Christy Clark is playing

Christy Clark is playing desperation politics to try and sway public opinion. For months she took the weak stand of awaiting the results of the NEB JRP, even though various statements made by her clearly showed she was pro-pipeline. Then when the damning NTSB report was released, she felt compelled to take a stand, or maybe I should say, her handlers/advisors brainstormed to see how they might spin that result to their benefit. Picking a fight with Alberta over Royalties, a constitutional non-starter, was obviously done to create a situation that she felt she might benefit from. Many busy people in BC spend little time keeping abreast of the NGP situation apart from catching sound bites on the 6 pm news and Christy and her cohorts must have thought putting a price on the pipeline passage (along with the 4 obvious requirements) might gain her some traction with those busy people. Christy likes to talk about families and transparency - truth is, she is becoming completely transparent - she says whatever is expedient in the moment, to try and gain popularity, but can't seem to see that her phoniness is what people are seeing and don't like. Her recent appearance on 100 Huntley Street, where she claims she uses the Bible for inspiration to lead the Province, is not borne out by her 'talking points' or her actions as Premier. Fortunately, the polls conducted since her fight with Alberta seem to indicate that her disapproval rate hasn't changed. She retains the support of those that would vote for anyone just to keep the NDP out. She's discredited herself with her fellow Premiers and we can only hope that her time as Premier will be, at worst, over by May 14, 2013 (sooner would be better). No doubt she and her handlers/advisors will continue to try and find ways to spin this to fit their agenda, which is to see the NGP go through. Fortunately for BC, it will never happen without united First Nations approval and that, at the moment, seems highly unlikely. Many of us will be ready to stand with FN's if this madness progresses to the point of the evil one (Harper) actually giving the NGP the nod.

fair share?

She has established what she is now she is just negotiating a price!

Its a canard

When I heard Clark's statement I interpreted it as a cunning ruse to shift the focus of the debate so that people are talking about provincial rights rather than about environmental concerns. Seems to me that it worked wonders.

Clark

This is a very good article and colin65' s response is right on.
British Columbiians do not want this pipeline in this area, built by this Company period.
Robyn Allen, in his economic analysis for the review board, finds that this is a bad deal for Canada in that it will increase the cost of oil for all Canadians. Further, he fould that Enbridge is using a limited partnership for the project to insulate Enbridge from liability in the event of a major spill. This has been admitted by Enbridge in a letter issued through thier lawyers.
Why the need to limit liability if the risk is benign? Further, the plan is to bring first nations people into the limited Partnership which would actually make them liable for damage caused by the pipeline.
In addition, several of the proponents for the pipeline include the Chinese state owned oil industry, Alberta and Nexen ( which the Chinese are attempting to purchase). Where is the national interest here?
Finally, BC has much to lose as any spill, especially in Coastal water, will devastate BC tourist and fishing in the area. Spills in the rivers and streams may permanently destroy fish spawning grounds. Who bears the cost for this. Those working in the industry for sure and BC. You can be sure Alberta will not step up with cleanup or compensation funds.
Clark is wrong to demand money. She should demand that the pipeline be killed. The right to get product to market cannot trump environmental safety.

Review panel

Given the comments by Harper,restrictions on the review panel, and the rights to meaningful consultation for First Nations people, this pipeline will be challenged in court and will likely be overturned. The consultation must be meaningful and in good faith. Harper has indicated that the decision has been made so consultation and this hearing is not in good faith nor meaningful.

The blind leading the blind.

Some people are just unable to grasp the concept of something having value beyond measure. It's infuriating to me that these types of people are constantly put in charge despite there being people truly capable of leadership out there. What's worse is that most people are more concerned about 'Teen Mom' than they are about ecology security...

Harper's downfall

The tar sands projects will be Harper's downfall and Christy Clark is going down with him. The evidence regarding climate change is mounting as more and more people witness the disasters like fires and droughts increasing around the world. Even the church groups are mounting a campaign against Harper's decisions regarding the environment especially his lack of concern for protecting it from oil giants like Enbridge.

the lineup

In case of civil unrest:

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=403d90d6-7a61-41ac-8cef-902a1d14879d

Environment at ministers discretion:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/budget-bill-gives-harper-cabinet-free-hand-on-environmental-assessments/article4105864/

Agree w Hakuin - it's an end-run to divest FN's peoples' of their lands.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harper-government-to-introduce-law-to-allow-private-property-on-reserves/article4464434/

If I was a paranoid-type, I would say this is a lead-up to a gloves-off, throw down confrontation, not by choice, but by design.

Robyn Allen

I would like to point out that Robyn Allen is a woman. Here is a link to her presentation on the Northern Gateway project using Enbridge's financial numbers and illustrating clearly the inadvisability of this project for the public good. http://thetyee.ca/Video/2012/07/22/RobynAllen/?utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=230712

Robyn

I was unaware whether Robyn was a man or woman
Here is a link to her full report. Very good but long, technical and detailed. I would recommend the Executive summary though.

www.afl.org/index.php/Download-document/566-2012-January-Allan-Northern-Gateway-Assessment.html

Robyn

Ms. Allan has also come up with the only sensible response to the entire Gateway review shambles. Rather than continue to participate in the farcical "Joint" Review Process, the answer to which has already been dictated by Steve Harper [via his Divine Right veto power], B.C. still ahs the right to bail out of the JRP and establish our OWN environmental review. Ms Allan has already pointed out the mechanism in her April "open letter" to premiere Crispy Clark--30 days notice via Clause 6. Wake up your favourite provincial politician, remind them there's an election coming, and get them to help INVOKE the CLAUSE SIX FIX

Northern Gateway Alternative

Some might recall when Quebec negotiated its deal with Newfoundland to buy hydroelectricity at a fixed rate for decades and transmit it over lines owned by Quebec. It sure worked out well for Quebec.

So here's a thought. Alberta sells BC the oil at the border of Alta/BC. BC builds and maintains the pipeline and resells the oil itself.

In this way BC could "build in" the cost of constructing a proper line, the cost of proper monitoring and also "build in" the risk of spill expenses.

BC could borrow the construction money (good credit rating and money is cheap today).

If the money numbers don't add up, that is, the cost of a proper, well maintained and insured line is so expensive that BC cannot profit by the enterprise, then a HARD QUESTION might be: how can Enbridge?

if Vimy made Canada

then the Pipeline War will restore Canada.

So Run the Pipeline South......

....as part of the Keystone XL system, then branch west to whichever port of call and ship the filthy goo from there.

Oil Company Guarantee!

If the pipeline is to be built, ALL product moved through it must be upgraded prior to transit. This is essential to minimize the damage caused by a spill.

AND the producer oil company must guarantee to cover all damage costs and claims related to a spill until the oil has crossed the 200 mile limit in the Pacific Ocean. The producer oil company can hammer the pipeline company, the almost-fraudulent tanker companies, and the asset-less purchasing oil companies who exist for tax avoidance alone.

The Enbridge discussion brings a whole new meaning to exactly what's limited when we say Enbridge Ltd. The limit now seems to be to avoid liability for environmental damage.

Speak now...insist now...act now...on behalf of your children...it is their education and healthcare in a future time that will be sacrificed to cover the slippery liability so evident in this pipeline story.

Dreamers everywhere!

Latest news is that the pipeline may run north of us instead!
Just wonderfull, like the polluted water would not enter our shores when a tanker breaks up somewhere?

no it won't

that NWT politico hack is just posturing. Inuits are good shots.

pipeliners

When foreign corporations said " THE ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS ARE TO HARD", the Harper Conservatives said " WE WILL CUT THEM, MASTER".
When the Foreign corporations told the Clark Liberals to "Jump", they said "How high, Master".
Build refineries here,not pipelines.
Don't export more Canadian jobs.

alive

Anywhere but east it seems......

Ban diluted bitumen aka heavy oil

I think there should be a ban on the production of "diluted bitumin" aka heavy oil considering how toxic it is. My opinion is based on information I viewed in a Tyee article, "Vancouver Oil Sands Tanker Spill Could Cause Evacuation Nightmare", by Mitchell Anderson, published Jun 4th 2012. I am sharing a couple of excerpts that caught my attention.

... "diluted bitumen" is more abrasive, corrosive & acidic than conventional crude, & typically must be piped under higher temperatures & pressures -- raising the risk of pipeline failures."

"The additional risk is that the toxic solvents used to dilute bitumen can quickly evaporate when released into the environment, increasing public safety risks & complicating clean-up efforts if the heavy bitumen sinks into water."...

"Oil sands operators have considered the composition of diluted bitumen blends a trade secret & regulators are often not provided detailed information on the types of chemicals they might have to respond to in the event of a spill & subsequent public health emergency. What information is available is not reassuring. The Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) for one common variety of diluted bitumen warns: "High vapour concentrations are irritating to the eyes, nose, throat & lungs; may cause headaches & dizziness; may be anesthetic & may cause other central nervous system effects, including death. Hydrogen sulphide gas may be released. Hydrogen sulphide may cause irritation, breathing failure, coma & death, without necessarily any warning odour being sensed. Avoid breathing vapours or mists."

Expert testimony last year to the U.S. Congress also flagged the possibility of off-gassing bitumen solvents "exploding with catastrophic results." The MSDS sheet from Imperial Oil states "Extremely flammable; material will readily ignite at normal temperatures... may release vapours that form flammable mixtures at or above the flash point."

Why on earth are we even marketing this stuff? This is poison.

So how is that HST working for you all?

You want to see Canadian democracy in action, you got it front and centre.

The discourse has changed from 'whether the pipeline should even exist' to 'how are we gonna divvy up the money'....

and the revenue neutral HST still keeps getting collected because that is precisely how Canadian shamocracy works.

I hope to see a few of you with me on the front line, physically blockading the 'wrecking crew' when they start breaking ground in BC.

Premier Clark's 5 lousy conditions after missed deadline for JRP

Clark and Harper are merely posturing re: 'Joint Review Panel' to draw attention away from settled case law in Canada.
Not having sold nor ceded land in the north coast of beautiful BC, or its seaways through Grenville Channel and Principe Channel, the House of 'Wii T'a Lii owns all of the resources in its traditional tribal territories. That is according to natural law, tribal law, constitutional law and international law (upon which case law has been decided.
What we are witnessing are the unlawful decisions and actions of renegade (turncoat) governments in BC and Canada, fiduciaries all to the House of 'Wii T'a Lii. MPs, MLAs, AANDC, lawyers, consultants, the courts know this but plead otherwise, as in fraud, treason and genocide since the unconstitutional 'Indian Act, 1876' was foisted upon First Nations by our fiduciaries, breaching the law of fiduciaries, not to mention the law of contracts.
Inasmuch as BC and Canada have demeaned their own laws, especially 'the supremacy of God and the rule of law' (Preamble), they immediately cease to be legitimate governments. First Nations and the voters of Canada possess a natural law right to alter, or abolish, these 2 corrupt governments.
What can be clearer?