Spiderfish

Correct, the NGP is completely new, the west-east option is not. Both options would surely offer positive economic benefit for their respective regions. I'm not sure what the chances are of the NGP getting final approval and surviving the inevitable appeal process if it does. I understand the resistance to this option and the potential environmental risks. The west-east option seems like it would satisfy all parties, BC would be left alone, and the eastern provinces could reap the economic benefit from transporting it east.

Do you think there will be little economic benefit to a pipeline construction through BC? As I said, if BC doesn't want in on the economic benefit from Alberta oil, there are other provinces who do.

Try to keep up.

Yeah...10,000 jobs and $10 billion in GDP during development and construction phase (according to an independent Delloite & Touche projection analysis) is really nothing....nothing at all. And the majority of this project utilizes an existing operating pipeline, so much of the risk has already been assumed. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/energy-east-pipeline-may-create-10-000-jobs-study-says-1.1699614

Don't worry, if BC doesn't want in on the economic benefit from Alberta oil, there are other provinces who do. TransCanada west-east pipeline in first stage of approval

Right. But grain farmers are facing the same challenge as the oil and gas industry... lack of product is not the issue, finding a buyer for the product is not the issue, it's getting the product to the buyer that is the problem. And there are viable solutions, but we have to start putting a process in place that encourages more efficient transport of all products. Instead of trying to control and limit production of our resources by creating logistical bottlenecks in delivery, it would seem to make sense from a business perspective to find safer, cheaper, and more environmentally friendly solutions that will eliminate or reduce the problem of transporting product to market.

Your implication that environmentalists are fighting the good fight and that "Sometimes you just need to get out of the way and let the environmentalists do the job that most of us would rather not do" will do nothing to solve the problem of transporting oil to market, and in fact would surely slow it down to a crawl if not stop it completely if not challenged. Restriction and limitation of transportation options is an effective way of controlling the rate of production, as I'm sure you are aware. It's in grain farmers best interest to transport oil as cheaply and efficiently as possible, their industry is heavily dependent on fossil fuels and their profitability is directly linked to the cost of fuel.

The added pressure on rail transport due to an exponential increase in the movement of crude has created a shortage and competition for rail capacity, although I wouldn't necessarily define it as subtle, he did offer a viable solution to the bottleneck.

Has pipeline construction caused the endangerment of many species of mammals, animals, plant life, etc.? Are you simply generalizing the positive protection efforts of environmentalists overall versus the evil pipe?

Sure it would, just like delaying and opposing the Keystone XL is. As I said, there's more than economics at play.

I think there's more to the equation than simple economics, and believe that the new fight to control and limit this new transportation option is just heating up. If economics was the only consideration, pipelines would be the obvious choice. The DOT has implemented 4 new Emergency Orders in the last 7 months to the existing Safety Standards for transporting crude by rail, something that is inevitable and ultimately necessary. There has been relatively little effort by environmental organizations so far to exploit this new safety fear, but this too I believe is inevitable. Shipping Crude By Rail: The New Front In The Tar Sands Wars I think this pretty much sums up the strategy that can be expected moving forward:

Their seems to be quite a bit of pent up passive aggression and antipathy from some people around here, and their lack of self-control and disregard for the forum rules is in no small way contributing to the degradation of quality within threads. Maybe a sandbox area could be added where members can go to throw insults and hurl accusations at each other without junking up the rest of the place.

The Liberal expense disclosure doesn't break expenses down to anywhere near that level of detail, the price of their oj would be unknown even if the Conservatives followed suit. I would not be against a full detailed audit of all MP spending.

I agree.

Celebrating and preserving heritage should be something that all cultures are afforded, and not discouraged.

Obviously, the article indicated Iggy was in charge at the time and it was under his command that both Simson and Scott Andrews were sent to the penalty box. This reflection from Ignatieff outlines the tremendous difficulty he faced in trying to accomplish this incredible feat, and where he ultimately failed. Perhaps the Conservatives are simply in the process of calculating how they are going to "maintain caucus unity on the subject".

It's encouraging to see the Liberals attitude towards transparency may be changing. A little too late for Michelle Simson, but she doesn't appear to be someone who holds a grudge. http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/justin-trudeau-expense-plan-good-baby-step-says-ex-mp-1.1858162

Not necessarily. The recent case of the native student violating the scent policy in a school in MB because he was smudging before class shows that you can be labeled racist for not accommodating cultural preservation and heritage. I think society has deemed it acceptable for minorities to preserve heritage, but it seems less acceptable for non-minorities. This double standard may have to do with trying to "level the playing field", or may be an effort to enforce the perception of multiculturalism.

Efficiency is gained through tedious repetition, the opposition has become exceedingly "efficient" in their delivery. Their may even be a few people still listening.

With due respect Michael, should we not be trying to stay on topic? I mean, thread drift has been identified as a significant issue around here recently.

Well...at least he makes an effort to show up. As opposed to the refreshing and stimulating dialogue offered up by the opposition

Lol. Was that a shot?

If something doesn't change, there may be a lot less people who do. Half of Quebec non-francophones consider leaving

See above.

So in other words...his drug and alcohol abuse.