Jump to content

Recommended Posts

but hey, here's a revealing thought for you: I've not offered my personal position on the pipeline. Don't let that get in your way, hey! :lol:

No one needs you to offer your personal position on energy related matters. You're as predictable as they come.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 410
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

He promised to reform the NEB, which seems to work OK.

The NEB should and does hold these companies to the highest standards in building and maintaining the pipelines.

guys, guys... apparently not, according to the Federal Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Julie Gelfand - by the by, she was appointed by Auditor General Michael Ferguson in March, 2014:

National Energy Board needs to fix pipeline oversight, watchdog says

The National Energy Board is not doing enough to track whether pipeline companies are complying with conditions set out when projects are approved, according to a new report by the federal commissioner of the environment and sustainable development.

The report, tabled in the House of Commons on Tuesday, warns that the national regulator needs to do more to keep track of pipeline projects, especially given the increased number of projects it is required to handle

.

.

The environment watchdog found the systems set up by the NEB to check whether companies are keeping their promises when building and operating pipelines are "outdated or inaccurate."

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well that's hardly your "gotcha", is it? That's in line with the position statement I put forward earlier! Nice try though. :lol: Did you think anything else was happening, other than the current progressing NEB process... what you describe as "moving forward under the proper environmental investigation and review"? Yeesh! Given you kept repeating and challenging me with your "waddabout Trudeau", how does it play now that your "gotcha"... ain't so... "gotcha"?

Actually it is. Trudeau has always tried to sit in the middle on this issue but has routinely enforced that he is NOT in favor of this stressing too many things need to work itself out.Now he is at a point saying he is 'solidly' in one camp which is supporting Notley and Wynne and their support of the project. Much like you, Trudeau won't give a straight answer however this is clearly MILES ahead of where he was before the election. And its not just Trudeau that provides the 'gotcha', its the coalition of left leaning Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario and New Brunswick are all leaning their support towards the line. I guess those lefties sure love oil...hey? All this right after the parade at COP21. Ouch....

in line with this thread, Coderre/MMC does not have final authority... on either dumping human shyte into the St. Lawrence or in making a decision on Energy East. Accordingly, in your targeted criticism of Coderre for the waste dumping, that rightful target is the federal government... and in the prior 2 waste dumping instances I mentioned that was absolutely with the Harper Conservative government approvals. And if you really want to press the point, the most recent instance was planned well before the election working with the Harper Conservative government... and executed just days after the Liberal government assumed government - but who's counting, hey! :D

.

I'm ashamed of you waldo. Just a few posts back you properly suggested that this topic should be discussed in another thread. I politely agreed but now here you are bashing your own idea of keeping that in another thread. No wonder no one on this forum listens to your ideas...you don't even listen to your own! :D

Fine...I'll address your off topic post....Coderre does not have final authority however he has 99% of the responsibility leading up to this and for something like this to NOT happen. The City of Montreal has allowed their infrastructure to crumble with zero contingency plans put into place. Hell...they are one of the few plants in North America that still only offering primary treatment. You know what this means waldo...they take out most of the solids and dump all the untreated bacteria into the St. Lawrence ALL the time. Their tertiary treatment expansion will only come online in 2018. Coderre and previous Montreal officials are certainly responsible for this. But...hey lets not blame Montreal for that either.

The federal government does not intervene in the vast majority of decisions cities make. They get involved in the final decision when said cities are planning on dumping into federal/international waterways above the values that were already regulated. The alternative on this was to spend almost 1 billion dollars on a temporary solution OR dump it for free...like I said there were alternatives but they were costly. The feds weren't about to stuff a bill like that down Montreal's throat considering other cities in this country are dumping directly. Montreal/Quebec would cry foul and threaten separation once again. So it gets approved.

As for the other two Harper incidents....please provide a citation showing the dates of said dumps as well as confirmation these dumps were planned/approved by the Harper government. Would gladly have a read on this.

no deflection, no BS and no "faulty and presumptuous Dennis Coderre claims".

As previously requested, please provide proof of your claim that I criticized Dennis Coderre for taking his stand. Anytime now would be appreciated. Thanking you in advance.

I'm most interested in why you're so reluctant to provide an answer to the point I've made now several times to you... only to have you ignore it, repeatedly: given TransCanada has positioned the pipeline as a "win for Eastern Canada" in regards replacing imported oil with domestic oil, care to comment on just how much existing refinery capacity there is towards meeting that premise, particularly given the proposal is so heavily aligned towards exports ala the development of new export terminals within the proposal? When Denis Coderre/MMC suggests that, "all the risks are being placed on the greater Montreal area with no direct gains to the area"... is he right? Well, is he?

