Hello John Horgan....hello to you too Carole James.....If I can sum up here...
Site C.....The chances of you stopping Kinder Morgan are slim to none... The people of Burnaby themselves may stop it, but the odds are, a federal project, federal jurisdiction, not likely you can stop it Horgan.... That leaves Site C, you can stop that project...
Times are different today, the mainstream media doesn't hold sway anymore, just look at a few of Canada's most recent elections.
PostMedia and all their major Canadian newspapers...from coast to coast they fell in line with their PostMedia corporate bosses demands and endorsed Stephen Harper... Stephen Harper lost badly.
Alberta's 2015 election... Alberta's MSM papers endorsed the Alberta's PC Conservative Party...
Here in British Columbia our Conservative Party is named The BC Liberal Party, but we know, you know, most know they are Conservatives(actually, I would call them crony-capitalist corporate controlled conservative party).... In our 2017 British Columbia provincial election once again...PostMedia..Vancouver Sun, the Province, Michael Smyth, Vaughn Palmer, their editorial boards all endorsed Christy Clark and her Conservative(BC Liberal Party)..
As you can see, our Canadian mainstream media has been on the wrong side of history on many occasions, and not just on which political party should win elections but on issues too...Enbridge Northern Gateway, pumped up by Vancouver Sun..LNG cheerleaders at Postmedia too, selling the golden unicorn LNG dream in 2013 and they are still selling LNG snake oil today... only bloggers called BC's LNG industry's future right(as in The Straight Goods nailed it)...PostMedia failed badly on the LNG file(rank amateurs)
Vaughn Palmer tweeted today that "those who threaten to leave political parties over a contentious issue seldom do"..... I will once again refer to Vancouver Sun's recent track record of failure..highlighted above..
Vaughn, Keith Baldrey..Michael Smyth, they live in the past, they can't escape the echo chamber of their own making...Joe Public doesn't believe the mainstream media anymore, people, the computer savvy people source information everywhere...even pollsters, so wrong, so often because they too were slow to adapt to the new reality...calling the few, not connecting with the many..
Mr. Horgan.... The mainstream media are attempting to kowtow you into making a bad economical decision...they are also kowtowing you into making an immoral decision, and perhaps John they've(MSM) suggested that if you go forward on Site C it will result in a fairer treatment in the press..
It won't, you John will never get favourable press from PostMedia, certainly not at crunch time, as in an election writ period....The Vancouver Sun and Postmedia will pressure you to go forward on every contentious project, whether it be Kinder Morgan, LNG, a revamped Enbridge northern gateway and a WestCoast refinery... MSM will pillory and pressure you John Horgan to approve every industrial/energy proposal, no matter how contentious.....and even if you Horgan decided to approve everything, every industrial project, come election time the MSM, the Vaughn Palmers will still pump up and endorse the BC Liberals.... That my friend is fact..
So, Vaughn Palmer's assertion that those who voted NDP in 2017 who now threaten to leave the party or not vote for the party is unlikely.., that Vaughn Palmer statement is wrong,.. Social Media today is stronger, and getting stronger everyday...myself, i've never held a political party card, never been a member of any political party...and I've voted Conservative, Liberal and NDP...and I can vote Green Party... I won't vote NDP again if Site C is approved, and it's not a threat, it's a reality...I'll vote Green, independent or stay home..
I think most 2017 NDP voters think like me...for 16 years we witnessed the BC Liberals tear-down and take...BC Rail gone, no consequences for the criminals, including those elected...BC hydro driven into the ground, ferry rates through the roof, Hydro rates skyrocketing, pipelines approved, money laundering, ICBC looted....
With all that and so much more, including the crimes legislated against schools, children in care, our environment, the poor.. Even with all those BC Liberal crimes you Mr. Horgan barely squeaked out a minority government...
It's the progressive voters that inked a ballot for the NDP.
So, with Kinder Morgan probably going forward as it is federal jurisdiction, with most of your election platform not fulfilled, renters grant is dead...$10 dollar daycare is going nowhere fast, that will be so scaled back..housing crisis, you have no tools available to make housing in lower mainland affordable....
And we don't, or should I say, ....I don't blame you for these current problems..
I'm one of the disgruntled that endured 16 years of wrong government decisions.....
In 2017 I voted for a government that was going to make the right decisions....not for a government to hammer in the coffin nails the previous administration left sticking out of our provincial coffin.
The reason why what Vaughn Palmer says isn't true....if Site C is green-lighted by you John Horgan..... Means I can no longer trust any political party to stand up for the people...i'll move my vote again, this time to the Green Party or independent or abstain...
The progressive voters need a Site C win, .....Social media today, that's where the power lays.
Lastly....Site C, if approved...come election 2021 Site C will still be 4.. 5.. 6... years away from completion, all the cost overruns, geological and structural problems will be on full display, the ballooning cost overruns, the media and BC Liberals will blame your 2017 Site C waffling, this I know to be true, because even today, BC Liberals and our MSM have stated "Site C was on time and on budget until John Horgan took power"..
You campaigned against Site C...your MLAs campaigned against Site C...there are pictures circulating of you Horgan holding signs opposing Site c.
Site C cancellation is, for me, and for most who voted for you a moral issue....and if the NDP can't be a party of morals, including making moral decisions..
(remember that picture John?)
And this one....
