Tag Archives: rafe mair

An oil tanker carries Tar Sands bitumen past Stanley Park (Paul Manly, David Maidman)

Kinder Morgan’s Massive Pipeline, Tanker Expansion Plans (Finally) Making Headlines

Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, , , ,
Share

How wonderful it is to have such breaking news fanatics as the Vancouver Sun and the Vancouver Province. The Sun on Friday the 13th carried a headline story of how Kinder Morgan is planning to increase its pipeline capacity to 850,000 barrels per day at a cost of $5 Billion. The Province with a breathlessness usually reserved for the discovery of a three headed toad in Tasmania, told us this:

Kinder Morgan Energy Partners gave the green light Thursday to its pipeline expansion, which will more than double the current amount of crude oil flowing from Alberta to Burnaby to 850,000 barrels per day, up from the current 300,000 bpd.

The quantity is about 40 per cent more than what the Houston-based company had originally proposed. And it will see annual tanker traffic jump from about 70 tankers per year to 360 to 365 tankers per year, based on one tanker visiting port per day, said Kinder Morgan.

This story is nearly two years old. When a downtown accountant noticed, out his office window, a huge increase in tanker traffic – following Kinder Morgan’s quiet increase of Tar Sands bitumen through its Trans Mountain Pipeline to Burnaby from 200,000 bpd to 300,000 – the matter was the subject of a full Vancouver City Council meeting and investigation in July 2010 (scroll down to story, “Misinformation Given to Vancouver City Council).

Of course, back then the Vancouver media hadn’t noticed fish farms, private river destruction, assaults on agricultural land, schemes ruining the environment and bankrupting BC Hydro or the Enbridge Pipeline and the proposed tanker traffic either. That may, the saints be praised, be changing.

For the past decade, the Postmedia papers in Vancouver have liked to ponder environmental matters for a year or two before dealing with them. Can’t be in a rush, you know – that tends to be irresponsible; far better to offer op-ed  space to fish farmers, private rivers despoilers and the corporate interests that promote the world’s biggest single-source polluter, the Tar Sands, and their proposed disasters in BC on land and sea. That the editor of the Sun op-ed page is a former Fellow of the Fraser Institute has nothing to do with this policy, of course.

One hates to make too general a statement on such matters but perhaps the Newspapers would tell how much any of these subjects have been covered by, let’s say, Vaughn Palmer or Mike Smyth.

There was a time, well within the memory of many readers, when the media in Vancouver truly held the establishment’s feet to the fire. No statements were taken as unchallengeable when delivered by big business or government. The Vancouver Sun and Province were known for their tough journalists as was BCTV. This certainly was the case when I was in government – a long time ago – but as recently as the last NDP government it prevailed. One remembers with admiration the work Mr. Palmer did on the “fast ferries issue”. Since the arrival of the Campbell/Clark government, the plain fact is that government and big business have had even better than a free ride – the editorial policy has supported business and government with nary a tough question.

My old station, CKNW, which was once on the cutting edge of skepticism of the establishment’s statements, now has Vanilla Bill in charge of the morning spot and now has a 10 share of the market when his predecessor had double that audience. Even the CBC, which is scarcely known for hard hitting radio, beats the CKNW morning show.
If I had performed that way I would have been cashiered along with the Program Manager and senior management.

Yes, times have changed and how ironic it is that this happens at a time the Supreme Court of Canada in the case of Simpson v. CKNW, Mair et al made it much more difficult for politicians and other prominent people to maintain a successful defamation action. In addition to showing the statement was untrue they must now demonstrate malice.

You, the public of BC, have been swindled every bit as much as if you’d played 3 Card Monte at the fair. You pay, through subscriptions and advertising revenues, for a gigantic crock of crap being delivered to your doorstep and living room.

What especially outrages me is that once a year the media fills itself with praise, basking in the reflected glory of the late Jack Webster at the annual dinner held in his name. I knew Jack Webster as one who barely survived his interviews, as a competitor then a colleague and I can tell you if he heard and read one day’s coverage of current events he would be thoroughly ashamed of those who carry on what were once honourable outlets of hard hitting journalism.

