CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Toronto Maple Leafs
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14139
PostPosted: Wed Jun 18, 2014 9:21 am
 


xerxes xerxes:
If it's such a great thing, why would there need to be 209 conditions for Enbridge to meet? The last time there was a leak in pipeline owned by Enbridge, they only noticed/gave a damn 17 hours later.

This is BS. Expect the FN in BC to fight this as well as a bunch of environmental groups as well. Herr Harper and his anti-science, oil soaked cronies strike again.


Gee. If only there were some source of energy that didn’t need to be transported thousands of miles, didn’t pose a constant risk of mass ecological contamination, powered the global economy and could be used to make some 6000 different consumer goods.

Let me know if you hear of one.


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 2103
PostPosted: Wed Jun 18, 2014 5:55 pm
 


From Yahoo News:

$1:
A new Angus Reid poll, conducted after the decision was announced, shows how split Canadians are on the issue.

The survey shows Canadians are split over whether the decision to allow energy company Enbridge to build an oil pipeline through northern Alberta and BC – provided it meets 209 conditions – was the correct one. Just over one-third (37%) say they think the decision was right. About the same number (34%) say the decision was wrong and nearly one-third (29%) say they aren’t sure.

Regardless of their views on energy versus the environment, respondents had little doubt about the future of the Northern Gateway project. Nearly seven-in-ten (68%) say regardless of how they feel about the pipeline, they do think it will actually be built.
The highest opposition to the controversial $6.5 billion mega-project comes from British Columbia where environmental and First Nation groups have promised to do whatever it takes to make sure it's not built.

But even in B.C. — the province arguably most affected by the pipeline decision — public opinion is split: 40 per cent of those surveyed say the government made the wrong decision, 38 per cent said it was the right move, while 22 per cent are unsure.


Funny thing, if you go strictly by volume (e.g. loudness) of the protests, you would think that the go-ahead for the pipeline is bound to be an unpopular decision. Obviously it's not. Even in BC it's an even split.





PostPosted: Wed Jun 18, 2014 6:58 pm
 


..according to the same protestors Harper's goose is cooked in BC....not


OTTAWA — It was easy to assume in mid-2012 that Prime Minister Stephen Harper would pay an onerous price in B.C. for supporting Enbridge’s proposed Northern Gateway oilsands pipeline.

The project seemed to be in trouble after a U.S. regulator compared the company’s management to the “Keystone Kops,” thanks to Enbridge’s inept handling of a major spill on American soil two years earlier.

B.C. Premier Christy Clark and Harper’s West Coast lieutenant, James Moore, subsequently piled on, making clear their displeasure over the company’s maladroit attempts over several years to win public and First Nations’ confidence.

Some started likening Northern Gateway to past federal initiatives that proved toxic in the West, like Pierre Elliott Trudeau’s 1980 National Energy Program.

But analysts say Harper’s downside is limited.

“It’s unlikely that the pipeline will be a major game-changer for any of the federal parties” in the 2015 election, said Norman Ruff, a professor emeritus at the University of Victoria.

Harper, continuing the longstanding Tory dominance in B.C. outside of Vancouver and Victoria, took 21 of 36 B.C. seats in 2011 while capturing just under 46 per cent of the provincial vote.

The NDP finished a strong second, with just under 33 per cent of the vote and taking a dozen seats. The free-falling Liberals took just 13 per cent and two seats, while the Greens came away with Elizabeth May’s Saanich-Gulf Islands seat while taking eight per cent of the votes.

With B.C. getting six new seats, one on Vancouver Island and the rest in the Lower Mainland, Elections Canada says those 2011 results transposed on the new electoral boundaries would mean the Conservatives would have done even better in 2011 -- 28 B.C. seats compared to 11 for the New Democrats, two for the Liberals and the single to May.

Harper has taken a beating since the 2011 election on everything from the environment to the Senate scandal. Yet the party’s loyal base remains at around 31 per cent in recent polls, putting it in a statistical tie for the lead with Justin Trudeau’s Liberals, according to the website threehundredeight.com.

And the Conservatives tend to perform better on election day – usually five points better – than between-election polls indicate, according to threehundredeight.com’s analyst Eric Grenier.

Harper also has an impressive cushion to work with, given that the Conservative victory margin was more than 15 percentage points – the same difference between the party’s current poll standing and its 2011 vote result -- in all but nine of the 28 ridings.

And just five of those nine were in any way nail-biters -- that is, within six percentage points or less of the second-place candidates. Those five were Port Moody-Coquitlam and Vancouver Granville in the Lower Mainland, Courtenay-Alberni and Vancouver Island North-Comox-Powell River on the island, and South Okanagan-West Kootenay in the overwhelmingly Tory-blue B.C. interior.

Even if the Tories remain stuck at current support levels, there is an argument that anti-Harper British Columbians will struggle to determine whiat is the vehicle to send him a message on Northern Gateway.

The Liberals are led by a charismatic Montreal MP with B.C. roots, but Trudeau – a Gateway opponent -- is unproven in a tough election campaign and leads a relatively weak B.C. organization.


Tom Mulcair’s New Democrats would have to improve in the polls and take advantage of their better organization to make a convincing case they’re the top anti-Harper option.

The presence of May’s Green party further muddies the anti-pipeline field.

Polls on Northern Gateway, meanwhile, have for years been all over the map, with questions put by environmental organizations typically showing massive opposition. But some of the more even-handed surveys have indicated that a range of 30 to 40 per cent, and sometimes a little more, accept the government’s argument that Canada needs access to B.C.’s coast to get full value for the country’s oilsands riches.

It’s assumed that group is roughly the same sub-section of British Columbians who typically vote Conservative.

“It’s his people who are in favour of it,” said B.C. pollster Dimitri Pantazopoulos.

With that kind of West Coast support, opposition MPs could have trouble painting Harper as anti-B.C.

“Harper can withstand quite a bit of negativity out here,” according to Ruff.

poneil@postmedia.com


http://www.canada.com/business/Northern ... story.html


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
Profile
Posts: 1465
PostPosted: Wed Jun 18, 2014 7:56 pm
 


Jonny_C Jonny_C:

I'm talking about those who might be affected (even marginally) by the construction of the pipeline - people who live in the area (i.e. First Nations), not the outside do-gooders who couldn't see the benefits of economic development if they were run over by a truckload of them.


You're quite right-Aboriginal leaders like Georges Erasmus are on record as saying they're all for investment and working with private enterprise to create jobs, but the problem it seems is that too often the deck seems stacked against them, particularly when there are no Treaties, as is the case for so much of B.C.

The really sad thing is how badly the Northern Gateway pipeline sales job has been managed. The Canada West Foundation has called for an extensive overhaul of the way that government and industry build public trust and get "social licence" for energy projects. Preston Manning has chimed in on this, calling for governments to act more as facilitators in bringing different groups together to work out common ground on these issues.

Instead, however, under the Harper government we have the federal Natural Resources Minister braying about "radical environmentalists" who want to "hijack" the pipeline hearings, when most of the people concerned about the pipeline are ordinary, hardworking British Columbians concerned about the potential effects of the pipeline.

At the same time, the President of Kinder Morgan criticized the federal government for the way it attacked pipeline critics. On top of that, we have Jim Prentice and Doug Eyford both criticizing Ottawa for the way it's mishandled the sales job to the Aboriginal people. Bear in mind that Prentice used to be a Harper Cabinet minister, while Eyford is one of Harper's most recent appointees. Finally, there's also the fact that cuts to things like search and rescue, and environmental monitoring, do not make it seem like Ottawa is concerned as much about the environment.

The thing is, we need to get Alberta's oil to new markets, instead of just shipping it all to the U.S. at a big discount. I am very much in support of the idea of a pipeline going east to refineries in Ontario and Quebec (and I'm slightly puzzled as to why the Ethical Oil advocates haven't put more emphasis on reducing the East's dependence on oil imports), I am dismayed that Keystone XL is not going forward and I think that Northern Gateway might actually be very worthwhile if it was rerouted through an area that wasn't as quake-prone and wouldn't require tankers to go through those really narrow straits.

You know, actually listening to BCers' most pressing concerns and taking them into account, instead of impugning their patriotism and calling them "un-Canadian" for having a dissenting view.

Whether we like it or not, the Alberta oilsands are one of the most critical parts of our economy right now, and one of the main reasons we've weathered the economic storm as well as we have. I can only guess at how much money migrants who come here from out East send back to their home provinces, money and jobs that would only increase if more of our resources were refined in Canada, including east of Manitoba. Of course we shouldn't put all our eggs in one basket-this is something that Peter Lougheed tirelessly tried to remind us of-but oil and gas remains a critical part of not just the provincial but the national economy.

Stephen Harper has not done anyone any favours with his handling of Northern Gateway, but anyone who demonizes my province is not doing the environmental movement any favours either. How can they possibly expect Albertans to take them seriously if they paint us as a bunch of greedy, environment-raping hayseeds who don't care about anything but money? Where the hell do they think Western alienation came from in the first place?

We need to export our oil, but we also need to take into account peoples' concerns about how we do it. Just as with so many other issues in Canada, the polarization and attacking of people with different opinions is not helping matters. We can do better, and we need to do better.

Like it or not, we're all in this together.


Last edited by JaredMilne on Fri Jun 20, 2014 10:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 19939
PostPosted: Wed Jun 18, 2014 8:40 pm
 


Xort Xort:

$1:
This is BS. Expect the FN in BC to fight this as well as a bunch of environmental groups as well. Herr Harper and his anti-science, oil soaked cronies strike again.

And this is why no one cares what you have to think or say, outside of their own amusement in poking you to get a reaction.





Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Edmonton Oilers
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 6932
PostPosted: Wed Jun 18, 2014 11:39 pm
 


209 conditions ???? like Blazing Saddles. " Badgers?...Badgers? we don't need no stinking Badgers.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 11830
PostPosted: Wed Jun 18, 2014 11:43 pm
 


So long as they can continue posting shit like this
$1:
Even in BC it's an even split.

people might even believe it. Try adding little comments like we often hear "The citizens of Kitimat with the most to benefit, voted against the pipeline but the results are non-binding". Plays into the spin even if it really means we don't give a shit what the people want
Funny how you can convince people that an economic plan that delivers the least possible benefit to Canada at the highest risk possible, that will not benefit you personally and will increase of gas that you buy 10c/L is necessary and good.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Toronto Maple Leafs
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14139
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 5:29 am
 


herbie herbie:
Funny how you can convince people that an economic plan that delivers the least possible benefit to Canada at the highest risk possible, that will not benefit you personally is necessary and good.

Kind'a like mass immigration :lol:


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 2103
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 6:49 am
 


herbie herbie:
So long as they can continue posting shit like this


You'll like this then...

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/cartoonist-s- ... 15955.html


Last edited by Jonny_C on Thu Jun 19, 2014 2:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Toronto Maple Leafs
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14139
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 7:46 am
 


herbie herbie:
So long as they can continue posting shit like this
$1:
Even in BC it's an even split.

people might even believe it. Try adding little comments like we often hear "The citizens of Kitimat with the most to benefit, voted against the pipeline but the results are non-binding". Plays into the spin even if it really means we don't give a shit what the people want

In all fairness, that attitude is hardly a Harper specialty. The Chretien/Martin era wasn't much better in that regard. The Mulroney era wasn't any better and neither was the Trudeau era.

However, I think the Northern Gateway is a mistake. Not because it's a pipeline, but because tanker traffic heading to and from Kitimat will have to traverse one of the most treacherous stretches of water on the planet.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 21665
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 8:59 am
 


Jonny_C Jonny_C:
Gunnair Gunnair:
No they wouldn't.


I think they might.

I'm talking about those who might be affected (even marginally) by the construction of the pipeline - people who live in the area (i.e. First Nations), not the outside do-gooders who couldn't see the benefits of economic development if they were run over by a truckload of them.


I don't think so in this case. In some instances that may be true, but this one is different. This one is resonating with First Nations across BC. They are fed up with the feds--going back hundreds of years really--and this seems to be acting as an event to unify around. I don't think money is the issue.


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
 Vegas Golden Knights
Profile
Posts: 2577
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 9:23 am
 


Zipperfish Zipperfish:
I don't think so in this case. In some instances that may be true, but this one is different. This one is resonating with First Nations across BC. They are fed up with the feds--going back hundreds of years really--and this seems to be acting as an event to unify around. I don't think money is the issue.


If they really don't like pipes, they are really going to hate what is going through feasibility studies right now.

Let's put it this way, we will have zero say in how oil and gas is transported in the very near future.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 21665
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 9:41 am
 


peck420 peck420:
If they really don't like pipes, they are really going to hate what is going through feasibility studies right now.

Let's put it this way, we will have zero say in how oil and gas is transported in the very near future.


I don't think "we don't like pipes" is an accurate reflection of their position. The issue is more around perceived lack of consulatation--or as you said, "having zero say." Many First Nations in BC felt that the federal government was acting like a proponent of the project, as opposed to overseer.


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
 Vegas Golden Knights
Profile
Posts: 2577
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 9:46 am
 


Zipperfish Zipperfish:
I don't think "we don't like pipes" is an accurate reflection of their position. The issue is more around perceived lack of consulatation--or as you said, "having zero say." Many First Nations in BC felt that the federal government was acting like a proponent of the project, as opposed to overseer.


Lol. That it? I could have sworn that money was mentioned just as often...wait, that could have just been the BC government.

That being said, none of it will matter much in the near future.

The oil transportation will be approved by the federal government, transported by means that fall out side of Provincial and civilian jurisdiction (from federally controlled to federally controlled land no less), and overseen by a private entity.

Quite frankly, it will not be pleasant.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 21665
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 10:37 am
 


peck420 peck420:
Lol. That it? I could have sworn that money was mentioned just as often...wait, that could have just been the BC government.

That being said, none of it will matter much in the near future.

The oil transportation will be approved by the federal government, transported by means that fall out side of Provincial and civilian jurisdiction (from federally controlled to federally controlled land no less), and overseen by a private entity.

Quite frankly, it will not be pleasant.


Techncially the right of way for an interprovinical pipeline is federally regulated and overseen by a private entity. Same with railroads. However, in practice it's difficult to go ahead without the provincial government (Enbridge, for example, requires dozens of provincial regulatory permits) and teh First Nations (who have no regulatory authority but pack a lot of clout in court).


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Previous  1  2  3  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 44 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.