I'll look for answers elsewhere.. (P.S. if Site C is approved, The Straight Goods is going silent, I have nothing else to offer, .........Thanks everyone for all the years of contributions)
(updated here, December 8th/2017)...Come election 2021, Site C will still be 5 to 6 years away from completion, or longer, cost overruns on Site C will drip out month in, month out...election 2021..all Site C cost overruns will be blamed on John Horgan's 2017 waffling...Election meme 2021 will be...why did Horgan not do the economically right thing for ratepayers.....As a political hawk...John Horgan has zero chance in 2021 if he approves Site C...many progressive voters, myself included will not vote NDP...as they will have proven themselves to be merely BC Liberal clones...
First term governments, do the tough thing early in your mandate....the tough thing to do, actually, the easy thing to do is cancel Site C...
It's my belief that the want of power, the want of a second term as premier will trump all....and Site C will be cancelled...
Lastly.....I think Doug Routley would make a good new BC NDP leader....for if i'm wrong..John Horgan will be un-electable in 2021...NDPs 2017 platform..
$400 dollar renters grant promise...gone....$10 dollar daycare...an utter disaster on all fronts...no ability to stop Kinder Morgan as it is a federal jurisdiction problem...unafforadable housing crisis will not be resolved...ICBC rates will rise..BC hydro rates will rise with or without Site C...in other words...The only election promise Horgan will have kept is toll elimination...Now that's funny in a way...For that Toll Elimination election winning idea came not from John Horgan and the NDP Party but from me...Grant G and The Straight Goods..The proof is here..
Many things come in 3's. The 3 Musketeers. The 3 Stooges. 3 Blind Mice. 3 Ring Circus. Speak no evil, Hear no evil, See no evil.
Are the 3 disaster dams for Canada:
Muskrat Falls - Labrador's money-pit will finish at close to 100% overbudget, years behind schedule and will multiply by 5 the monthly bill of every NALCOR customer for who knows how long, maybe forever
Keeyask - Hydro Manitoba went "too big to fail" but ratepayers can cover what has years to go and has risen 40% in cost with less than 20% done
Site C - BC Hydro's boondoggle may likely cost more than $12 billion if completed, costing ratepayers for at least 70 years for who knows the total
Muskrat Falls nears completion as a Commission of Inquiry seeks why they got a white elephant at double the cost before generating a watt. Keeyask may be the most remote of the 3 and is a long way from generating power as its budget skyrockets at this early stage. Another 100% overrun is possible.
Many things make Site C different. The Clean Energy Act 2010 for one. There are openings for Horgan to reverse-Clark on BC Hydro. The much bigger economy of BC. But what is clear is Site C output would have no market now or the foreseeable future.
We here at The Straight Goods nailed the LNG file....all those industry experts, pundits, spindoctors, along with our MSM media cheerleading LNG all the way....I bested every damn one of them, by a country mile....My take-down of the LNG file wasn't political, wasn't a witch-hunt....I based my assertions on economics, location, competition, market needs and demands..and the price...I wrote this early in 2015....
British Columbia LNG Industry, The Last Gas(P)....A Straight Goods Special
We will discuss the myriad of economical reasons, and environmental reasons to kill Site C....we'll delve into how we got here..the hideous BC Liberal 2004 Clean Energy Act....a brutal piece of legislation that was rammed through our legislature by a BC Liberal majority...."The Clean Energy Act" not only shut the door on the BCUC reviewing Site C...The "clean energy act" also forced BC Hydro to buy inflated IPP run of river power while simultaneously preventing BC Hydro from building any of their own run of river projects....Site C..The boondoggle...It was the BC Liberals' "Clean Energy Act" that set the stage in bankrupting BC Hydro..and set the stage for skyrocketing electricity rates, and set the stage for shutting out everyone, including the BCUC on reviewing Site C.....
BC Liberal Clean Energy Act got us to this terrible place....Clean Energy Act needs to be ripped up, amended, eviscerated....It's the Clean Energy Act of 2004/20008 that is hamstringing the BCUC today...and it's providing John Horgan a headache...or an excuse...Time to amend the Clean Energy Act...time to Kill Site C...
This unknown to most BCers(clean energy act) is the poisonous BC Liberal legislation that is about to bankrupt BC Hydro and send ratepayers to the poorhouse......We will tear down this legislation from cover to cover....in the meanwhile....Another LNG project/proposal fades to black..as in KAPUT.....
"Steelhead LNG will no longer be looking at building a floating LNG processing plant on Malahat First Nation owned Bamberton industrial lands.
The project was announced for the Saanich Inlet south of Mill Bay in August of 2015.
The proposed floating liquefaction facility moored to shore would have had capacity to process up to six million tonnes of LNG per year.
It immediately proved controversial garnering stiff opposition including from other First Nations in the area.
Late Friday, Steelhead LNG confirmed it is no longer moving ahead with the project.
A statement on the Malahat LNG website reads,
“Steelhead LNG made the decision after careful consideration and based on several factors as we look to develop a project that delivers low-cost LNG that is globally competitive.”
It was estimated at the time it was announced that, when fully operational, the project would would create 30 years of revenue for the Malahat Nation and would create 200 full-time jobs.
“Steelhead LNG would like to thank and acknowledge the many Malahat members who contributed more than 2,200 hours of work as Field Assistants on the early environmental studies,” the statement reads.
The company did say it continues to pursue another LNG project on Vancouver Island near Port Alberni."
Here is what I wrote about Steelhead LNG in 2015
British Columbia LNG Industry, The Last Gas(P)....A Straight Goods Special
Written by Grant G
"A fool and their money soon part ways".....
Seems to me that every time devastating news on the world LNG front rears its head out comes a British Columbia made LNG spin story, yesterday was no different, articles and newscasts came outblazing, ...The proponent,...Steelhead LNG
Steelhead`s proposal, a floating LNG operation near Mill Bay on Vancouver Island and a $30 billion dollar LNG liquefaction plant in Port Alberni..
