposed pipeline if I understand it correctly.
Those in the know, with experience and thus called a Radical by the tories says the pipeline is not necessary at all:
http://business.financialpost.com/2012/01/17/northern-gateway-endangers-...
I think people are losing sight of the real issue here. It's not a question of where the pipeline should go, but of whether any pipeline should be built at all for the stated purposes.
The settlers and First Nations of BC are not the only people whose interests are at stake. The entire planet has a vital interest in the Northern Pipeline issue because its purpose is to facilitate the expansion of the world's fossil fuel combustion and the acceleration of global climate change. The existence of the pipeline would be a huge setback to conservation and sustainable energy projects all over the world.
For Canadians as a whole, it would secure the future expansion of the tar sands and the essential destruction of Canada's manufacturing base. We would become entirely dependent on petrodollar income in order to purchase our goods from abroad. No imaginary social-democratic government in the future would be able to turn off the pipeline tap without putting the country into bankruptcy.
This pipeline is a tipping point in Canadian history. To focus exclusively at this time on whose land the pipeline is passing through is to fail to see the forest for the trees. It's not a First Nations battle or a BC battle. It's a fight for the future of humanity and our existence - and the existence of thousands of other species - on this planet.
I hope that article makes it to the hearings, and receives a wide circulation as well.
@ M. Spector
I don't think anyone is losing sight of anything, in that I haven't read any arguments here in favour of the pipeline, alternate route or not. I think there is one reference up there to a rerouting.
(edit)
...and I think the point was more Harper's stubborness than an argument in favour of the pipeline
(/edit)
I think the reason why First Nations and other governments are being mentioned is they will be most directly affected by it, and part of the fight to stop the pipeline is happening right there, right now.
If we do want to talk about stopping it, I think that is exactly where we want to be focusing out attention and efforts, becauseshort of a court injunction I expect only one result to come out of the federal review process, and that will be whatever the prime minister decides.
For Canadians as a whole, it would secure the future expansion of the tar sands and the essential destruction of Canada's manufacturing base. We would become entirely dependent on petrodollar income in order to purchase our goods from abroad. No imaginary social-democratic government in the future would be able to turn off the pipeline tap without putting the country into bankruptcy.
The Yanks have already siphoned off the most profitable crude oil out of Alberta. Alberta might have been robbed blind for many years with nothing to show for it, but they are not bankrupt. They are slightly above break even with a few paltry billion dollars left in the Heritage Fund since Klein cleaned it out to pay down what were highest per capita debts in Canadian provincial history.
I think Boom Boom is right, a social democrat government in B.C. will stop a pipeline to the West coast. The U.S. Wall Street government will then push hard for a pipeline to the US, and this time siphoning off Canadian jobs in addition to taking dirty oil off our hands for a song same as usual except with a lot more CO2 emissions. And whichever colonial administrativeship is at the helm in Calgary will go right along with whatever national energy policy is written for Canadians by Americans in the U.S.A. proper. It's a done deal.
There's a tendency on the part of armchair leftists to characterize the issue as "Plucky First Nations defending their territory against Harper and the oil companies" with the BC NDP supposedly waiting in the wings to come to the rescue of the FN's when the pipeline is approved. Then they sit back in their comfy chairs and reach for the bag of popcorn.
Some of them are apparently even incapable of understanding that I wasn't accusing anyone of supporting the pipeline, but rather of unnecessarily limiting the scope and importance of the issue to all of us.
The commission of inquiry, of course, is going to focus on the small picture: should the pipeline go through this forest or around this lake. The MSM will do so as well. We have to be vigilant against allowing that to become the focus of public discourse, or we will lose everything to public apathy.
So what you're trying to tell us is that without a federal NDP government writing national energy policy for Canadians and by Canadians, we're fucked, and so will the environment be fucked.
We thought so.
@ M. Spector
Well if you feel a burning desire to say something, please just say it.
But before you assume that people have different goals than you, or aren't aware of certain things, maybe you should ask rather than saying people have lost sight and accusing them of limiting the discussion. Has anyone said you can't bring these points up?
To be clear, I want to stop that pipeline.
I don't even live in BC, so I have no ulterior motive regarding the fortunes of the NDP. My personal concern, other than the future of the entire planet, is more on the pollution that comes from those tar sands to our province, and the cost of natural gas to heat my home.
Let's just not become complacent on any of the planks of possible opposition to the pipeline - whether it be the hearings, the provincial election, the longer-term federal election, the coalition with FN, or even the labour/sovereignty argument which is not about the environment but is a "coalition of convenience". None of these can be taken for granted, and each one requires committed people who know what they're doing.
Stuff you will never read in the MSP.
http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2012/01/17/Ethical-Oil-My-Gas/
Stuff you will never read in the MSP.
http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2012/01/17/Ethical-Oil-My-Gas/
It makes reference to "the repressive Communist military dictatorship in China". Last week The Tyee published an article that referred to "Imperial China".
Bunch of anti-commies at The Tyee?
From Rick Mercer last night:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZf5fC9v2qE
Bunch of anti-commies at The Tyee?
As I pointed out in that other thread, they are just promoting the flip side of the "ethical oil" canard: All the other oil producers in the world are evil, and Canada should continue to be the beacon of freedom and justice that provides oil to the nice American allies, and we should not be selling oil to the unethical Chinese.
Involvement in the regulatory process is equated with "hijacking" it, which is a means for Harper to discredit the federal environmental review process itself.
