Tag Archives: rafe mair

Clark, Harper, Enbridge Taking Suicidal Risks With BC’s Future

Share

Today, because events are moving so quickly, a twofer for you.
 
First, Premier Clark is in one hell of a jam and it’s scarcely improved with a man who I bet left the inner staff of Attila the Hun to join with Madam Photo-op by name of Ken Boessenkool, who amongst other clients worked as lobbyist for Enbridge for two years! What the hell reason could she give for this kind of move?

This woman is out of control. She’s in a political hotbox like President Gerry Ford was when he took over the mess Nixon left him. In fact she’s in a box Houdini couldn’t have escaped.

She’s trying to distance herself from the disgraceful reign of Gordon Campbell and now finds herself in the midst of the worst environmental fight probably in history. The proposed Enbridge Pipeline and resultant tanker traffic is straight from the Gordon Campbell/Fraser Institute playbook and it isn’t working out quite like the Liberal advisors had expected. In fact, Clark is facing, and knows she’s facing a political storm that makes Bill Vander Zalm’s troubles look like a kid’s fight in a sand box.

The trouble is, the public is onto them. It’s becoming clearer and clearer that a rupture or spill is inevitable and that the word “risk” has been replaced by “certainty”. Clark has this problem: the project only has the support of the “right” and the pretty far right at that. This problem wasn’t seen by the likes of Patrick Kinsella and other handlers – it’s called believing your own bullshit.

The NDP, and, of course the Greens have staked out the “no bloody way” voters and you might think well, so what’s the problem?

It’s called The Conservative Party and John Cummins. Without them, Clark might have been able to hold all the non NDP vote and been able to hold on. I doubt that because the government is in deep doo doo on so many fronts. With the Conservatives in the picture it’s Adrian Dix’s dream come true. Not only is their enemy divided but he has a good chance with the voter who perhaps doesn’t like anybody very much but tends to vote right rather than left.

If Ms. Clark were surrounded by happy campers, perhaps the Libs could hang on. The cold fact is that she only had one caucus member who supported her leadership and because he was given a cabinet seat – and then screwed up – she has a nest of adders in her caucus, many of whom will be looking at their own ridings and grasping at the life saver as they jump ship.

The pipeline/tanker issue has Clark buried. She knows it’s a terrible idea for the province and the people but can’t say so because she’ll lose her supporters.

She can’t say yes without jeopardizing her election chances.

She’s apparently without sufficient courage to say “no” and say “to hell with the right”, inside or outside the party, run on that stance then say, “Mr. Dix, we both agree on the pipeline/tanker issue now lets get down to the issue of which party should run this province.”
 
She doesn’t have the jam to do that so even the faint chance of a May 2013 victory is all but gone.

————————————————————————————————————————

Secondly, let us get some things straight for the times ahead – there will be leaks and spills from the pipeline and tankers no matter how much trouble Enbridge goes to avoid them. We’re being asked to commit environmental suicide – by Enbridge, the federal government and, by strong inference, Premier Clark.
 
My old and perhaps late friend, Bud Smith, says we cannot demand perfection. The trouble is, that is precisely what is demanded from Enbridge and its tanker clients because anything less will permanently damage the world’s last great rainforest – it cannot be remedied.
 
The route Enbridge’s pipelines would travel is for the most part inaccessible except by helicopter, meaning that even if there were measures to fix an oil spill (there aren’t) there is no way it could be handled (see map below).

The proposed pipeline crosses several mountain ranges and nearly 1000 rivers and streams, including at least three major ones where hundreds of thousands of salmon spawn. This is a region which caribou, grizzly bears, other species of bear, including the rare Spirit Bear, deer and moose inhabit. It is, in short, an ecological treasure.
 
But let’s play along with Enbridge and let’s say that there is only a one in 100 chance of a leakage. Look at the map and see where that 1 in 100 is going to strike…are you going to gamble away our wilderness on these odds?
 
Forget about the environment for a moment and look at it as a cost-benefit analysis. Given that the leakage will come in a wilderness which will likely be only reachable by helicopter making any equipment for a clean-up out of the question, is the financial gain to BC worth this likely consequence?
 
This is a critical question, for the record is clear – you simply cannot clean up an oil spillage wherever it may occur.
 
The fact is, except for a few low paying white collar jobs there is no gain for BC. We are letting Enbridge use our wilderness to transfer Alberta’s toxic gunk to Kitimat to be shipped down our highly sensitive coast line to Asia and America. Does that sound like a good deal to you?

I don’t want to deal with economics here but simply the wilderness of the province of British Columbia.
 