This proposal will never happen, never be built, a foolish pipedream, ...Steelhead LNG is not an energy company, they have no assets, they own no LNG facilities, they own no upstream drill properties, Steelhead LNG is a group of people, including BC Liberal Geoff Plant and some other people with expertise in the energy game, but to be clear they have no financial means to back up their silly proposal..
I feel bad for Vancouver Island First Nations who have drank the LNG koolaid...
Steelhead LNG proposes a pipeline from northeast British Columbia to our southern B.C. coastline, from there another pipeline on the bottom of the Georgia Straight, from there a pipeline to cross Vancouver Island to BC`s wild west coast, (Sarita Bay)...In Sarita Bay Steelhead LNG proposes building a $30 billion dollar liquefaction plant, ..Thus having massive LNG tankers traversing the wind-swept Alberni canal, a waterway that is winding, very narrow, where winds whip up to 100 miles per hour on a regular basis, winds that come out of nowhere, regardless of the weather, the Port Alberni canal is a natural wind tunnel, winds race through the canal without a cloud in the sky, winds in the canal are thermal dynamic driven...The canal is also full of fishing vessels, both sport and commercial, the canal is also a tourist destination with fishing lodges and camp-sites from end to end...
This project will never happen, for two reason, the first being the risk to tourism, to salmon, to life itself, the canal is too small and too windy to ever have that kind of operation approved..
The second reason why the project will never happen is money, Steelhead has no financial means and no bank or money lender will ever sanction such an expense on an industry gone/going bust."
For those interested....Here is how Gordon Campbell's "Clean Energy Act" has severely crippled BC Hydro's financial position....
Gordon Campbell in about 2004 mandated by the act that BC Hydro become self sufficient in power needs....BC Liberals argued at the time that BC Hydro was a net importer of power, ...Clean Energy Act mandated that BC Hydro become self sufficient...
That though depends on how you interpret the importing and exporting of electricity...
What BC Hydro has done successfully for decades(until BC Liberals messed everything up)...was sell power at peak pricing and import almost free power at night from neighboring jurisdictions...BC Hydro would let all their storage capacity build up at night...then sell at peak periods PST 5pm to 9pm....BC Hydro would buy almost free power at night, the reason..Alberta's grid power..N Dakota grid power doesn't shut off at night, these jurisdictions must either dump the power they're producing for nothing/free or sell it dirt cheap to any and all takers....
BC Hydro would use their storage advantage.....save storage and sell at peak to California and other points south...this worker out very well for BC Hydro and their ratepayers....
Clean Energy Act put an end to that practice....The Act mandated BC Hydro have all the power they need without buying cheap imported late night grid power....
The Clean Energy Act did something else.... By law, BC Hydro was prevented in building any of the new supply of power they needed.....The ACT strictly prohibited BC Hydro from building anything except Site C...so..energy tenders were sent, and BC Hydro was forced to buy energy from lucrative run of river contracts..guaranteed returns for 60 to 100 years...BC Hydro can do run of river..it is simple technology, ..divert river water through tunnels or pipes with generators then water returns to the river...simple technology, ..rather than BC Hydro build themselves...a goldrush set off in the run of river game, BC Liberal insiders made out like bandits....BC Hydro was shaken down by bandits...
$100s of million per year in losses...now BC Hydro starts deferring debt..today, $6 billion plus in deferred BC Hydro debt/ratepayer debt...
Clean Energy Act did more....The Act mandated that Burrard thermal shutdown...that is/was our emergency nat-gas power supply..used only sparingly for winter peaking..Burrard thermal was upgrade and is one of the clean gas burners in the world....
BC Hydro could no longer use Burrard thermal, that power too had to be replaced...more run of river, more BC Hydro debt..
as of now, IPP run of river power accounts for 25% of BC's electrical grid but consumes 75% of BC Hydro's revenues!...
However...back when the Clean Energy Act was written...BC Liberals knew not of LNG...LNG, the $trillion dollar prosperity windfall, that gimmick arrived in BC in 2012 under Christy Clark...not only was BC going to get filthy rich...They told us we will clean Asia's airshed with our "clean LNG"...
That's right, ..when the Clean Energy Act was written...BC Liberals called gas power plants dirty...now their regardless as clean....Think about it...We as a province, even today tout the benefits of clean LNG...Yet the Clean Energy Act precludes it's use in BC...and the BCUC was not allowed to consider LNG(natural gas) as an energy replacement source for Site C...
We could build a Clean burning natural gas power plant anywhere in the province, the cost would be less than $2 billion dollars and produce more firm power than Site C...! fact.
So..right now the Clean Energy Act is hamstringing both John Horgan and the BCUC.....
It do't have to be that way....
Clean Energy Act also set out out GHG reduction laws....By law, BC must reduce GHG levels by 33% of 2007 levels by 2020.....That was the law...
Back to that LNG thingy....Guess what the BC Liberals did in their last year in office....They of course were chasing LNG prospects..that didn't turn out to well...but, nevertheless, If Petronas hbuilt..or Chevron had built their proposed LNG liquefaction plant....They were going to be burning natural gas to create power..Petronas would have added 25% to BC's entire provincial emission's level on it's own...
So...BY by law...BC had to reduce our GHG levels by 33% of 2007 levels by 2020.....if we had 2 le LNG plants our emissions would have gone up by 50%....as of 2016...BC had not reduced GHG emissions at all...4 years til 2020 and we are not going to reach that target..if LNG came to BC...targets not missed, targets blown away...
