Harper under fire for not getting Canadian oil to international markets

[mentalfloss]

Mulcair blames Harper for not getting Canadian oil to international markets - NEWS 1130
NEWS 1130 - Vancouver Breaking News, Traffic and Weather

VANCOUVER (NEWS 1130) – NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair is firing back after being accused of not supporting the export of Canadian resources.

Mulcair believes Stephen Harper is at fault for not getting more access to foreign markets.

Toronto NDP Candidate Linda McQuaig said some of the oil from northern Alberta might have to be left in the ground, causing a harsh rebuttal from the Tories.

Mulcair says he is open to exporting Canadian natural resources, but it must be done in an environmentally sound way.

“The reason that none of these projects is getting off of the drawing board is because Mr Harper thought he could get away with environmental laws that the public and the environment need,” says Mulcair. “Canada’s reputation is being hurt on the world stage simply because we’ve been working consistently against the planet. We’re the only country in the world to withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol.”

Mulcair veered away from any comments about leaving oil in the ground.

“Our position is that if we can, of course, develop our natural resources as long as it’s done sustainably.”

Mulcair blames Harper for not getting Canadian oil to international markets - NEWS 1130

 

[Locutus]

Thanks Obama.

 

[mentalfloss]

Yes we are already acutely aware that our 'Prime Minister' blames others for his own failings.

It's what makes him so Prime Ministerial.

 

[Locutus]

Thanks Tom.








Conservative PartyVerified account ‏@CPC_HQ

Q: “Will you stop Energy East?” @ThomasMulcair: “Sure” Vid: https://youtu.be/MV5pn8ky-Sw #cdnpoli #elxn42 #ableg #nbpoli

 

[mentalfloss]

That "Sure" was probably at the end of his response to a completely different question.

 

[petros]

Obama and the attack on Canada.

How do you like getting want you wanted?

 

[Locutus]

That "Sure" was probably at the end of his response to a completely different question.

you didn't listen to the rest of the clip did you.




0:21

Q: "will you say 'NO' to the pipeline"?

A: "Of course we will".

 

[mentalfloss]

It's not an export, but you tried.

That's why I like you.

 

[petros]

Canadian union made pipe made from recycled steel cooked with renewable energy not to mention content.

Not a double or even a triple but a qudrawhammy.

You sure can pick 'em!

Evraz Announces Major Keystone XL Pipe Order

 

[Locutus]

It's not an export, but you tried.

That's why I like you.

The Energy East pipeline is a proposed oil pipeline in Canada. It would deliver oil from Western Canada to Eastern Canada, from receipt points in Alberta and Saskatchewan to refineries and port terminals in Quebec and New Brunswick.

 

[damngrumpy]

The parties position is not to leave oil or resources in the ground.
Sustainable action yes.
Keystone is not in Canadian interests however from my view. We
pipe it to Texas they refine and sell it to the world for a higher price
for our stuff. Build our own refinery and raise the price for our
benefit.
But do the export to America for use in America only.

 

[skookumchuck]

The parties position is not to leave oil or resources in the ground.
Sustainable action yes.
Keystone is not in Canadian interests however from my view. We
pipe it to Texas they refine and sell it to the world for a higher price
for our stuff. Build our own refinery and raise the price for our
benefit.
But do the export to America for use in America only.

Too many people of your mindset would howl if we wanted a refinery within any number of miles/klicks of them.

 

[mentalfloss]

The Energy East pipeline is a proposed oil pipeline in Canada. It would deliver oil from Western Canada to Eastern Canada, from receipt points in Alberta and Saskatchewan to refineries and port terminals in Quebec and New Brunswick.

You do realize you still took the comment out of context right?

Oh wait, of course you did.

You do that all the time.

 

[gerryh]

You do realize you still took the comment out of context right?

Oh wait, of course you did.

You do that all the time.

Then how about you put it into context for us.

 

[petros]

The parties position is not to leave oil or resources in the ground.
Sustainable action yes.
Keystone is not in Canadian interests however from my view. We
pipe it to Texas they refine and sell it to the world for a higher price
for our stuff. Build our own refinery and raise the price for our
benefit.
But do the export to America for use in America only.

You never did research did you?

 

[mentalfloss]

Then how about you put it into context for us.

The question was posed based on the condition that building it would significantly impact climate change or cause significant difficulty in meeting international targets.

In which case he was absolutely correct in saying that it shouldn't be built if that were the case.


But you shouldn't be surprised at the attempts by conbots to take things out of context. They are doing the same thing with the McQuaig comment about 'keeping oil in the ground'.

These guys are getting desperate and that's why Harper is ramping up the terror-talk to distract from the economy.

They prey on getting the dumb vote and that's the one thing they are good at.

 

[Dixie Cup]

OK Tom - what would you have done if you were in Harper's shoes? Its all well to criticize but tell us how you would have handled the oil issue differently. Then at least, I would be able to decide if you have a legitimate point. Would you have personally started digging the trenches? Welded the pipes together? Like, what specifically would you have Harper do? Talk some sense into the Provinces i.e. Quebec whose refineries would have benefitted but who doesn't want the pipeline to go through the province?


I am already tired of Justin and Tom's blaming Harper for pretty much everything - especially for the economy that neither one of them could have controlled if they would have been in power.


And for Justin to say that the federal government should pay for municipal infrastructure is mind boggling. He sure needs to brush up on the constitutional division of powers.


I tried to send a comment to the Liberal Party of Canada but unless you actually want to join them, there is no room for any opinion. Ah well....


Dixie

Its all well and good to say build the refineries here. Whose going to do it? The companies involved say it is too expensive and would take too long to build. Oh, I know - I bet there are those who think its something the government should do. right. I can see it now.


Do you honestly think if it was economically feasible that these companies wouldn't have started building refineries a long time ago? Seriously???


OK...

 

[mentalfloss]

How can you do any worse than doing nothing? Lol

 

[captain morgan]

How can you do any worse than doing nothing? Lol

Voting for someone that just isn't ready

 

[petros]

The question was posed based on the condition that building it would significantly impact climate change or cause significant difficulty in meeting international targets.

In which case he was absolutely correct in saying that it shouldn't be built if that were the case.


But you shouldn't be surprised at the attempts by conbots to take things out of context. They are doing the same thing with the McQuaig comment about 'keeping oil in the ground'.

These guys are getting desperate and that's why Harper is ramping up the terror-talk to distract from the economy.

They prey on getting the dumb vote and that's the one thing they are good at.

Do you believe Canadian oil and pipelines will destroy the planet and mankind?