We absolutely should not risk the cost. We’re in the midst of a climate crisis already! The cost is too great. But I can get on the both Smith and Poilievre spouting some BS about technology that supposedly “protects” marine life or that cleans up spills “quickly with minimal impact.” They’ve always got empty promises to counter legitimate opposition.
Conservatives are so hyper focused on moving oil for billionaires and have zero plans to diversify energy, support and fund renewable energy sources, or bolster industries like tourism that are already thriving and benefiting Canadians more.
It’s unsurprising that conservatives so quickly and easily dismiss real environmental and habitat threats in the name of “the economy,” but it’s baffling how many people fall for it (all while they complain about flash floods, wildfire smoke, drought, and unprecedented heat).
The UCP is happy to destroy caribou habitats (which threatens their existence) because they want to sell our forests to foreign logging corporations. And they’re eager to allow Australian billionaire Gina Reinhart’s mining company to release toxic levels of selenium into Alberta’s headwaters—not to mention using exorbitant amounts of our freshwater amid drought—for a mediocre boost in jobs and abysmal profits for the province.
So of course, Smith and Poilievre are willing to sacrifice BC’s coastal communities, waterways, and marine life. They only care about helping their billionaire friends while they lie to Canadians about how important fossil fuels are to our economy. I’m beyond exhausted with this rhetoric and the people who eat it up.
Right on, Athena! I love that coastline. I am infuriated by Smith and Poilievre, so willing to risk it for the sake of a few more dollars for the already-rich. There is much more money to be made in tourism (even if the economy were the only rationale) and I suspect, more equally distributed.My daughter is a qualified coastal kayak guide in BC (now a librarian because it’s more family-friendly for a young mom.) But she spent almost a year learning how to read the tides and do what it takes to safely look after tourists for a week so at a time, kayaking on the Pacific coast. And she did it well. I’m extremely proud. What right do two politicians— who perhaps have never really experienced the stunning beauty and generosity of that landscape, perhaps never seen humpbacks rising out of the ocean — what right do they have to offer it up for sacrifice? Like you, I am exhausted by their greed and their utter lack of respect for that beautiful land and its people.
PS I live in Northern Ontario. Also extraordinary. This does not stop me from a powerful affection and sense of awe when confronted by other landscapes, other creatures. What can we do to open their eyes to the paradise, the many paradises, they seem determined to destroy?
Interesting how Poilievre and Sith want Federal support to impose something on another province for the benefit of their province, while at the same time threatening separation because “it’s not fair” for Alberta to be “burdened” with the needs of the rest of the country. So it’s “Alberta’s” oil & gas, but it’s the “Canadian” coast? The arrogance and entitlement is astounding.
I am old enough to remember the Exxon Valdez. The complete habitat destruction and painful lingering death of thousands of animals was sickening. We must NEVER allow tankers of this type again. The bill was passed for very good reasons. In this era of becoming more climate aware we must always think about our limited natural reserves, our delicate eco systems and the people that rely on them. Erasing the hard work done on restoration of the coast is to laugh in the face of actual progress. Taking a huge step backwards is not the way.
What is it going to take to convince people that the cost of more oil infrastructure is not worth the risk to the environment? We need oil for many things, but we don't need it that much. We have a thriving economy and environment here on the West Coast that requires a clean ocean. It seems our collective desire for a healthy climate is again at threat from the corrupt 'the only thing better than money is more money' class.
Good topic to write about. There really is not adequate stats/projections on the 'economic life' of O&G and other critical info. What's the capacity of the Trans-mountain Pipeline and when will that be reached? Where is the O&G industry investment? Why has the O&G industry and AB not pushed for product processing in AB rather than shipping raw product across land and sea? Why does O&G industry and AB not manufacture products from O&G in AB? For a proper analysis of this particular 'idea' there should be a much broader discussion of other options including risks and costs. Why are Smith & PP hanging their hats on this one dubious idea??
Sounds pretty straightforward to me. What Trudeau did was in our best interest. (as so many of his decisions were). Same as fracking the short term gain of natural gas versus the absolute destruction of freshwater forever. The math doesn’t matter. I hope BC sticks to its guns or the federal government does BC is a treasure trove of beauty and natural resources and we can’t risk destroying that. because Smith will be long gone when the oil starts leaking.
We absolutely should not risk the cost. We’re in the midst of a climate crisis already! The cost is too great. But I can get on the both Smith and Poilievre spouting some BS about technology that supposedly “protects” marine life or that cleans up spills “quickly with minimal impact.” They’ve always got empty promises to counter legitimate opposition.
