Trans Mountain ‘pipeline is going to get built’: Trudeau dismisses B.C.’s bitumen ban


Cliffy
Free Thinker
#121
 
Most helpful post: The members here have rated this post as best reply.
DaSleeper
+1
#122
 
Murphy
Conservative
+2
#123
Cliffy and Hoid do not understand that BC has no right to stop any business that Canadian or International corporations wish to conduct there.

Electric cars will continue to be a small sideline. The environment is ours to control, modify and otherwise do with as we please. Cliffy, Hoid, grow the hell up.
 
petros
+1
#124
 
JLM
No Party Affiliation
-1
#125
Quote: Originally Posted by Murphy View Post

Cliffy and Hoid do not understand that BC has no right to stop any business that Canadian or International corporations wish to conduct there.

Electric cars will continue to be a small sideline. The environment is ours to control, modify and otherwise do with as we please. Cliffy, Hoid, grow the hell up.

Exactly!
 
petros
#126
Fur pipelines of Western Canada.

 
OpposingDigit
#127
On CTV Question Period today, Pamela D. Palmater (Indigenous Nationhood website) claimed that First Nations have the specific right to stop this pipeline as ruled by the supreme court. Trudeau is in deep sh?t if he attempts to force the issue in BC. It seems to me that Trudeau is promising huge changes to the Indian Act and huge increases in funding of First Nations social programs with the hopes that the First Nations will not bring down his government over this pipeline issue and agree to this pipeline. Failure to agree might well place all Trudeau funding promises in jeopardy if his government is not re-elected.
Last edited by OpposingDigit; Feb 4th, 2018 at 06:39 PM..
 
Murphy
Conservative
#128
Good luck. If they are to be built, no one will stop them.
 
OpposingDigit
#129
Quote: Originally Posted by Murphy View Post

Good luck. If they are to be built, no one will stop them.

Hi! Murphy

Trudeau will need to bring in the military because First Nations will shut down all freight rail transportation and highways. Lower Mainland BC is quite warm all year thus protests can be continuous, not like freezing to death while protesting in Ontario.
 
Murphy
Conservative
+1
#130
If you'd like to believe that, fine. Let's pull up a rock and watch.
 
petros
#131
I'd love to see that happen. Can't fight a pipeline when in jail for terrorism.

Not even ghost bears can stop them now.

It reminds me of the 1880s when Chief Piapot tried to stop construction of the CPR.



Edgar Dewdney, Piapot and troops drawn up, 1885.
Images may be subject to copyright.
 
pgs
Free Thinker
#132
Quote: Originally Posted by Cliffy View Post

Good thing those Wolfe’s aren’t Hungary or she would be toast .
 
petros
#133
If winter she'd be wearing them.
 
Twin_Moose
Conservative
#134
Quote: Originally Posted by OpposingDigit View Post

On CTV Question Period today, Pamela D. Palmater (Indigenous Nationhood website) claimed that First Nations have the specific right to stop this pipeline as ruled by the supreme court. Trudeau is in deep sh?t if he attempts to force the issue in BC. It seems to me that Trudeau is promising huge changes to the Indian Act and huge increases in funding of First Nations social programs with the hopes that the First Nations will not bring down his government over this pipeline issue and agree to this pipeline. Failure to agree might well place all Trudeau funding promises in jeopardy if his government is not re-elected.

I'm pretty sure they do not have the right to stop this particular pipeline (all legal guidelines have been followed and approved), but do have the right to protest against it being built.
 
JamesBondo
#135
when the feds claimed right of way for the railroad, wasn't it something like a 5 mile wide right of way?
 
Hoid
#136
the pipeline was approved contingent on many conditions being met.
 
petros
+1
#137
Quote: Originally Posted by OpposingDigit View Post

On CTV Question Period today, Pamela D. Palmater (Indigenous Nationhood website) claimed that First Nations have the specific right to stop this pipeline as ruled by the supreme court. Trudeau is in deep sh?t if he attempts to force the issue in BC. It seems to me that Trudeau is promising huge changes to the Indian Act and huge increases in funding of First Nations social programs with the hopes that the First Nations will not bring down his government over this pipeline issue and agree to this pipeline. Failure to agree might well place all Trudeau funding promises in jeopardy if his government is not re-elected.

It's too late. The time to speak up came and went. Many of the bands on the route didn't bother to show up.

Quote: Originally Posted by Twin_Moose View Post

I'm pretty sure they do not have the right to stop this particular pipeline (all legal guidelines have been followed and approved), but do have the right to protest against it being built.

See above.
 
JLM
No Party Affiliation
-1
#138
Quote: Originally Posted by JamesBondo View Post

when the feds claimed right of way for the railroad, wasn't it something like a 5 mile wide right of way?

The E & N on Vancouver Island may have been wider than that!
 
petros
+1
#139
Quote: Originally Posted by JLM View Post

The E & N on Vancouver Island may have been wider than that!

Rail are 1.5 track links (99 feet).

Roads are 1.0 track links (66 feet).
 
Hoid
#140
The first promise (not counting the "could be up to one billion dollars" revenue-sharing agreement - was Kinder Morgan Canada's $6.8-billion project will protect B.C. from potential environmental damage with world-leading spill prevention and response measures.

Head of Kinder-Morgan's Public Relations team Justin Trudeau even restated this promise at length on Friday in Nanaimo.

And yet there has been no definitive research undertaken to determine the nature of diluted bitumen spills in the proposed corridor and especially in the ocean.

The promises that have been made are just bullshit.

We know that now for sure and we know that the pipeline should be stopped until a thorough and completely transparent study is done.

That is just common sense and anyone opposing it is a fool - or simply does not care about this province and its people.
 
petros
+1
#141
Quote: Originally Posted by Hoid View Post

The first promise (not counting the "could be up to one billion dollars" revenue-sharing agreement - was Kinder Morgan Canada's $6.8-billion project will protect B.C. from potential environmental damage with world-leading spill prevention and response measures.

Trudeau's 3 person panel made its rounds and those who showed up left happy.
 
Murphy
Conservative
+1
#142
Hoid thinks the world is full of unicorns and rainbows!

The plan is to experiment in BC. The federal government - the Liberals actually - have determined that the least environmental impact will happen if an accident happens in BC. That's why the pipeline is a go. Hey, you can't make this up! I got my information from the same source that Flossy/Hoid gets his info from. Obviously, I cannot be wrong or lying!

Common sense tells us that it's a good idea to keep potential failures away from here.
 
OpposingDigit
#143
This is a huge problem ....

Canada signed up and agreed to the terms outlined within the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples requires states to obtain free and informed consent prior to approving projects like natural resources extraction on Indigenous land or territories.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/rome...ghts-1.4432858

Also ....

The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) ruling, extending the scope of Indigenous rights to include the right to permanently control “land conferred by aboriginal title”, has the potential to transform the politics of resource extraction and development in Canada.
Governments and companies seeking to use land (say, for resource development and infrastructure) to which an Indigenous group has title will now require the consent of the Indigenous groups involved. Indeed, the court found that where Indigenous title exists, it is exclusive: in other words, the Indigenous groups in question have the exclusive authority (with some important exceptions) to determine who can use and benefit from the land – and the resources on that land.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle19347252
Last edited by OpposingDigit; Feb 5th, 2018 at 11:55 AM..
 
Twin_Moose
Conservative
+2
#144
Quote: Originally Posted by OpposingDigit View Post

This is a huge problem ....

Canada signed up and agreed to the terms outlined within the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples requires states to obtain free and informed consent prior to approving projects like natural resources extraction on Indigenous land or territories.

And they did get the required permission from the First Canadians directly impacted from this project

Quote: Originally Posted by OpposingDigit View Post

This is a huge problem ....

Canada signed up and agreed to the terms outlined within the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples requires states to obtain free and informed consent prior to approving projects like natural resources extraction on Indigenous land or territories.
NDP bill adopting UN Indigenous declaration begins debate with Liberal support - Politics - CBC News

Also ....

The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) ruling, extending the scope of Indigenous rights to include the right to permanently control “land conferred by aboriginal title”, has the potential to transform the politics of resource extraction and development in Canada.
Governments and companies seeking to use land (say, for resource development and infrastructure) to which an Indigenous group has title will now require the consent of the Indigenous groups involved. Indeed, the court found that where Indigenous title exists, it is exclusive: in other words, the Indigenous groups in question have the exclusive authority (with some important exceptions) to determine who can use and benefit from the land – and the resources on that land.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle19347252

And on your 2nd part yes it is recognized that is why construction always avoids crossing on directly owned First Nation lands, unless set up in partnership/cooperation with the affected First Nation
 
petros
+3
#145
Quote: Originally Posted by OpposingDigit View Post

This is a huge problem ....

Canada signed up and agreed to the terms outlined within the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples requires states to obtain free and informed consent prior to approving projects like natural resources extraction on Indigenous land or territories.
NDP bill adopting UN Indigenous declaration begins debate with Liberal support - Politics - CBC News

Also ....

