We need to have a joint referendum, do we want the pipeline and do we want the dike. I don’t feel my interests are being represented on either count

Perhaps the referendum should include whether to keep IPG. As before. . .

Spills to the environment are a definite possibility.

What is a definite CERTAINTY is that the Enbridge project is about sucking the natural resources out of this country with the minimum investment (kinda like raw log exports). And Harper supports this? Build the refineries here, support Canadian families working IN Canada and send the Chinese whatever finished products they would like to buy.

BTW, spills of refined petroleum products are far less damaging to the environment than raw crude.

The pipeline will be going in.. its a matter of dollars, and the oil/gas companies have lots to throw around. Everyone has their price and its a matter of the oil/gas companies finding it.

As for our city hall, would you expect anything else from them. Green is proving to be more and more useless everytime she opens her mouth. She and council are only good at one thing, wasting our tax dollars.

I sure hope it doesn’t go through. This just isn’t regular crude. A spill would be a disaster . Enbridges handling of spills in the US is nothing short of criminal.

First green assumed there would be some kind of severance package for mcewen, then she was concerned he shouldn’t get a taxpayer funded severence package, then she was suspicious there was some double dealing going on with the severance package, now she isn’t happy with the information obtained from the FOI act and all the while courting her girlfriend oland around the country. Now she doens’t know IF the city has an opinion on the enbridge pipeline? But suspects that since they haven’t come out against the IPG stand then they are more than likely for it? Who’s running this ship of fools, anyways? I can honestly say I wasn’t fooled by this inept old boy wannabee and didn’t vote for her.

I suspect Ms. Green’s supporters have money invested in both Enbridge and Commonwealth.

“Mayor Green says since the City has not retracted the IPG stand, (nor openly endorsed it) it would appear the City is supporting the IPG stand on the project.”

How can she say that! If the City has NOT endorsed it, how would it appear that the City is supporting it???

The City is at best neutral (spineless?) by not taking a stand itself (independent of IPG)! How can the City RETRACT the IPG stand? The City is an entirely different and autonomous entity as is IPG. IPG takes its own stand on issues, as should the City, like other cities – like Smithers, Terrace and Prince Rupert!

Politicians. OMG.

I say this pipeline should go to Eastern Canada, or once the US election is over it will go South on the Keystone to Texas Refineries.

People should keep in mind that while they talk about shipping this oil to China, they also talk about shipping it to the USA. There are many refineries in San Francisco, and L.A. that would love to get their hands on this crude. So dont fall into the trap and assume that it is all destined to China, which would give us another market.

The Oil Sands, Pipelines, Shipping Companies, Refineries, etc; are all owned for the most part by American interests. So why would they ship it to China.??

Amazing. Small communities across the north are being heard and our fearless leaders are taking a page from the liberal playbook at staying silent. So northern bc’s largest city has no opinion? Easy way out for a politician but a miserable failure for any who think they are a leader. Leaders don’t hide and stay silent on a critical issues like this.

California refineries are currently supplied with all the heavy oil they can process and furthermore California has its own heavy oil resources. Eastern Canadian refineries cannot process heavy crude. Houston area refineries can and will be served by the Keystone XL pipeline and Chinese ones can or are being upgraded to handle heavy crude and are already served by Kinder Morgan’s Transmountain pipeline through BC. The Enbridge pipeline will expand this capacity and will serve to spread the risks, rather than concentrate them. At least do your research before spouting off. Environmentalists are their own worst enemy. People would listen to them more if they brought credible arguments to the table.

When the Keystone is built most of the refined product will be exported as the US requirements have flattened and in some cases actually declined.

Refining the product in Canada would be great but the problem is distance from market. Instead of two pipelines there would be five or more needed to transport the different refined products.

We should have a recall process for our mayor and council. They need to know who elected them and why. They couldn’t spend excessive amounts of money on useless projects and they would become more accutely aware of the tax payers bottom line and the things that we need as a city.

We should have a recall process for our mayor and council. They need to know who elected them and why. They couldn’t spend excessive amounts of money on useless projects and they would become more accutely aware of the tax payers bottom line and the things that we need as a city. I also totally agree with mucker we do require a referendum for the Enbridge Pipeline. When we get rid of Harper–well that is another story.

Referendum on the pipeline, I didn’t know it was coming through PG.

Gamblor. When the various politicians, and newspaper articles state that some of the crude from Alberta will go to the US. And considering that it is moving via ship, just where do you think it would go, if it didnt go to California.???

Its POSSIBLE to send bitumen to California, but not likely. As stated, they have their own bitumen and heavy oil refineries. The only reason we would be able to send them oil is if their government/environmentalists prevent/delay bitumen production down there. Environmentalism is action – we all use oil but if everybody says “not in my backyard” it creates huge distortions. One of 2 things happens – either a society pays for imports, or desperation sets in and environmental regulations get tossed aside, which is the case with Enbridge. Which is why the sensible argument is not to attempt to halt the project, but to get it built to proper standards.

Reportedly about half of Canada’s crude oil requirements are met with imports from Venzuela and others to Eastern Canada.

Why don’t we fill 100% of our own crude oil needs with CANADIAN oil from CANADIAN sources???

We don’t have to pipe any oil from the Tarsands to the West coast to fill huge supertankers headed for some other countries!

Who is in control of all these shady manipulations and detrimental contorted schemes?

Thats oilsands, tar is manmade. I know the description, tarsands is supposed to make it sound worse.

That’s bitumen, neither oil sands or tar sands is correct.
http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/bitumen

Technically yes but oil is the common usage and tar raunchier.

We have the highest fuel prices in Canada and we have a city council that sits on its hands and will not support a national energy policy… they think if they sell out to foreign interests the increased exports will trickle down to Canadians.

We have a council that has little vision and no ability to make hard decisions on their own.

Not that long ago I wrote an article called “Neutrality on Enbridge – The Art of Deceit”
http://www.jlsreport.com/?p=2668
In it I said quote, “If the verdict is yes to Enbridge, there will be no further legal obstacles for Enbridge to proceed short of a court order by First Nations based on land claims.”

“It hardly seems fitting that any counselor or mayor would be foolish enough to at that point start to take a position opposing the Northern Gateway Project. What can be done after Enbridge has already received approval from the National Energy Board?”

Once again a city council, just like our provincial government, thinks they can avoid the consequences by sitting on their hands. Failure to take a stand will be considered approval of the project, although you think you can deny after the project has been approved.

Remember that, unlike your former mayor, you will NOT be offered well paid jobs by Enbridge. Look out your window and consider what we have to lose with this project.

All I can say to City Council is “grow a set and take a position”. The people have a right to know.

Not that long ago I wrote an article called “Neutrality on Enbridge – The Art of Deceit”
http://www.jlsreport.com/?p=2668
In it I said quote, “If the verdict is yes to Enbridge, there will be no further legal obstacles for Enbridge to proceed short of a court order by First Nations based on land claims.”

“It hardly seems fitting that any counselor or mayor would be foolish enough to at that point start to take a position opposing the Northern Gateway Project. What can be done after Enbridge has already received approval from the National Energy Board?”