Login / RegisterPremier Christy Clark wins support for her position on pipelines
Despite what one would tend to gather from all of the recent noise and hoopla generated by the antipipeline faction in B.C., recent polls have shown that only about 35 percent of British Columbians are dead set against oil pipelines [“ Dix blasts B.C.’s approach to pipelines”, August 16-23]. The other two-thirds (the silent majority) want to know more before making up their minds.
That’s exactly the same position Premier Christy Clark and the B.C. Liberal government have taken on proposed oil pipelines, including the Northern Gateway project undergoing a federal environmental review.
From the start, Premier Clark and the B.C. Liberals have made it clear that hearing all the facts, and considering all the potential benefits and risks, before passing judgment on any project is an essential part of the process.
Premier Clark has also made it very clear that tough environmental standards would have to be achieved by any oil pipeline project, and that meaningful engagement with the affected First Nations communities would need to be clearly demonstrated.
Premier Clark’s position on oil pipelines shows it’s not just about the money. It’s about meeting key environmental and social objectives, which are just as important to the province as meeting key economic and fiscal objectives.
> Massimo Mandarino / Vancouver
I am astonished and disgusted to hear so much division among B.C.’s politicians. How can there be any question of what comes first? It has to be the best interests of British Columbians, and secondly those of all Canadians.
Let’s not be hypocrites, and put aside partisan politics when it comes to protecting and fostering B.C.’s interests.
The bottom line on this: I fully support our government’s position in all matters that clearly put our interests over those of Albertans or the federal government.
I am 100-percent Canadian, and I place our national interests ahead of those of other countries, but B.C. always comes first for me.
We support the poor and needy around the world, and so we should. But we do not have to worry about Albertans not making enough money.
In the case of building a pipeline across our land, exposing us to most of the environmental downside, our government must take the correct stance.
> H. Peter Kuehn / Kelowna
a clue as to what would be lost if we had a pipeline break or a tanker collision in the Douglas Channel.
Extra, extra you can read all about how the Enbridge pipeline is a bust right here in the Georgia Straight.
Harper and Gordon Campbell, did some very serious offenses, to BC and the citizens. Enbridge has done nothing other than, out and out blatant lie and deceive the BC citizens. Enbridge and Harper's map into the channel of Kitimat Port, that was missing all of the islands, was the last dirty tactic, the BC citizens are going to put up with.
Communist China has been showing, their aggression around the globe. Harper had no right, permitting Communist China on our Canadian soil. Harper has permitted China, to bring their own people, to work the tar sands. Harper has said, China can bring swarms over, to build the Enbridge pipeline. China is permitted to refine the tar in their own country. Who benefits??? Harper, big oil, Enbridge, Alberta and Communist China.
They say, China has not been paying their bills at the tar sands. Premier Redford launched a site called, the wall of shame. Seems people up there aren't getting paid. The company's names go on the wall of shame. China is the worst offender.
BC citizens are prepared to go to Kitimat and stand beside the F.N. In BC, Salmon is a staple food for the F.N. People. Dirty diseased fish farms, are killing off the wild Salmon. Even the bears are very hungry, Salmon is a staple for them too. They are being driven into towns, to look for food for their hibernation time. Sadly, they lose their battle for food too, and are shot. Baby Bears are then, often left to die.
And oil tanks have traveling the coast of Bc for almost as long ...
How does vancouver island get it oil?
Thanks for the input, but what part of "letter to the editor" don't you understand?
Or perhaps you only want the Straight to publish letters whose views run parallel to those held by yourself?
effecively the future of our environment and all species that live within the air, water, earth, and that includes us, hangs in the balance while we wait while the governments debate.
does Christy Clark have what it takes to protect everything that is at risk? what is Christy Clark's definition of potential benefits and risks? what is Christy Clark's definition of achieving tough environmental standards and meaningful engagement with the affected First Nations communities?
i venture to say that this all goes back to the beginning of naming values and what makes a leader an effective, strong, solid leader vs what makes a weak, indecisive, wavering leader. and to me that is what they are made of that is their morals, goals, values, and beliefs.
how can our governments be quibbling about how much money our land, air, water are worth, when the answer is: priceless.
our governments would be better to do everything in their power to protect our environment and the interconnected life it sustains, rather than bargain it off to the highest bidder.