[Freakinoldguy]

I'm getting tired of the headlines reading B.C. wants "more balanced fair share" of oil loot when it should actually read:

The unelected by the people Premier of B.C. Christie Cluck wants a "more balanced fair share" of oil loot so she can make the people of B.C.like her.

She's proving herself to be as thick as two short planks and hasn't got a clue as to what her constituents really want, which isn't more money.

[Xort]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

It's already been spelled out in black and white in the link I provided.
Kitimat is pretty much the worst choice for a port. It's almost as if someone thought, "Hmmm where's the enviromentally riskiest place on the west coast from which we can ship oil oversees?"

The link to Captain Mal Walsh's writing?

He didn't seem to be overly negitive on the topic, just pointing out what would need to be done and what has been suggested so far.

[andyt]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

I'm getting tired of the headlines reading B.C. wants "more balanced fair share" of oil loot when it should actually read:

The unelected by the people Premier of B.C. Christie Cluck wants a "more balanced fair share" of oil loot so she can make the people of B.C.like her.

She's proving herself to be as thick as two short planks and hasn't got a clue as to what her constituents really want, which isn't more money.

She's actually made reasonable proposals that the companies involved shoulder all the risk. I would support the pipeline in that case, assuming the marine issue was resolved, ie PR. We can't stop every project because there is risk, or we'd never get anything done. What we can do is take all reasonable precautions, to a very high standard.
But when she says she wants us to be indemnified for the risk, but also get a bigger cut of the profits, she just undercuts her position and makes herself look like a blackmailer.

[Freakinoldguy]

andyt andyt:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

I'm getting tired of the headlines reading B.C. wants "more balanced fair share" of oil loot when it should actually read:

The unelected by the people Premier of B.C. Christie Cluck wants a "more balanced fair share" of oil loot so she can make the people of B.C.like her.

She's proving herself to be as thick as two short planks and hasn't got a clue as to what her constituents really want, which isn't more money.

She's actually made reasonable proposals that the companies involved shoulder all the risk. I would support the pipeline in that case, assuming the marine issue was resolved, ie PR. We can't stop every project because there is risk, or we'd never get anything done. What we can do is take all reasonable precautions, to a very high standard.
But when she says she wants us to be indemnified for the risk, but also get a bigger cut of the profits, she just undercuts her position and makes herself look like a blackmailer.

Has hell frozen over? You defending Christie Cluck and me attacking her, you onside with big oil and me against it? WTF dude.

That's the thing I like about this forum. People can have divergent views on most everything and be at odds with each other yet when another topic comes up they're quite willing to flip their ideologies to suit their own preferences rather than spouting their chosen parties line.

[Gunnair]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

andyt andyt:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

I'm getting tired of the headlines reading B.C. wants "more balanced fair share" of oil loot when it should actually read:

The unelected by the people Premier of B.C. Christie Cluck wants a "more balanced fair share" of oil loot so she can make the people of B.C.like her.

She's proving herself to be as thick as two short planks and hasn't got a clue as to what her constituents really want, which isn't more money.

She's actually made reasonable proposals that the companies involved shoulder all the risk. I would support the pipeline in that case, assuming the marine issue was resolved, ie PR. We can't stop every project because there is risk, or we'd never get anything done. What we can do is take all reasonable precautions, to a very high standard.
But when she says she wants us to be indemnified for the risk, but also get a bigger cut of the profits, she just undercuts her position and makes herself look like a blackmailer.

Has hell frozen over? You defending Christie Cluck and me attacking her, you onside with big oil and me against it? WTF dude.

That's the thing I like about this forum. People can have divergent views on most everything and be at odds with each other yet when another topic comes up they're quite willing to flip their ideologies to suit their own preferences rather than spouting their chosen parties line.

Your outside the box thinking is what ensures you won't be sacked as Lord High Admiral of the Cascadian Fleet and then sent to the minors as Admiral of the Tajik Grand Fleet.

Yet.

Well done, Admiral.

[herbie]

Shit even I would reconsider opposition if they ensured the risk, moved the terminal and even just refined the bitumen into crude or bunker grade to scrap the condensate line and create some real jobs here in Canada.

Then a smart Premier could just day it's not a share of royalties, we're just gonna ding a flat buck a barrel BC transport tax.

[Xort]

herbie herbie:

Shit even I would reconsider opposition if they ensured the risk, moved the terminal and even just refined the bitumen into crude or bunker grade to scrap the condensate line and create some real jobs here in Canada.

Then a smart Premier could just day it's not a share of royalties, we're just gonna ding a flat buck a barrel BC transport tax.

Oil sands production is the most labour intensive method of oil extraction in the world already, but you demand more before you will give your stamp of aproval?

WTF man.

[Unsound]

herbie herbie:

Shit even I would reconsider opposition if they ensured the risk, moved the terminal and even just refined the bitumen into crude or bunker grade to scrap the condensate line and create some real jobs here in Canada.