What were the BC Liberals to do?....Simple...Last year the BC Liberals used their majority, and that GHG 2020 reduction law contained withing the Clean Energy Act was taken out..removed, gutted..the LAW was amended to new a reduction target date..that being 2050...
In other words...When the Clean Energy Act got in the way of LNG...When GHG reductions were not going to be meant...what did the BC Liberals do....They amended The Clean Energy Act...
John Horgan can do the same...Burrard thermal can be used for winter peaking if needed...BC Hydro should be able to buy almost free late night power...BC Hydro needs to go back to the old ways of making money....
There is no way in the world British Columbia can tout LNG as the cleanest burning fuel, promote it..yet tell the world BC is too good for natural gas power.....No, government of BC can't say no to natural gas, for if, ....for if BC gets a big LNG pl or two....they'll be burning natural gas by the bucket loads to chill natural gas down to a liquid(LNG)....An LNG liquefaction will be BC's highest single point GHG emitter...
What does a new NDP government need to do?...they need to amend Gordon Campbell's hamstringing Clean Energy Act.....get it out of the way and go KILL SITE C..
Batting a 1000% friends....let's keep this party going..
Jackboots In The Canadian Academy . Written by Robin Mathews .....Freedom of Expression And Inquiry Under Threat…Again....University of Lethbridge, Alberta.
Freedom of Speech battles in universities often mirror problems in the larger community, and the one being fought at the University of Lethbridge,Alberta, is no exception. It is conducted, on one side, by convinced believers as a response to alleged Anti-semitic positions which have surfaced there and which, the believers think, need relentless, radical, extreme responses. Conversely, the conflict looks, to some others, perhaps, as a program to create a huge smokescreen behind which representatives or friends or sympathizers of the State of Israel can attempt to cut off any examination of that State’s activities which might bring it into disrepute. And the quickest method is to brand any adverse references to the accounts of history held by the State of Israel as well as to any of its actions and policies as acts of Anti-semitism.
Forces wishing to dominate and to dictate inquiry and to control “freedom of expression” always seek to repress certain kinds of knowledge, investigation, and expressions of opinion.
In the late 1980s I was proposed for a year’s exchange with a professor in Simon Fraser University’s English Department – at the time dominated by U.S. immigrants holding U.S. citizenship. They rejected my presence at SFU – and were backed belligerently by SFU’s Canadian president who was quoted in the Vancouver Sun saying that he wouldn’t have Robin Mathews on his campus and he didn’t know a university president in Canada who would! (Amusing slander, but slander nonetheless.)
(If William Saywell’s comment sounds like an utterance by present University of Lethbridge president Michael Mahon it may be because both men appear to have fallen to thinking they could dispose of human persons in any way a passing whim suggested ... and to make no bones about it!)
The U.S. citizen chair of the SFU English Department wrote me a letter saying that many people in the Department disliked my views on literary and cultural nationalism in Canada and did not want to give me a place at SFU to utter them. That was a ban on free (scholarly) expression. I took it to mean, also, that U.S. citizens intended to decide what Canadians could say to Canadians in British Columbia.
There was a battle. It was long … months and months. The national faculty body (the CAUT) was strong. It declared SFU in violation of academic freedom. At that point, SFU admitted it had lost. The intensity of the battle is hard to think of now – the basis of it is so apparently minor. Reports, however, were that “grown men” at SFU interviewed on the matter almost burst into tears. And, indeed, passions were running so high the SFU Administration asked me if I would teach from the Centre for Canadian Studies rather than from the bent, bleeding, and discountenanced English Department.
That battle was won at SFU for freedom of expression and inquiry! But the personal victory was muted because president Saywell and a few of his closest underlings, I believe, did everything they could in the next years to limit my effectiveness. No surprise. “The fortunes” one might say “of (academic) war”.
At the University of Lethbridge twenty-six-year professorial veteran of Native American Studies, Liberal Arts, Globalization Studies … and more … Anthony Hall has responded with invention, far-reaching research, and creativity to the hugeness of the body of knowledge he has taken as his province. In two large, scholarly, and fascinating works (The American Empire and the Fourth World (2003), and Earth Into Property (2010) Hall traces the oppression and exploitation of the globe’s indigenous peoples since the historic voyage to “the new world” of Christopher Columbus in 1492.
As a result of his wide-ranging research (and travel) Anthony Hall couldn’t fail to see the power and to observe the participation of the U.S.A. in what he names “imperial globalization”. Nor could he evade the intimate ties between the State of Israel and the U.S.A. Nor, of course, could he fail to see the huge influence the State of Israel has upon U.S. policy in the Middle East (a region populated with indigenous peoples, like the Palestinians).
He is, moreover, a scholar who believes genuinely that no subject worthy of study can be declared ‘off limits’ – whether Canadian culture and literary nationalism or the complex “Holocaust” in Nazi Germany operated preceding and during what we choose to call The Second World War (1939-1945). Donning the apparel of true scholars everywhere, Professor Hall accepts that there is no historical, scientific, or cultural fact – however apparently sunk in concrete – that cannot be revisited, re-opened, re-weighed, re-examined, reassessed.
Closer to home, professor Hall has paid attention to the rising tide of voices in the U.S.A. and Canada which claims the “official” account of 9/11 (of, that is to say, the destruction of the Trade Towers in New York on September 11, 2001) was, has been, and is the product of a huge Conspiracy by complex powers (involving U.S. government) producing a Conspiracy Theory created to mislead everyone and to place the blame for the event on people of Islam, especially in the Middle East … people, incidentally, who have become, it would seem, ‘by the accident of history’, enemies - in fact – of both the U.S.A. and the State of Israel.
