what gives debora munoz the idea that her personal views represent the city of prince george?

Mayor Rogers would be smart to distance himself from Colin Kinsley on this one. It is not going to end well for Enbridge, or its paid cronies.

Just eco-terrorists doing what they do best, pounding on tables and blowing hot air. May I ask how the building this discussion took place in was heated? Likely natural gas. How did everyone arrive? Likely in cars. Case closed. Build the pipe. Anyone concerned about the environmental "disaster" this will be should drive through Jasper. Chances are many people have and had no idea Kinder Morgan just built a pipeline through "pristine" mountains. The only thing you see are elk grazing peacefully while the oil flows below. This will be the best hting to happen to this place in decades.

I think Skakun hit the problem dead on. BC bears the risk of the pipeline while Alberta gets the profit. I have said time and again that my opinion on the project would change if the financial realities of this project were changed to give far more money to BC to offset the current unfunded financial liability. If we got say 25% of the royalties i would be happy to engage in a constructive dialogue on the subject, but currently all we get is the benefit of a pipeline being laid and that is it.

Gamblor, you are correct in stating that there is already a pipeline route carrying Alberta oil to the coast. Why should we build another one? Kinder Morgan has a plan to double the size of its existing pipeline to 700,000 barrels a day. Let Enbridge build its pipeline down that existing route, rather than jeopardize over 750 river crossings and the North coast ecology.
Futhermore we are fools not to tax the hell out of these pipelines. The Chinese are willing to pay a premium of over a billion dollars a year for Alberta oil over what the Texas refineries are willing to pay for the 550,000 bpd Enbridge is promising them. Sounds like a good tax to me, since we are accepting the environmental risk, with at the present, little economic benefit.

TILMA and the HST place strong limitations upon what the Province can tax. Currently the Provincial govenment is unable to strongly tax the pipelines because of the laws it has put in place. We need a government that is willing to reverse these taxation policies to put the taxation laws in place to gain taxation revenue from Alberta. If that was done, i would be willing to change my view on the revenue from the tar sands, without that revenue, i will stay opposed to the project.

"what gives debora munoz the idea that her personal views represent the city of prince george?"

God only knows. Maybe the the same crazy idea that the others have that their views represent the City of Prince George?

They were all elected by the City. Munoz got more votes than several others. She has as much right as anyone else on Council to speak here mind and what she feels is on the minds of those she hears, as very Councillor will typically do.

What I find interesting is that almost the same people want a plebiscite for spending money on City infrastructure but are willing to not ask for that when it comes to issues they support.

Kind of hypocritical.

I do like what Rogers said: "if his comments are being used by the Alliance in a more aggressive way to support the project, he will deal with that."

So, I will watch to see what he does when that happens. I think it already has, because people typically do not look at the finer points. Guilt by association is the typical view of most people who do not look the the details and Kinsley and Enbridge know that and count on that.

TILMA and the HST place strong limitations upon what the Province can tax. Currently the Provincial govenment is unable to strongly tax the pipelines because of the laws it has put in place. We need a government that is willing to reverse these taxation policies to put the taxation laws in place to gain taxation revenue from Alberta. If that was done, i would be willing to change my view on the revenue from the tar sands, without that revenue, i will stay opposed to the project.

Here is the reality of a "modern" pipeline project of Enbridge

"In 2009, Enbridge Energy Partners, a US affiliate of Enbridge Inc., agreed to pay $1.1 million to settle a lawsuit brought against the company by the state of Wisconsin for 545 environmental violations. In a news release from Wisconsin's Department of Justice, Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen said "...the incidents of violation were numerous and widespread, and resulted in impacts to the streams and wetlands throughout the various watersheds." The violations were incurred while building portions of the company's Southern Access pipeline, a ~$2.1 billion project to transport crude from the oil sands region in Alberta to Chicago."

Why would anything change in 2012/13/14 or whenever they decide to build it. I do not trust our regulators and inspectors either. It is not only Enbridge that we have to deal with, but our own government quality control people and the contractors they will likely hire to help. Bet you bottom dollars that none will come from this area because that is not something we have any expertise in. The best we will get from them is the accommodations, cars, etc they will be renting.

