no pipeline, no tankers, no problem 2

473 posts / 0 new
Last post
epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..exactly quizzical but the neb can only recommend not decide that's up to the fed gov. with van, bby, 1st nations around barrard inlet and now the prov coming out against..this puts enormous pressure on the cabinet. they are well aware of how the cons lost a lot of votes in the last election. no one wants tankers on our coastline at the rate proposed.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..awesome!!!! now it becomes clear why the bc liberal snakes in the grass took the recent position on kinder morgan.

First Nations win court challenge against B.C. over Enbridge pipeline

The B.C. Supreme Court has ruled the B.C. government breached its duty to consult the Gitga'at and neighbouring First Nations on the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline. The decision, announced Wednesday, is seen as a major victory for First Nations that could have an impact on future oil pipeline projects.

Coastal First Nations took the B.C. government to court in January 2015 in a bid to strike down an agreement that gave Ottawa decision-making authority over the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline project. In June 2010, the B.C. Liberals signed an "equivalency agreement" with Ottawa, which effectively gave the federal National Energy Board final say over the environmental assessment process for five projects including the Enbridge Northern Gateway and Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline expansion.

"I don't think we could be happier. This is a landmark decision," said former Coastal First Nations executive director Art Sterritt, who said he and others were "pretty confident" about the odds of winning the case...

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

City, residents file final arguments against pipeline

The worst possible project in the worst possible location – that’s what the City of Burnaby is claiming with respect to the Kinder Morgan pipeline expansion, as the National Energy Board hearing enters the final argument stage for intervenors.

Burnaby outlined the written portion of its argument in a 148-page document filed with the National Energy Board Tuesday, citing a litany of concerns around the project.  

The issues include a lack of social license, inadequate hearings and potential oil spills. The city also raised concerns about risks associated with the Westridge Marine Terminal and the Burnaby Mountain tank farm, both set for expansion should Kinder Morgan secure approval.... 

MegB
epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Market crash robs $2.3 trillion from investors

The stock market rout is starting to get really expensive — destroying $2.3 trillion from the market's top last year and $1.5 trillion in net wealth just this year.

The giant companies that predominantly populate the Standard & Poor's 500 have fallen an average of 8.9% this year — which, when translated into dollars, is real money. Real big money. The S&P 500 is down 8% this year already — including another 2.2% Friday — in what's been the worst start to a year ever. Since the market peak on May 21, 2015, the market has declined 11.7%.

The biggest wealth destroyers in the S&P 500 from the high have been gadget maker Apple (AAPL), pipeline company Kinder Morgan (KMI) and corporate software company Oracle (ORCL) — crushing $218 billion, $63.5 billion and $49.8 billion in market value, respectively, from the May 21, 2015, top....

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Climate activists lock themselves to door of Vancouver National Energy Board office

Some 25 activists led by 350Vancouver marched through the downtown core up to the regional office of the National Energy Board, where they presented a “People’s Injunction” notice. The document demands the suspension or cancellation of the upcoming Kinder Morgan pipeline hearings.

Organizers say that the hearings, which start on January 19, will mark the breaking of a key campaign promise by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to overhaul Stephen Harper’s pipeline reviews.

“You can’t fix a broken car while it’s driving, just like this government can’t rebuild Canada’s environmental regulations while still putting pipelines through Stephen Harper’s reviews,” said Claris Figueira, one of the leaders of the protest....

quizzical

last night on the news they basically said the Liberals were putting the pipelines through as part of the infrastructure projects and going to pay more than their usual share on all infrastructure projects.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Burnaby RCMP arrest seven Kinder Morgan protesters

Burnaby RCMP have arrested seven activists for protesting Texas oil giant Kinder Morgan's drilling activities in the Salish Sea and Burrard Inlet off the southwestern coast of British Columbia. The arrest took place Monday at the Westridge Marine Terminal in Burnaby, a suburb of Vancouver, where demonstrators had camped overnight on a Kinder Morgan barge being used for test drilling.

"You do not have the consent of Indigenous people to work on unceded Indigenous territory," said a protester, caught on camera, through a megaphone to individuals demanding that he and his company vacate the barge.

On Sunday, two Tsleil-Waututh hereditary chiefs had served the company an official "cease and desist" work order for starting its drilling in the water on Jan. 14 without the express permission of First Nations communities in the area....

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..do you have a link quizzical? i'd like to understand what your saying better.

...

Vancouver-Mount Pleasant By-Election: The BC Liberal candidate running in the provincial by-election in Mt. Pleasant in two weeks has been a consultant to Kinder Morgan since 2011. Might want to let your voter friends in Mt. Pleasant know.

LinkedIn

Gavin Dew

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Management Consulting

Trans Mountain Expansion Project Starting April 2011

Stakeholder Engagement & Communications. Trans Mountain is proposing an expansion of its current 1,150-kilometre pipeline between Edmonton and Burnaby. The proposed expansion, if approved, would create a twinned pipeline that would increase the nominal capacity of the system from 300,000 barrels per day, to 890,000 barrels per day. Trans Mountain has been responsibly operating since 1953.

quizzical

no don't have a link epaulo. it was just a report on Global or CTV Edmonton News but there is this now as it's understood  "they need to get their oil to oceanside" before further a d continued development occurs. it could also be a new refinery????