And so … if more and more authentic voices are saying “the official account” of 9/11 was created by government and Secret Intelligence Conspiracy Theorists wanting to pin onto Islam the guilt of 9/11 … a question forces itself forward. If the formally accused did not … then who did organize and carry out the destruction of the buildings of the World Trade Centre (and of the building which, a little later, simply appeared to collapse into rubble without any apparent cause)?
Also, since September 11, 2001 an increasing number of so-called “terrorist” events and attacks have occurred all over the Western World and have (by persistent and often careful and scholarly non government-approved examination) been called by investigators arising in the population “faked events” or what is called “False Flags” undertaken (it is alleged) to terrify innocent Western populations and to condition them to accept “Islam” (in a hundred different forms) as the over-arching enemy of the peace-loving and (mostly) Christian West. In answer to the very active, very numerous, and wholly ‘un-government’ on-going operations and investigations into those “terrorist” events, Anthony Hall has found himself a co-host of “The False Flag Weekly News”.
It is hugely relevant to the whole subject (and especially to Canadians) that in July, 2016, Madam Justice Catherine Bruce in the B.C. Supreme Court declared that an apparent attempted “Islamic Terrorist Event” at the B.C. legislature grounds on July 1, 2013, was, in fact, wholly the work of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, [a major False Flag event] entrapping socially challenged converts to Islam, counselling them, coaching them, assisting them, giving them money, and delivering them to the terrorist site … and then arresting them as terrorist criminals … caught in the act! For all those who say that people questioningterrorist events are ‘conspiracy theorists’ making up lies – the highly organized RCMP criminal action proves absolutely that at least one State – Canada – has engaged in a major False Flag event in order to slander Islam. It did so employing hundreds of RCMP and millions of dollars of Canadian taxpayers’ funds (during the Conservative government led by Stephen Harper).
Subsequently, in answer to a call for a Public Inquiry into the RCMP, (Liberal) Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Ralph Goodale, responding for the Liberal, Justin Trudeau cabinet, expressed, in effect, approval of organized criminal activity on the part of the RCMP... what he calls in his letter the RCMP’s “major crime technique”. Nowhere in the letter does he refer to the request for a Public Inquiry, instead urging understanding and support for the Force he gives evidence of accepting as a criminal organization….
If the officially declared Islamic men did not plan, organize, and carry out what we call 9/11 … then who did? All possibilities are open for consideration. One of them is that the State of Israel was involved, wanting to influence the U.S.A. towards an aggressive policy in the Middle East. The claim may be completely false. Naturally, the hosts running The False Flag Weekly News, Kevin Barrett and Anthony Hall, would air the possibilities (among many others) on their weekly program. And they did … and, apparently Professor Hall was not unsympathetic to the idea that the State of Israel may have had a hand in the events of 9/11.
Then: in an astonishing event on Friday, August 26, 2016 when Anthony Hall was out of Canada, someone placed a despicable, violently Anti-semitic cartoon on his Facebook Page … completely unknown to Hall. With truly remarkable speed, organizations and individuals, some apparently supporting the State of Israel went to work as if Anthony Hall was wholly guilty of the posting on his Facebook Page. People from outside the University, a few who would normally be thought of as related to the State of Israel in one way or another, pressed upon the University Administration, the police, officers of the Alberta government…and more. (The Alberta government, it seems, has insisted upon keeping secret some of the names of those complaining.)
If one were to suggest the possibility that a carefully staged campaign was unleashed against Anthony Hall, one might not be wrong to so suggest. The University Administration filed a complaint against Hall with Alberta Human Rights. The complaint was rejected. And so the University Administration filed another one.
In an action (some believe) marked by intemperance and folly – without having exchanged a single word with Professor Hall, a senior academic colleague - president Michael Mahon of the University of Lethbridge ordered Hall off every University of Lethbridge campus and suspended him without pay. He did those things while completely ignoring ALL carefully constructed processes within the university for managing complaints against professorial staff. The processes are written into almost every university faculty/administration agreement in Canada and have been honed and improved over many decades.
Slander and libel filled the Lethbridge air to match the wholly unacceptable actions of the University of Lethbridge Administration and Board of Governors. Nonetheless, the national faculty body, the Canadian Association of University Teachers, and the local Faculty Association held firm – the CAUT naming the University of Lethbridge in Violation of Academic Freedom, not a light designation in the university world in Canada. In a court procedure weighing the actions, a little later, the Administration of the university won over neither the judge presiding nor the Alberta government represented at the process.
And so on November 23, 2017, the University of Lethbridge Administration reinstated Professor Hall, lifting all sanctions against him and announcing it would also withdraw its complaint against him to Alberta Human Rights. After fifteen months of attempted Jackboot Justice, the Administration at the University of Lethbridge agreed to use the processes long set up to provide fair and impartial judgements of complaints against faculty members. At one level the return to civility by the University of Lethbridge Administration is a victory for democratic forces in Canada. But at another level its long hold-out, a period filled with injustice to Anthony Hall as well as being filled with violent language and slander, will long remain a scandal in the Canadian Academy.
On the same day – November 23, 2017 - a top B’nai Brith official declared that B’nai Brith is “outraged” at Professor Hall’s full reinstatement which is coupled with the move to due process in the examination of complaints against him.
