Results 1 to 48 of 48

Thread: Trudeau Approves 2 Pipelines

  1. #1

    Default Trudeau Approves 2 Pipelines

    No new thread on this great accomplishment by Prime Minister Trudeau.

    Especially gratifying is that the CONS on this Board are rendered mute.


  2. #2

    Default

    Not quite. He had to announce something to take peoples minds off the Castro fiasco.
    As for 'great accomplishment', isn't that what government is there to do. Create wealth through innovation and jobs.
    The announcement is great but talk is cheap. It's the end results we all want to see.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  3. #3
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,573

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Not quite. He had to announce something to take peoples minds off the Castro fiasco.
    As for 'great accomplishment', isn't that what government is there to do. Create wealth through innovation and jobs.
    The announcement is great but talk is cheap. It's the end results we all want to see.
    This was in the works long before Castro passed and Trudeau's comments although it does help them there.

    And yes, this what government is supposed to do and the Liberals and Alberta NDP seem to be doing a better job it here than the CPC and PCs before them. Whether they can get done to completion remains to be seen but this is more progress than we've seen in awhile.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  4. #4

    Default

    The new and upgrading of pipelines it seems have been in the works forever. I'm now wondering how the provincial/federal governments are going to handle the protesters that will no doubt be out in full force obstructing anything that moves along those routes. One cannot compare Tater Tot to Trump but I should imagine Trump would have no time for protesters. Hopefully our elected representatives are in the same frame of mind as nothing will get done.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  5. #5

    Default

    And if it has been Harpie/Prentice (...or even better for you, in a far-removed alternate universe, Harpie/Smith) announcing the same you'd be crowing with delight, no reservations voiced.
    I think of art, at its most significant, as a Distant Early Warning system that can always be relied on to tell the old culture what is beginning to happen to it. —Marshall McLuhan

  6. #6
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    390

    Default

    I'm assuming these pipelines could also be used to pump water around the place ? Perhaps water (someday) will be the new oil.

  7. #7

    Default

    When did I ever crow about Harpie?. The thing is that some of you that worship Trudeau somehow think you are a superior breed. News flash, your not. You seem to think that we all should be hanging onto Trudeau's every word and worship the very essence of him. As if he's some knight in shining armour lauding it over his kingdom. Most Canadians are just not that into him. The ones that are into him can go right ahead and bask in whatever it is you see in your dear leader. Go ahead, have your sweet dreams about him.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  8. #8

    Default

    Just spent 2 days on the road to and from Saskatchewan which gave me time to reflect on this announcement and I seem to have a different take away than some.

    1) Northern Gateway ...project the cancellation of this pipeline project was a given the moment Justin was elected ... no surprises

    2) H3 project ... No choice. If it had not been approved and the 50+ year old pipeline had failed the responsibility would have been the government's. If Enbridge had not been allowed to increase capacity they would have turned to government for funding for safety upgrades and if they refused responsibility for any environmental disaster would have been blamed on the government.

    3) Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain ... Can't see it been be built in my lifetime, great politics though and both Trudeau and Notely know it in my opinion.
    - Trudeau comes off looking like he is working for the middle class and with the cancellation of Northern Gateway his government appears to be building compromise while supporting Notely's Climate Change Plan.
    - Notely looks great and a leader with her government's climate change plan.
    - Both know that the legal actions and protests (which will become extreme and violent) will keep this line from being built in my lifetime in my opinion.

    My opinion does not come in a vacuum ... over the last few weeks there have been several oil and gas consultants and advisers on the radio discussing the overall outlook and pipelines. All were in agreement on Kinder Morgan. Expect it to be approved and not built. All were in agreement that the legal actions would be long and involved as well as the protests becoming massive, extreme and violent making the "Dakota's" protests look like a playground scuffle.

    This will be seen as the Green Extremes stand and they will do anything to stop it (including violence) IMO. I believe the only way it would get built is with military intervention and I don't believe Trudeau will go near that option. My thoughts were reinforced when CHED interviewed Mike Hudema from Green Peace immediately after the original announcement, it wasn't even specifically what he said but how he said it. So much for social license and activists as I see it.