Quote:
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has decided to focus initial stimulus efforts in oil-producing Alberta and Saskatchewan, while waiting to assess whether further stimulus is needed nationwide, according to officials familiar with the plans.

The government is in talks to quickly allocate $1 billion for infrastructure projects in the two provinces — money earmarked by the previous government’s infrastructure fund but not yet delivered, two of the officials said. The move is part of a decision to prioritize new infrastructure in the two provinces because the impact of the oil-price shock is strongest there, said three government officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because budget decisions aren’t yet final.

 

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..have a look at this quizzical. it fits in with what your saying. the gov is getting more desperate by the day to get a pipeline going. all because they have no alternative plans for generating revenue for all their talk.

China open to historic free-trade deal with Canada under certain provisos

China wants to forge a historic free-trade deal with Canada, but a senior Chinese official said this will require Canadian concessions on investment restrictions and a commitment to build an energy pipeline to the coast.

China sent its Vice-Minister of Financial and Economic Affairs to Ottawa this week for discussions with senior bureaucrats about the prospect of negotiating its first free-trade deal with any North American country.

quote:

The Chinese desire for a pipeline may prove impossible to achieve. The new Liberal government effectively killed the Northern Gateway pipeline when it banned all crude-oil tanker traffic on the North Coast of British Columbia, while the B.C. government has refused to support the $6.8-billion expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline. The leading contender now is Energy East, which would deliver oil from Western Canada to refineries and port terminals in New Brunswick and possibly Quebec, but it is years away from regulatory approval.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

What’s A Public Hearing Without The Public?

quote:

The City of Surrey was presenting their final arguments. Like 90 per cent of the intervenors in this process, they are opposed to Kinder Morgan’s pipeline proposal. The City of Surrey has close to 500,000 residents but NEB regulations allow only two participants per intervenor group to attend at any one time. It felt absurd, really: 30-40 police, fire fighters, security guards, an enormous NEB staff and just the two of us, sitting there, in an empty room.

The previous Conservative government was intent on limiting participation and they have succeeded. This is a public hearing into a massive project that will in fact (a fact denied by the NEB panel) affect everyone and only a handful of people are able to witness the process first hand.

This NEB review has been a carefully orchestrated process designed to defeat the public. Knowing how many people will be affected by the outcome of this process and knowing how many people and groups have actively participated, for there to be only two witnesses outside of government and media is astounding. And the new Liberal government continues to allow the public to be shut out.

quizzical

epaulo13 wrote:
..have a look at this quizzical. it fits in with what your saying. the gov is getting more desperate by the day to get a pipeline going. all because they have no alternative plans for generating revenue for all their talk.

China open to historic free-trade deal with Canada under certain provisos

China wants to forge a historic free-trade deal with Canada, but a senior Chinese official said this will require Canadian concessions on investment restrictions and a commitment to build an energy pipeline to the coast.

China sent its Vice-Minister of Financial and Economic Affairs to Ottawa this week for discussions with senior bureaucrats about the prospect of negotiating its first free-trade deal with any North American country.

quote:

The Chinese desire for a pipeline may prove impossible to achieve. The new Liberal government effectively killed the Northern Gateway pipeline when it banned all crude-oil tanker traffic on the North Coast of British Columbia, while the B.C. government has refused to support the $6.8-billion expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline. The leading contender now is Energy East, which would deliver oil from Western Canada to refineries and port terminals in New Brunswick and possibly Quebec, but it is years away from regulatory approval.

ty interesting article and it kinda supports my own thinking and hearing from inside the pipe line industry.

the new Liberal government banned crude oil tankers only in the northern straights, not refined petroleum or natural gas. and they limited it to the northern straights not southern. think their might be another refinery in AB's future. Harper wouldn't have spent a fortune up grading Prince Rupert's port for nothing.

and out of Vanouver can have crude oil  tankers when Transmountain goes through. really the BC Liberals aren't saying no even though the media propaganda says they are. they're weasle wording it.

i feel like helpless in the face of Site C and the needless oil industry forcing piplines...well everything to do with corporations controlling us. i might go back to turtling like everyone else.

i used to believe when i was a little girl out on the logging blocks protesting with my grandparents. now i don't believe at all.

 

Pondering

quizzical wrote:

i feel like helpless in the face of Site C and the needless oil industry forcing piplines...well everything to do with corporations controlling us. i might go back to turtling like everyone else.

i used to believe when i was a little girl out on the logging blocks protesting with my grandparents. now i don't believe at all.

Why so defeatest when Harper has failed to get a single foot of pipeline put in?

quizzical

sadly the proposed pipelines haven't failed and i don't believe they will. keystone was a 3 card monty trick imv.

they actually take time to get the process, support capacity in rural communities  they go through and thousands of workers needed in place, besides all the government stuff, unlike legalizing marijuana which  just means taking it off the restricted list.