.

Several??? To me??? Well the definition of several is more than two but fewer than many. So lets count how many times you asked me about this. Let's see......there was post 92 where you asked the FIRST time. Here it is...

in that "honest broker" positioning of yours, care to offer comment on the TransCanada (and proponents) statements/implications/positioning that the Energy East proposal has a significant emphasis on domestic usage, one intended to lessen/remove Eastern Canada reliance on imported oil? Broker that... honestly - yes?

And then there was...hmmm....geez....can't seem to find any other times that you asked. Well....that certainly doesn't make it plausible for it to be SEVERAL....to me....does it? Not another dishonest statement, is it waldo? With that said, what did I respond when you asked me the FIRST time....well...lets check it out:

Throw a citation at what you are talking about and I'll have a read.

WHAAAAAAT? Me asking for a citation about about this? How dare I? So I will wait patiently for you to actually provide what was asked for...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said, the NEB SHOULD and DOES hold these companies to the highest standards. Part of developing those standards are to have regular internal and external audits to point out the areas that one can improve. Very standard for an audit to come back with improvements. Of course, they only took a look at less than 5% of the cases of which they found issues with about 2% of the total.

As per the Ottawa Citizen article:

The environment commissioner made six recommendations to the NEB related to tracking company compliance, emergency preparedness, and attracting and retaining staff. The Board has accepted all of the recommendations.

See waldo...not so hard. Examine your process, make it better, and strive to the best. You see something wrong with this? Perhaps your worldly experience of audits that you have endured will enlighten all of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It comes in pipelines. It doesn't matter from where or to where. If Quebec is afraid of pipelines then shut them all down.

I want to see Quebecers pushing their cars up the long lines to the few remaining open gas stations, so I can laugh my head off.

Quebec is afraid of pipelines when the contractors have failed to do their homework and present comprehensive contingency plans. Quebecers won't be pushing their cars anytime soon so you can keep your head on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now he is at a point saying he is 'solidly' in one camp which is supporting Notley and Wynne and their support of the project.

no - you simply choose to read what you want into a statement... here, let me provide your own supplied quote again:

“I am solidly in one camp on this one,” he said. “I am very much in the camp of both premiers, [Ontario’s Kathleen] Wynne and Notley, who demonstrated that Canada can and should work together on economic issues for all of us.”

do you really want me to point out the extreme liberty you're taking with that statement? Emphasis has always been on the Liberal Party position that I put forward... and nothing I've read Trudeau say, or that you've presented here counters the following that I quoted earlier in the thread:

Liberals believe that Canada needs new infrastructure, including pipelines, to move our energy resources to domestic and global markets. However these projects must earn the trust of local communities, respect Indigenous rights, and cannot put our lands and waters at risk.

The Energy East project is undergoing an environmental assessment, and it would be inappropriate to pre-judge the outcome of the review.

please quit making shyte up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As previously requested, please provide proof of your claim that I criticized Dennis Coderre for taking his stand. Anytime now would be appreciated. Thanking you in advance.

again, never made your strawman claim. What I did highlight was your disingenuous 'honest broker' play where you put forward criticisms of that Coderre/MMC position, then whined about other MLW members supposedly talking about "relations instead of positions"... while you at the same time relayed facets of your own/industry position, vis-a-vis "pipeline are safe... are the safest".

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Several??? To me??? Well the definition of several is more than two but fewer than many. So lets count how many times you asked me about this. Let's see......there was post 92 where you asked the FIRST time. Here it is...

And then there was...hmmm....geez....can't seem to find any other times that you asked. Well....that certainly doesn't make it plausible for it to be SEVERAL....to me....does it? Not another dishonest statement, is it waldo? With that said, what did I respond when you asked me the FIRST time....well...lets check it out:

OMG! You went to all that trouble without actually responding to it? You're right... my 'several' included another instance beyond the single post directed to you... the one you initially ignored... and now ignored again, while you doubled-down to make a point that I only directed the point to you, uhhh ONCE! So, ok... I'll put it forward again. Broker it, the following... honestly - yes?

given TransCanada has positioned the pipeline as a "win for Eastern Canada" in regards replacing imported oil with domestic oil, care to comment on just how much existing refinery capacity there is towards meeting that premise, particularly given the proposal is so heavily aligned towards exports ala the development of new export terminals within the proposal? When Denis Coderre/MMC suggests that, "all the risks are being placed on the greater Montreal area with no direct gains to the area"... is he right? Well, is he?