    Sorry to be a spoiler but that is what the evidence says to me and I find it upsetting, frustrating and disappointing.

    I would rather be wrong

    In my opinion

  9. #9
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,573

    Default

    You may well be right about the Trans Mountain but the factors that would lead to it failing are not from either the federal government or the Alberta government. Personally I think it has reasonable odds of succeeding but it will be a challenge. It sounds like Kinder Morgan has done a lot of work and brought most of the First Nations on the route onside and that's a huge accomplishment.

    As for Northern Gateway, I think the obstacles to it, given it was a new route, requiring a new port, and tankers coming into a previously new area for them, were much greater than Trans Mountain. If Trans Mountain is a huge challenge then Northern Gateway was never going to happen.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull View Post
    You may well be right about the Trans Mountain but the factors that would lead to it failing are not from either the federal government or the Alberta government. Personally I think it has reasonable odds of succeeding but it will be a challenge. It sounds like Kinder Morgan has done a lot of work and brought most of the First Nations on the route onside and that's a huge accomplishment.

    As for Northern Gateway, I think the obstacles to it, given it was a new route, requiring a new port, and tankers coming into a previously new area for them, were much greater than Trans Mountain. If Trans Mountain is a huge challenge then Northern Gateway was never going to happen.
    Paul

    I agree the problems now faced with Kinder Morgan are not federal or provincial ... my point is both leaders had full knowledge, the announcement makes them look good politically and if/when it doesn't get built "it's not their fault". But they knew IMO. But hey, nice announcement ...

    as I said above I'd rather be wrong.

    I also agree that Kinder Morgan has done their due diligence, research and honourable negotiations. Hell it's even on an existing route for crying out loud.
    But none of that or Notely's Climate Change Plan means a darn thing to the activists and green extremists. People out of work, families effected also means squat to them.

    All that matters to these activists and extreme folks is this is their best chance to prove that what they can do on the world stage and they will do what ever they have to to push their agenda. Alberta and anyone else that gets hurt are just collateral damage. In my opinion

    I also agree with your comments re: Northern Gateway

  11. #11
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,799

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks
    But none of that or Notely's Climate Change Plan means a darn thing to the activists and green extremists. People out of work, families effected also means squat to them.

    All that matters to these activists and extreme folks is this is their best chance to prove that what they can do on the world stage and they will do what ever they have to to push their agenda. Alberta and anyone else that gets hurt are just collateral damage. In my opinion


    I don't disagree with you. But those people represent maybe 10-20% of the population, the hardcore environmentalists that will oppose any project no matter how desperately needed. There's no convincing those people. But I think it's a bit much to claim, as you essentially are, that Trudeau and Notley are somehow using those people and their opposition as cover to make a decision that they otherwise wouldn't have. You seem to be staking out a viewpoint, without coming right out and saying it, that they would not have approved Trans Mountain had they thought it would be likely to be built, as if that somehow should minimize their leadership over the past year and a bit in laying a lot of the groundwork to make this decision possible. The decisions they've made have made it much likelier that the pipeline will be built, as compared to anything the Conservatives would have done or had attempted to do over their 10 years. Why is that so incredibly difficult for you to admit, seemingly?

    Again, you aren't going to change the mind of the hardcore environmental lobby. But by making the decisions they have in regards to climate policy, banning tankers on the North coast, shoring up oil response on the South coast, and so on they're hoping to defuse opposition amongst the other 80% or so of the electorate that can be convinced that the pipeline is a necessity, even if it does come with costs and risks. As opposed to the Conservative strategy of shoving it down people's throats while paying nothing more than lip service to the real environmental costs, and being surprised when the greater populace says "whoa, wait a minute".
    Last edited by Marcel Petrin; 01-12-2016 at 09:04 AM.

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    3) Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain ... Can't see it been be built in my lifetime
    Wanna bet? Shovels will be ground in late 2017 (or at least, tree clearing), ramping up for it now.

    Earlier on Wednesday, Kinder Morgan Canada president Ian Anderson said he's confident there will be shovels in the ground later next year now that Ottawa has given the green light to the contentious Trans Mountain expansion project.

    ...