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

i feel like helpless in the face of Site C and the needless oil industry forcing piplines...well everything to do with corporations controlling us. i might go back to turtling like everyone else.

..more than 30 years ago site c was proposed. more than 30 years it's been oppossed. this has meaning. not as long ago dilbit pipelines have been proposed and opposed. no pielines as yet have been built. this is an important point whether or not you believe it will eventually be built. it's clear to me we are not helpless. 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Native Americans call on Canada to kill Kinder Morgan's pipeline expansion plan

Lummi Indian Nation members Dana Wilson and Troy Olsen from their reserve Washington to protest the contentious Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. They were hoping to bear witness to the National Energy Board (NEB) proceedings on the project as well, but only one of them could get into the hearing room as the 'plus one' of an intervener.

"We’re here because we care about our future, the seven generations to come," said Olsen after attorney Kristen Boyles presented on behalf of Coast Salish nations in Washington, including the Swinomish, Tulalip, Suquamish, and Lummi.

quote:

A duty to consult

Prior to the American Coast Salish nations participating in the NEB process as interveners, Boyles said Trans Mountain did not consult them once through the course of its stakeholder engagement in Canada. During oral arguments before the panel, she called the company "blind" to the impact its expansion would have on Indigenous people below the border.

"'The U.S. tribes are not Aboriginal people of Canada, so it has to do nothing further,'" she said, describing Trans Mountain's position on U.S. consultation. "Failing to consider impacts on the other side of the border matters."

quote:

Indigenous rights transcend borders

In her presentation, Boyles also presented panelists with the challenge that Canada, as a signatory to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and through its own environmental and constitutional commitments, has a duty to respect the rights of all Indigenous people, regardless of the border separating it from the U.S.

Basic human rights include the right to subsistence and culture, she argued, and if Canada approves a project that impacts these rights, it is not a decision to be taken lightly.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Kinder Morgan protesters take over Burnaby bridge  (with pics)

Their voices rang loudly and clearly on a grey afternoon in Burnaby, B.C.

"NEB is a sham!" shouted protesters, swarming the outer lanes of the busy Willingdon overpass at lunch hour on Tuesday. "Trudeau, we said no!" "Kinder Morgan, make my day, take your pipeline, go away!"

"This project does not benefit us, not only as citizens but as human beings," said Carleen Thomas of the Sacred Trust Initiative for the Tsleil-Waututh Nation. "The scope is so narrow. How can a regulatory process not consider the impacts of climate change?"....


Demonstrators take over the Willingdon overpass in Burnaby, B.C. in protest of the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline expansion and the NEB hearing currently under way. Photo by Elizabeth McSheffrey 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Media Release: Shutting public out of Kinder Morgan hearings “potentially unlawful”: BCCLA

The BC Civil Liberties Association has written to the National Energy Board to call on it to immediately open its hearings into the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain Expansion Project to the public.

“The National Energy Board needs to unlock its doors and let some sunshine in” said Laura Track, lawyer at the BCCLA. “The hearing room has row after row of empty chairs while interested members of the public are locked out. The Board is legally a court, and like the courts it has a duty to make its hearings open and physically accessible. Telling people that they can watch online just isn’t good enough.”

The BCCLA’s letter argues that the National Energy Board, like other courts of law, is bound by law and the Constitution to be open to the public according to the “open courts” principle. The courts have stated that the public must be able to see how the decisions that affect them are administered, and that means that courts and tribunals like the National Energy Board cannot refuse public access unless there is a “serious danger” to be avoided. Hearings must also be forums where the people understand they are free to enter without specifically requesting admission....

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

For anyone who isn't sure that the NEB is a complete industry dominated regulator this article should convince you of the truth. They can't even monitor the existing pipelines and ensure they are safe. They apparently don't even follow up on its orders to companies. 

Quote:

A federal government audit has slammed the National Energy Board, the agency responsible for policing 70,000 kilometres of pipelines in Canada, for not doing its job and properly protecting public safety.

In an extensive 31-page report, Michael Ferguson, the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, found that the controversial NEB "did not adequately track company implementation of pipeline approval conditions, or consistently follow up on deficiencies in company compliance with regulatory requirements."

http://thetyee.ca/News/2016/01/26/NEB-Inadequate-Regs/

quizzical

wellllll......if the NEB is not doing their jobs as proven by this report then they should be fired from their 1/4 million at least salarie jobs just like in the REAL world.

if the Liberas had will to get rid of Harper appointees, which imv they don't, then this would be the time to do it.

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

'Pennies for Billions': Aboriginals Fight Near Giveaway of Pipeline Rights in 1952

Sixty-four years ago, a tiny B.C. Aboriginal community was paid $1,292 for a corporation's right to forever pump oil through its reserve.

Now the Coldwater Indian Band is suing to kill that deal -- a challenge that threatens to derail the $6.8-billion expansion of that pipeline proposed by current owner Kinder Morgan.

The latest step in the fight came last week, when Coldwater representatives testified at the National Energy Board hearing, urging a rejection of the expansion pipeline....

