jacee Posted October 29, 2013 Report Posted October 29, 2013 This isn't in local jurisdiction really so...it's a provincial matter and should be dealt with as such. Locals are free to disagree and try to make changes. Quote
Smallc Posted October 29, 2013 Report Posted October 29, 2013 Yes they are, but that doesn't mean that they should or will get their way Quote
guyser Posted October 29, 2013 Report Posted October 29, 2013 I was deliberately giving cyber a taste of his own medicine. The attempt at sarcasm is lost in a forum post. Yea...thats the ticket , sarcasm. Quote
GostHacked Posted October 29, 2013 Report Posted October 29, 2013 The court was trying to navigate a fine line. It wanted governments to pay attention to native concerns but it did not want the country to be held hostage by greedy native groups. The requirement to consult was the compromise. Do you really believe that native groups should be able to hold the country hostage? Kind of like being held hostage by greedy energy companies? Quote
g_bambino Posted October 29, 2013 Report Posted October 29, 2013 Kind of like being held hostage by greedy energy companies? Such as? Quote
jacee Posted October 29, 2013 Report Posted October 29, 2013 . If someone has constructive suggestions that reduce the impact of the project then they should be listened to. To be "listened to", native and other local communities would have to be consulted, would they not? Quote
TimG Posted October 29, 2013 Report Posted October 29, 2013 (edited) To be "listened to", native and other local communities would have to be consulted, would they not?As far as I can tell the people complaining simply want to stop development and do not have any constructive suggestions so they are now claiming there were not consulted because the development is going ahead. IOW - people complaining about not being consulted simply don't understand that consultation does not mean they get to dictate how and where development happens. It means they have an opportunity to provide input that should be listened to if it makes sense. If it does not make sense it will have to be ignored. Edited October 29, 2013 by TimG Quote
jacee Posted October 29, 2013 Report Posted October 29, 2013 As far as I can tell the people complaining simply want to stop development and do not have any constructive suggestions so they are now claiming there were not consulted because the development is going ahead. IOW - people complaining about not being consulted simply don't understand that consultation does not mean they get to dictate how and where development happens. It means they have an opportunity to provide input that should be listened to if it makes sense. If it does not make sense it will have to be ignored.How were they consulted? Quote
Argus Posted October 29, 2013 Author Report Posted October 29, 2013 I can't help but wonder how you'd feel if your mayor was bribed to rubber-stamp something you were otherwise following legal channels to oppose. Isn't that basically the way most of our cities are run? Developers put money into the pockets of the mayor and councillors and then generally get their way, no matter what private citizens want, or what the rules say. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted October 29, 2013 Author Report Posted October 29, 2013 So now they cannot refuse "reasonable" accommodation. Who's defining reasonable here? I dunno but I bet "No fracking, period" is not going to count as a reasonable accomodation. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
eyeball Posted October 29, 2013 Report Posted October 29, 2013 Isn't that basically the way most of our cities are run? Developers put money into the pockets of the mayor and councillors and then generally get their way, no matter what private citizens want, or what the rules say. Basically, but the question was how would you feel about it? I mean, why should back room bribery be any more acceptable than burning cars in terms of getting things done? Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
jacee Posted October 29, 2013 Report Posted October 29, 2013 Isn't that basically the way most of our cities are run? Developers put money into the pockets of the mayor and councillors and then generally get their way, no matter what private citizens want, or what the rules say. Less so all the time, thanks to more active communities willing to take the trouble and risk of protesting. Quote
jacee Posted October 29, 2013 Report Posted October 29, 2013 I mean, why should back room bribery be any more acceptable than burning cars in terms of getting things done? Man, I'd like to frame that quote! Beautiful! Quote
cybercoma Posted October 30, 2013 Report Posted October 30, 2013 I mean, why should back room bribery be any more acceptable than burning cars in terms of getting things done? Because those with the money get whatever the hell they want. Those without money get thrown in jail. Quote
Smallc Posted October 30, 2013 Report Posted October 30, 2013 Because people shouldn't be thrown in jail for burning hundreds of thousands of dollars in public property. Quote
roy baty Posted October 30, 2013 Report Posted October 30, 2013 First Nations are being used as pawns yet again because FNs can get away with civil disobedience far easier than a bunch of white environmentalists blocking a road. The cost of that entire affair should be levied from the federal transfer payments given to that band IMO. Instead, us working folk fit the bill for this nonsense yet again. Quote
cybercoma Posted October 30, 2013 Report Posted October 30, 2013 Because people shouldn't be thrown in jail for burning hundreds of thousands of dollars in public property. Did I say that? Quote
Smallc Posted October 30, 2013 Report Posted October 30, 2013 Did I say that? You implied that if they had money they wouldn't go to jail... Quote
cybercoma Posted October 30, 2013 Report Posted October 30, 2013 (edited) You implied that if they had money they wouldn't go to jail... If they had money, they would be able to game the system in other ways, namely influence peddling and bribery. Edited October 30, 2013 by cybercoma Quote
Smallc Posted October 30, 2013 Report Posted October 30, 2013 I don't actually believe that's as widespread as you think. There are too many people working just to keep things like that from happening. That's why government is so big. Quote
jacee Posted October 30, 2013 Report Posted October 30, 2013 Because those with the money get whatever the hell they want.We could burn their cars. Those without money get thrown in jail.Ya but you get to burn a cop car. Quote
jacee Posted October 30, 2013 Report Posted October 30, 2013 Because people shouldn't be thrown in jail for burning hundreds of thousands of dollars in public property. People should be thrown in jail for bribery too. eyeball said I mean, why should back room bribery be any more acceptable than burning cars in terms of getting things done? Quote
jacee Posted October 30, 2013 Report Posted October 30, 2013 If they had money, they would be able to game the system in other ways, namely influence peddling and bribery. Quote
g_bambino Posted November 1, 2013 Report Posted November 1, 2013 If they had money, they would be able to game the system in other ways, namely influence peddling and bribery. Like what? Quote
jacee Posted November 1, 2013 Report Posted November 1, 2013 (edited) cybercoma, on 29 Oct 2013 - 9:10 PM, said: If they had money, they would be able to game the system in other ways, namely influence peddling and bribery. Like what?Oh ... I don't know ... "Don't frack here ... frack waaaay over there $$$$$$"In the case of First Nations, they could afford to go to court for an injunction to stop exploration. Edited November 1, 2013 by jacee Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.