BUT…are times changing? There is evidence that the mainstream media is covering the environmental corporate/political atrocities being inflicted on British Columbia. Meetings of First Nations are being covered and Damien Gillis’ videos and footage are being shown (watch these recent Enbridge stories on CBC’s the National and Global TV). Especially encouraging is coverage by local papers including those controlled by the mainstream media companies. The Victoria Times-Colonist has been under the parent company’s radar and has, for some months now, challenged those in corporations and governments which would continue and expand their takeover and destruction of our province.

Given my history with the media I don’t think one can say “let bygones be bygones”, but all of us can join in the real battle.

The media have more obligations than just fairly and thoroughly presenting the news – they have a traditional duty to speak for the audience they seek. Until the beginning of the Gordon Campbell/Christy government they did just that. Critics of the “establishment” abounded. For example, it was Vaughn Palmer that almost single-handed exposed the “fast ferries” issue that played a major role in the 2001 election.

What the media faces is a simple question: do you accept as a duty the obligation to defend our wonderful province against the corporate/political assault on our environment?

While those who fight fish farms, agricultural land degradation, private power schemes, pipelines and exposing our shores to sure destruction can’t be expected to suddenly embrace those who have been enablers of the corporate assault on our province; we can and will get behind and speak kindly of a media which has columnists and broadcasters who will speak for British Columbia!

I sense a willingness to do just this and it is welcome indeed. 

Share

Mainstream Media, Former Politicians Finding Religion on BC Libs and Fish

Canada, Energy and Resources, Fisheries, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, Western Canada, , , , , ,
Share

It’s wondrous to behold! So many have seen religion at the same time!
 
Vaughn Palmer of the Postmedia Sun has finally got religion and is openly questioning the Liberal government’s position on the use of Telus resources to help build the new roof on BC Place Stadium! One looks in vain to see any criticism of consequence over the deal to build the roof in the first place so that the jock world had a better playpen at taxpayers’ expense.
 
Where, oh where, has there been any coverage in Vaughn’s columns over the years on fish farms, private power development, Enbridge’s pipeline project and tanker traffic down our coast and increased tanker traffic through Vancouver Harbour?
 
Mike Smyth of the Postmedia Province has got religion at long last and is highly critical of the Clark government’s refusal of the $35 million Telus offered to have the jocks’ publicly financed sand box named for them.
 
Where, oh where, has there been any coverage in Mike’s columns over the years of fish farms, private power development, Enbridge’s pipeline project and tanker traffic down our coast and increased tanker traffic through Vancouver Harbour?
 
There’s a guy named Fletcher, I think, who works, I believe, for the David Black newspapers, who manages to kiss the establishment’s backside while anointing its feet – a daunting task which he has easily managed. I somehow doubt that he’ll see the light – although he did come out against the Enbridge pipeline not too long ago.
 
Tom Siddon, formerly Federal Fisheries Minister, has seen religion and is critical of his old party for removing “habitat” from the Fisheries Act. Here’s the story from the Edmonton Journal.

Siddon said the wording would turn fish into a commodity and overlook the importance of the broader ecosystem that, for instance, allows British Columbia’s famous salmon resource to thrive.

“It’s like saying as long as we have a happy lifestyle and can go to the rec centre and keep fit, it doesn’t matter what the air is like that we breath or the water that we drink,” Siddon said.

“If we want to preserve and protect our fish stocks, it’s more than a commercial equation.”

Wasn’t Siddon the federal Fisheries Minister when a so-called compromise was brokered between the senior governments and Alcan which agreed to lower the Nechako River – which Alcan’s Kemano II project would do despite a Department of Fisheries study condemning the project in no uncertain terms? A report of 1985 which didn’t see the light of day until it was leaked to me at the height of the battle in the 1990’s?

Here’s what I said during the fight against this hideous project. Scientists were giving evidence that the proposals were catastrophic to salmon runs. The deal was struck in the absence of all seven DFO scientists who had worked on the project and the commission was, in effect, given Alcan’s figures to work with. The chairman of the Settlement Group, Dr. David Strangway, wouldn’t know a sockeye salmon from a sea cucumber.

I strongly support what Mr. Siddon said last week and hope his former mates take him seriously. I say – in all  seriousness – that we all should be like Mr. Siddon and ponder on positions we took in earlier times. As Emerson put it, a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.
As environmentalists, the Common Sense Canadian welcomes Mr. Siddon’s support. With his long government experience and his position as Fisheries Minister his words carry considerable weight.