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

This is likely going to found to be a breach of the Crown's fiduciary duty. It is much the same issue that the Musquem won in the Guerin decision from the early 1980's. That case was one of the first significant wins for FN's before the SCC. I kept thinking it was the Sparrow case but that was a different Musqueam win.

Quote:

R. v. Guerin acknowledged that Canada (the federal government) has a trust-like relationship, or “fiduciary duty” towards First Nations, specifically in regards to reserve lands. In other words, the federal government has the obligation to act in their best interest. Chief Justices Wilson and Dickson interpreted this fiduciary duty as stemming from an Aboriginal interest and title to the land, and the Crown’s relationship to Aboriginal peoples. Wilson understood this relationship to be characterized by Section 18 of the Indian Act, which specifies that reserves are held by the Crown “for the use and benefit of the respective bands for which they are set apart,” and that “the Governor in Council may determine whether any purpose for which lands in a reserve are used or are to be used is for the use and benefit of the band"4 (emphasis added). The government demonstrated it did not act in Musqueam’s best interest by not consulting them about the revised terms of the lease.

The concept of “fiduciary duty” has gone on to inform other Aboriginal rights cases as well as the protection of Aboriginal rights under Section 35 of the Canadian Constitution.

http://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/home/land-rights/guerin-case.html

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Kinder Morgan pipeline a ticking bomb in a region bracing for major earthquake, Burnaby residents warn

A group of residents in Burnaby is focusing on the “significant seismic hazard” in the Lower Mainland in its final arguments against an expanded Trans Mountain oil pipeline system.

“A major earthquake could result in ground motion, liquefaction, and landslides that have the potential to damage the pipeline and storage tanks at the Burnaby Tank Farm, with catastrophic outcomes,” according to the Burnaby Residents Opposing Kinder Morgan Expansion (BROKE).

Representing more than 800 residents, BROKE is scheduled to present its oral arguments today (January 28) before the National Energy Board at the Delta Burnaby Hotel and Conference Centre....

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

B.C. union joins First Nations vowing to use law to fight pipelines

A union representing 65,000 workers in British Columbia has signed a declaration vowing to oppose pipelines from crossing the territories of more than 130 First Nations.

The B.C. Government and Service Employees' Union has signed the Save the Fraser declaration, a document of indigenous law banning the Northern Gateway pipeline or similar projects from crossing the signatories' territories.

Union treasurer Paul Finch says the BCGEU is a steadfast supporter of indigenous rights.

He says delegates at a 2014 union convention called on leadership to sign the declaration and it is proud to have made that move today.....

Pondering

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2016/02/04/support-from-mayors-essent...

It is by far the most contentious issue on the federal-provincial radar. Yet, this is one national discussion that is unlikely to be resolved between first ministers. To date, the lead players in the debate have mostly been municipal politicians.

Here are a few of them:

  • Joanne Monaghan was the mayor of Kitimat, B.C., on whose watch a plebiscite was held on the Northern Gateway pipeline in 2014. As the end point for the pipeline bringing oil from Alberta, Kitimat would be home to a marine terminal where tankers would load up. Almost 60 per cent of her constituents voted no, driving another nail in the coffin of the moribund $6.5-billion Enbridge project.

  • Derek Corrigan is the mayor of Burnaby, B.C. The Trans Mountain pipeline runs through the city and its corporate owner, Kinder Morgan, wants to triple its capacity. Corrigan is hardly the only Vancouver-area mayor to oppose the pipeline but he is one of the most vocal. Last May, he told a community meeting he was prepared to be arrested and see his political career come to an end to stop the project. He called last week’s federal announcement of an expanded consultation process and an extended approval timeline a disappointment.

  • Marc Demers is the mayor of Laval, Quebec’s third largest city, and one of 82 Montreal-area municipal leaders who came out against the Energy East pipeline. While most Canadians see Denis Coderre as the face of the region’s opposition to TransCanada’s current plans, Demers has been campaigning hard against the pipeline since early last fall.

  • Gilles Lehouillier is the major of Lévis, across from Quebec City. He turned down TransCanada’s plan to locate a terminal for the Energy East pipeline in his city and remains ambivalent about the project as whole.

  • kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

    Indeed the Trudeau Liberals lied through their teeth in Metro Vancouver because the people oppose the Kinder Morgan pipeline. This was one of the bullshit promises that won the Fiberal's seat in this area.

    Quote:

    Natural Resources Canada appeared to dismiss Corrigan’s request again in a statement on Tuesday.

    Micheline Joanisse, a spokeswoman for Carr, said the National Energy Board is conducting a “thorough, science-based review” of Kinder Morgan’s proposal.

    “The government has committed to regaining public trust by ensuring projects undergo credible and robust environmental and regulatory reviews,” she said.

    “Our plan will include a transition period for projects currently under review to provide some certainty through the modernization process. No project proponent will be asked to return to square one.”

    http://www.thestar.com/business/2016/01/12/burnaby-mayor-asks-trudeau-to...

    Quote:

    At a campaign stop in August 2015, Trudeau told Kai Nagata, energy and democracy director at the Dogwood Initiative, that the NEB overhaul would apply to the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline.

    “Yes. Yes,” Trudeau said. “It applies to existing projects, existing pipelines as well.”

    “Okay,” Nagata said. “So if they approve Kinder Morgan in January, you’re saying…”

    “No, they’re not going to approve it in January. Because we’re going to change the government,” Trudeau responded. “And that process needs to be redone.”

    Trudeau on Kinder Morgan

    Justin Trudeau says if he's Prime Minister, Kinder Morgan will have to go back to the drawing board, saying “the process needs to be redone.” Find out where candidates in your riding stand: http://votebc.ca/

    Posted by Dogwood Initiative on Friday, August 21, 2015

    http://www.desmog.ca/2016/01/15/trudeau-breaking-promise-he-made-allowin...

    epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

    City of Vancouver calls on NEB to reject Kinder Morgan pipeline expansion

    Lawyers representing the City of Vancouver told the National Energy Board Friday that they are opposed to the proposed expansion of Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain Pipeline.

    Standing before the NEB at a hearing in Calgary, the City of Vancouver lawyers asked the NEB not to recommend approval of the pipeline....

    quote:

    Over 5,000 people have filled out an online survey with over 80 per cent of respondents opposed to the Kinder Morgan pipeline expansion proposal. People continue to be encouraged to join the conversation online at #TalkTankers.

    epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

    ..other kinder morgan pipelines in the news.

    Deerfield to pipeline co.: Don’t tread on us

    Local police will be used to protect property owners who refuse to allow Kinder Morgan pipeline surveyors or any other agency or individual onto their land with or without an order from the state Department of Public Utilities.

    Kinder Morgan, which plans a natural gas pipeline through eight Franklin County towns, including Deerfield, has asked the DPU to force property owners along the route to allow surveyors on the land.

    In a letter submitted into the public record at the DPU, Deerfield states its Board of Health has forbidden within the town all activities of Kinder Morgan and will enforce this order. Anyone entering onto private properties, without permission from the property owners, for activities related to the proposed natural gas pipeline will be arrested for trespassing, the selectmen have warned....

    Pondering

    Kropotkin, Trans Canada is suing the US under NAFTA over the Keystone rejection. We could probably be sued for forcing companies to return to square 1 costing them millions of dollars in a useless regulatory process. For that reason the process was added to rather than replaced for existing projects.

    Carr also made the point that it is a political decision. Approval by the NEB does not imply government or parliamentary approval.

    epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

    ..pondering, that didn't stop the liberals from limiting tanker trafic in the north. where they not afraid of being sued by embridge over northern gateway?  

    kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

    Spin it anyway you want. Trudeau, during the election, stood in front of large crowds in the Lower Mainland and lied. Nothing on the file has changed since he made those statements.

    Yes indeed if we cancel any of these pipeline projects it is clear we will be sued under the current corporate rights treaties. Why is that the Liberals signed onto TPP again? All parties that have seen the initial drafts know it contains a steroid enhanced investors rights clause. Trudeau will do what his business masters want him to and like Liberal leaders before him he was willing to say anything to get elected.

    Pondering

    epaulo13 wrote:

    ..pondering, that didn't stop the liberals from limiting tanker trafic in the north. where they not afraid of being sued by embridge over northern gateway?  

    No because there are other ways to transport fuel, like by rail car. That the company wouldn't find that financially feasible is besides the point.

    That they did stop the tanker traffic shows that they were, at least in that case, being responsive to the demands of people.

    They have said that social licence is a requirement and that it is up to the oil companies to get it.

    They added to the approval process.

    We have known all along that it is up to the people to stop the pipelines.

    The Liberals are not about to become Quebec Solidaire. I think it's pretty silly to expect that of them or to condemn them for not being Quebec Solidaire. That isn't the mandate they were elected on.

    He most definitely did not get elected on the promise that he would stop all pipelines nor that he would scrap the process the companies had already gone through. To refuse all pipelines will take political cover especially if we end up having to pay millions of dollars out to oil companies in penalties. It is up to us to provide that political cover by illustrating that it is the people of Canada rejecting the pipelines.

    It isn't realistic to expect the Liberals to tell Alberta and Saskatchewan to go screw themselves.

    Pondering

    kropotkin1951 wrote:

    Spin it anyway you want. Trudeau, during the election, stood in front of large crowds in the Lower Mainland and lied. Nothing on the file has changed since he made those statements. Yes indeed if we cancel any of these pipeline projects it is clear we will be sued under the current corporate rights treaties. Why is that the Liberals signed onto TPP again? All parties that have seen the initial drafts know it contains a steroid enhanced investors rights clause. Trudeau will do what his business masters want him to and like Liberal leaders before him he was willing to say anything to get elected.

    What was the lie? Quote please.

    Because refusing to sign would be pulling out prior to debate. The next step is debate in the house. Unfortunately no one has demanded a debate on CETA before we ratify it and we are almost there.

    The ISDS chapter is reported to be the same in CETA and TPP. CETA was approved by all the provinces so there is reason to believe that they will also approve TPP if they haven't already done so.

    It isn't Trudeau that has to be convinced TPP is a bad idea, it's Canadians. If Canadians are convinced that TPP is a bad deal, then maybe we can stop it. If Canadians think it is too complicated and must be left up to politicians to sort out then it will be ratified.

    kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

    Pondering wrote:

    He most definitely did not get elected on the promise that he would stop all pipelines nor that he would scrap the process the companies had already gone through.

    I have posted numerous links that quote him as saying he would scarp the process but you still persist in spreading disinformation.

    Trudeau wrote:

    “Yes. Yes,” Trudeau said. “It applies to existing projects, existing pipelines as well.”

    “Okay,” Nagata said. “So if they approve Kinder Morgan in January, you’re saying…”

    “No, they’re not going to approve it in January. Because we’re going to change the government,” Trudeau responded. “And that process needs to be redone.”

    Justin Trudeau says if he's Prime Minister, Kinder Morgan will have to go back to the drawing board, saying “the process needs to be redone.

    Pondering

    kropotkin1951 wrote:

    Pondering wrote:

    He most definitely did not get elected on the promise that he would stop all pipelines nor that he would scrap the process the companies had already gone through.

    I have posted numerous links that quote him as saying he would scarp the process but you still persist in spreading disinformation.

    Trudeau wrote:
    “Yes. Yes,” Trudeau said. “It applies to existing projects, existing pipelines as well.” “Okay,” Nagata said. “So if they approve Kinder Morgan in January, you’re saying…” “No, they’re not going to approve it in January. Because we’re going to change the government,” Trudeau responded. “And that process needs to be redone.” Justin Trudeau says if he's Prime Minister, Kinder Morgan will have to go back to the drawing board, saying “the process needs to be redone.

    They did not approve it in January. Why is that? It's because he added to the process. He has also reiterated (through Carr) that even if the NEB process leads to approval that doesn't mean the government has to approve it.

    If he approves a pipeline that does not have social licence then you can call him a liar. If he gains the agreement of First Nations and mayors and there are no major demonstrations against whatever he approves then he isn't a liar.

    kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

    No Pondering he lied and I get to say that. You can spin it anyway you want it He was definitive during the election and it won him Lower Mainland seats. The Mayor's of Burnaby and Vancouver both think this new process is window dressing and no substantive change. I'll take their word for it rather than trust Liberal spin on the issue.

    epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

    Pipeline proposal omitted key pollutant: FVRD lawyer

    quote:

    In the regional district’s verbal submissions to the National Energy Board last Friday, Maegen Giltrow said the FVRD is concerned about the effect of that tanker traffic on the valley’s funnel-shaped airshed, which traps pollutants close to the ground. She said the district spends considerable time trying to limit air pollution, and criticized Kinder Morgan for omitting ozone from its health assessments.

    “Fraser Valley’s fundamental concern is that while ground-level ozone is one of the most high-profile, well-studied and significant ground-level contaminants in the Fraser Valley airshed, ozone is not included in the human health risk assessment of Trans Mountain’s submission,” said Giltrow, who also presented submissions for the City of Abbotsford, and the Township of Langley. As presented, the pipeline plans “fails to identify and evaluate a key risk of the project.”

    epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

    Pondering wrote:

    epaulo13 wrote:

    ..pondering, that didn't stop the liberals from limiting tanker trafic in the north. where they not afraid of being sued by embridge over northern gateway?  

    No because there are other ways to transport fuel, like by rail car. That the company wouldn't find that financially feasible is besides the point.

    That they did stop the tanker traffic shows that they were, at least in that case, being responsive to the demands of people.

    They have said that social licence is a requirement and that it is up to the oil companies to get it.

    They added to the approval process.

    We have known all along that it is up to the people to stop the pipelines.

    The Liberals are not about to become Quebec Solidaire. I think it's pretty silly to expect that of them or to condemn them for not being Quebec Solidaire. That isn't the mandate they were elected on.

    He most definitely did not get elected on the promise that he would stop all pipelines nor that he would scrap the process the companies had already gone through. To refuse all pipelines will take political cover especially if we end up having to pay millions of dollars out to oil companies in penalties. It is up to us to provide that political cover by illustrating that it is the people of Canada rejecting the pipelines.

    It isn't realistic to expect the Liberals to tell Alberta and Saskatchewan to go screw themselves.

    ..that (the bolded) can be said of all pipelines. why make that distinction for northern gateway? 

    Pondering

    epaulo13 wrote:

    Pondering wrote:

    epaulo13 wrote:

    ..pondering, that didn't stop the liberals from limiting tanker trafic in the north. where they not afraid of being sued by embridge over northern gateway?  

    No because there are other ways to transport fuel, like by rail car. That the company wouldn't find that financially feasible is besides the point.

    That they did stop the tanker traffic shows that they were, at least in that case, being responsive to the demands of people.