What resources does the general public have to ask the right questions at the hearings. What resources will the feds and the province have to ask the right questions and respond to answers which do not answer the questions. What experts will the city hire? In fact, what questions will the "alliance" ask and what experts will they hire to ask the questions. None of the Councillors, the Mayors or any of the others on the alliance have the faintest clue when they are snowballed.

The key actually is to figure out what exact role the Alliance members will take on with respect to the hearings.

Finally, how will a conflict of interest be identified?

Right on gamblor...totally agree!

I dont want pipelines here
we are always takeing never thinking about sustainabillity, not thinking about how many lives are already ruined from contaminated tailing getting in the rivers and drinking supplies. People down streem from these oil sand are starting to get a wide array of cancers and the fish too.
some people dont care about contaminating people and the enviroment and seem only to care about profit for some mulitnational company you make me sick and embarrised to be part of a society that never cares about any thing but profit at any cost

its interesting how many of these councillors said that they had concerns about the pipeline but were unwilling to take a stand against it. Just the other day at the BC Municipalities convention there was a vote against this very pipeline but to think that our politicians would have the backbone to stand up even when it is very evident that there is little or no benefit to Prince George residents and plenty of risk ... makes me wonder how much money Dan Rogers gets to sit on this board...

Also I thought Dan came forward with a kind of green agenda,,, more bike trails, clean air.. wouldn't be surprised if some of those that were asking him to stand down were the same people that went out door to door asking for his support...

be surprised to see him have the same support next time around ....

Mayor Rogers is in quite a pickle. He seems to lean toward sustainability personally, but is stuck with people like Colin Kinsley and his ilk breathing down his neck. Hearing Kinsley on CBC radio yesterday, it almost sounded like he had received some assurance from the mayor that he'd stay the course and not leave the Alliance.

Supporting the Enbridge Pipeline undermines the credibility of all of the other sustainability initiatives the mayor has brought forward. I hope he finds a way out before the next election, because the opponents are organized and could easily have an impact on the outcome at the ballot box.

Kudos to the Kitimat mayor for stepping down from the Enbridge astro-turf group. Regardless of her personal views, this move increased her credibility significantly. Mayor Rogers would be wise to follow her lead. If he wants to get unbiased information to make an informed decision, he should look elsewhere.

3 cheers to Gamblor. These tree huggers have no clue as to the economic benefits to be had from a big pipe project. Like fields of new F250's at the staging areas for example...
Of course the anti pipeline bunch, like the ones appearing at city council don't care, because they are on nice cozy payrolls from the BC taxpayer.

The amount of jobs this will create is nothing! Once the pipeline is built there will be no jobs for people in PG. So build the pipeline to help Alberta profit getting the oil across our province to the Chinese so they can refine it. Yes, sounds like BC is going to get riche on this one. Look up the state of the existing pipelines where the companies have ignored them for decades. What a bunch of short sighted people on this forum. You would actually risk the rivers, watershed and animals of our beautiful province for two years of jobs? How much do you want to bet that Prince George does not see one person get a wage from this. It will be Albertans working! It will be Chinese working! The only work we will see is years down the road when the pipeline breaks! Wake up!

rodangus, would you rather tell your kids about the two years when there were flocks of new F-250s around Prince George, or tell them about the good old days when you could fish the Fraser, Nechako, Bulkley and Skeena?
Don't get distracted by those spinner hubcaps dude - there really is a bigger picture here.

The fact that this project is subject to review by a federally regulated body of experts is apparently lost on all the eco-opposers that do nothing but oppose everything, yet rely comfortably on the wealth that resource extraction has, and continues to provide, great wealth for our region and country. Our cities are clear-cuts, the internet relies on mineral extraction and energy production to exist, and the comforts of home such as heat, light, and even rapid transit come at the price of developing resources to build them with. A group of elected officials should neither openly oppose nor promote the project, instead, I would expect them to act in an impartial way and support the processes that underly the objective, legitimate roles that they play within the varied municipal, provincial, and federal governments that they represent. Congrats to Dan for being a part of the discussion and having a seat at the table because without it PG would certainly not be able to effective push our own interests. Leave the grand-standing to external, non-taxpayer funded organizations that rely on donations Munoz - you have no legitimate place opposing something that you are no expert in. Opposition in advance of a formalized review is nothing but posturing and an insult to the well researched, scientific based regulations of our own federal and provincial environmental regulators.

tree huggers versus pipe huggers I see ...... love that feel of cold steel in the morning dew.... LOL

"Congrats to Dan for being a part of the discussion and having a seat at the table"

Excuse me. What discussion and what table? This is not some government round table. This is a group that was assembled by the proponent to support their proposal. Nothing more and nothing less.