* * *
Because of the almost total breakdown of press and media in Canada (including the CBC) … because much of the reporting of the matter dealt with here has been reactionary, brainwash propaganda,
(I urge readers to post this column and to send it on to contacts, friends, and elected representatives. R.M)
BC Hydro’s second-quarter 2016 financial report
points to lower domestic power demand and a projected drop in 2016 sales
to large industrial customers resulting from mine and mill closures and
other effects of the global commodity nosedive.
The Q2 2016 numbers continue the theme in the Crown energy
corporation’s 2015 fiscal report, showing stagnant electricity demand
from large industrial customers in the province over the past decade.
Meanwhile, a January 25 U.S. Supreme Court decision supporting the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s right to offer major power users
financial incentives to curb power use during peak demand periods could
dim BC Hydro’s power export prospects in North America via its Powerex
Despite those factors, opposition from First Nations and other groups
and criticism from power analysts, the Crown power corporation’s $9
billion Site C dam remains on track, and Chris O’Riley, the Hydro
executive overseeing the project, remains convinced of the long-term
need for Site C’s capacity when it comes online in 2023, and of the
fiscal prudence of the massive engineering project.
According to the Q2 report, revenue from Hydro power sales into the
North American grid for the six months ended September 30, 2015, was
down 44% compared with the same period a year earlier.
Among the reasons for the drop, according to the report: a 33%
decrease in the average price of natural gas resulting from increased
Significant changes from the fiscal 2016 service plan noted in the
report include a drop in large industrial and commercial categories
“largely as a result of lower forecast customer load in the mining and
pulp and paper sectors due to metal mine closures, closure of a major
pulp and paper mill [Howe Sound Pulp and Paper] in July 2015 and lower
commodity market outlook.”
Numbers in Hydro’s 2015 fiscal report show flatlining electricity
demand from large industrial customers in the province over the past
decade. Sales in that category have slipped 15% from fiscal 2006 to
Those numbers have again raised questions over the need to invest billions in building Site C.
Robert McCullough, principal of energy policy research company
McCullough Research, said the horizontal hydraulic fracking revolution
has rendered Site C “an expensive luxury” in a world where the price of
natural gas is roughly one-third of what it was in 2008.
In December, natural gas spot prices, according to OilPrice.com, hit their lowest monthly average since 1999. McCullough’s May 2015 report for the Peace Valley Landowner
Association questioned the math used in Hydro’s far-lower projection of
per-megawatt-hour costs for Site C versus such alternatives as
independent power projects.
In an interview with Business in Vancouver prior to a recent visit to
Vancouver, the Portland, Oregon-based McCullough reiterated the
concerns raised in his report over such issues as Hydro’s discount rate
(cost of future money) for Site C and cost assumptions for Site C
alternatives that Hydro used in its calculations to justify the project.
But he emphasized how dramatically the plunge in natural gas prices,
generated by the advent of horizontal fracking technology, has changed
the global energy marketplace – to the point that “only an idiot would
be building a very expensive project in Canada instead of buying power
on the open market.” He pointed out that the chief expense for electricity generated by
natural gas is the gas itself, which can now be bought far into the
future relatively cheaply.
The U.S. Energy Information Administration predicts that natural gas
prices will remain low and stable for the long term. According to its
projections, spot natural gas prices will be lower in 2020 than they
were in 2015.
In a December Site C information briefing with Business in Vancouver,
O’Riley said that despite the recent drop in energy demand, Hydro is
confident in its forecasts of 1.1% annual growth in electricity demand
in B.C. “You don’t build something like this [Site C] for today or even 10 years; you build it for the long term.” O’Riley said the forecast is based in part on population migration to
B.C. and “the continued reliance in B.C. on the resource sector,”
regardless of whether liquefied natural gas export plants are built in
the province or not.
“But we know you can never get supply and demand to match up
perfectly, so we know we’ll be some years short and some years long, and
we have got a good capability to optimize that, so we think …
particularly in a carbon-constrained world, there’s a long-term benefit
for low-cost, low-[greenhouse gas], reliable, dependable, firm power.” Site C would add around 10% to the province’s overall annual electricity output of 60,000 gigawatt hours. BC Hydro claims the cost for Site C power will be between $58 and $61
per megawatt hour, but that’s a cost levelized over 70 years. Actual
costs in a given year could be much higher. Power can be bought in the North American market for less than half that range. Hydro estimates that Site C will result in ratepayers paying an
average of $650 million less each year over the first 50 years of the
dam’s operation compared with a power portfolio generated by independent
power producers or natural gas.
O’Riley added that with interest rates so low, it’s a good time to invest in major power infrastructure projects like Site C. As to the impact of the U.S. Supreme Court decision on Hydro’s power
export prospects in America, Mike MacDougall, Powerex’s director of
trade policy, said in an email that the changes will have little effect
on Hydro’s trade with U.S. markets because they predominantly affect
market-clearing prices during higher-priced hours and won’t
significantly change overall market demand.
That was a very good article.....Global BC...CKNW..Vancouver Sun or Province Newspaper hasn't produced that quality of truthful, accurate reporting on anything in 10 years or more...That BIV article was a refreshing read......Grant G February 17/2016
Below is a little something the Straight Goods put together on the not-needed Site C Dam boondoggle..