Even Jim Harding is bad-mouthing China for its GHG emissions, as an argument against the pipeline. It seems it's okay for us to send our manufacturing jobs and our raw materials to China, and along with them our carbon emissions, but suddenly it becomes wrong to send them the energy they require in order to produce all those manufactured goods that we depend on for our exalted standard of living.
Send a letter via LeadNow to Environment Minister Joe Oliver. Put Canada’s best interests before oil industry profits and stop the pipeline
Bullshit petition alert!
"Canada" doesn't have any "best interests". It is a country divided along class, cultural, and racial lines, and has many competing interests. To Joe Oliver, "Canada's best interests" lie in maximizing oil company profits. Making public policy based on somebody's idea of "Canada's best interests" is pure spin-doctoring - nothing else.
I don't even think it's a real country anymore and certainly not a sovereign G8. Canada is a America's gas tank. Canada is 10 loosely affiliated, resource-rich provinces and some northern territories for corporate America to raid at will. Canadians are becoming renters in their own land.
There will be more pressure to approve the Northern Gateway now that Keystone XL is on hold pending a new application by 2014.
ETA: Joe Oliver on P&P tonight made a 180-degree turn and said the government will respect the review process, however it turns out. But he made another attack on the Tides group.
This pipeline will never ever be built.
If Harper tries to get the pipeline built after a negative review (not a sure thing - the review process may already be compromised towards the government position), and in the face of local opposition, he risks widespread civil unrest. Probably doesn't give a sh*t, he'll just call in the army.
This pipeline will never ever be built.
I don't know which pipeline you're referring to. But if it's either Northern Gateway or Keystone XL, you are dead wrong.
Enbridge Deal with BC First Nation Collapses
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/01/18/bc-enbri...
"The deal, which would have seen the Gitxsan community receive an equity stake in the $5.5 billion project and at least $7 million in profits, was first announced in December..."
Jan 18: NEB Joint Review Panel is Flawed
http://www.carriersekani.ca/news/neb-joint-review-panel-is-flawed/
Enbridge Deal with BC First Nation Collapses
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/01/18/bc-enbri...
"The deal, which would have seen the Gitxsan community receive an equity stake in the $5.5 billion project and at least $7 million in profits, was first announced in December..."
Evan Solomon read the press release of this to a visibly shocked Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver last night on P&P - Oliver was clearly caught flat-footed or sideswiped, and all he could say in response was that he hoped the Gitxsan would re-consider because of the many potential benefits of the Northern Gateway Project - money, jobs, and a much better standard of living. I actually think if any Gitxsan were listening, they would have been offended at Oliver.
Throughout the interview, Oliver looked like a defeated man. He did a 180-degree turn and said the government would respect the final decision of the review process, whichever way it went. I think Oliver is finally recognising that the govt. has lost the PR battle on this file.
Gitxsan reject Enbridge deal on pipeline
APTN National News
VANCOUVER-Gitxsan hereditary chiefs have rejected a deal signed by one of their negotiators with Enbridge over the energy firm’s proposed Northern Gateway pipeline to transport Alberta bitumen to a West Coast port in Kitimat, B.C.
Gitxsan hereditary chiefs voted 28 to eight to reject the deal during a meeting Tuesday evening outside of Hazelton, B.C.
The deal was signed last December by Elmer Derrick, who is a Gitxsan Treaty Society negotiator, triggering outrage among many Gitxsan people who said the move embarrassed them before their First Nations neighbours in the province who have pledged to stop the pipeline project at all cost.
Gitxsan protestors nailed shut the Treaty Society’s office door in protest and set up a running blockade in front of the building to prevent anyone from entering.
The RCMP refused to intervene.
Derrick claimed the deal to support the pipeline project would have given the Gitxsan $7 million.
A source, however, told APTN National News, that the Gitxsan would only have received a portion of the $7 million which Enbridge has set aside to divide among all First Nations that signed onto the deal.
On Enbridge’s Web site, the company promised 10 percent of the $5.5 billion project would go to First Nations. Chiefs learned that was an opportunity to buy stock in the pipeline company.
Dozens of First Nations in B.C. have pledged to stop the pipeline and they represent the most potent opposition to the project, which also faces resistance from environmental groups and municipalities in the province.
Enbridge did not respond to a request for comment from APTN National News, but issued a statement reported by other media confirming the Gitxsan deal was dead, but that “more than 20″ First Nations groups had endorsed deals with the energy firm.
Just received this email from Nicole Turmel in response to my signing the petition from LeadNow (the title of the petition was their wording, not mine).
the coast of BC via the Northern Gateway Pipeline. Please know that I share
your concerns.
First, let me comment on the Conservatives' recent musings about
environmental assessments and funding sources for environmental NGOs. When
it comes to an environmental assessment process, many Canadians have a stake
in both the process and the outcome. New Democrats recognize that this is
entirely legitimate. Interestingly, one must ask themselves: whose interests
are the Conservatives representing? Canadians or the interests of the
American and Chinese companies who will profit from the pipeline?
Furthermore, while the Conservatives feign concern over foreign donations to
Canadian NGOs, they seem to have no problem with one of their favourite
think-tanks, the Fraser Institute, receiving 9% of their funding from
foreign sources! (Annual Report, Fraser Institute, 2010 (pg 39):
http://www.fraserinstitute.org/about-us/who-we-are/annual-reports.aspx)
We are glad that President Obama has listened to people's concerns on both
sides of the border, questioning whether this pipeline is worth the high
environmental and social cost. This outcome is the direct result of this
government's inaction on the environment and refusal to properly regulate
the oil sands. That's why some of our closest trading partners are shutting
their markets to Canadian oil.