    They have said that social licence is a requirement and that it is up to the oil companies to get it.

    They added to the approval process.

    We have known all along that it is up to the people to stop the pipelines.

    The Liberals are not about to become Quebec Solidaire. I think it's pretty silly to expect that of them or to condemn them for not being Quebec Solidaire. That isn't the mandate they were elected on.

    He most definitely did not get elected on the promise that he would stop all pipelines nor that he would scrap the process the companies had already gone through. To refuse all pipelines will take political cover especially if we end up having to pay millions of dollars out to oil companies in penalties. It is up to us to provide that political cover by illustrating that it is the people of Canada rejecting the pipelines.

    It isn't realistic to expect the Liberals to tell Alberta and Saskatchewan to go screw themselves.

    ..that (the bolded) can be said of all pipelines. why make that distinction for northern gateway? 

    Because the argument I was responding to is that by blocking tanker traffic the Liberals blocked the pipeline therefore could be sued through NAFTA. I responded that I don't think that is the case. Blocking the tankers may lead to the company deciding the pipeline isn't worth it but that is up to the company. The Liberals can't be sued for blocking the pipeline because they didn't block it. 

    Trudeau made it very clear that he considers it the PMs responsibility to get Canada's resources to market including oil. He will make a genuine good faith effort to accomplish it. To do otherwise would be political suicide. Not even the NDP opposes all pipelines on principle.

    Lofty goals are great; unrealistic expectations are just stupid. We know that corporations are far too involved in government and hold great sway over government actions. So much so that only massive public pressure and courts can stand in the way of their influence. We also know that there are powerful diplomatic pressures brought to bear on countries to cooperate with US geo-political goals from trade agreements to military actions. (Isn't it weird that we never actually declare war anymore?)

    Trudeau is going to try to get pipelines approved. He has a majority so massive pressure will be brought to bear on him to approve them. Even if he didn't have a majority the Conservatives would all vote in favor, the NDP probably against, so it would still be up to him. Saying no to pipelines will be extremely politically costly.

    The only political cover he has to refuse pipeline approval is massive social resistance. He can say he can't push them through based on massive public outcry. Certainly the Conservatives will heap blame on him but he can shift it to the oil companies failure to obtain social licence which he has said since day one is a requirement and is up to the oil companies to obtain.

    Pondering

    kropotkin1951 wrote:

    No Pondering he lied and I get to say that. You can spin it anyway you want it He was definitive during the election and it won him Lower Mainland seats. The Mayor's of Burnaby and Vancouver both think this new process is window dressing and no substantive change. I'll take their word for it rather than trust Liberal spin on the issue.

    You get to say it. I doubt it will sway anyone. No matter how long and drawn out the process the NEB is going to approve the projects with "conditions" added to pretend they have addressed the people's concerns.

    If the mayors of Vancouver and Burnaby (and Montreal) remain against the projects and have the public's support then I don't see how anyone can claim that the oil companies have obtained social licence.

    The more you claim that Trudeau is a liar etc. the better it is for him if and went he refuses pipelines based on lack of social licence. You'll turn him into a hero that stands up  oil corporations as the trade deals get ratified with the ISDS included.

    epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

    UBC board to make final decision on whether to dump fossil fuel investments

    quote:

    Investments tied to oil, gas and coal companies make up about 10 per cent of the university's endowment.

    In 2014, UBC students voted 77 per cent in support of divestment. Faculty voted similarly the following January, 62 per cent in favour of selling off the school's fossil fuel holdings within five years.

    In the wake of the student vote, UBC created a responsible investment policy that set out five conditions to meet before it would consider divestment from any industry. That includes providing evidence that the school's financial interests would not be harmed.

    Concordia University in Montreal became the first Canadian university to adopt a partial divestment policy in December 2014, though that measure only applies to a $5-million fund — a fraction of the school's $130-million endowment.

    The University of Calgary, McGill University in Montreal and Dalhousie University in Halifax have all decided against divestment.

    Pondering

    epaulo13 wrote:

    UBC board to make final decision on whether to dump fossil fuel investments

    quote:

    Investments tied to oil, gas and coal companies make up about 10 per cent of the university's endowment.

    In 2014, UBC students voted 77 per cent in support of divestment. Faculty voted similarly the following January, 62 per cent in favour of selling off the school's fossil fuel holdings within five years.

    In the wake of the student vote, UBC created a responsible investment policy that set out five conditions to meet before it would consider divestment from any industry. That includes providing evidence that the school's financial interests would not be harmed.

    Concordia University in Montreal became the first Canadian university to adopt a partial divestment policy in December 2014, though that measure only applies to a $5-million fund — a fraction of the school's $130-million endowment.

    The University of Calgary, McGill University in Montreal and Dalhousie University in Halifax have all decided against divestment.

    The oil industry is now a pyramid scheme. It's all about who will be left holding the bag. Divestment isn't just the right thing to do morally, it's the right thing to do with all kinds of funds that are owned by non-oligarchs.

    epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

    ..i agree pondering. unfortunately ubc didn't.