Conservatives are so hyper focused on moving oil for billionaires and have zero plans to diversify energy, support and fund renewable energy sources, or bolster industries like tourism that are already thriving and benefiting Canadians more.
It’s unsurprising that conservatives so quickly and easily dismiss real environmental and habitat threats in the name of “the economy,” but it’s baffling how many people fall for it (all while they complain about flash floods, wildfire smoke, drought, and unprecedented heat).
The UCP is happy to destroy caribou habitats (which threatens their existence) because they want to sell our forests to foreign logging corporations. And they’re eager to allow Australian billionaire Gina Reinhart’s mining company to release toxic levels of selenium into Alberta’s headwaters—not to mention using exorbitant amounts of our freshwater amid drought—for a mediocre boost in jobs and abysmal profits for the province.
So of course, Smith and Poilievre are willing to sacrifice BC’s coastal communities, waterways, and marine life. They only care about helping their billionaire friends while they lie to Canadians about how important fossil fuels are to our economy. I’m beyond exhausted with this rhetoric and the people who eat it up.
Right on, Athena! I love that coastline. I am infuriated by Smith and Poilievre, so willing to risk it for the sake of a few more dollars for the already-rich. There is much more money to be made in tourism (even if the economy were the only rationale) and I suspect, more equally distributed.My daughter is a qualified coastal kayak guide in BC (now a librarian because it’s more family-friendly for a young mom.) But she spent almost a year learning how to read the tides and do what it takes to safely look after tourists for a week so at a time, kayaking on the Pacific coast. And she did it well. I’m extremely proud. What right do two politicians— who perhaps have never really experienced the stunning beauty and generosity of that landscape, perhaps never seen humpbacks rising out of the ocean — what right do they have to offer it up for sacrifice? Like you, I am exhausted by their greed and their utter lack of respect for that beautiful land and its people.
PS I live in Northern Ontario. Also extraordinary. This does not stop me from a powerful affection and sense of awe when confronted by other landscapes, other creatures. What can we do to open their eyes to the paradise, the many paradises, they seem determined to destroy?
I support the Tanker Ban 100%. I hope the government does not cave on this. Unfortunately the North Coast MPs are both Conservatives.
The Pacific Caucus of the Liberals is meeting here in Kelowna July 14-15 but I suspect the Tanker Ban won’t be discussed.
Premier Eby has said he supports it. Smith is putting a lot of pressure on him.
Interesting how Poilievre and Sith want Federal support to impose something on another province for the benefit of their province, while at the same time threatening separation because “it’s not fair” for Alberta to be “burdened” with the needs of the rest of the country. So it’s “Alberta’s” oil & gas, but it’s the “Canadian” coast? The arrogance and entitlement is astounding.
I am old enough to remember the Exxon Valdez. The complete habitat destruction and painful lingering death of thousands of animals was sickening. We must NEVER allow tankers of this type again. The bill was passed for very good reasons. In this era of becoming more climate aware we must always think about our limited natural reserves, our delicate eco systems and the people that rely on them. Erasing the hard work done on restoration of the coast is to laugh in the face of actual progress. Taking a huge step backwards is not the way.
What is it going to take to convince people that the cost of more oil infrastructure is not worth the risk to the environment? We need oil for many things, but we don't need it that much. We have a thriving economy and environment here on the West Coast that requires a clean ocean. It seems our collective desire for a healthy climate is again at threat from the corrupt 'the only thing better than money is more money' class.
Good topic to write about. There really is not adequate stats/projections on the 'economic life' of O&G and other critical info. What's the capacity of the Trans-mountain Pipeline and when will that be reached? Where is the O&G industry investment? Why has the O&G industry and AB not pushed for product processing in AB rather than shipping raw product across land and sea? Why does O&G industry and AB not manufacture products from O&G in AB? For a proper analysis of this particular 'idea' there should be a much broader discussion of other options including risks and costs. Why are Smith & PP hanging their hats on this one dubious idea??
Sounds pretty straightforward to me. What Trudeau did was in our best interest. (as so many of his decisions were). Same as fracking the short term gain of natural gas versus the absolute destruction of freshwater forever. The math doesn’t matter. I hope BC sticks to its guns or the federal government does BC is a treasure trove of beauty and natural resources and we can’t risk destroying that. because Smith will be long gone when the oil starts leaking.