When one looks at the entire picture of the Harper government in the environment, a thought occurs. That bunch are for fish farms, private river projects, pipelines carrying toxic gunk over 1,100kms of our pristine wilderness, huge tankers down our extremely dangerous coast, all without much meaningful public input.

It seems clear that our MPs join the Prime Minister in giving British Columbians the finger, leaving civil disobedience the only option left for thousands of British Columbians who condemn Harper’s wanton abandonment of our heritage.

May I respectfully suggest that you post on the fridge this list of 21 Conservative toadies who have abandoned their province to the Harper whip:

Ed Fast Abbotsford ed@edfast.ca
Dick Harris – Cariboo – Prince George Harris.R@parl.gc.ca
Mark Strahl – Chilliwack – Fraser Canyon mark.strahl@parl.gc.ca
Kerry Lynne Findlay – Delta – Richmond East MP Kerry-Lynne.Findlay@parl.gc.ca
Nina Grewal – Fleetwood – Port Kells Grewal.N@parl.gc.ca
Cathy McLeod – Kamloops – Thompson – Cariboo McLeod.C@parl.gc.ca
Ron Cannan – Kelowna – Lake Country ron.cannan@parl.gc.ca
David Wilks – Kootenay – Columbia David.wilks@parl.gc.ca
Mark Warawa – Langley Warawa.M@parl.gc.ca
James Lunney – Nanaimo – Alberni Lunney.J@parl.gc.ca
Andrew Saxton – North Vancouver Saxton.A@parl.gc.ca
Dan Albas – Okanagan – Coquihalla http://www.danalbas.com/contact-dan.html
Colin Mayes – Okanagan – Shuswap Mayes.C@parl.gc.ca
Randy Kamp – Pitt Meadows – Maple Ridge – Mission Kamp.R@parl.gc.ca
James Moore – Port Moody – Westwood – Port Coquitlam Moore.J@parl.gc.ca
Bob Zimmer – Prince George – Peace River Bob.Zimmer@parl.gc.ca
Alice Wong – Richmond Wong.A@parl.gc.ca
Russ Hiebert – South Surrey – White Rock – Cloverdale Info@RussHiebert.ca
John Duncan – Vancouver Island North Duncan.J@parl.gc.ca
Wai Young – Vancouver South info@waiyoung.ca
John Weston – West Vancouver – Sunshine Coast – Sea to Sky Country Weston.J@parl.gc.ca

Share

Tell DFO to Save Kokish River Steelhead from Proposed Private Power Project

Fisheries, WATER, , , ,
Share

These opening words from Gwen Barlee of the Wilderness Committee which cry out (in my mind at any rate for I don’t speak for the W.C. which certainly doesn’t need my help) for the highest manifestation of protest including civil disobedience:

Tucked away in the wild of northern Vancouver Island, the Kokish River is a treasure for fishers and wilderness lovers alike.

The Kokish River, located 15 km east of Port McNeill on northern Vancouver Island, is threatened by a proposed 45 megawatt hydropower project. The river is renowned for its high fish values including endangered summer and winter runs of steelhead.

Thus has begun yet another rape of a river without any public process at all. The deal requires approval from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, which is why the Wilderness Committee is calling on citizens to write to them and demand they reject this project that would unquestionably damage important fish habitat.
 
The proposal is to divert the river through 9 kms of pipe through the generators then back into the river. This river has 2 steelhead runs and all 5 species of Pacific salmon.
 
Back to Ms. Barlee:
 
Kwagis Power, owned by Brookfield Renewable Power and the Namgis First Nation, has applied to dam and divert the 11 km river into a 9 km pipe. The federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) considers the Kokish to be a high-value river with a sensitive fish population.

The Kokish is a fish-rich river. In addition to the steelhead populations, it is home to five species of wild salmon, coastal cutthroat trout and Dolly Varden.
 
This is an outrage and it must be stopped.
 
Let’s remind ourselves what this means.

In the environmental sense, the river will no longer be the home and breeding point for the salmon and trout which rely upon this river. How the hell can you expect anything else to happen? It is indeed “common sense”!

What also happens is the slow death of the river and its ecology which depend upon the fish in the river for its own survival.