Then a smart Premier could just day it's not a share of royalties, we're just gonna ding a flat buck a barrel BC transport tax.

How much Alberta transport tax should we charge for a load of lumber?

[Gunnair]

Unsound Unsound:

herbie herbie:

Shit even I would reconsider opposition if they ensured the risk, moved the terminal and even just refined the bitumen into crude or bunker grade to scrap the condensate line and create some real jobs here in Canada.

Then a smart Premier could just day it's not a share of royalties, we're just gonna ding a flat buck a barrel BC transport tax.

How much Alberta transport tax should we charge for a load of lumber?

Fair enough that this is a tit for tat statement but recall that Alberta is landlocked. Most things you need come through another province which could be taxed with a transport tax.

A transport tax will hurt Alberta more than BC

[Unsound]

A transport tax will hurt Canada more than it'll hurt any one province. It's simply not how confederation works.

I completely understand BCers concerns about the pipeline, and I think you have every right to make any rules or ask for any environmental assesments that the law allows for. In fact I think you should. Make any deals with the oil companies that you think is needed to protect BC. Also completely fine by me. But renogatiating confederation, which is basically what clark seems to want, is just not on.

[bootlegga]

Xort Xort:

herbie herbie:

Shit even I would reconsider opposition if they ensured the risk, moved the terminal and even just refined the bitumen into crude or bunker grade to scrap the condensate line and create some real jobs here in Canada.

Then a smart Premier could just day it's not a share of royalties, we're just gonna ding a flat buck a barrel BC transport tax.

Oil sands production is the most labour intensive method of oil extraction in the world already, but you demand more before you will give your stamp of aproval?

WTF man.

It makes sense to upgrade it - why ship unrefined goods elsewhere so that someone else can turn them into finished products?

Even the Alberta government thinks so.

http://www.energy.gov.ab.ca/About_Us/1617.asp

http://www.industrialheartland.com/inde ... 2&Itemid=0

[bootlegga]

Gunnair Gunnair:

Unsound Unsound:

herbie herbie:

Shit even I would reconsider opposition if they ensured the risk, moved the terminal and even just refined the bitumen into crude or bunker grade to scrap the condensate line and create some real jobs here in Canada.

Then a smart Premier could just day it's not a share of royalties, we're just gonna ding a flat buck a barrel BC transport tax.

How much Alberta transport tax should we charge for a load of lumber?

Fair enough that this is a tit for tat statement but recall that Alberta is landlocked. Most things you need come through another province which could be taxed with a transport tax.

A transport tax will hurt Alberta more than BC

You sure about that?

I think it would hurt Canada's "Gateway to Asia" even more if everyone started taxing goods from BC as they travelled across their province. My guess is the Port of Vancouver would be shutdown about 5 minutes after something like that happened because everyone would just offload in Seattle instead.

Fortunately, that's not how Confederation works, so it's a non-issue.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

bootlegga bootlegga:

Xort Xort:

herbie herbie:

Shit even I would reconsider opposition if they ensured the risk, moved the terminal and even just refined the bitumen into crude or bunker grade to scrap the condensate line and create some real jobs here in Canada.

Then a smart Premier could just day it's not a share of royalties, we're just gonna ding a flat buck a barrel BC transport tax.

Oil sands production is the most labour intensive method of oil extraction in the world already, but you demand more before you will give your stamp of aproval?

WTF man.

It makes sense to upgrade it - why ship unrefined goods elsewhere so that someone else can turn them into finished products?

Even the Alberta government thinks so.

http://www.energy.gov.ab.ca/About_Us/1617.asp

http://www.industrialheartland.com/inde ... 2&Itemid=0

Xort is demonstrating the art of "clueless condescension".

[andyt]

So the transport tax wouldn't apply to goods that originated in Seattle? How does that work? And lumber doesn't come from Asia - y'all want to tax the wood you use for your houses? You want to put a tax on cheap crap that comes from Asia, that might actually help the country out - Albertans pay more for it and maybe the Ontario manufacturing industry gets a shot in the arm.

That said, a transport tax is a ridiculous idea. Christie Crunch has really shot her argument in the foot with demanding BC be indemnified against all risk (good idea) but that we deserve a bigger cut of the profits because we're taking all the risk. I worry that she'll just use this as leverage to get a bigger slice of the pie, while BC still carries the risk of a spill. The extra money she gets will have just been spend in reducing taxes further on her business buddies.

[Thanos]

As much as I loathe to step into this particular thread again, here's another indication of how far this fight over pipelines in BC, even already existing ones, is going to go. Money grab? Make the cost of transport so high that the companies give up on BC altogether? BC Liberals trying to out-do the NDP with the harshness of their new environmental policies for political gain in the upcoming election? Or all of these mixed together?