We must understand that Enbridge has an unbelievably bad track record. Since 2002 their American subsidiaries alone racked up 170 leaks, and the company itself had a staggering 610 leaks from 1999-2008, including a 2007 explosion in Minnesota that killed two men and brought it $2.4 million in fines – this in addition to a 2003 gas pipeline explosion that killed 7 in Ontario. More recently there is the Kalamazoo River spill in July 2010 which will never be cleaned up.
 
I leave it thusly:
 
Is there any set of circumstances, other than an assurance of God Himself, under which you would approve any pipeline going through our precious wilderness?

Share

Rafe Challenges Premier Photo-op to a Debate

Share

I have good news for our premier.
 
If what I’m about to say is wrong, you have nothing to worry about. You see, Premier, I have this radical notion that the mood of the voter has changed – you evidently don’t, making it obvious (sorry to talk as if you are a slow learner) that if you just paddle along, down the happy old stream, why the voters, so afraid of the bad old NDP, will put you right back in government in 2013.
 
In fact, if I’m wrong and you’re right, may I respectfully suggest that some tactics are natural:

1. Keep right on charging us the HST. No matter that if you could start it in an instance you could stop immediately. I’m sure that the voter knows that you’re really trying hard on this matter.

2. Ignore the Fish Farm issue – most of the jurisdiction is now with the Feds so just wash your hands of the whole mess. Some might suggest that you should now speak up for BC and urge the Feds to get rid of this monstrous rape of our precious wild salmon resources, but I’ll betcha most people will overlook the fact that you don’t want to piss off the feds just when you’re trying to make a deal on that pesky HST.

Even though I and others will, tiresomely remind voters that it was under your stewardship that this horrific mess came about you can depend upon the fact that the voters will still have faulty memories.

3. On the question of those private power plants you should assume that I’m wrong to say that voters are pissed over losing all those rivers to foreign companies to make power BC Hydro must pay for yet doesn’t need. I’m obviously a bad British Columbian who doesn’t realize voters don’t care about BC Hydro going broke, and trust in your bosom buddies at the Fraser Institute who say it would be a great blessing if all crown corporations and agencies went into private hands. (By the way, Madame Premier, did you know that a fairly recent “Fellow” of the Fraser Institute believes in “consensual slavery”? If, for example, a young single Mom can’t feed, clothe and educate her kids she should be permitted to enter permanent bondage to some guy with lots of loot! Look it up…I can give you the guy’s name but your government should, I know you would agree, do its own research.)

4. If I’m wrong about the pipeline issues clearly you should maintain your position. Just in order for people to understand what that position is, can we infer from recent comments that you don’t think the Enbridge pipeline from the Tar Sands to Kitimat should be dealt with by the National Energy Board? And that I’m wrong again to point out that a spill from such a pipeline is inevitable and the ability of Enbridge to get to, much less do anything about it is nil? Again, with respect, might I suggest that your people “google” Enbridge/Kalamazoo?

5. I am always on about tanker traffic and simply oppose it as being a sure source of catastrophe. Again, with respect and just for clarity, might I infer from your statements that you don’t understand that the Enbridge Pipeline must result in about 300 tankers a year out of Kitimat, down the most beautiful and most dangerous coastline in the world? It’s like the old song about Love and Marriage – “you can’t have one without the other.” I should add, Madame Premier, that I’m sure you know about the new capacity and planned huge expansion of the Kinder Morgan line to ship Tar Sands gunk through Burrard Inlet.

No, of course, a person of your attainments must understand the big picture here and just think that in this modern world we need gunk from the Tar Sands going to China more than a pristine environment.
 
I do have this little query Ms. Clark: what does BC get out of all this except short term labour? Are we getting royalties? Any security against damages certain to happen?
 
6. I have been making a lot of noise about First Nations rights where land has not been ceded. I believe First Nations have rights and, following the Supreme Court of Canada, ownership of land not yet dealt with. Following the theory that the opposite of Rafe’s opinions are the right ones, you should continue to ignore these interests and just barge ahead – after all, we’re only talking about a bunch of Indians here and you will surely make the case that Rafe’s concerns about their rights are not in the best interests of the Province. Standing against Rafe and all those who stand with First Nations, especially where the environment is at issue will surely be understood by voters for what it is – loyalty to all your old friends. Surely that trumps concerns for touchy-feely things like birds, bears, fish, caribou that don’t make you a nickel for election expenses.
 
May I make another assertion on your behalf, namely that the NDP are fiscally irresponsible and that your government is business-oriented. I want you to know my stance so that you can be clear what you oppose.
 
Here’s Rafe’s take:
 
Party philosophies and positions tend to change over time and the coming of new issues – surely you and your party would agree to that. I believe that the NDP has learned much more from its mistakes than you have learned from yours.
 