For our part, we have been consistent in our call for the government to ban
oil tanker traffic on the BC coast. Building on NDP past work that included
a motion calling on the government to ban oil tanker traffic on the BC
coast, in June 2011 NDP MPs Fin Donnelly and Nathan Cullen laid out a
legislative proposal for a permanent ban on oil supertanker traffic off the
north coast of British Columbia.
We have long felt that these supertankers are all risk and no reward - it's
all about shipping raw bitumen from Alberta's tar sands to Asia.
Additionally, banning oil tanker traffic would effectively stop any move by
Enbridge to ship oil through its planned $4.5 billion Northern Gateway
Pipeline.
You may also be interested to know of our party's efforts to cut subsidies
to non-renewable energy producers, and redirect these revenues into clean
energy projects. We feel that the Conservative government's irresponsible
support for the fossil fuel industry is leaving Canada behind and costing us
billions. (http://www.ndp.ca/platform/tackle-climate-change#section-4-2).
You can read more about our ideas to help achieve a cleaner and healthier
environment by visiting:
http://www.ndp.ca/platform/tackle-climate-change
http://meganleslie.ndp.ca/post/ndp-calls-for-action-against-climate-change
http://www.ndp.ca/press/climate-change-conservatives-inaction-putting-jobs-r
isk
Our team of New Democrat MPs remains committed to putting forward practical
solutions that will move Canada forward and ensure that we maintain a clean,
sustainable Canada for future generations.
Again, I appreciate the time you have taken to voice your concerns. I invite
you to visit our website at www.ndp.ca to learn the latest about our team of
New Democrats. Also, feel free to pass along my response to your network of
friends and family.
All the best,
Nycole Turmel, M.P.
Interim Leader of the Official Opposition
New Democratic Party of Canada
Enbridge Deal with BC First Nation Collapses
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/01/18/bc-enbri...
"The deal, which would have seen the Gitxsan community receive an equity stake in the $5.5 billion project and at least $7 million in profits, was first announced in December..."
Evan Solomon read the press release of this to a visibly shocked Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver last night on P&P - Oliver was clearly caught flat-footed or sideswiped, and all he could say in response was that he hoped the Gitxsan would re-consider because of the many potential benefits of the Northern Gateway Project - money, jobs, and a much better standard of living. I actually think if any Gitxsan were listening, they would have been offended at Oliver.
Throughout the interview, Oliver looked like a defeated man. He did a 180-degree turn and said the government would respect the final decision of the review process, whichever way it went. I think Oliver is finally recognising that the govt. has lost the PR battle on this file.
Holy crap, I had no idea that happened on P&P. It's on my PVR but I didn't watch it last night. I'm going to check that out tonight, thanks!
Be sure to watch where Oliver does, however, attack the Tides organization once again - he still has it in for "foreign" environmentalist radicals. And, following the Oliver bit, there's an interview with Bob Rae where he expresses astonishment at Oliver's 180-turn.
Solomon has been keeping the Cons under fire throughout this whole Northern Gateway process. Good for him.
ETA: It was either last night or Tuesday night. I think last night (Wednesday) was all about Keystone XL, but you'll have to check. The Oliver interview is near the start of the program, followed by Bob Rae's response, also Megan Leslie I think. Megan Leslie was wonderful.
Turmel had better get her facts straight before she ends up being embarrassed in public. The Northern Gateway Pipeline will not carry "raw bitumen", which cannot be piped anywhere. The oil company proposal is to pipe "crude oil" from Alberta to the west coast. The "raw bitumen" mined at the tar sands will have to be processed and diluted with "natural gas condensate" before it can be piped to Kitimat.
Turmel had better get her facts straight before she ends up being embarrassed in public. The Northern Gateway Pipeline will not carry "raw bitumen", which cannot be piped anywhere. The oil company proposal is to pipe "crude oil" from Alberta to the west coast. The "raw bitumen" mined at the tar sands will have to be processed and diluted with "natural gas condensate" before it can be piped to Kitimat.
Yes, exactly.
I think you are both right, M. It is raw bitumen in Alberta, but before it can be piped westward it has to be mixed with nat-gas condensates in order for it to flow through pipelines. They do similar process for Venezuela's tar sands when mixing bitumen with light crude to make a kind of "olio" that flows and piped long distances. I'm thinking they must have plans to recover the light crude and pipe it back to Alberta for re-mixing with tar sands bitumen.
Enbridge's pipeline of distortions
excerpt:
What is encouraging, however, is that the chorus against Enbridge and the tarsands is growing, as the call for sustainable economies outside of restrictive industries is amplified. The recent financial crisis, alarming rates of climate change, and growing inequality have made clear that not only does this fundamentalist system destroy the planet, it simply does not work for any of us.
The JLS Report: Enbridge Info
http://www.jlsreport.com/?p=1766
Lots of Enbridge info and links here
Hearings have moved to Edmonton this week.
Oral Presentation by Hereditary Chief and Speaker, Je Dim Ska Nes (Babine Lake) to Enbridge and Government of Canada:
http://www.jlsreport.com/?2358
"...So, speaking about the land, I have a big concern. Our clan, our nation, has a big concern with this pipeline...
Just before Christmas, I got a call from one of the political leaders asking me for an opinion. He said that Enbridge were - we met with them. They offered us $14 million. It's got to be signed today. If you don't sign it today, it's gone.