Site C Dam Not Required, Christy Clark's Justification for the Taxpayer Funded Project Falls by the Wayside
Site C Dam Not Required, British Columbia Could Save $15 Billion Dollars
Written by Grant G
(this factual article was originally posted in January 2015)
That's absurd, Alberta and Alberta
industry will not pay the price, Alberta is building natural gas power
plants that will create more power than Site C dam.., take up almost no
space and cost 1/10th of the price.....Christy Clark is,...is
unfortunately economically challenged, perhaps Christy Clark needs
another university or college course.... _______________
Site C Dam Not Required, British Columbia Could Save $15 Billion Dollars
Written by Grant G
In late December/2014....A couple of weeks after Christy Clark told
Bloomberg in New York that British Columbia didn`t need Site C dam for
the proposed LNG industry, Christy Clark also told Bloomberg the price
of Site C was going up by potentially $billions of dollars, we are
looking at $10 to $15 billion dollars to build Site C...Possibly $15
billion dollars for a very tiny bite of electric power...Expensive
power, power we don`t need for LNG...The one group that looked at Site C
and BC Hydro`s power for the future projected growth model...They came
to the conclusion the power was not required, the case not made..!
Meaning there is no need to spend $15 billion dollars we don`t have, no
need to put BC Hydro over $20 billion dollars in debt($15 billion plus
the $billions of debt hidden in BC Hydro`s deferral accounts), BC Hydro
would have as a crown corporation almost as much debt as British
Columbia had when the BC Liberals came into power in 2001...Our
provincial debt in 2001, including contractual debt, crown debt stood at
that time about $28 billion dollars(now it`s almost $80 billion
dollars, not counting contractual debt and crown corporation debt)...And
these BC Liberals want to add $15 billion dollars in more debt for
power we don`t need?..
Christy Clark`s mouth says we don`t need to spend $billions of dollars that we don`t have on Site C for LNG..
And guess who else says we don`t need Site C...
"The retired head of the Association of Major Power Users of BC, Dan
Potts, estimates the proposed Site C Dam would lose $350 million a year
for taxpayers and BC Hydro ratepayers. The 30-year pulp mill manager
told media in Vancouver yesterday that the project, estimated to cost $8
Billion or more, is “fundamentally uneconomic” – based
on its outmoded technology and power trading prices that are likely to
remain far lower than the cost of electricity produced by Site C.
Potts made the comments at a press conference organized by the
District of Hudson’s Hope – where the 80 km-long reservoir would be
located – to raise concerns about Site C in advance of the federal
cabinet’s ruling on the project, expected this Fall.
Potts and other speakers, including agrologists, farmers,
First Nations leaders and elected officials from the region, called
for the BC Utilities Commission’s oversight of the project to be
restored. The independent energy watchdog was stripped by the BC Liberal
Government of its usual role of reviewing a project based on issues
like cost and need. In the absence of that review, Potts worries that a
project which makes no economic sense may receive unjustified approval. “This project is turning gold into lead,” said Potts.
It’s going to have a legacy of wealth
destruction…It’s going to sap the province’s ability to raise money
and borrow money, to do other things, such as infrastructure,
hospitals, schools – all the things we need to do."
So here we have experts, and he`s not alone, calling Site C a boondoggle
in the making, a very expensive boondoggle, not only will it cost much
more than $10 billion, interest payments on that debt will be $400
million per year....And it will lose on average another $350 million per
year in direct losses...
All in, this project could end up costing BC taxpayers $30 billion dollars after interest payments and operating costs...for power we don`t need.
The BC NDP should refuse to even enter our provincial legislature until Site C is taken off next summer`s starting date agenda...You see readers, friends, British Columbians, there
is time for a strong opposition to fight for British Columbia, that
time is now, before the legislature opens...How many days do politicians
need off, vacationing, sitting on their over-paid asses!
We must demand that Site C go to a non
partisan regulator, or non-partisan committee...Like the BCUC...This
project must be vetted by those who have no skin in the game, by those
not wanting to win or steal an election..
There are power generating turbines being added to BC`s Mica dam...For a
cost of $500 million dollars Mica Dam will produce extra power, the new
power generated, on top of power Mica already produces......For $500
million dollars a couple of new added turbines will produce half the
power of Site C Dam..Without flooding land, flooding farm land...Merely
adding turbines to an existing dam will create half the power of Sire C
dam...for a cost of $500 million dollars...
1/20th the cost of Site C dam ....Mica will produce half the power Site C would at 1/20th the cost..
Where is the media outrage?
Someone needs to haul the BC Liberals off to jail..Demand a Site C plebiscite, or referendum...
The biggest expenditure ever proposed in British Columbia with not one shred of evidence that this power is required..
It would be criminal to allow that big of an expenditure without the case being made that the power is needed..
If the NDP can`t persuade the powers at be, the courts, the new media, the internet media..
We need all hands on deck to stop this $15 billion dollar theft of public money...
We need to explore other options for power..Like this option...
Since we have, according to Christy Clark and Rich Coleman, "British
Columbia has some of the largest known natural gas reserves in the
world, more than enough for domestic use only, hundreds of years of
supply", more than we can ever use domestically.....And as of right now, and probably forever, we don`t and won`t have an LNG export industry..
What British Columbia has is tonnes of natural gas and nowhere to sell it, how about we sell it to ourselves..?
British Columbia could create a market for domestic natural gas, no need
to liquify if...And at the same time can create 800 to 1200 mega watts
of power, or more, as much power as Site C dam would produce..
We would not have to flood 30,000 acres of fertile northern
farmland...Thus that land up north would not be flooded, the land would
continue to grow food and be a carbon sinc, , meaning the non-flooded
land would absorb greenhouse gases...Absorb enough greenhouse gas to
offset the below proposal..
A proposal that would give B.C. options,
options to turn up or down the electrical output depending on the
needs, this electrical plant would only take up in total space..24 hectares of space/land required...