On the fiscal side, here is yet another nail in the BC Hydro coffin. It will be required to take this power during the spring run-off when BC Hydro doesn’t need the power, at double+ what it’s worth in the market or use it at many times over what BC Hydro can make for themselves!
 
Adrian Dix now has a right, and indeed a duty, to speak out loudly and clearly that he and his party condemn this project and that if elected, he will cancel this deal forthwith.
 
As for the premier and her outfit – who have already approved the project without any public consultation – this demonstrates, as if it were needed, her appalling ignorance of environmental and, indeed, fiscal matters. It also indicates the premier’s lack of courage – she evidently wants no controversial matters to spoil her day, assuming that if she just sticks to photo opportunities, her admitted good looks will sway the voters.

Now she gives us all the finger as she hands over yet another of our rivers to her corporate supporters. (I suppose we should be comforted in the knowledge that the Vancouver Board of Trade always gives her a standing ovation.)

This government has squandered at least 3 billion dollars, tripled our provincial debt and is dumb enough to cost the province $35 million dollars by refusing that sum from Telus who offered that if the dome was called Telus Field.

It has not just shown no interest in the environment, it has encouraged those who would pillage it for profit, to fill their boots.
 
It has driven BC Hydro into what would be bankruptcy in the private sector and now strikes yet another blow to it by adding the Kokish to the ecological disasters which have been the hallmark of the Campbell/Clark government.
 
More than fifty organizations and individuals – including NHL star Willie Mitchell and yours truly – have signed onto the Wilderness Committee’s letter calling for DFO to reject the project. They clearly believe that if the public adds its voice to the chorus, there is a real opportunity to make DFO do the right thing.

Share

Rafe Confronts Dix on LNG, Fracking, Enbridge

Canada, Energy and Resources, Fracking, Oceans, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, Salmon Farming and Aquaculture, Western Canada, , , , , , , , ,
Share

Rafe Mair pulls no punches in this, the second of a two-part interview with BC NDP Leader Adrian Dix – grilling the potential future premier of BC on Liquid Natural Gas, fracking, the proposed Enbridge pipeline and salmon farms. Will the NDP stand up to Harper over Enbridge and open net pen aquaculture? Why do they favour LNG – and how do they reconcile their support for it with the controversial fracking process that would supply it with much of its gas? Watch and find out!

Share

Rafe Mair – One on One with BC NDP Leader Adrian Dix (Part 1)

Canada, Hydropower, Politics, WATER, Western Canada, , , , , , ,
Share

In the first of a two-part interview, Rafe Mair grills BC NDP Leader Adrian Dix on private power, Site C Dam and BC’s flawed environmental assessment process. What will the NDP do with existing and future private river power projects (a.k.a. IPPs) if they form the next government – and where do they stand on Site C Dam? Watch and find out…and stay tuned for part 2 Thursday, dealing with Enbridge, LNG and salmon farms.

Share

Cutting Enbridge Deal with Alberta is Bad Advice for Christy Clark

Canada, Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, Western Canada, , , ,
Share

Bob Plecas has an op-ed piece in the Vancouver Sun – they whose recent papers are celebrating their 100th birthday have carried the art of media masturbation to new heights once thought unreachable.
 
I assume that the editor in charge of its op-ed page, being a Fellow of the far right Fraser Institute, chooses his op-ed writers with care and, if part of that mandate is to push the government’s agenda, Fazil Milhar has done well indeed with Mr. Plecas.
 
Mr. Plecas was a deputy minister when I was in government and has written a biography of former premier, Bill Bennett.
 
I always thought he was a bright lad but clearly he is captive of the right as his article clearly demonstrates.
 
In this screed, Plecas is telling Premier Christy how to win the next election. Here is one of his suggestions, indeed his first choice:
 
The Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline. Demand Alberta share in the revenue from the pipeline between the oil (sic) sands and Kitimat as a condition for BC’s support. As proposed Alberta would gain all the benefits while BC takes all the “risks’’ (emphasis mine). Royalty splitting would have BC dedicate its share towards safety, first nations and communities in the North…
 
You will note that Mr. Plecas, as a faithful follower of the right, says the “oil” sands which is Liberal Party’s mantra. Oil sounds so much better than “tar” sands which has the nasty problem of the accurate description.
 