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said, the NEB SHOULD and DOES hold these companies to the highest standards.

how does the NEB do such a thing currently... when the Environment Commissioner, Julie Gelfand, states:

- "the systems set up by the NEB to check whether companies are keeping their promises when building and operating pipelines are outdated or inaccurate."

- when in 50% of the audited sample, {in the} 49 cases it audited, there were 24 cases between 2000 and 2014 for which the tracking of the company's compliance was either out of date or files were missing.

is this representative of your declared, "to the highest standards"?

.

Part of developing those standards are to have regular internal and external audits to point out the areas that one can improve. Very standard for an audit to come back with improvements. Of course, they only took a look at less than 5% of the cases of which they found issues with about 2% of the total.

perhaps you're under the incorrect impression that this was the NEB taking a self-improvement initiative and auditing itself! :lol:

.

As per the Ottawa Citizen article: [waldo: the article you didn't bother to link to... that one? I presume this is the article you're referring to: National Energy Board doing 'inadequate' job of enforcing pipeline safety]

See waldo...not so hard. Examine your process, make it better, and strive to the best. You see something wrong with this? Perhaps your worldly experience of audits that you have endured will enlighten all of us.

again, you leave an impression that this was the NEB auditing it's own deficiencies, it's own "inadequacy"... going back 10-15 years, no less! And again, is this your declared, "to the highest standards"?

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quebec is afraid of pipelines when the contractors have failed to do their homework and present comprehensive contingency plans. Quebecers won't be pushing their cars anytime soon so you can keep your head on.

Well, I guess it's their choice, they can prefer to continue to be afraid of train loads of oil that have killed no one rather than pipelines that have killed dozens, no, that's not right..anyway, maybe if the pipeline company does it's 'homework', whatever that means, they can ensure that that world will be perfect for all and never a drop can be spilled. Sunshine and lollipops for everyone! Heaven forbid a society completely reliant upon oil bear some of the risk associated with it's transport, especially when the proposed method is the safest one that we have. Fyi, homework is for children, and that is a much more appropriate description of the people who object to this pipeline than of the adults who pay the bills in this country and want to see it built.

Edited by poochy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The strategy has now been forced out of Trudeau, when he went to see Coderre, so Denis could straighten him out on some harsh political and electoral realities in Quebec/Canada.

Trudqau will undertake a long ';review' of the NEB, which will take a couple of years.

Then the 'review' of pipl;eine proposals will take a few years, while every hamlet, First Nations, province and individual in Canada says their piece. Then a few more eyars to provide an approval with a few hundred conditions.

Of course, by then the interest and capital will be long, long gone to other countries. Mission accomplished.

It is the Sunny Ways version of the NEP.

Some things just never change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no - you simply choose to read what you want into a statement...

I chose to read into an article that is titled Trudeau supports Notley on Energy East pipeline? Notley wants this pipleline to go through and he supports her. Its what is known as the Transitive Relation in mathematics (you know...if A=B and B=C, then A=C). I'm certain I saw that on my nephews grade school test. Not that hard. Having said that, has he given a statement saying he supports Coderre on it NOT going through?

again, never made your strawman claim.

waldo...i have clearly shown you the claim you made and you even made a half assed attempt to apologize saying you ASSUMED I would be critical based on past threads. ASSUME....you know where it makes an Ass out of you...and well it looks like you again on this one.

For the last time, show me where I have criticized Coderre over his stance on Energy East otherwise please stop your belly aching and moaning about a topic that you even said should be on a different thread.

OMG! You went to all that trouble without actually responding to it? You're right... my 'several' included another instance beyond the single post directed to you... the one you initially ignored... and now ignored again, while you doubled-down to make a point that I only directed the point to you, uhhh ONCE! So, ok... I'll put it forward again. Broker it, the following... honestly - yes?

All that trouble? There was only one post....post 91 where you actually said it. I responded accordingly by asking you to share a link to shed light on the topic you wanted to discuss however you ignored/failed to comprehend what a link was. Your only response to shout out that you've asked 'several' times and then proceeded to ask me for the SECOND time.....still with no link.

I'll ask you for a second time....please provide a link as to what you want to discuss or to what point you are trying to make. If I have to ask more than twice then that will be 'several' attempts.

And just to be clear.....I did not get response from you on my request for the following:

As for the other two Harper incidents....please provide a citation showing the dates of said dumps as well as confirmation these dumps were planned/approved by the Harper government. Would gladly have a read on this.