And here`s the most attractive part of the whole deal...For a cost of about $1.4 billion dollars we could produce as much power as Site C..
We could save over $10 billion dollars before interest charges...BC Hydro`s ratepayers would not see their bills go through the roof...
We could build the world`s cleanest,
newest, most modern most efficient natural gas electrical generating
plant in the world...At the same time greenhouse gas emissions from the
natural gas plant would be offset by not flooding 30,000 acres of
farmland..no homeowners to piss off, to buy out..no First Nations to cut
deals with, plus it gives our natural gas drillers a new market for
some of their gas, that means some royalties for the province..And
create B.C. jobs for B.C. workers.
And we will save not a few $hundred million dollars but over $10 billion dollars ...
And if someday in the future LNG exports produce bigtime revenues for
the province we can shut down this plant, maybe nuclear fusion will come
online, newer more efficient appliances, possibly domestic power
generation that could feed into the grid, like solar, tidal, geo-thermal
and who knows what other technological miracles are coming down the
Pipe dreams, no....A
win win win...BC Taxpayers win...Saving food growing farmland wins...A
new market for our gas drillers, a win for them, a win for BC`s credit
rating and a break-even win for the environment, what greenhouse gas
emissions are expelled will be offset by not flooding 30,000 acres of
farm land, maintaining the land as a carbon sinc.
BC Hydro won`t have to carry a $20
billion dollar debt, ratepayers won`t have to carry that debt on their
bi-monthy electric bills..
British Columbia could save $billions and $billions of dollars by building a copy of this..
"Shepard Energy Centre is a new,
natural gas-fired power plant being built near Shepard Industrial Park
in south-east Calgary, Alberta, Canada. The project, estimated to cost
C$1.3bn, is being hailed as one of the largest projects ever undertaken
by the city of Calgary.
The facility will have a nominal
plant rating of 800MW and will be the largest natural gas-fired
electricity generation facility in Alberta when commissioned in 2015.
It will generate enough electricity to meet the needs of more than half of Calgary's existing power demands.
The facility will use an advanced
emissions technology and will generate less than half the CO2 per
megawatt than a conventional coal-fired plant. The plant will be owned
and operated by Enmax Shepard, a subsidiary of Enmax Energy."
Enmax Energy's Calgary plant features
Important features of the plant
include natural gas compression, auxiliary boilers and a wet surface
condenser and cooling tower. Heat recovery steam generators (HRSGs)
will be partially enclosed, while the steam turbine generator (STG) and
gas turbine generators (GTGs) will be fully enclosed. The project also
has provisions for future carbon dioxide capture.
We have time, Major Site C dam construction has not started
Plus there are many lawsuits pending..
I personally asked John Horgan and the NDP party to pay for and
commission a non-partisan study exploring the options I highlighted
above, if the BC Liberals can prove we need much more power in the
future and Site C is the only viable option, so be it, if the BC
Liberals have complete faith and confidence they shouldn`t fear a
non-partisan committee to review in depth Site C, the costs, the
ramifications and other options.
We may not even need the natural gas power plant, but if we need power, this is the route to go..
However, the time has come for the opposition NDP to step up to the plate, the BC Liberal`s clean energy act is gone, out the window, each
proposed large LNG plant would add near 9 million tonnes of greenhouse
gas emissions to our provincial airshed each year...This natural gas
electrical plant would add about 1/10th of that total...BC`s clean
energy act is null n void with an LNG industry..
Christy Clark and the BC Liberals have been talking the talk, Christy Clark was blathering in public how "BC`s LNG would clean China`s airshed and make the world`s air cleaner"..
If that is true, if it is good enough
for China than a natural gas electrical plant must be good enough for
British Columbia too.
We as a province could even buy carbon offsets, $100 million dollars
worth of carbon offsets per year and we would still be ahead of the Site
C cost by $billions and $billions of dollars..We could buy offsets of
that amount for 30 years and only spend $3 billion dollars... Add in the
cost of a natural gas electrical plant of $1.3 billion to even as high
as $2 billion dollars, add both amounts together ....$5 billion
dollars...And we wouldn`t have to buy carbon offsets if we didn`t need
to....As stated above...We would not be flooding 30,000 acres of carbon
We can`t wait until the spring session of the legislature starts to begin this battle..
Building a natural gas electrical plant(if we need the power) is a win win...
BC jobs, BC workers..A electrical
generating plant using B.C. natural gas, drilled by B.C. natural gas
well drillers, piped through B.C. pipeline, power generated flowing to
B.C. homes at a fraction of the cost of a Site C dam...Thus saving the
province, saving B.C. Hydro $billions of dollars...Saving ratepayers
even $billions more, money that will flow into our economy rather than
to New York Bond Buying hedge funds..
A win win win...
We need the media to get onside with
this plan...We need the BC NDP making wave after wave...Refusing to sit
in our legislature until all these $billion dollar plus saving options
are explored thoroughly by non-partisan entities with no skin in the
We need The Straight Goods....We need leadership, we need a robust opposition...
Who knows what energy efficiencies lie ahead in the future..A $1.3 to $2
billion dollar natural gas electrical generating plant can easily be
decommissioned...A $15 billion dollar dam, not so much..
Food security....Saving ever declining farmland stocks...Not having to
flood 30,000 acres...Not having to buy out home-owners, northern
businesses, not having to fight First Nations in the Peace region..
The non-flooded land will grow food and absorb carbon...B.C. workers to
build a natural gas power plant, giving our drillers another market for
our excess gas..
Everybody wins, taxpayers, ratepayers, northern homesteaders, First Nations, the environment, our credit rating..