Now, Bob, repeat after me: there is no “risk” to BC from these two pipelines – THEY ARE MATHEMATICAL CERTAINTIES WHICH WILL RE-OCCUR FOR THE LIFETIME OF THE PIPELINES.
 
Bob, your article is simply untrue. Not only will these pipelines burst, you can’t clean up this stuff, called bitumen. Please look at the Enbridge disaster in the Kalamazoo River which happened 18 months ago and has not been cleaned up and never will. And now we learn the company is back at it with a new spill in Michigan this week! The Kalamazoo River is in populated Michigan not the wilds of British Columbia.
 
You casually toss aside First Nations, as if Victoria had some vague responsibility to look after the helpless Indians thus ought to give them a share of the revenue.
 
Bob, you know better than this having been involved in aboriginal affairs as a Deputy Minister.
 
The truth of the matter – better brace yourself (I would take a shot or two of single malt whisky) – is that First Nations make no case for sharing royalties because they oppose the pipelines. They’re no longer clients of the government but have a special place under our constitution as declared by the Supreme Court of Canada. This pipeline is mostly on unceded land the status of which has not yet been determined. Didn’t you know that, Bob?
 
How dare you patronize them!
 
I suppose you’ve done them a favour since your remark clearly shows that you and the government haven’t kept up to date and are wrapped in a time warp of 35 years ago.
 
Bob, I notice you haven’t dealt with the tankers issue. The First Nations on our coast are dead set against tanker traffic and saw what happened after the Exxon Valdez spill.
 
Yes, the tankers may be double hulled. Do you not know that in the past two years there have been four double hulled major spills and these vessels weren’t in dangerous waters as we have on our coast?
 
Bob, how could you be so wrong? Don’t you care for our Great Bear Rainforest? Does it not bother you that these two* pipelines traverse 1,100 km through the Rockies and Coast range only accessible by helicopter. Do you simply not give a damn that 1,000 rivers and streams will be crossed including three essential to wild salmon?
 
I can’t believe that you would dissemble – nor can I believe you’re stupid.
 
Unfortunately, Bob, it’s one or the other.
 
*the second pipeline which runs parallel to the one carrying the bitumen, takes the condensate which is mixed with the bitumen so it will flow, back to the Tar Sands

Rafe Mair’s latest book, The Home Stretch, is now available online at www.kobo.com and www.amazon.com at the appallingly low $9.99
 

Share
BC Premier Christy Clark and Alberta Premier Alison Redford (Ted Rhodes/Postmedia photo)

Redford Signals Alberta’s Intent to “Clear a Path” for Tar Sands Through BC

Canada, Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, Western Canada, , , ,
Share

I wasn’t surprised at what Alberta Premier Alison Redford recently said, namely:

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 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.

I was only surprised that it took so long for this vague testing of British Columbia opinion – and we must understand that this is all part of proposing bribes to BC to overcome its fast-growing aversion to the Enbridge pipeline.
 
An old golfing pal of mine and I were in the same meeting which was trying to get pros to come to a golf tournament our club was putting on. One of the group suggested some incentives, whereupon John Kelly said, “I stand foursquare against bribery – unless, of course, it gets the job done.”
 
We have just seen the beginning of a bribery process.
 
Premier Redford made her remarks in a speech – premiers are very careful what they say in speeches so one thing is clear: these remarks were not made just for the hell of it or off the cuff. This statement outlined vaguely what is to come.
 
The Harper government is in a pickle. When the PM told the Chinese that their investment in the Tar Sands (NOT the Oil Sands as the flacks want it) was safe, it didn’t seem possible that the people of BC would make a fuss about The Northern Gateway, a two way pipeline from the Tar Sands to Kitimat.
 
In making his commitment, Harper has painted himself into a corner, big time. How do you tell the Chinese that environmentalists, for God’s sake, have scuppered their huge commitment?
 