I say that there are things the public should know about.
 
The NDP from 1991-2001 doubled the Provincial debt. From 2001-2011 the Campbell/Clark government more than tripled it.
 
I understand that your claim is that the Liberal debt was caused by events over which you had no control. If that’s the case you must be saying that when you put together your 2009 budget and ran an election on it you hadn’t heard of the 2007 stock market crash and the 2008 massive Recession.
 
At the same time – I hope I’m not embarrassing you Madame – when the NDP were in power the Asian Flu occurred, all but obliterating that market for our forest products. I would like to say that then-Opposition Leader Gordon Campbell pitched in and offered bi-partisan support in our province’s time of need but, alas, such was not the case.
 
So there we have it Premier – your view of things and those who are of another persuasion.
 
Disagreement on all fronts – so let’s you and me have a debate!
 
Looks like pretty easy pickings for you but I’m used to being beat upon and will do it just so you can demolish all my silly, left wing notions with one swing of the bat.
 
Surely you, a premier with all the resources of government behind you isn’t afraid of an octogenarian who’s not running for anything. (I’m not running away from anything either – are you?)
 
So, let’s do a TV debate on these matters – any time, any place – and let the chips fall where they may.
 
 

Share

Fighting the Corporate Take-Over of BC

Share

I write this not just as a New Year’s thought but also as one looking personally at his ninth and presumably last decade. And a sad scene I see.

From the commencement of time ownership and control of societies have been shared, preposterously unfairly, between “them that has and them that doesn’t”.

It continues today as never before. What the super rich don’t own, they control. 100s of thousands of jobs, thanks to the computer, have been exported to lands where labour is dirt-cheap and where benefits are minimal if they exist at all.

We are witnessing the corporatization of our government by the powerful. It’s an easy task, for the ordinary MP or MLA, by reason of our rotten system, does what his or her leader orders. The decisions of society are no longer made by parliaments – if they ever were – but in the corporate boardroom.

A question or two:

What say did you have re: fish farms? What say have you about the huge damage these farms present? What say have you now on new licenses?

What say have you had in the destruction our rivers by large and very rich foreign companies? Have you agreed that it’s a good thing that these private sector companies get a sweetheart deal, where they sell power to BC Hydro for more than twice what it’s worth, forcing Hydro to buy this power at a huge loss when they don’t need it?

BC Hydro is technically bankrupt – is that what you thought you would have when the Campbell government set forth its private energy policy, turning over power production to rich companies like General Electric?

What say did you have in the privatization of BC Rail where the Campbell government gave our railroad away in a crooked deal that the government hushed up?

What about the Enbridge Pipeline scheduled to ship hundreds of thousands of barrels of Tar Sands gunk (aka bitumen) from the Alberta to Kitimat? Have you had a say in this matter? The only reason to send this gunk to Kitimat is so that it can be shipped down our coast through the most dangerous waters in the world – have you had a say in this?

Of course you haven’t and it’s instructive, I think, to note that Premier Clark will only express her opinion after the rubber stamping National Energy Board has deliberated.

Premier Photo-Op doesn’t seem to understand that the approval of the pipeline means oil tankers at almost one a day sailing down our pristine coast line.

Is the premier that dumb?

Or is it that her government is prepared to approve tanker traffic?
 
The companies and politicians talk about minimal risk – the plain, incontrovertible fact is this:

THESE ARE NOT RISKS BUT CERTAINTIES WAITING TO HAPPEN.

The issue facing BC can be simply stated: will we give up our land and resources to the private sector and, while we do it, will we accept the destruction of our environment?

The Corporations say that these efforts, fish farms, private power, pipelines and tankers will being lots of money and lots of jobs into BC.

I ask two questions – what money and what jobs? Building fish farms, private dams and pipelines bring construction jobs, mostly to off shore crews, and leave behind a few caretakers to watch the computers. The profits go out of the province into the pockets of Warren Buffet and his ilk.

This is the fact Premier Clark must ponder and soon: will the public of BC simply accept these destructions of our beautiful province? Will they just simply shake their heads and go quietly?

In my view they won’t. Through the ages the long-suffering public takes so much and no more. Read your history, Madame Premier – there comes a tipping point where the public will take no more and in my judgment we have reached that point.

I beg of you, Premier, shake the scales from your eyes, look and think! This isn’t a right wing versus left wing matter but a question of right and wrong.

The last thing in the world I want to see is violence but I tell you fair that the decision rests upon you – if you don’t deal with the fish farmers, the energy thieves, the pipelines and tankers there will be violence, and that will be the legacy of the Campbell/Clark government.

Share

Free Speech, Censorship, and Why Ryerson’s Journalism Program Can Go F#@k Itself

Share

On November 24th a “roast” was held for me and it was a fantastic night.

During my speech I raised the “Ryerson” incident that was recently revived.
 
About 10 years ago I received a call from a young woman from the Ryerson School of Journalism who asked if I would write the main article for their “Annual”. I accepted and asked no money in return.
 
I asked her if she knew who I was and what I did. She assured me that she did.
 
Addressing myself to the graduates, I did an essay on free speech and concluded with the statement that they had all better be “ready to self censor or that they would be censored”.
 
Some weeks later the same young woman called me again and was obviously in some distress as she told me that my article was “unsuitable”.
 
“Was it badly written?” I asked.
 
“Not at all – it was very well written…it’s just…unsuitable.”
 
“To whom?” I asked.
 
“It was just unsuitable.”
 
“Why?” I asked.
 
“It’s just unsuitable – but we have a couple of options here. We can pay you $100.”
 
“I don’t want your money,” I said.
 
“The second option is you can do another article.”
 
“There is a third option,” I replied. “You can all go fuck yourselves!”
 
My God! One of the top schools of journalism rejects an article on free speech! If ever I needed verification of my statement, here it was!
 
A few weeks later I happened to be interviewing the deputy dean of Ryerson and I told him this story, off air. He protested vehemently, assuring me he would look into the matter and would get back to me in a few days.
 
I never heard from the man again.
 
Fast forward to about three weeks ago when I got an email from a young woman from Ryerson asking me if I would give her an interview for the Annual. I agreed and made a time and date in Lions Bay for the chat. She was delighted and couldn’t wait – so she said.
 
A few days later I received an email from her saying that the subject, being put to a lot of journalists across the country, was “your biggest disappointment in your career,” and asking me what my answer would be. I immediately replied “the censorship of my article for Ryerson School of Journalism.” That happened to be true.
 
She wrote back saying that this wasn’t really what she was looking for.
 
Perhaps a day later she sent another email.
 
“While I would love to conduct the interview, the issue is not that you are criticizing Ryerson or the Review (which we have no problem with), but rather that what you wish to talk about doesn’t exactly fit in with our theme. I really want to stress the fact that this is not a cancellation due to the fact that you are angry with our publication; it is because this series is specific to “most” tales. Examples from previous videos show journalists talking about their dumbest moment on a deadline, their most awkward meal, etc. And while your story is interesting to be sure, it is not a “most” something from your journalistic career. I hope you understand.”
 
Somehow Ryerson doesn’t quite understand that a journalist who has fought for years for free speech in this country would think that being denied it was a big disappointment.
 
Let me now go to 1990 when another “roast” in my honour was held. I asked that all proceeds go to the UBC School of Journalism and with some help from Jimmy Pattison, a scholarship in my name was set up and when it was handed out I was asked to make the presentation.
 
Of course I agreed and was asked to say a few words, which I did, warning the graduates that when they got into the Canadian media they would either self-censor or be censored.
 
I have never been asked back! A scholarship in my bloody name and I don’t get to make the presentation.
 
The upshot of this is that the Canadian media is censored in the absence of appropriate self-control by the journalist, as demonstrated twice by the #1 or #2 journalism school in the nation and repeatedly for a decade by my old alma mater, the University of British Columbia.
 
How does this censorship happen?
 
For the most part, it’s simply an understanding that some questions and some subjects for columns and articles are just “not on”.
 
Let’s go back to 1991-2001 when the NDP governed BC. They were, even by the standards set by the Vander Zalm government before them, pretty awful. Every political pundit in the province, including me, held their tootsies firmly to the flame for that decade. Especially expert in their shots were columnists, one of whom brought them down almost single-handedly over the “Fastcat” ferries and Mr. Clark’s naivete over a gambling licence.
 
Now it’s 2001 and Gordon Campbell is in power and almost in the drive home from government gives a huge tax rebate to better off folks. The bumbling and fumbling, the loss of BC Ferries, BC Rail and the virtual bankruptcy of BC Hydro made Glen Clark’s misdeeds look liked childish pranks. It’s been a decade of paying off political pals, resulting in the government that was supposed to be fiscally superior more than tripling the real provincial debt.
 
The zealous media that thrashed the NDP has become a snoozing, slothful syndicate of political poodles reporting only that which simply couldn’t be ignored as news; the ignoring being done on a daily basis by the same columnists who did their duty and then some during the NDP years.
 
I hasten to observe that I don’t blame the journalists themselves – they have families, mortgages and kids’ education to pay for and I don’t think I would have been any better if I didn’t have a legal profession to fall back on.
 
Probably the worst example of media favouritism is the Vancouver Sun, whose editor in charge of the editorial pages was a fellow of the Fraser Institute, a right wing (to say the least) “think tank” that churns out big business babble to a fare-the-well. If you wish an example you only need look at the number of times Mary-Ellen Walling, the fish farmers’ flack, and environmental whores like Patrick Moore, get op-ed columns with no similar access to the other side of these environmental debates.
 
This is not mere mental meandering but very practical – when you see what’s happening with wild salmon because of farmed fish cages, what’s happened to BC Hydro and our rivers because of sweetheart deals it’s been forced to make, what’s happened and is happening to lakes to be mined, to say nothing of the pipelines from the Tar Sands, then tankers down the coast, you must ask yourself where has the mainstream media been? The answer is short and clear: Up Big Business’ ass.
 
You simply cannot have a functioning democracy without a media that keeps pressure on the government as they go. That doesn’t mean that the government isn’t entitled to praise when they do good things but that their every action is assessed with a jaundiced eye as in days gone by.
 
It must always be remembered that the government has unlimited use of public funds with which to bombard the public with their spin.

I close with a bit of doggerel slightly altered to fit:

You cannot hope to bribe or twist,
(thank God!) the BC journalist
But, seeing what the man will do
Unbribed, there’s no occasion to

 
As A.J,Leibling put it “Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one.”

 

Share

Alex G. Tsakumis: A Tribute to Rafe Mair

Share

Read this heartfelt tribute to Rafe Mair, written by conservative blogger and investigative journalist Alex G. Tsakumis following last week’s 80th birthday celebration of Rafe.

“I was privileged to attend my pal Rafe Mair’s birthday roast last night. It was a truly eclectic mix of about 200 media personalities,
politicians and Rafe fans. He was feted by friends and colleagues, led
by the incomparable Shiral Tobin, who was hysterically funny and
terribly endearing as host. In no particular order: Damien Gillis, Rick Cluff, Jon McComb, Red
Robinson, Mayor (of Lions Bay) Brenda Broughton, John Cummins, Stewart
Phillip, Tex Enemark, Joe Foy, David Beers (for whom my respect grows on
a daily basis) and a host of others took turns skewering Rafe both on
and off stage–but praising him too…

…Every morning, without fail, Rafe dared us to face our fears–of
course, after he dangled them inches from our collective face and
foretold of our peril should we refuse his thoughtful remedy. There was
no one in the history of Canadian broadcasting that provided that kind
of educated, articulate, expressive, emotional perspective. Rafe
singularly identified where entire governments went wrong, and then lent
his considerable intelligence, free of charge, to the very same targets
of his often devastating comments, only to deliver pertinent solutions
and sweeping policy where there was nothing. He’s still doing it. In my recent interview with him, where the
tables were turned and I did the asking, he was more persuasive, topical
and fluent than commentators half his age.” (Nov. 25, 2011)

Read full blog post: http://alexgtsakumis.com/2011/11/25/a-tribute-to-rafe-mair/

Share

Rafe’s 80th Roast a Big Success!

Share

Thank you to all those who helped make last night’s celebration of Rafe Mair’s 80th birthday a smashing success! A packed house at Vancouver’s Wise Hall was treated to entertaining and inspiring words from a wide range of speakers – each representing the different areas of Rafe’s long and storied career in politics, media and the environmental movement.

The list of memorable roasters included CBC broadcaster Rick Cluff, radio legend Red Robinson, David Beers of The Tyee and Grand Chief Stuart Phillip – plus surprise appearances by retired NDP MLA Corky Evans and Chief Marilyn Baptiste of the Tsilhqot’in peoples battling Prosperity Mine. The program was expertly MC’d by Rafe’s former producer and current CBC program director Shiral Tobin and culminated in a moving speech from the man of the hour, Rafe Mair.

The proceeds from the roast will be a boon to our work at The Common Sense Canadian – bad news for the likes of Enbridge, Marine Harvest and Taseko Mines; good news for citizens who care about managing our public resources for the public and environmental good.

A special thank you to Rafe’s family who came a long way to be there, to all our roasters, volunteers and to the Wise Club for playing host to such a memorable evening.

Last night’s event was well documented, so watch for video highlights next week!

Share

Why Independent Media Needs Your Support – And How You Can Help TheCanadian.org

Share

This, dear friends, is a plea for help. Let me illustrate that with an anecdote.
 
The great American attorney, Clarence Darrow once had a client praise him asking, “How can I help?” to which he replied, “Madam, since the Phoenicians invented money there’s only been one answer to that question.”
 
The Common Sense Canadian needs your help, which is especially so when you see what we and other organizations are doing up against corporations and governments which have an endless amount of money. For example, in the struggle to keep our power in BC’s hands we are up against General Electric and both the federal and provincial governments. With fish farms we’re fighting both senior governments and an industry which is immense.
 
The same applies with pipelines and tanker traffic – the enemy is both governments and endless corporation lucre.
 
Our need is magnified many times over by the corporatization of the major media.
 
We at the Common Sense Canadian also back, wherever we can, those fighting to save agricultural land and prime wildlife preserves. There are many valiant people and organizations with which we ally ourselves and they with us.
 
The leadership provided by Alexandra Morton, for one example, has had an extraordinary impact; as has the leadership of Donna Passmore, Rex Weyler, Jennifer Lash and Independent MLA Vicki Huntington. In naming these names I must say that there are many more, like the tireless Joe Foy and Gwen Barlee of the Wildlife Committee and indeed valiant fighters all around this province.
 
Now let me make this clear – we are not overwhelmed by the forces of environmental evil. Indeed we relish the fight; we’d prefer not to have a fight but if that’s what the bastards want, that’s what they’ll get. Most of us have been up against these forces for years and we know there will be many scars to come.
 
We at the Common Sense Canadian see ourselves as an outlet for others which is why we make space available for people to express their views. I would urge you to look at the quantity and quality of regular contributors. I assure you that you’ll be impressed by those who regularly contribute – for free on a regular basis. We also encourage others to pitch a blog through our pages.
 
In the absence of a mainstream media we try to take their place.
 
The task we face is bigger than groups like us, and you who help us, have ever faced. The governments and large corporations are coming at us on a massive mission that will scar our wonderful province for all time.
 
Every time we blink another army appears – recently it’s been the “frackers” who, going deep in the ground, with a massive use of water which they pollute beyond repair in the process, to capture huge quantities of gas not available through traditional drilling methods. This hasn’t been presented to us the citizens who need to know the answers to many questions; where do you get the water? Is that water that could and should be going to farmers and hydro electric facilities? What happens to that water after its been blasted with great force during the “fracking” process? Does it get into the water table and become unsafe to drink?
 
These questions are wrapped up in the issue of Site “C”. Quite apart from the normal and serious environmental concerns, is this power going to be delivered to fracking operations, coal mines and the Tar Sands so that we use an environmental nightmare to assist the biggest polluters on the planet?
 
These and many other questions should be determined by our elected officials after thorough consultation with all citizens and after a thorough airing in the House of Commons and the BC Legislature.
 
The environmental processes in place are a terrible disgrace. I’ve said this before but I’d almost prefer a root canal without  anaesthetic than go to another. They are stacked. with all awkward questions being “out of order”, complete with a corporation-government cosiness that makes you want to vomit.
 
We can and do contribute to the common cause – just look at the great work my colleague Damien Gillis does with his camera and his insightful articles he does while I use my lungs and computer to try to get the message out. (To paraphrase the great Robert Benchley “it took me 15 years to learn that I couldn’t write but by that time I was too famous to quit.”)
 
As mentioned earlier, we the citizens face a force of environmental degradation, to the immense profit of outsiders who thus are unconcerned about environmental and, yes spiritual, matters with only the people as our soldiers. That won’t deter any of us but you can keep us in the fight with financial help.
 
Please join us, if you can, at my roast on Thursday at the Wise Hall 1882 Adanac Street where for $35 ($40 at the door) you can expect some very well known people give me the mickey as I enter my 9th decade.

Also, watch this coming Monday for the start of our Common Sense Canadian membership drive for – as we unveil our hip new t-shirt that promises to the must-have fashion item of 2012!

Share

Canada: Peace, Order, Good Government…and Violence?

Share

A version of this article first appeared on the website of Strategic Culture Foundation, a Russian online paper.

Let me explain the title to this article. Canada’s overriding mission, according to its constitution. is “Peace, Order and Good Government”, yet I see violence ahead and It’s all about the Tar Sands in Alberta, the worst polluting project in the world, and proposed pipelines from them to the British Columbia ports of Kitimat and Vancouver.
 
As an inseparable companion is the Keystone XL pipeline from the Tar Sands to Houston, Texas.
 
Sniffing anxiously around is China which has $75 BILLION invested in the oil pit.
 
It must be noted that in the middle of the mess that’s a-brewing are First Nations, who, in contradistinction to many aboriginals elsewhere, carry a lot of legal weapons arising out of Supreme Court of Canada decisions and their rights to unceded territories in BC, and it may be within that power that they can stop pipelines – and their stated goal is to do just that.
 
The proposed pipelines to Kitimat through BC will be sited through one of the last real wilderness areas in the world. There are two pipelines – one to carry the Tar Sands gunk, officially called bitumen, and the other to take back to Alberta the condensate which is mixed with the Bitumen to allow it to flow through the pipeline. Enbridge, the pipeline company, has an appalling record on spills and time taken to respond.
 
Of huge importance is the shipping of this gunk down the coast of BC, arguably the prettiest and most treacherous coast in the world.
 
First Nations, plural, have unceded land where they have traditionally fished and hunted for centuries. All along the pipelines and down the coast the various nations have said, “no way”. And as to the tanker traffic, the huge Exxon Valdez spill in 1989 remains burned in their memories.

Meanwhile, on the south coast of BC, another pipeline battle is mounting around KinderMorgan’s plans to turn Vancouver into a major shipping port for the Tar Sands. The company wants to boost the existing Trans-Mountain Pipeline, designed to supply the Lower Mainland with oil for local uses, from 300,000 barrels to 700,000 barrels a day, with hundreds of Suezmax tankers shipping toxic bitumen through the Salish Sea en route to Asia and the United States.

The stakes of this issue were ratcheted up a notch when the First Nation in whose traditional territory the pipeline terminates and the tankers depart from – the Tsleil-Waututh (“People of the Inlet”) – took a strong stance against the expansion of this pipeline and tanker traffic through their waters.

Up until recently, KinderMorgan may have figured it was going to slide its pipeline under the radar, while protests raged against Enbridge and TransCanada (the company behind the Keystone XL). But it looks very much now as though they won’t be so lucky.

Hanging over these proposals is the uncomfortable truth that spills from the pipelines and tankers are not a threat but a reality waiting to happen. On the tanker issue, for example, Environment Canada, scarcely full of Greenies, says that there will be a spill of 1,000 barrels every four years and a 10,000 BBL spill in 9.
 
Here’s the chilling fact: not only are the spills a certainty, no matter what size the spill the damage will be horrific. The Enbridge pipeline passes through Caribou feeding grounds and over and through a great many fish bearing rivers and streams including three major salmon spawning rivers.
 
I would suggest readers go to this site to see the Enbridge spill into the Kalamazo River in Michigan and note that Enbridge’s record on this spill is typical and it hasn’t been cleaned up 15 months later (and never will be). Remember, this spill happened in a populated area, not the wilds of British Columbia.
 
Let’s take a look at the Keystone XL pipeline to Houston. Readers have no doubt read about the rallies including movie stars in front of the White House. President Obama has postponed the decision until 2013.
 
Here’s the crunch – this postponement means that huge pressure now will be mounted against by the government of Canada and within hours of the President’s announcement the Canadian Minister of Finance, Jim Flaherty said, “it may mean we have to move quickly to ensure that we can export oil to Asia through British Columbia”. (Cynics like me note that the formal environmental hearings of Mr Flaherty’s government have scarcely begun, confirming what we always knew – these hearings are a farce.)
 
That is a declaration of war.
 
I am a peaceful man who hates violence so much he turned off the first Harry Potter movie. I have lived in, and loved my province for a lifetime of nearly 80 years and I can tell you that there’s going to be violence and that I will be lying in front of the first bulldozer. The largest of the First Nations along the proposed pipeline has contemptuously turned down a 10% piece of the action. Unless that’s just part of a dickering process  –I don’t think so – First Nations will pose a huge actual and political problem for the Federal Government.
 
Moreover, it’s not just the pipelines that will be resisted – I don’t believe that coastal First Nations can be bought off and the pipelines are useless without the tanker traffic.
 
What President Obama and Finance Minister Flaherty have done is to all but ensure violence. Obama’s postponement until 2013 really means more like 2014 since the Keystone XL people know that they must, as a minimum, come up with an alternative to avoid the environmental concerns with their present plans. Trans-Canada is already trying to push the project forward with a few minor tweaks, but that may be wishful thinking as the have to get by the growing numbers of environmentally sensitive people who will have been emboldened by Obama’s action. In the meantime the pressure on BC will substantially increase.
 
This brings in China. It’s not just the money, although even to China, $75 billion is a hell of a lot of dough; what’s also at stake is China’s need for oil. What will China do? It sure as hell isn’t going to just turn around and find another pen to play in. Ironically, the BC premier has just been in China trying to sell them BC lumber and BC coal!
 
Let’s pause and catch our breath. Are we not supposed to be weaning our way off the use of fossil fuels? Are we not supposed to be finding alternative sources for our power and fuel needs? Yet here we have the Premier of British Columbia flogging coal, for God’s sake! And we have the national finance minister unable to wait to destroy our province in order to jack up production and sales of the worst fossil fuel of the lot!
 
It would be folly and unhelpful for me to predict how China will deal with the US but clearly British Columbia can be and will be hit hard.
 
Doesn’t that mean that Canadians will buckle under pressure?
 
That’s what Mr. Flaherty hope, but I believe he’s whistling past the graveyard. He doesn’t know or understand British Columbians.
 
Back in 1992 the federal government held a national referendum on proposed changes to the Constitution which we were told would solve all our problems with Quebec. One of then-Prime Minister Mulroney’s senior aides told me and my radio audience that if the referendum failed, the country would immediately collapse. In the face of extreme forces such as 100% of business and 100% of labour, plus both the federal and provincial governments, British Columbians turned it down by just under 70%!  Every single constituency (the votes were counted according to provincial election boundaries) turned this deal down and it was fascinating to see that every ethnic area voted just as the rest of British Columbians did. In short, British Columbia is very different than other provinces – it doesn’t accept threats.
 
There is always the danger that the forces for expanding the Tar Sands to Asia will abandon the highly controversial Enbridge pipeline for the lesser known expansion of the KinderMorgan line to a tanker terminal in Burnaby, next to Vancouver. 
 
If that’s the plan, the war simply shifts battlefields. And the First Nations and their supporters have already signaled their intention to fight back.
 
Take it from me, as they sing in The Music Man, “There’s Trouble in River City” – a heap of trouble.

Share

Rafe in the Tyee: Keystone XL Delay Increases Pressure for BC Pipelines, Tankers

Share

Read this editorial from Rafe Mair in The Tyee on the increased pressure to build oil pipelines from the Tar Sands through BC in the wake of Obama’s decision to send the proposed Keystone XL pipeline to Texas back to the drawing board.

“Now that the Obama administration has delayed its decision
on whether to approve the Keystone XL pipeline from Alberta’s oil sands
to refineries in Texas, we had better gear up for quite a fight here in
British Columbia. The pressure just rose to push through two dangerous
oil sands pipeline projects running through our own province.” (Nov. 14, 2011)

Read article: http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2011/11/14/Oil-Spill-Threats/

Share

Rafe on Supporting the Common Sense Canadian – Plus Our New Op-ed Blog

Share

The Common Sense Canadian has been going well over the past year-plus and this seems to be a good moment to reflect on what we’ve done, not done, and will do.
 
First please understand that we are just two people. Our funding is very limited and, to speak boldly, we need considerably more. We’re deeply grateful to those who have donated and special thanks to those who have signed on for a regular donation. We’ll be launching a special promotion next week for November and December, encouraging more of you to become monthly sustaining contributors – even $5 a month helps, as it’s funding we can count on into the future.
 
Second, one way you can immediately be of help is to attend my 80th birthday Roast on November 24th next – tickets cost $35 in advance ($25 for students) and all proceeds go to the Common Sense Canadian. (Incidentally, the name derives partly from Thomas Paine’s pamphlet Common Sense which sparked the American Revolution. Paine is a great hero to Damien and me.)
 
The most critical issue we now face comes from the success of this offering. Our “hits” and regular emails from readers tell us that we’re making contact with a large number of British Columbians and that has become a unique “problem” – more and more people want us to get involved with the war they’re having with the establishment over an environmental issue in which they are heavily involved. And, in a moment I’ll tell you what we’re going to do to assist these wonderful folks in BC and Canada.
 
For historical reasons Damien and I find ourselves with three issues that dominate our time – Fisheries, private power projects (IPPs) and power projects generally, and pipelines/tankers. This by no means dulls our concern about other issues such as the Gateway Project and its many facets, mining issues such as Raven coal project on Vancouver Island and the so-called Prosperity Mine and other issues that  so many of our courageous citizens are involved in.
 
We have set up a page called “Your Voice”, where we welcome op-ed blogs on issues we don’t regularly cover (you can read our first entry there now – a piece from David Williams, President of Friends of the Nemaiah Valley, on the cultural impacts of the proposed Prosperity Mine). This column will be accessible from our home page and also included in our weekly mail-outs to readers. I want to emphasize this – we take all these issues seriously and just because a blog is published doesn’t mean that we won’t help in other ways as well when the opportunity arises.
 
We reserve the right to edit for errors and length as well as issues of good taste and defamation – and we can’t guarantee that we’ll publish every piece. But if you have an issue you’re dealing with and would like to inform more people about it, please contact us with your proposed op-ed.
 
Damien and I welcome this opportunity to expand the horizons of the Common Sense Canadian.
 
We must be our own media in this province of anaemic mainstream media who peddle, uncritically, the establishment line.
 
Please join us!
 
Rafe and Damien
 
 

Share