    "This is a defining moment for our project. It's also a defining moment for the country," Anderson said on a conference call.
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...line-1.3874478

    Northern Gateway is a shame - the deep water port, aboriginal equity stake, and that it would be built on a TUC, you would have thought, would have count for something. But in fairness, as much the fault of the Conservatives as the Liberals re how it proceeded.
    Last edited by moahunter; 01-12-2016 at 09:22 AM.

  13. #13
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,573

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull View Post
    You may well be right about the Trans Mountain but the factors that would lead to it failing are not from either the federal government or the Alberta government. Personally I think it has reasonable odds of succeeding but it will be a challenge. It sounds like Kinder Morgan has done a lot of work and brought most of the First Nations on the route onside and that's a huge accomplishment.

    As for Northern Gateway, I think the obstacles to it, given it was a new route, requiring a new port, and tankers coming into a previously new area for them, were much greater than Trans Mountain. If Trans Mountain is a huge challenge then Northern Gateway was never going to happen.
    Paul

    I agree the problems now faced with Kinder Morgan are not federal or provincial ... my point is both leaders had full knowledge, the announcement makes them look good politically and if/when it doesn't get built "it's not their fault". But they knew IMO. But hey, nice announcement ...

    as I said above I'd rather be wrong.

    I also agree that Kinder Morgan has done their due diligence, research and honourable negotiations. Hell it's even on an existing route for crying out loud.
    But none of that or Notely's Climate Change Plan means a darn thing to the activists and green extremists. People out of work, families effected also means squat to them.

    All that matters to these activists and extreme folks is this is their best chance to prove that what they can do on the world stage and they will do what ever they have to to push their agenda. Alberta and anyone else that gets hurt are just collateral damage. In my opinion

    I also agree with your comments re: Northern Gateway
    Given your criticism of these decisions what do you think the federal government should have done?

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  14. #14

    Default

    When something is in the national interest maybe governments (provincial & federal) should strengthen or initiate new laws when it comes to protesters. I don't mean going out and being extremely rough with them but longer prison terms and bigger fines. They should also follow the money of who is backing these protesters. If the same faces can show up day after day protesting they either are trust fund kids or have some form of income. Special interest groups should not be able to hold up necessary infrastructure. Yes, a pipeline is part of the infrastructure that is needed. Protesters have hi-jacked the pipeline projects for far too long. It's time to rope them in.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  15. #15

    Default

    Just caught part of the CFRN News at 12. People who are involved in these new/upgraded pipelines were talking about civil disobedience and the safety of workers on these pipelines. They said that the police will be called in and measures will be taken. Seems like they are putting the eco warriors from Rent a Riot on notice.
    Elizabeth May of the Green Party said she would go to jail to stop Kinder Morgan building the pipeline. That's O.K. no great loss there.


    http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/eliza...line-1.3182604
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  16. #16

    Default

    Paul ...
    Gemini has hit the thoughts I have pretty much on target.

    With the approvals should have come a formal plan to deal with violent protesters, threats and work stoppages caused by the protests.
    I am all for peaceful protest, but the rhetoric from the extreme protesters is already alluding to violence and more.

    If they had announced a full enforcement action plan with the approvals it would have sent a very clear message to the extremists and inspired confidence they actually wanted the projects to happen.

    IMO

  17. #17
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,799

    Default

    That's a great plan, except it would likely do the exact opposite of what was intended. Instead the extremists would be that much more galvanized by the government having a pre-determined plan to suppress protests and infringe on civil liberties. They would just hand that narrative, whether true or not, to the environmental lobby. What you're suggesting is frankly utter nonsense.

  18. #18

    Default

    Well we disagree. Oh well.

    (2) Questions though
    1) Where did I suggest suppressing peaceful protest or civil liberties?
    2) When did inciting/inflicting violence/damage/trespass become a right?

    IMO

  19. #19
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,573

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    That's a great plan, except it would likely do the exact opposite of what was intended. Instead the extremists would be that much more galvanized by the government having a pre-determined plan to suppress protests and infringe on civil liberties. They would just hand that narrative, whether true or not, to the environmental lobby. What you're suggesting is frankly utter nonsense.
    Pretty much my response. Deal with protests as they happen not beforehand.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  20. #20
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,799

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks
    1) Where did I suggest suppressing peaceful protest or civil liberties?