I’ll tell you what I think has happened:

  1. Harper reminded Premier Photo-Op that she’s in a serious financial bind which Ottawa could be of assistance over, say, the HST money Victoria owes. It would help, Harper probably told his new pal Christy, if you would butt out of this and don’t, in the name of all that’s sacred, talk about tanker traffic in the Inner Passage and good things will happen for you.
  2. Harper then told Premier Redford that Ottawa and Edmonton must prepare an incentive package for BC in order to stop those radical neo-communists from making massive protests and civil disobedience.
  3. Harper urged Redford to put up a trial balloon such as offering money to help building quays to handle the 300 or so tankers out of Kitimat every year.
  4. When the Prime Minister returns from China there will be meetings in Ottawa and Edmonton where we’ll put some meat on the bones of our bribe, er, incentive package for BC.

In the next year or so, we’re going to see just what British Columbians are made of as we get money thrown at us – serious money – in exchange for the right to ruin our great and very rare wilderness.
 
That this or something like it will happen is sure. We just don’t know when and how much.
 
For me and The Common Sense Canadian, there isn’t enough money in the world, much less in the country, that would compel us to sacrifice a square millimetre of our natural heritage and environment to a pipeline.
 
I close with this: Prime Minister Harper, if he doesn’t back off, is asking for, to use his words, “consequences” – serious consequences.
 
In the words of First Nations leader Gerald Amos, this so-called Northern Gateway project is “not going to happen.”
 
Rafe Mair’s latest book, The Home Stretch is now available online at www.kobo.com and www.amazon.com at the appallingly low $9.99

Share

Harper, Enbridge Jet to China on Heels of Massive Prince Rupert Protest

Canada, Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, Western Canada, , , ,
Share

This from the CBC:

Canadian oil and business executives are well-represented in the delegation travelling to China with Prime Minister Stephen Harper, with oil exports expected to be high on the government’s agenda.

A delegation assigned to Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver includes eight mining or oil and gas companies.

That list of companies includes none other than Enbridge, Inc.

The prime minister and his government are asking for a show down and my experience this past weekend in Prince Rupert indicates that the Enbridge deal, about which more in a moment, is going to spawn a First Nations and supporters v. industry and government fight compared to which all other showdowns will seem like minor incidents.

First, let’s look at the Enbridge deal from the point of view of First Nations both in their territory over which the pipeline travels and those on the coast where the consequent tanker traffic will go.

Enbridge, one of the largest pipeline companies in the world, has an utterly appalling safety record. In fact since 1998 they have had 811 “accidents”. They now tell us that with that record, mostly in easy geographical situations, they can take on the hugely difficult route to Kitimat “accident free” (or that they have a “plan” to deal adequately with spills if they occur).

The pipeline they propose, and Harper and Co. support, is about 1100km from the Alberta Tar Sands to Kitimat over and through both The Rockies, The Coast Range and over 1000 rivers and streams, including critical sources of three major salmon runs. To put this in perspective, in July of 2010 Enbridge had an “accident” which spilled over a million gallons of crude oil near the Kalamazoo River which is near Marshall in Michigan, a populated area.

Two notes from that: the cleanup continues and most observers say it will never be completed and this spill is, unlike the Rockies/Coast Range, easy to access with machinery. And another note: the spill was crude oil, which is bad enough, while the Enbridge pipeline would carry bitumen going west and condensate (the stuff they mix with bitumen) east – bitumen is far more viscous than crude oil.

The last points are very important for that there will be a spill from the Enbridge Northern Gateway line is not a risk but a mathematical certainty, and will happen in places only accessible by helicopter and the damage will be permanent no matter what the company does.

We have then 1100 km of venomous gunk of which there will be spills in wild areas inaccessible except by helicopter, which spills threaten precious wildlife and fish, which spills will be there forever. And let’s be clear on this – these spills will happen again and again.

Mr. Harper and his government, dirty hand in dirty hand with Enbridge and the Chinese giant Sinopec, are bound and determined to impose this on the people of British Columbia.

What of our fellow citizens, First Nations? They come into this awful business in two ways – those whose lands have not been ceded and those who live, as they have for centuries on the coast. At this point there are 131 nations absolutely opposed to Enbridge stepping one millimeter into BC.

Enbridge and the two governments are convinced that these First Nations can and will be bought off. And this point must be considered.

Damien Gillis and I were at the huge First Nations rally in Prince Rupert this past weekend and we can both say with confidence that this will not happen – certainly not amongst those represented there. We were both at the historic “Save the Fraser Declaration” press conference last December and saw the resolve in the faces of these leaders.