If there are any discussions going on at this alliance, I want to hear what is being said, and especially what is being said by people that are my representatives on Council.

This is not some private club ... well, it is, but it most certainly should not be!!!!

It is a very well concerted piece of public relations by Enbridge. If they were only that good with the technical side of their projects.

Why are folks so scared of a public review by federal regulators? I'm not saying I'm for or against it, I'm just in favor of a legitimate process that weighs all the risks and benefits in a balanced way. Do we forget that an oil pipeline flows through our community now, yet fish still swim in the river? As for Dan, I think he's stated he's in favor of the process - and the more informed he is through either the alliance, the community advsory board, or any other avenue of information, then I'm all for him doing it.

Zeitgeist2010 wrote: “If we got say 25% of the royalties i would be happy to engage in a constructive dialogue on the subject, but currently all we get is the benefit of a pipeline being laid and that is it.”

I am totally with you.

In the USA, some states tax interstate pipelines on the basis of the value of oil/gas passing through them across their state lands. On several occasions it seems that the constitutionality of that has been challenged, but not successfully. In fact, there was a recent challenge in Louisiana because they were taxing the transmission for interstate pipelines at a higher rate than intrastate pipelines. That challenge was defeated as well.

I cannot find anything on the internet about similar taxes in Canada. Perhaps one of the readers knows either way and would like to share that information with the other readers.

However, there may be one major precedent that has been set with the agreement with HydroQuebec and the Churchill Falls generating project in Labrador. The project has to export its electricity via transmission lines cutting across Quebec territory. Quebec negotiated a deal of extremely low electricity rates in return for allowing them to transmit across provincial lands.

I wonder if anyone in the province is looking into that and, if they are not, why we are not able to do the same things as in the USA.

Who is not in favour of the process? Did anyone say there should not be a review? It is the law of the land that there has to be a review. Quite simple.

As I said, Enbridge is carrying out a very well conceived PR process under the guise of people who are all in favour of a review process that is mandated by law and regulation. It is a non issue.

What is the issue is that those who are part of the alliance are implicit supporters of the project. Which, in fact, most of them are with their tongues hanging out drooling over a pile of dollars they think is huge, when, in reality, it is quite small. The big dollars are in China and other parts of Asia and they are flowing right back to the eastern end of the pipe with a couple of bucks dribbling out along the way for maintenance.

Time for BC, at least, to tax the transmission.

I agree with BC getting royalties.So much money in oil,look what Dubai has built.Where is all our money going from the worlds largest oil reserve located right here in Canada.

The problem with the Kinder Morgan pipeline is we don't get the royalties. People complain The North always gets the short end of the stick, well its because the people down south think we're all a bunch of Weibo Ludwigs when we shoot things like this down. Let me put it another way - if you don't like pipelines, you don't like hospitals and schools and paved roads and all the other nice things big business pays for either. Horse and buggy and dying at 38 of dysentery may sound like fun to you, but not me.

Then the treehuggers talk about "sustainability" and how we don't need oil and yet ythey refuse to give up cars and admit they need oil just as bad as the rest of us. I just choose not to lie to myself.

Nice pension's coming for the sea to sands bunch....I see the BC pension corp. has $260,000,000 invested in Enbridge and a $1 billion in the Syncrude partnership. They have a bigger reason to love the pipeline project than even the mayor...

Nice pension's coming for the sea to sands bunch....I see the BC pension corp. has $260,000,000 invested in Enbridge and a $1 billion in the Syncrude partnership. They have a bigger reason to love the pipeline project than even the mayor...