Wow! What a forceful group. betcha a group of motorists can get a petition Upwards of 600 to get our roads patched and paved properly? Betcha they could get 6 THOUSAND signatures. Maybe Enbridge could buy off it's foes just like BP bought off Greenpeace for ten mil. Every one has a price. Make an offer.

Sea to sands make an excellent point. IPG is not elected in anyways and has no right to act as an advocacy group outside of a voted on agenda from city council.

Do we live in a democracy, or do we just pay taxes so others can fund their agenda regardless of what the tax payers think?

From the Enbridge Northern Gateway Alliance website:
"Welcome to the Northern Gateway Alliance, a COALITION OF COMMUNITY LEADERS supporting the regulatory review of the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines project. We believe THE BENEFITS AND OPPORTUNITIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT SHOULD BE GIVEN SERIOUS CONSIDERATION through the regulatory review process.."

http://northerngatewayalliance.ca

Couple that with:
"Mayor Rogers recently told his fellow Directors on the Regional District of Fraser Fort George that being a member of the Alliance’s community group doesn’t mean you support the project"

You be the judge of how realistic his view is that members of the Alliance do not necessarily support the project.

His picture is up there with the other high profile individuals as is a statement.

I believe the average person, reading the statement from the Alliance, which is a marketing tool of Enbridge, as well as the Mayor's statement, gets the clear message that those who are members are supporters of the project and that he is a supporter of the project.

The Mayor cannot get input otherwise? Okay, tell me another one!!

The Mayor's words:
"As BC's Northern Capital, we will be impacted by this project and we are well positioned to potentially benefit both in the short and long term. It could mean much needed economic development opportunities for us and communities across the north. What's most impressive about this initiative is the demonstrated willingness of Enbridge to engage communities throughout the process, to listen to concerns, and to meet the requirements of stringent environmental regulations. This balanced approach aligns well with our vision of sustainable development."

Does the mayor not know that in projects such as this that community engagement by the proponent is a key component. Why does this impress him that an organization is doing what they need to do?

On the above linked site of Enbridge, there is a membership form. Those who take out a membership will have agreed to the following statment written there.

"I support the regulatory review of the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines project and would like to become an Alliance member. If approved, I believe the project will represent significant new economic benefits and opportunities for First Nations and communities in northern BC and northern Alberta while adhering to the highest construction standards and best practices to protect our environment.'

Unless one has done their homework and knows something about the standards referenced in general, one would not be able to attest to the last part of the statement.

As far as supporting the regulatory review, that's like saying you support the Motor Vehicle Act. It is not a voluntary review process. It is a legal requirement!

I think that the whole process that Enbridge has their name attached to is very underhanded.

Of course, getting a neutral body of people to do something like what Enbridge is purporting to do is goingto be rather difficult. Mamy of these individuals have public money collected through taxes behind their support.

http://wcel.org/media-centre/media-releases/review-process-enbridge-northern-gateway-project-subject-ongoing-opposit

From the "other side of the coin".

From my point of view, there are four sticking points in order of importance:

1. the project is totally reliant as well as supportive of a very controversial project - the oil sands in Alberta.

2. the other end of the pipe will increase oil tanker traffic on the coast which will be the second highest risk factor of the integrated project of oil sands production-pipeline-oil tankers-oil users

3. the pipeline itself has environmental risks involved but are lower than the two above.

4. The hype of jobs is just that, hype. Sure there are short term construction jobs in the locations along the pipe route. Where are the sustainable jobs? Not on this side of the ocean other than at the tar sands. The rest one can almost count on one's hands relatively speaking.

It's that last point that people are addressing when they show support. However, they fail to identify how it will bring a significant number of jobs to their business or their community over the next 20 years.

Remember the three legs to the stool of sustainability - social, environmental, economic.

We are hearing primarily from one of the legs.

Imagine the whole world with every person in it NOT saying, "You know what you should do.....?"

I think everyone will imagine something different from that.

Could not even say: "follow your heart"

The Mayor's words:
"As BC's Northern Capital, we will be impacted by this project and we are well positioned to potentially benefit both in the short and long term. It could mean much needed economic development opportunities for us and communities across the north. What's most impressive about this initiative is the demonstrated willingness of Enbridge to engage communities throughout the process, to listen to concerns, and to meet the requirements of stringent environmental regulations. This balanced approach aligns well with our vision of sustainable development

"B.C.'s northern capital??? Constantly repeating silliness does not make it true. Dream on.