    I didn't say you did. Perhaps you didn't notice where I said "
    They would just hand that narrative, whether true or not, to the environmental lobby". It doesn't matter if that's what the government set out to do, because no matter what the true intentions of such a plan would be, it would be seized upon by the environmental lobby as a coordinated effort by government on behalf of the pipeline companies to suppress protests.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks
    2) When did inciting/inflicting violence/damage/trespass become a right?


    I'll ask you the same thing: where did I suggest that was the case?

    Obviously, it isn't. As the Natural Resources minister said today, we have the rule of law in this country. If protesters are breaking laws, they should be dealt with accordingly.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/rule-of-law-will-prevent-violence-on-pipeline-routes-says-natural-resources-minister-1.3876611

    I don't disagree that things will likely be a mess with protests. But the perception of government pre-emptively moving to suppress them would only make that problem worse, not better.

  21. #21

    Default

    I did not get the impression on the bit I caught on the news that the government was putting out a perception of pre-emptively suppressing eco warriors. Even if it was it would be no different if there was a strike or any other types of unrest. Why would it make things worse if the government said the RCMP (or regional police) would intervene if things got violent. Pre warning people is exactly that, a pre warning. Not a licence to go ape chit. Break the law and their will be consequences. What makes them so special.
    No doubt some of these tree huggers thought Justin was their Knight in Shining Armour and would not let these projects go ahead. These snowflakes must be feeling pretty betrayed round about now. Mad at the O & G industry, mad at Captain Selfie. Oh my, they better all get jobs to use up some of that pent up anger. Jobs will keep them away from the protest line.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  22. #22

    Default

    Pipeline protests will be met by police and military, federal minister tells Edmonton business leaders.


    Two days after the federal government approved two major pipeline projects, two feelings are surfacing in Alberta’s business sector — elation that the approval has finally been given and concern that protests may keep the line from being built at all.
    “We’ve already heard in these few short days since the announcement some voices raised saying this is going to be a hill for them to die on,” said Paul De Jong, president of the Progressive Contractors Association of Canada, at an Alberta Enterprise Group-sponsored breakfast with federal Natural Resources Minister Jim Carr at the Hotel Macdonald in Edmonton on Thursday.
    De Jong, who represents companies that employ thousands of people in the construction industry, alluded to comments made by federal Green Party Leader Elizabeth May that she would go to jail to keep the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline — one of two approved by the federal government Tuesday — from being built.
    Not everyone is taking the protest comments seriously.

    “Elizabeth May has declared war on common sense and Canadian unity,” said Ric McIver, interim leader of the Alberta PC party, following Carr’s speech.
    “We can’t let the pipeline get held up by people that will never agree to any standard,” he added. “The law of the jungle cannot prevail.”
    Carr fielded questions from business leaders about the potential for protest escalating to the kind of civil unrest seen recently at Standing Rock in North Dakota.
    He said he welcomes peaceful dissent, but draws the line at breaking the law.

    “If people choose for their own reasons not to be peaceful, then the government of Canada, through its defence forces, through its police forces, will ensure that people will be kept safe,” he said to applause from the room. “We have a history of peaceful dialogue and dissent in Canada. I’m certainly hopeful that that tradition will continue. If people determine for their own reasons that that’s not the path they want to follow, then we live under the rule of law.”
    De Jong was happy with that response, but remains cautious.
    “In Canada, we have a long tradition of building major infrastructure projects like railways and highways under the rule of law where there’s a fair negotiation for access to land and the effect it has on communities,” he said. “Once those decisions are made, people fall in line and our workers have always been pleased to work in that kind of safe environment. We now see the possibility that perhaps some conditions may be different.”
    He said the companies that he represents have not had to deal with major protests in the past, but employees are told to put their own safety first and he expects no one to put themselves at risk to get a project done.
    For now, Carr is welcoming conflicting views to come forward.
    “These decisions are in the best interest of Canada. They are difficult and they are controversial,” he said. “Those who feel as if they have been, for their own reasons, treated badly by this decision, we welcome to hear from them still, to know that peaceful protest is part of our DNA as Canadians. We respect it, we honour it and we cherish it.”

    http://edmontonjournal.com/news/loca...siness-leaders
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  23. #23

    Default



    Colin Chepil Pipeline UA Local 488
    Comments Section Edmonton Journal
    http://edmontonjournal.com/news/loca...siness-leaders
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  24. #24
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    7,269

    Default

    These nutbar protesters are human beings that actually use petroleum products each and every hour of their lives. It's just hard to believe how stupid some people are.