I saw the resolve when I spoke to 500 on Saturday night as I received a hearty standing ovation. I spoke with them afterwards and I can tell Mr. Harper and his resident toady, Resources Minister Joe Oliver, that they have badly and dangerously misread the situation.

The coastal nations know that they must help their eastern brethren in order to help themselves. In the words of spokesman and much admired Gerald Amos of the Haisla Nation,“It isn’t going to happen.”

What’s the matter with our governments? Don’t they understand that there is no way you can settle or compromise this issue? You can’t have half a pipeline or smaller boats!

Premier Christy Clark is a big player in this game because she can put a ban on tankers. The fact is that Gordon Campbell sent a note to Ottawa some years ago saying that his government had no issue with tanker traffic and Premier Photo-Op no doubt thinks that takes her government off the hook. Think again, lady.

Prophets of doom are often, like all messengers, blamed when their prophecies come to pass. I’ll run that risk and tell you fairly that I don’t believe that First Nations can be bribed and that the governments and Enbridge are provoking them and thousands of supporters, growing every day, to resort to violence.

People all around this province, aboriginal and non-aboriginal, are sending the governments, China and Enbridge a very solemn message: Don’t do it.

For in your words, Mr Harper, “there will be consequences.”

Share

Enbridge, Harper and Consequences for Speaking Out

Canada, Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, , , ,
Share

Did Prime Minister Harper threaten Tides Canada with “consequences” if they didn’t stop funding supporting campaigns – specifically that of ForestEthics – against the Enbridge Pipeline project?
 
ForestEthics says so, which is enough to have all Canadians, no matter what their stance on this issue or others, demand the Prime Minister make it clear that all Canadians, subject to the Criminal Code of Canada, have a constitutional right to say what they please on all issues, big and small – without consequences.
 
I have had experience with this. Back in 1992, when the Mulroney government was shoving the Charlottetown Accord at us, I was one of a very few people in the media that was opposed and said so with a passion.
 
One day my “mole” in the Conservative caucus – and at the same time a national media person – told me that Mulroney was going to retaliate against me by having me face a tax audit. I went on the air the following morning and reported this on the hope that this would discourage such a threat. Whether it worked or not I cannot say – I can say that no such audit was ordered.
 
The information I was given may not have been accurate but the sources were such that I felt very vulnerable.
 
(Before going on let me say that in those days I was making a lot of money from different places and had one of Canada’s best tax accountants, Russ Wilson, handling my affairs, as he still does. As with anyone making that kind of money there are always “grey” areas so that a tax audit could simply stop you cold in whatever you were doing until their audit was over. Ask any small business person what that kind of interruption can do…These days, an old man, I make very little money, have no pensions other than OAP and CPP, and we travel on our kids’ inheritance, so I’m not much of a legitimate target.)
 
I raise this issue because there is no end of ways a government can hassle you with “consequences” but this is a very effective one.
 
The “consequences” Tides Canada would pay, as I understand, would be taking away their charitable tax status, and by extension, their ability to support other environmental organizations and their own affiliate groups like ForestEthics. In the environmental field there are a number of very competent active and effective groups who have such an exemption, without which they simply couldn’t function.
 
The government doesn’t have to take away the exemption – all they have to do is threaten to do so, “or else”.
 
Let me be clear: I do not say that this will become Mr Harper’s way of shutting us all up. I have no evidence to support such an allegation other than the Tides/ForestEthics matter.
 
What I do say is that this sort of tactic has been used before – in the Richard Nixon days it was common.
 
What I also say is that the pipelines/tankers issue is shaping up to be a huge fight with the Harper Government, the oil and tanker businesses and most of the business community lined up against ordinary citizens and distinctly unwealthy environmental groups and spokespeople.
 
We who stand resolutely against the ruination of our environment also have the mainstream media against us. It’s a daunting task yet what I read and hear every day is support from ordinary, decent British Columbians who are undaunted by this huge array of corporate and government power.
 
The collision between Mr. Harper and the people of British Columbia is being made more certain by every assurance the PM gives to companies and governments that the gunk from the Tar Sands will be available to them. Every utterance from him and his Resources Minister Joe Oliver makes it clear that environmental hearings are nothing more than a nuisance and should be cast aside so we “can get on with it”.
 
I have left the biggest issue to the last: First Nations. The federal government has many financial arrangements with First Nations. Will there be “consequences” for the 131 Chiefs who oppose the pipeline/tanker plan from the heart; from the depths of their long heritage?
 
We are en route to a very serious collision and the purpose of this article is twofold: warn the public about how governments in the past have fought issues and demand from Prime Minister Harper that he state clearly and unequivocally that dissent on this or any other issue will not come “with consequences” from him and/or the federal government.
 
If we cannot have that assurance, look for serious consequences for people who put their environment, their treasures, the very soul of this province ahead of ruining it by people outside our province, who don’t give a fiddler’s fart for our feelings about our land and rivers and flora.
 
We are listening, listening very hard Mr Harper, for your clear unequivocal statement that we can oppose your plans without “consequences”.

Share

Should BC Have a Referendum on Enbridge?

Canada, Energy and Resources, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, Western Canada, , ,
Share

If there’s one thing above all politicians hate it’s democracy. For God’s sake, we can’t have the rabble have a say in decisions! Let them do this once and we’ll never get to run the province again! They believe that we live in a parliamentary, representative “democracy” which means that we hire people, called representatives, to do our thinking for us and take decisions in our name.
 
Any thinking citizen knows that the public, for many reasons, cannot grapple with all the issues and email a vote on each one. The theory of our government, runs the mantra, is that at election time we can throw those we disagree with out on their duffs. That, at any rate, is the theory.
 
In practice that doesn’t happen, which means that a government does what it wishes – subject only to elections every four years at which time new issues cloud the old.
 
There is a way that the public can be consulted: a referendum. This is a tool used in many different ways, under different systems – sometimes as a method to get rid of a politician, sometimes to eradicate legislation, sometimes only to go to governments as popular advice.
 
I believe there are issues of such importance that the voter must be called upon to render its opinion and I say that the Enbridge pipelines and tanker traffic are just such issues.
 
On the national scene, in 1992 we had a referendum on changing our constitution when the government could have sought approval of the provinces. This vote was held because the issues went to the root of our social contract.
 
The referendum resulted in heavy debate in the country, especially in BC. Canada turned down the proposed agreement with BC by far the biggest “no” vote.
 
In BC recently we had a referendum on the HST. It was easy to handle on the technical side and the public made its decision.
 
Whether or not that vote was an example of a debate that went to the root of our system of governance is debatable but I give you an issue that clearly does. I refer to the proposed twin pipelines to Kitimat, the subsequent tanker traffic and the expansion of the Kinder Morgan line and its increase in tanker traffic on the south coast. This package of policies to bring bitumen to our coast and ship it by tanker does indeed present a permanent change in policy on an issue that certainly goes to the root of our way of life.
 
That these Enbridge pipelines will leak is now beyond debate and it’s crystal clear that even if the company does get to a spill in wilderness BC, there is nothing it can do – the damage will be permanent. It’s the same, we surely must agree, with a tanker spill in our coastal waters. Enbridge has an appalling record, over 800 spills since 1998. Moreover, apart from temporary jobs in construction and a handful of permanent jobs, BC gets nothing for being the overland conduit for the highly toxic bitumen from the Tar Sands.
 
Prime Minister Harper and his Resources Minister Joe Oliver are talking about this all being a done deal.
 
Does the destruction of our environment not seem to you to be a matter we the public should have a say in?
 
In making this case I understand that it would not disturb First Nations land and other claims.
 
Let’s be clear on this – Prime Minister Harper hasn’t any time for democracy.
 
Because these issues are so important, Premier Clark should hold a referendum but she hasn’t the courage – she’s afraid to threaten Harper on the HST and of more concern, she wants Harper to withhold all support for John Cummins at the local level. That should be easy since Harper and Cummins loathe one another.
 
So to Premier Photo-Op: Madam, BC has jurisdiction over its coastline so let’s have that referendum.
 
Oops! I nearly forgot – is the debate I proposed between you and me on our environmental policy a go?
 
Surely you, with an entire government behind you, can’t be afraid of taking on an old man who would only bring to the debate all he has left – a fire in his belly!
 
Back to business – will you have a referendum and let the people decide what must be the law concerning pipelines and tanker traffic in this province of ours?
 
If not, why not?
 

Share