I told him, 'Let it be gone'..."
Prof Pressures Premiers to Support Northern Gateway (and vid)
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/01/13/prof-pressures-premiers-to-support-...
and interview with Elizabeth May MP
I'm still finding it incredibly disturbing that Enbridge is talking about how numerous bands have already signed deals for an equity stake with financing - the bands would be borrowing money (from Enbridge or the bank or otherwise) to finance paying Enbridge money to give them a stake in an investment. They seriously need better negotiators. If I were being bought off by an oil company, I would at the very least expect them to give me that equity stake outright, no loan attached.
I think people are losing sight of the real issue here. It's not a question of where the pipeline should go, but of whether any pipeline should be built at all for the stated purposes....
This pipeline is a tipping point in Canadian history. To focus exclusively at this time on whose land the pipeline is passing through is to fail to see the forest for the trees. It's not a First Nations battle or a BC battle. It's a fight for the future of humanity and our existence - and the existence of thousands of other species - on this planet.
Here's someone who gets what I'm saying:
[N]o one is discussing the proverbial "elephant in the room." This is the connection between tarsands expansion and...Harper's 2007 promise to Canadians to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions 65 per cent by 2050....
[F]or his promise not to be a lie, Harper cannot allow expansion of tarsands and associated pipelines, and he must require a growing market share of near-zero-emission vehicles. He knows this because his analysts are privy to the work of the world's leading researchers. Canadians on all sides of the issue should read a 20-page report from MIT's Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change entitled Canada's Bitumen Industry Under CO2 Constraints. The report shows how and why the Canadian tarsands must contract as part of a global effort to prevent a 4 degree increase in temperatures and catastrophic climate change....
The oft-heard argument that B.C. needs the jobs and tax revenue is particularly galling. This is like arguing we need jobs making a toxin or nuclear weapons. We are not helping ourselves and our children by creating jobs that spew CO2 into the atmosphere....
And where is the logic in the almost-complete focus on pipeline or oil tanker spills by environmentalists and first nations? If Enbridge is able to convince the hearing panel that these local threats are acceptable, then the project goes ahead. But since climate change will devastate all of the ecosystems potentially affected by the project, efforts to prevent local damage from spills are fruitless if they are not part of a concerted effort to stop CO2 emissions. Otherwise, it's like trying to prevent a fuel leak on the Titanic as it steams toward the iceberg. We need to turn the ship.
Time limits coming for regulatory review hearings, Oliver says
Harper is driving us into a developing world status. These changes to the Environmental Assessment and Review process sound like the crap that exists in the developing world were all resource based projects get a green light no matter how destructive they are.
Even the fact that his economic development plan is primarily focused on resource exploitation turns the clock back more than 100 years where we were no more than a colonial outpost rich in furs and timber.
ETA: And of course there is the added factor of carbon emissions and our lack of commitment to stalling global warming.
Questions Canadians Should Be Asking About China
http://ottawacitizen.com/business/Questions+Canadians+should+asking+abou...
"Nearly half of the $100-million up front cash for the Enbridge project is coming either directly or indirectly from the seventh-largest corporation on Earth, the absurdly corrupt Sinopec, a ravenous behemoth run directly by the regime in Beijing. Oilpatch rumours have it that Beijing's own Sinochem and the China National Petroleum Corp, came up with at least some of the other half.
In any case, you aren't allowed to know. Prime Minister Stephen Harper isn't saying and neither is Enbridge.."
A Whistleblower's Open Letter to the Citizens of Canada
January 22, 2012
This is especially concerning because ForestEthics is a legally registered intervenor in the National Energy Board’s Joint Review Panel process, currently examining the Enbridge oil tanker/pipeline proposal. By attempting to silence a registered participant in the review, I fear the Harper government may have permanently damaged the integrity of this process. After waiting more than two weeks for Tides Canada to go public with this story, it has become clear to me that the organization is too afraid of reprisals from the government to act. Tides is responsible for the employment of hundreds of Canadians and dozens of crucial environmental projects like the Great Bear Rainforest, and has been understandably paralyzed in challenging the Prime Minister’s Office on this matter.
I on the other hand, am speaking out as a private citizen because I feel that the rights and civil liberties of my fellow Canadian citizens, including freedom of expression and freedom of speech, are at risk.
Federal Documents Spark Outcry by Oil Sands Critics - by Nathan Vanderklippe
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/harper-government-plays-do...
"Critics are attacking Ottawa's energy strategy after internal documents shed new light on the extent of federal efforts to advocate for the oil sands industry. On Thursday, Prime Minister Stephen Harper reiterated his support for oil expansion at the Davos World Economic Economic Forum, calling it ' a national priority to ensure we have the capacity to export our energy products beyond the United States and specifically to Asia.'
Also Thursday, Mr Kent, in an address to Calgary Chamber of Commerce audience packed with some of the top oil patch executives, described the new relationship between industry and his ministry which plays an important role in regulating new projects.
'Environment Canada is a strategic partner to everyone in this room - everyone who does business in Calgary, everyone who does business in Alberta, everyone who does business in Canada,' he said.
Although, he said,
'we are still environmental regulators' he highlighted Environment Canada's efforts at streamlining regulations as 'the equivalent of installing bright lights around a rocky path to make progress safer and swifter.'
The Harper government is now making explicit that they define protecting the public interest as protecting the interests of the oil industry,' said Devon Page, executive director of Ecojustice.."
Confidential federal tar sands strategy document lists National Energy Board as a Harper "ally"
- Greenpeace
The March 2011 “Pan-European Oil Sands Advocacy Strategy” prepared by the federal government to undermine support in the EU for cleaner fuels legislation lists “National and European level Politicians (especially from the ruling and influential parties)” as a primary target.
The strategy document, obtained by the Climate Action Network under Access to Information legislation, identifies the government’s “adversaries” as Canadian NGOs and environmental organizations, Aboriginal groups, competing industries and media in Europe (although the type of media seen as an adversary is redacted).
The list of “allies” includes European industry associations and companies (with Shell and BP singled out elsewhere as “like-minded allies”), as well as the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, federal government departments, Alberta, business associations and unidentified NGOs. Disturbingly, the list of allies also includes the independent federal regulatory tribunal National Energy Board.
“Canadians should be concerned when a supposedly arms-length agency that is supposed to regulate the oil industry, including conducting hearings on the Enbridge’s proposed new tar sands pipeline across British Columbia, is listed as an ‘ally’ in a political strategy to lower environmental standards in other nations,” said Stewart.
Greenpeace also released a copy of minutes from March 2010, obtained under Access to Information legislation, between high-ranking federal officials, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers and former PMO official Bruce Carson. These minutes show that it was the oil industry that initially approached the government about crafting a joint strategy for “upping their game” and to “turn up the volume” in promoting the tar sands."
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/01/canadia...
Can you at least give us a hint as to why we would ever want to click on those huge long URLs you keep posting?
Kinder Morgan oil spill in Abbottsford: Timely reminder of pipeline expansion dangers
VANCOUVER – Kinder Morgan has confirmed there was an oil spill this morning at the Sumas Terminal and tank farm in Abbotsford, after nearby residents phoned 911 and reported headaches and nausea from a heavy smell of gas in the air.
quote:
“We have warned time and again that with oil pipelines there will be oil spills,” said Ben West, Healthy Communities Campaigner for the Wilderness Committee, which is one of a number of groups opposed to Kinder Morgan’s plans to expand the capacity of the Trans Mountain pipeline in order to increase exports of crude oil to Asia and other markets.
The Abbotsford terminal is part of the Kinder Morgan pipeline system which brings tar sands crude from Alberta via the Trans Mountain pipeline ending at terminals in Burnaby and Washington State.....
http://wildernesscommittee.org/press_release/kinder_morgan_oil_spill_abbottsford_timely_reminder_pipeline_expansion_dangers
Kinder Morgan cleans up B.C. oil spill, enviros point to pipeline dangersquote:
In a statement, the company said the spill was contained, foam was spread over it to dissipate the odours that local residents complained about and the oil should be cleaned up by sometime Wednesday.
"We are monitoring for air quality in the area. The monitoring is indicating no health concern," the statement said.
The statement did not reveal the cause of the spill or how much oil had leaked.
http://www.globaltvbc.com/kinder+morgan+cleans+up+bc+oil+spill+enviros+p...
#EnemyGate
Alberta and N.W.T. First Nations sign Fraser Declaration against Enbridge and Kinder Morgan pipelines
Allan says that using the pipeline proponents' own data and projections, the policy of exporting vast quantities of unrefined bitumen to Asia for processing will trigger an inflationary domestic price shock in the cost of petroleum energy and products.
Consumers, small businesses, the transportation and service sectors will suffer the worst.
Economic viability of the pipeline, she says, relies on Enbridge's projection of a $2 to $3 increase in the price of oil, "on every barrel of oil produced," every year for the next 30 years. From current prices, which are admittedly volatile, that would mean oil at $160 barrel with gasoline at $2.40 a litre.
"The inflation this will create as consumers and non-oil producing businesses try to adjust will have far-ranging implications including a decline in output, layoffs, decline in income and government revenues," Allan says. "It will also lead to higher interest rates and create another round of negative impacts as the cost of debt goes up."...
In fact, Allan says, the Canadian economy already shows signs of the "Dutch Disease," in which the exploitation of natural resources without adding value causes decline in labour-intensive manufacturing output; in other words, a hollowing out of Canadians' historic source of sustainable, well-paying jobs....
China faces hurdles in oil patch
quote:
Yet the strategy relies on many pieces falling into place.
One of them is new infrastructure to allow oil and gas to flow to Asia. While Chinese companies are okay with selling their oil and gas to the North American market for now, over the longer term they want to export across the Pacific.
Continuing opposition to the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline from Alberta to the West Coast is standing in the way of those plans and could influence future investment decisions by the Chinese and other oil sands operators.
The pipeline could be a sticking point for the Prime Minister next week, said Pau Woo, president and CEO of the Vancouver-based Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada.
“My view on how energy will play in this visit is the Prime Minister will want to underscore the importance of diversification, particularly to Asian markets and China specially, but that there is very little the Chinese can do to help the Prime Minister in his diversification aspirations, in the sense that the major stumbling block currently to exports of oil to Asia is a domestic problem, it’s nothing to do with the Chinese,” Mr. Woo said.
“The pipeline issue has to be resolved.”...
quote:
Asia in control:
1987 — Hong Kong tycoon Li Ka Shing acquires control of Husky Energy Inc. for $855-million and expands in 2000 by purchasing Renaissance Energy Ltd. for $2.6-billion
2009 — Korea National Oil Corp. acquires Harvest Energy Trust for $4.1-billion, and in 2010 buys Hunt Oil Co.’s Canadian assets for $521-million. In 2006, Korea National bought the Blackgold oil sands project for $308-million.