As I said I will gladly read up on this as I am interested in the historical back drop to this story. Of course if you can't provide this citation then I fully expect you to retract your claim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I guess it's their choice, they can prefer to continue to be afraid of train loads of oil that have killed no one rather than pipelines that have killed dozens, no, that's not right..anyway, maybe if the pipeline company does it's 'homework', whatever that means, they can ensure that that world will be perfect for all and never a drop can be spilled. Sunshine and lollipops for everyone! Heaven forbid a society completely reliant upon oil bear some of the risk associated with it's transport, especially when the proposed method is the safest one that we have. Fyi, homework is for children, and that is a much more appropriate description of the people who object to this pipeline than of the adults who pay the bills in this country and want to see it built.

And maybe you should do a little homework into what is actually going on with that pipeline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

perhaps you're under the incorrect impression that this was the NEB taking a self-improvement initiative and auditing itself! :lol:

I am under that impression...and I'm glad you used that word 'initiative' as right on the NEB website is a large scale program recently conducted called the National Engagement Initiative. Here is a copy of the full report: http://www.neb-one.gc.ca/glbl/ccct/ntnlnggmnt/2016rprt-eng.pdf

From the news release we find these important notes (http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?mthd=tp&crtr.page=1&nid=1027249&crtr.tp1D=1)

The National Energy Board (NEB) has released Engaging Canadians on Pipeline Safety. The report follows a 34 city national engagement tour that the NEB Chair and CEO Peter Watson started in January 2015 in Atlantic Canada, and concluded June 3 in Calgary with the NEB Pipeline Safety Forum.

The report summarizes what the NEB heard during the engagement tour. It outlines common themes that were brought forward in every region of Canada and describes how the NEB will address the feedback.

From January to June 2015, Mr. Watson met directly with municipal and provincial leaders and staff, First Nations Chiefs and Band Councils, environmental groups, first responders and academics, as well as professional and industry organizations to discuss pipeline safety and environmental protection.

Through 2015, the NEB achieved several milestones that are in direct response to what Mr. Watson and NEB staff heard during the tour. They include: a full public consultation on company emergency response plans; the launch of a pipeline incident map; posting NEB inspection reports online; and opening two regional NEB offices in Montréal and Vancouver.

I highlighted Montreal just for you!

Here were some quick facts on the tour:

Quick Facts: National Engagement Initiative
    • NEB met with 80 stakeholder groups in 34 cities (including First Nations Chiefs and Band Councils, environmental organizations, universities, municipal governments, and regional first responders)
    • 40,000 kilometres travelled in 9 provinces, 2 territories and through 3 blizzards
    • 400 attendees at the NEB Pipeline Safety Forum
    • 27,500 participants in the NEB’s Online Discussion Forum

Lets see what the CEO and Chair of the NEB (Peter Watson) had to say after he personally toured across Canada to discuss pipeline safety:

“The NEB is not done with engaging Canadians: on the contrary, the Engagement Initiative was meant to be the beginning of a new and different kind of conversation with our stakeholders,” said Peter Watson, NEB Chair and CEO.

Initiative enough for you waldo?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The strategy has now been forced out of Trudeau, when he went to see Coderre, so Denis could straighten him out on some harsh political and electoral realities in Quebec/Canada.

That is the part of this that I find intriguing. Lets just say that Energy East was determined to be the right move and Trudeau puts it through in light of Montreal's objection, it would certainly seal his fate in that area. An area that has a large Liberal strong hold.

Say what you want about Harper, but any PM that is in office for 9 years is going to build a list of enemies just by making tough decisions like this one. Once a voter hates you for one thing, they typically hate you for life. This list grows as you are in office. This may be Trudeau's first tough decision but it won't be his last. Unfortunately for him it may make him more enemies than he wants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An interesting take from Rick Mercer on this topic:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/mercer-report-rant-energy-east-denis-coderre-1.3419646

Mercer concedes that while many Canadians "hate the fact that the world is addicted to oil and Canada is sitting on a whole bunch of it," it would be in the country's best interest to approve the project.

"We all need this thing," said Mercer.

He points out that as a "have-not" province, Quebec received $9.5 billion in transfer payments last year "as they should" to make sure all Canadians have the same standard of living.

But it's a fund that Alberta pays into because of its oil wealth, even though the provincial economy is tanking. Mercer reminded his viewers that "we are all in this together."

"It is time for provinces to start asking what's in it for Canada, not just what's in it for me."

Wow...again with the Equalization comment. I expected it out of Brad Wall but not Mercer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The strategy has now been forced out of Trudeau, when he went to see Coderre, so Denis could straighten him out on some harsh political and electoral realities in Quebec/Canada.

the subsequent press conference certainly doesn't align with your assessment... nor does this article. Just what are you basing your "straightening him out" comment on?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I chose to read into an article that is titled Trudeau supports Notley on Energy East pipeline? Notley wants this pipleline to go through and he supports her. Its what is known as the Transitive Relation in mathematics (you know...if A=B and B=C, then A=C). I'm certain I saw that on my nephews grade school test. Not that hard. Having said that, has he given a statement saying he supports Coderre on it NOT going through?

as I said, you continue to take extreme liberty with that article and the very quote you put forward... that I in turn re-quoted to point out your liberty taking. Your quote supplied again... the one you read into and take self-serving liberty with:

“I am solidly in one camp on this one,” he said. “I am very much in the camp of both premiers, [Ontario’s Kathleen] Wynne and Notley, who demonstrated that Canada can and should work together on economic issues for all of us.”

the above quote is not the unconditional support you're posturing with. As I said, nothing I've read (or you've presented) has Trudeau stating anything that differs from the official Liberal Party position statement; again:

I already suggested you quit making shyte up!

.

Liberals believe that Canada needs new infrastructure, including pipelines, to move our energy resources to domestic and global markets. However these projects must earn the trust of local communities, respect Indigenous rights, and cannot put our lands and waters at risk.

The Energy East project is undergoing an environmental assessment, and it would be inappropriate to pre-judge the outcome of the review.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the last time, show me where I have criticized Coderre over his stance on Energy East otherwise please stop your belly aching and moaning about a topic that you even said should be on a different thread.

will this really be the last time you play your strawman? Really? :lol:

again, I never made your strawman claim. What I did highlight was your disingenuous 'honest broker' play where you put forward criticisms of that Coderre/MMC position, then whined about other MLW members supposedly talking about "relations instead of positions"... while you at the same time relayed facets of your own/industry position, vis-a-vis "pipeline are safe... are the safest".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll ask you for a second time....please provide a link as to what you want to discuss or to what point you are trying to make. If I have to ask more than twice then that will be 'several' attempts.

notwithstanding your continued avoidance, no link required. It's very straight-forward; again... and I'll even break it into 2 parts:

- given TransCanada has positioned the pipeline as a "win for Eastern Canada" in regards replacing imported oil with domestic oil, care to comment on just how much existing refinery capacity there is towards meeting that premise, particularly given the proposal is so heavily aligned towards exports ala the development of new export terminals within the proposal?

- when Denis Coderre/MMC suggests that, "all the risks are being placed on the greater Montreal area with no direct gains to the area"... is he right? Well, is he?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is the part of this that I find intriguing. Lets just say that Energy East was determined to be the right move and Trudeau puts it through in light of Montreal's objection, it would certainly seal his fate in that area. An area that has a large Liberal strong hold.

Say what you want about Harper, but any PM that is in office for 9 years is going to build a list of enemies just by making tough decisions like this one. Once a voter hates you for one thing, they typically hate you for life. This list grows as you are in office. This may be Trudeau's first tough decision but it won't be his last. Unfortunately for him it may make him more enemies than he wants.

The decision has been made by Trudeau.

The strategy is to drag out the process indefinitely, in the certainty that it will kill both any pipelines and any investment in the energy sector. There is no point in drilling or mining if your only market remains the USA at a deep discount to world price.

'

The intention is to delete the energy sector in Canada and do something more 'resourceful' and as yet undefined.

And it really does not matter at all what the NEB has done to date, Trudeau has announced they will be overhauled and a new process implemented. No timetable. All their work to date so far on these files will be set aside soon. They might start up again when the Liberals get around to defining what they want from the NEB. But the oil compnies waiting to put oil into a pipeline that will never get built won't wait. They will just leave and put their money elsewhere. The oil is not going anywhere, but the money can and will.

Mission accomplished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The decision has been made by Trudeau.

The strategy is to drag out the process indefinitely, in the certainty that it will kill both any pipelines and any investment in the energy sector.

a summary assessment only someone could make with no respect for regulatory oversight, localized public support, appropriate environmental review and risk assessments, and Indigenous rights, etc..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am under that impression...

Initiative enough for you waldo?

and, as I implied, it's the wrong impression... and the initiative you're so avoiding is the actual external audit that most pointedly and succinctly shows your claim that the NEB, "holds oil companies to the highest standards"... is nonsense... complete bunk! Again, quit making shyte up!

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As is the norm, Kwebek is standing in the way of something the ROC wants until it's extortion expectations are met. No surprise there. Shut off the valves and let the eastern bastards freeze in the dark.....

And for all of those "why is Canada doing business with Saudi Arabia??" types....... http://boereport.com/2016/01/25/saudi-oil-filling-a-new-brunswick-refinery-what-kind-of-an-energy-policy-is-that/

Yes...why are we?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...