The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) ruling, extending the scope of Indigenous rights to include the right to permanently control “land conferred by aboriginal title”, has the potential to transform the politics of resource extraction and development in Canada.
Governments and companies seeking to use land (say, for resource development and infrastructure) to which an Indigenous group has title will now require the consent of the Indigenous groups involved. Indeed, the court found that where Indigenous title exists, it is exclusive: in other words, the Indigenous groups in question have the exclusive authority (with some important exceptions) to determine who can use and benefit from the land – and the resources on that land.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle19347252

Who did you vote for as your UN representative?
 
OpposingDigit
#146
Hi! Twin Moose

I am not familiar with any agreement reached with First Nations.
I would really appreciate your giving me a link where I can learn about it.
 
Twin_Moose
Conservative
#147
Quote: Originally Posted by OpposingDigit View Post

Hi! Twin Moose

I am not familiar with any agreement reached with First Nations.
I would really appreciate your giving me a link where I can learn about it.

Why nine Island First Nations signed Trans Mountain deals

Trans Mountain expansion: The First Nations factor

Quote:

There are 133 First Nations living along or near the Trans Mountain pipeline corridor in Alberta and B.C., 40 of which have granted their support for the project and signed benefits agreements.
“We have the vast majority of the right-of-way communities impacted by this project supporting it,” Kinder Morgan Canada president Ian Anderson recently told the Greater Vancouver Board of Trade. “We have far more support in aboriginal communities than we have opposition.”

All First Nations crossed by Trans Mountain pipeline route in support of project: Kinder Morgan

Quote:

Since federal approval was granted in late November, twelve new Aboriginal communities have affirmed their support for the proposed Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion, says Kinder Morgan Canada.
There are now 51 Aboriginal communities that have signed mutual benefit agreements with the project valued at more than $400 million.
This includes all of the First Nations whose reserves the pipeline crosses and about 80 percent of communities within proximity to the pipeline right-of-way, the company says. The 51 agreements include 10 in Alberta and 41 in B.C.
Kinder Morgan Canada president Ian Anderson said in a statement that the company has "worked very hard to establish a relationship built on respect, trust and openness."

Google is your friend
 
OpposingDigit
#148
Hi! Twin Moose

I am only meaning to have a discussion with you .... not an argument ....

If your numbers are correct, there are 133 signatures required and only 80 have done so.

Thus; It can hardly be claimed that consent has been agreed to by First Nations Peoples.

I could be wrong, because I am not a lawyer.

Don't all FN Peoples need to agree?

And ..... are you a twin? The reason I ask is because I am an identical twin.
 
petros
+3
#149
Hello...Avro...how...are...you?
 
Twin_Moose
Conservative
+1
#150
Quote: Originally Posted by OpposingDigit View Post

I am only meaning to have a discussion with you .... not an argument ....

If your numbers are correct, there are 133 signatures required and only 80 have done so.

Thus; It can hardly be claimed that consent has been agreed to by First Nations Peoples.

I could be wrong, because I am not a lawyer.

I put the article kinda in order the last one explains your answer pretty much

All First Nations crossed by Trans Mountain pipeline route in support of project: Kinder Morgan

Since federal approval was granted in late November, twelve new Aboriginal communities have affirmed their support for the proposed Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion, says Kinder Morgan Canada.
There are now 51 Aboriginal communities that have signed mutual benefit agreements with the project valued at more than $400 million.
This includes all of the First Nations whose reserves the pipeline crosses and about 80 percent of communities within proximity to the pipeline right-of-way, the company says. The 51 agreements include 10 in Alberta and 41 in B.C.
Kinder Morgan Canada president Ian Anderson said in a statement that the company has "worked very hard to establish a relationship built on respect, trust and openness."

And from what I know in the provinces that signed treaties (all of which except B.C.) all Native reserves within an 80 km distance of the proposed construction must be consulted with, usually means a compensation/labour agreement being made. All landowners on the route must have a signed deal in place before the project can proceed, difficult land owners on a new route usually gets re-routed out. On previous easements the land can be expropriated to build the pipeline in the easement if it is for the best of all concerned.

Now in B.C. since no treaties exist all bands technically have the right to said land, but on the pipeline proposal an impact study is done and in it they recognize who has direct, indirect, trace, and no claim to said land. So they must strike a deal with direct, and indirect up to 80km, consult and respond to all other claims. I read in the articles that the burden of compensation and consultation have been met and possibly surpassed by Fed. Gov. standards

Twin Moose is a name of a creek not to far from where I live