    UBC board of governors votes against divestment from fossil fuel industry

    The University of British Columbia's board of governors has voted against dumping the university's investments in fossil fuels.

    The school's finance committee brought a motion not to support divestment, but instead to create a so-called sustainable future fund.

    The fund would include a portfolio mandate for low carbon emissions and be seeded with an initial allocation of $10 million.

    Investments tied to oil, gas and coal companies make up about 10 per cent of the university's $1.4-billion endowment...

    epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

    Council approves deal with pipeline company for new Ledgeview clubhouse

    Abbotsford council gave the thumbs up Monday to a deal that will see Kinder Morgan Canada provide $1.3 million for a new clubhouse at the city-owned Ledgeview Golf and Country Club if the company's proposed twinning of its Trans Mountain Pipeline is approved by the federal government.

    Mayor Henry Braun said a new clubhouse would transform Ledgeview, which would have to close for several months for construction of the twinned pipeline.

    Council voted six to one to approve the deal, with Coun. Patricia Ross the one voice opposed and Coun. Les Barkman absent. Prior to the vote, council heard from Lynn Perrin, of the anti-pipeline PIPE UP Network, who said it was "not appropriate" for the city to sign such an agreement while the case remains before the National Energy Board, given that Abbotsford is an intervenor in the case....

    epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

    Why We Need to Keep 80% of Fossil Fuels in the Ground

    quote:

    So here are the numbers: We have to keep 80 percent of the fossil-fuel reserves that we know about underground. If we don’t—if we dig up the coal and oil and gas and burn them—we will overwhelm the planet’s physical systems, heating the Earth far past the red lines drawn by scientists and governments. It’s not “we should do this,” or “we’d be wise to do this.” Instead it’s simpler: “We have to do this.”

    And we can do this. Five years ago, “keeping it in the ground” was a new idea. When environmentalists talked about climate policy, it was almost always in terms of reducing demand. On the individual level: Change your light bulb. On the government level: Put a price on carbon. These are excellent ideas, and they’re making slow but steady progress (more slowly in the United States than elsewhere, but that’s par for the course). Given enough time, they’d bring down carbon emissions gradually but powerfully.

    Time, however, is precisely what we don’t have. We pushed through the 400 parts per million level of CO2 in the atmosphere last spring; 2015 was the hottest year in recorded history, smashing the record set in … 2014. So we have to attack this problem from both ends, going after supply as well as demand. We have to leave fossil fuel in the ground.

    quote:

    But in fact it’s not a hopeless task. We’ve begun to turn the tide, and in remarkably short order.

    If you understand the logic of the Keep It in the Ground campaign, for instance, then you understand the logic of the Keystone pipeline fight. Pundits said it was “just one pipeline,” but efforts to block it meant that the expansion of Canada’s tar sands suddenly, sharply slowed. Investors, unsure that there would ever be affordable ways to bring more of that oil to market, pulled tens of billions of dollars off the table, even before the price of oil began to fall. So far, only about 3 percent of the oil in those tar sands has been extracted; the bomb is still sitting there, and if we block pipelines, then we cut the fuse.

    And the same tactics are working elsewhere, too. In Australia, there was unrelenting pressure from indigenous groups and climate scientists to block what would have been the world’s largest coal mine in Queensland’s Galilee Valley. Activists tied up plans long enough that other campaigners were able to pressure banks around the world to withdraw financing for the giant mine. By spring 2015, most of the world’s major financial institutions had vowed not to provide loans for the big dig, and by summer the mining company was closing down offices and laying off its planning staff.

    quizzical

    we can leave the oil in the ground and other fossil fuels but it doesn't mean another country or countries won't be filling in on the global sales we used to have.

    there'll be a no gains on climate change globally. the same amount will still be consumed, it'll just be coming from somewhere else.

     

     

    epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

    quizzical wrote:

    we can leave the oil in the ground and other fossil fuels but it doesn't mean another country or countries won't be filling in on the global sales we used to have.

    there'll be a no gains on climate change globally. the same amount will still be consumed, it'll just be coming from somewhere else.

     

    ..that is a very real and possible outcomes quizzical. maybe more than 80% possible. some folk believe (i lean this way) that all we can do is plan for what happens after the collapse. financial colapse will come first i imagine before ecological collapse. how do we care for ourselves then. do we do some apocalyptic fascism or will we be deomcratic. never to early to start planning and organizing. what we can achieve today in implementing alternatives will go a long way into the future.

    quizzical

    epaulo, i don't believe in standing in false purity. imv it's the ultimate hypocrisy.

    we should be making the money off of it and moving to alternatives with the money from it.

    in the future, as a very poor nation, because of opting out for reasons of false ego purity, we won't have a choice.

    imv our only hope is to nationalize it.

    epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

    ..i report what i see here on babble. i report on the struggles and their basis for existing. i report what they say and how they feel about things. i don't make it up and sometimes my point of view coincides with others i post about. in no way do i seek purity. who are you referring to that does?

    ..the push for nationalization just isn't there. certainly not from current parties. 

    Pages