2011 — China National Offshore Oil Corp. (CNOOC) acquires 100% of insolvent oil sands developer Opti Canada Inc. for $2.1-billion, after acquiring 17% of MEG Energy Corp. in 2005 for $77-million
2011 — China Petroleum & Chemical Group (Sinopec) buys 100% gas explorer Daylight Energy Ltd. for $2.1-billion, after buying a 9% stake in the Syncrude oil sands consortium for $4.7-billion in 2010. In 2005, Sinopec bought a 40% stake in the Northern Lights oil sands project for $105-million and another 10% in 2009 for an undisclosed amount.
2012 — China National Petroleum Corp. (PetroChina) buys full control of the MacKay River oil sands project from Athabasca Oil Sands Corp. for $680-million, after buying the first 60% of MacKay River and the Dover oil sands project in 2009 for $1.9 billion. PetroChina is expected to acquire full control of Dover over the next year. PetroChina bolstered its presence in Canada this week by purchasing a 20% stake in the Groundbirch shale gas project in Canada from Royal Dutch Shell PLC. The two companies are partners in a plan to build a major liquefied natural gas export terminal in Kitimat, on the British Columbia coast.
2012 — Sunshine Oil Sands Corp. is gearing up to be the first oil sands company to be publicly traded in Hong Kong. An IPO planned for this month was postponed Friday.
Source: TD Securities Inc., Financial Post.
http://business.financialpost.com/2012/02/03/china-faces-hurdles-in-oil-patch/?__lsa=5d538e85
The revised Keystone XL is certain to be approved as soon as the American election is over, and that pipeline almost certainly will start up at least a year before the Northern Gateway - if it is ever approved, which I doubt.
The only way Northern Gateway is going to go through is if Harper and his thugs run roughshod on everyone - on the regulatory agency, FNs, scientists, environmentalists, and concerned citizens. He'd probably call in the Army to push it through. I think if worse comes to worse and Harper decides to defy a negative finding by the regulatory agency, the only thing that could stop the pipeline is new Premier Dix blocking the route.
As long as it's a matter of shipping unrefined raw materials, the labour-environment coalition will hold up and block it.
If somehow it were to magically transform into a pipeline for refined products, thereby creating more jobs in Canada, that would have the potential to divide and conquer the coalition.
Canada Doesn't Know How to Protect Its Interests - by Terry Glavin
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/Canada+doesn+know+protec...
"'We are sitting ducks.'
That's the way Anthony Campbell, the former head of the Intelligence Assessment Secretariat of the Privy Council Office, put it to me the other day. We were talking about Beijing's designs on Canada's energy resources...
Most Canadians has probably never heard of the Enbridge project, which is a plan to build a huge bitumen tube from Alberta's oilsands to saltwater on the northern BC coast..
Just what legally constitutes a foreign activity in Canada that is detrimental to this country's national security interests these days anyway?"
Enbridge Won't Offer Natives Better Terms
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/02/09/enbridge-wont-offer-natives-better-...
"We think the financial package we're offering is very, very strong. So we don't have any intent or consideration on changing that,' Pat Daniel told Reuters.."
It's not a financial package... I wish the media would care about the details. It's a scheme that grants each nation the right to borrow money to purchase a tiny equity stake in the pipeline project.
Imagine someone is going to build a business that pollutes your backyard, and the compensation they offer you is the ability to take out a business loan to purchase part of their company. Shouldn't the compensation have a component more like an insurance policy, where you receive more compensation if it goes badly? With this leveraged proposal, it means that if the project goes badly, they could simultaneously have to deal with a ruined landscape and a loan that's gone into default. Some deal.
Someone from Enbridge - maybe their CEO? - was praising Harper today on CBC for signing oil deals with China.
Question: if Northern Gateway is shot down, or blocked by protests and/or lawsuits, what does Harper then do to guarantee tar sands bitumen will be shipped to China?
(and there's always a good possibility Adrian Dix will win the next BC election...)
Canada's population is shifting West quite dramatically as outlined in the latest census, which is where the resource-based jobs are. If you are looking for work that's the place to be.
PM pitches Canadian energy
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/02/10/harper-ties-chinese-energy-exports-...
I was sitting here wondering how you bet something like bitumen, which is pretty much solid at room tempurature to flow thousands of kilometers through a pipe, and my searches came up with this site
I found it to be a good primer for anyone interested in some of the technical aspects and had a lot of stuff I didn't know. It both increased my fears and conserns as well as giving them a more informed basis. Scary stuff!
Canada's population is shifting West quite dramatically as outlined in the latest census, which is where the resource-based jobs are. If you are looking for work that's the place to be.
PM pitches Canadian energy
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/02/10/harper-ties-chinese-energy-exports-...
Wow, what a pile of horse shit in that Sun article. Not one mention of the aboriginal peoples who are the main opposition to Northern Gateway. So, the question remains, which I've been asking for a while, which no one seems able to answer: if Northern Gateway in the final analysis is blocked by First Nations peoples (not to mention lawsuits and the prospect of an Adrian Dix NDP government in BC), what alternatives does Harper have? If he can't get the bitumen though the proposed Northern Gateway, does he call in the army, or does he look for alternative routes?
So, the question remains, which I've been asking for a while, which no one seems able to answer: if Northern Gateway in the final analysis is blocked by First Nations peoples (not to mention lawsuits and the prospect of an Adrian Dix NDP government in BC), what alternatives does Harper have? If he can't get the bitumen though the proposed Northern Gateway, does he call in the army, or does he look for alternative routes?
Neither the First Nations nor the BC government can "block" the pipeline. Harper doesn't need their permission any more than he needs the permission of the National Energy Board. He has a Parliamentary majority and the federal government has the constitutional power to build interprovincial pipelines. He will call in the army if he has to, but most likely RCMP and a few bulldozers will be sufficient to brush aside any physical opposition.
In other words, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act will become as useless as the Canadian Investment Act.
ETA: Harper's next step will be to stack the courts with ideologically friendly judges.
Well, that answers it, although I doubt that's the last of the matter.
By the way: Chinese 'frustrated' by Northern Gateway regulatory delays
Alberta seeks way to pay for B.C. support of pipeline
excerpt:
The Alberta government is looking to clear a path for the oil sands through British Columbia by upping the economic benefits for its western neighbour - including the option of paying to modernize and expand West Coast ports.
Premier Alison Redford's government stressed Tuesday there were no formal discussions, much less a formal proposal, but some in the Alberta government acknowledge that British Columbians need to see a tangible benefit if they are to bear the risks of an oil pipeline and associated West Coast tanker traffic headed to Asia.
excerpt:
In a January meeting, B.C. Premier Christy Clark bluntly told Ms. Redford that public opinion is against the pipeline in British Columbia - Alberta gets the benefits while B.C. carries the risks of environmental disaster, according to senior officials in B.C.
Alberta Energy Minister Ted Morton brought the debate into the open when he told The Globe and Mail editorial board on Monday that, to get British Columbians to support the proposed pipeline, there will have to be clearer benefits to that province.
excerpt:
The B.C. Premier is caught between widespread environmental and first nations opposition, and her desire to court federal Conservatives. With the B.C. election slated for May, 2013 - just months before a federal environmental panel is expected to deliver a decision on the pipeline - Ms. Clark faces a tough campaign where she could be vulnerable on both sides of the debate.
Ms. Redford, too, faces opposition to any deal to share in her province's energy wealth, with her chief opponent, Wildrose Party Leader Danielle Smith, saying Alberta should not be "held at ransom."
In other words, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act will become as useless as the Canadian Investment Act.
That's certainly what Joe Oliver plans.
Neither the First Nations nor the BC government can "block" the pipeline. Harper doesn't need their permission any more than he needs the permission of the National Energy Board. He has a Parliamentary majority and the federal government has the constitutional power to build interprovincial pipelines. He will call in the army if he has to, but most likely RCMP and a few bulldozers will be sufficient to brush aside any physical opposition.
So - why bother with having the Regulatory Agency go through with hearings, then?
There is a way to stop it. Indigenous sovereignty. As a settled and binding matter of constitutional and international law, 'beyond the treaty frontier' the non-native governments have no jurisdiction. However, neither the administrative units of the Canadian government Band Councils, nor their lawyers are 'up' to such a challenge since these councils, like their lawyers, courts, legislatures and other non-native institutions of law, government and business including the Environmental Assessment and Canadian Investment Acts would be found to be 'ultra vires' by any independent, impartial body that examined the relevent and binding precedents and statutes. My guess is at the end of the day, the US will get it not China.
There is certainly no need to 'stack' the courts with Harper friendly judges. The Canadian judiciary is already about as 'fixed' on such matters as it is possible to be.
From the M Spector's link:
Part of the plan will include overhauling the country's environmental assessment system on major projects, which in the past have been vulnerable to environmentalists who "hijack" it by tying up the process unnecessarily, he said.
"Right now, we see a process that is open to abuse, open to those who oppose economic development on ideological grounds," said Oliver. "We need a process that won't be subverted."
He then brings up the MacKenzie Pipeline review process that took 9 years as an example. What he fails to mention is that the process took that long in order to accomodate the concerns expressed by indigenous people directly impacted by the project.
The prospect of a pipeline bringing the natural gas to North American energy markets was originally analyzed in the 1970s with the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Inquiry. During that inquiry, Justice Berger heard testimony from diverse groups with an interest in the pipeline. The inquiry was notable for the voice it gave to the First Peoples whose traditional territory the pipeline would traverse. Berger recommended a ten year moratorium on development of the pipeline to deal with issues such as Aboriginal land claims and setting aside of conservation areas. The proposal was effectively shelved.
Exploration continued at a steady pace and by 1995 there were over 1,900 wells above the 60th parallel. In addition, aboriginal groups settled numerous land claims. The Inuvialuit settled the first land claim in 1984, followed by the Sahtu and Gwichʼin. By the late 1990s, companies once again seriously considered a pipeline. The Canadian government sold mineral claim rights, leading to C$400 million in bids and over C$1 billion in work commitments.
With the first wave of land claims settled, negotiations began between oil and gas companies and local aboriginal groups. These negotiations proved successful in October 2001, when ConocoPhillips, Shell, ExxonMobil, and Imperial Oil signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Aboriginal Pipeline Group. The APG was formed to represent the Inuvialuit, Sahtu, and Gwichʼin. The Memorandum of Understanding offered the APG a financial stake in the pipeline.[2]
On June 19, 2003 the Aboriginal Pipeline Group, and TransCanada Corp. signed an agreement giving the aboriginal groups of the Northwest Territories one-third ownership of the pipeline project.[3]
On 11 March 2011, the Mackenzie Valley pipeline was granted federal cabinet approval. The National Energy Board granted a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mackenzie_Valley_Pipeline
For certain, there were established environmental groups like the Sierra Club that raised concerns during the hearings but the major delay in getting approval rested on negotiating land claims and benefits sharing agreements. Oliver's failure to even mention Aboriginal rights demonstrates how little respect the Harper Government™ has for them.