  25. #25
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    7,269

    Default

    I hope the army builds big concentration camps for them in the desolate mountains somewhere with no petroleum products available

  26. #26

    Default

    Well, isn't it like everything else out there. Standard NiMBYism. We all want the upside benefits but don't want to be singled out to carry the downside risks as is the case with landfills, roads, etc.

  27. #27
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,165

    Default

    Announcing a pipeline is very different than actually building one, I'll wait for the latter.
    JT knows Kinder is going to take years, if at all. Roll on XL!

  28. #28

    Default

    Hysterical. What did we need the conservatives for again? I thought that was supposed to be their strong suit.
    Let's make Edmonton better.

  29. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hello lady View Post
    Announcing a pipeline is very different than actually building one, I'll wait for the latter.
    That's right. The preliminary work on these 2 newly-approved pipelines began years ago.

  30. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hello lady View Post
    JT knows Kinder is going to take years, if at all. Roll on XL!
    Trans Mountain will be in Service early 2020 (possibly late 2019), permits and tree clearing in late 2017, heavy construction 2018 and 2019.

  31. #31

    Default

    I am glad the Liberals aren't delaying this project to score political points with a few select groups, and they realize that proceeding with constructing these pipelines benefit the entire country.

  32. #32

    Default

    ^me too. I think they probably realize how important this is, in terms of their economic performance, which will be a bigger election issue than pleasing the special interest groups.

  33. #33
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,799

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini
    I did not get the impression on the bit I caught on the news that the government was putting out a perception of pre-emptively suppressing eco warriors.


    Because they aren't. Which Thomas feels is a mistake, and they should be doing as such:

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks
    With the approvals should have come a formal plan to deal with violent protesters, threats and work stoppages caused by the protests.


    What would such a "formal plan" look like, exactly? What concrete actions should the federal government, provincial government, or law enforcement undertake pre-emptively as part of this plan to "deal with" violent protests and illegal actions, that have not yet occurred? Other than stating, as was done yesterday, that we have the rule of law and that illegal actions will be treated as such? Again, doing anything more than that will only give ammunition and a "big bad government" narrative to the environmental lobby.

    In some ways, if protesters really do ramp up illegal and violent actions in the absence of a heavy handed government or law enforcement response, it will only undermine their cause as a good portion of the general public will react with disgust. If on the other hand the public perceives that government and law enforcement were being too heavy handed, then public opinion could turn the other way.

    It's a difficult balancing act, no doubt. Which is why Trudeau, Notley, Clark and the various law enforcement agencies have to handle this all very carefully. What Thomas is asking for, at least in terms of advance preparation for how to respond to civil disobedience and possible outright violence among the various branches of government and law enforcement, is likely well underway behind closed doors. But publicly stating a plan to preemptively stop protests before they turn violent? That would only help the protesters with public opinion.

  34. #34

    Default

    Well I consider myself 'the public' and I have no problem at all the government publicly stating they have a plan to stop protesters. How is it helping the protesters with public opinion? If the Rent a Riot have been warned of the consequences of public disobedience and they chose to ignore them they can take their lumps. If all they do is protest that's fine. If they decide to run amok and start causing damage that's another story. If they chain themselves to machinery that's another story. They have a right to protest but not a right to damage, infringe, harm or delay work in progress. I think it's people like Elizabeth May who are ramping up the rhetoric and making battle cry announcements. Her talk of being willing to go to jail is more inflammatory then government announcing their plans. These protesters should know they can only go so far with their antics, if they go too far they have been warned what will happen.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  35. #35
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,573

    Default

    The minister's comments were measured and I don't have a problem with them. The government and industry need to be careful not to get into a rhetoric war, though. The angrier people get the more likely there is to be violence. I think the minister was right to encourage peaceful protest while being clear violent protest would be responded to. This is different from comments that all protest should be addressed with force.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  36. #36
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,165

    Default

    Hose them down when its -18! I know, I'm horrible..