Yes, but that was then and this is now. In the interim lots of lawyers, including Berger, have made lots of money and all kinds of negotiations have ensued as well as some carefully crafted and federally funded 'test-cases' which have 'clarified' and 'defined' what existing 'Aboriginal rights' are. Although these are sometimes touted as 'wins' by those who lost them, they are losses and have defined Aboriginal rights to a pale shadow of their actual importance as being merely a 'burden' on Crown title which can be extinguished 'at the pleasure of the Crown'. If the Harper government has little respect for these rights it is because they have been essentially gutted of any serious oppositional content. Like I said, it's a fixed game and legally their usurpation gives them all the cards. Spector is right, a few RCMP and D8 Cats should take care of any problems. Physically stopping it will entail very many people making a very big fuss. And we've already seen the lengths the PTB will go to when petroleum pipelines and profits are at stake. Iraq, Libya, Iran? Do you think the Sierra Club et al is up for that?
I don't disagree with you, NDPP. I'm just saying that the situation is only going to get worse than better.
We agree. The tarsands is a planetary disaster. It should be stopped along with these pipelines. Doing it will be very difficult but every effort should be made to do so. I know there are those who have already decided to go the whole nine yards to try. May they succeed..
..today i briefly caught megan leslie (the ndp enviroment critic), on cpac, being interviewed in the foyer. a reporter asked about the recent deal with china and i was impressed that leslie used the term colonial powers when referring to china and the us. when asked about the ndp position on the tar sands she became viably uncomfortable and said that there were a lot of jobs in the tar sands and the the oil needed to be taken out in a sustainable manner. (like there was anyting sustainable re the tar sands.)
..i agree with ndpp about the oil moving south rather then to the coast.
I don't see why they won't end up getting both pipelines. Keystone will be approved by the White House in November, and in the unlikely event the NEB recommends to Harper's Cabinet that the Gateway not be built, Harper will reject the recommendation. There's plenty of bitumen for both China and the US.
..maybe they will m. spector but there is a limit to what people will put up with. what will be needed to clear the way for the coast route will more likely be brutal. after watching the treatment of the 1st peoples these past couple months i get an inkling that we are nearing that limit. they may try but there is no assurance the pipeline will happen.
Well, I guess we're going to be seeing in the next few years just how much people are going to put up with.
So far they've been willing to put up with quite a lot.
Well, I guess we're going to be seeing in the next few years just how much people are going to put up with.
So far they've been willing to put up with quite a lot.
..the occupations that just took place in ont is an omen..these are times of change. we are more connected globally than we've ever been in my lifetime.
Here's where the PTB are going: It's obviously going to get down and dirty..
Ban Foreign Funding of 'Radicals' MP Urges - by Peter O'Neil
http://www.vancouversun.com/business/foreign+funding+radicals+urges/6131...
"Conservative Brian Jean hints that aboriginal chiefs get money from US trusts..."
Ottawa's New Anti-Terrorism Strategy Lists Eco Extremists as Threats
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-new-anti-terrorism-s...
"After vowing to take on radical environmentalists determined to stop the Northern Gateway pipeline, the Harper government has released a new anti-terrorism strategy that targets eco-extremists as threats. With his announcement this week, Public Safety Minister Vic Towes, has increased the concern among environmentalists that Ottawa regards them as implacable adversaries to be monitored and battled rather than well meaning advocates to be consulted.
The minister said that, in addition to foreign threats, the government would be vigilant against domestic extremism that is 'based on grievances - real or perceived - revolving around the promotion of various causes such as animal rights, white supremacy, environmentalism and anti-capitalism.."
Resources and Infomation on the Enbridge NorthGate Pipeline
http://www.kitimatdaily.ca/cgi-bin/show_home.cgi
. With his announcement this week, Public Safety Minister Vic Towes, has increased the concern among environmentalists that Ottawa regards them as implacable adversaries to be monitored and battled rather than well meaning advocates to be consulted.
Three more years of this bullshit to go, and even longer if these bastards win another election in 2015.
If the federal government was at all interested in the opinion of the majority of Canadians about the Gateway pipeline, they would not have even had to hold these hearings - most of us desperately want a different direction for the energy industry!!
Many of us are concerned about the threat of "dilbit spills" [dilbit is the name of the slush in pipelines carrying Tar Sands bitumen which has to be diluted with benzene and natural gas and other chemicals to get it to flow in pipelines] along the pipeline route, as well as the horror of tankers spilling this crud on the BC coast.
It will be much more difficult a spill to deal with than the Gulf of Mexico spill of light sweet crude!!
Furthermore, any pipeline serving the Tar Sands will only serve to expand tar sands operations. The industry humps claim expansion of the Ft. Mac tar sands is not dependant on new markets, but that is a bold faced lie. Either the USA or China/Asia has to buy bitumen or expansion will be a white elephant.
Besides the global concerns [which are not a lot worse than other crude oil in terms of GHGs], there are the LOCAL effects on the Ft. Chip residents and their "rare bladder cancer" epidemic, the Athabasca River deformed fist and high chemical content downstream of the Tar Sands operations, and the fact that there is not enough water in that river for tar sands operations [drawing water in winter can reduce the flow to a level fatal to aquatic life!!].
Joe Oliver was on QP today saying the tar sands are essential to the economy, no other way to pay for government services. What a lying bastard.
CFL