    May is an insufferable *****.

  37. #37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hello lady View Post
    Hose them down when its -18! I know, I'm horrible..

    May is an insufferable *****.
    Can we assume you're boycotting all things BC, by not vacationing there or buying BC fruit, lumber, condos, etc.?

  38. #38
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by hello lady View Post
    Hose them down when its -18! I know, I'm horrible..

    May is an insufferable *****.
    Can we assume you're boycotting all things BC, by not vacationing there or buying BC fruit, lumber, condos, etc.?
    I lived in BC,I didn't care for it,or the people..

  39. #39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Well I consider myself 'the public' and I have no problem at all the government publicly stating they have a plan to stop protesters. How is it helping the protesters with public opinion? If the Rent a Riot have been warned of the consequences of public disobedience and they chose to ignore them they can take their lumps. If all they do is protest that's fine. If they decide to run amok and start causing damage that's another story. If they chain themselves to machinery that's another story. They have a right to protest but not a right to damage, infringe, harm or delay work in progress. I think it's people like Elizabeth May who are ramping up the rhetoric and making battle cry announcements. Her talk of being willing to go to jail is more inflammatory then government announcing their plans. These protesters should know they can only go so far with their antics, if they go too far they have been warned what will happen.
    Yes and if they to go too far, the protesters will probably start to lose public support even in BC. It may already be happening. So far, the Federal government is the one sounding reasonable and the pipeline opponents are the ones sounding radical and too confrontational.

  40. #40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hello lady View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by hello lady View Post
    Hose them down when its -18! I know, I'm horrible..

    May is an insufferable *****.
    Can we assume you're boycotting all things BC, by not vacationing there or buying BC fruit, lumber, condos, etc.?
    I lived in BC,I didn't care for it,or the people..
    You might like this article, if you haven't already read it. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opini...ticle33123104/

  41. #41
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    7,269

    Default

    I found the statement that 39 First Nations groups along the right of way have already signed benefit agreements with Kinder Morgan very surprising actually.

  42. #42
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,614

    Default

    ^ Money talks.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  43. #43
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drumbones View Post
    I found the statement that 39 First Nations groups along the right of way have already signed benefit agreements with Kinder Morgan very surprising actually.
    Why?That's why they hold out.

  44. #44
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by hello lady View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by hello lady View Post
    Hose them down when its -18! I know, I'm horrible..

    May is an insufferable *****.
    Can we assume you're boycotting all things BC, by not vacationing there or buying BC fruit, lumber, condos, etc.?
    I lived in BC,I didn't care for it,or the people..
    You might like this article, if you haven't already read it. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opini...ticle33123104/


    That's very interesting, thanks Dave.

  45. #45
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    7,269

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hello lady View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Drumbones View Post
    I found the statement that 39 First Nations groups along the right of way have already signed benefit agreements with Kinder Morgan very surprising actually.
    Why?That's why they hold out.
    I know. I'm just surprised that it's been done already.

  46. #46
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drumbones View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by hello lady View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Drumbones View Post
    I found the statement that 39 First Nations groups along the right of way have already signed benefit agreements with Kinder Morgan very surprising actually.
    Why?That's why they hold out.
    I know. I'm just surprised that it's been done already.

    I knew that would be a huge insensitive,it always is.

  47. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drumbones View Post
    I found the statement that 39 First Nations groups along the right of way have already signed benefit agreements with Kinder Morgan very surprising actually.
    Most of the First Nations whose land the pipeline passes through have approved the project (with a couple of exceptions). Much of the media spin that First Nations are opposed, is misleading, because most of the First Nations who are opposed, are not directly impacted by the pipeline as it doesn't cross their land.

  48. #48
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,165

    Default

    They also need, or like the work Moa.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •