Englishman, letter submitted to the panel.
Well done Foxsea! I have also submitted my letter directly to the Review Panel website which is here:-
http://gatewaypanel.review-examen.gc...cmmnt-eng.html
From what I am able to find out from this website they have had about 2-3000 Letters of Comment from the general public. Interesting reading, as the vast majority are opposed.
I was hoping for 10,000 or more but the deadline is still 12 days away so there is still time. Folks, please write if you can.![]()
Englishman, letter submitted to the panel.
"Fisheries and Oceans Canada has provided its assessment and is of the view that the risk posed by the project to fish and fish habitat in the freshwater and marine environments can be managed by the proponent through appropriate mitigation and compensation measures," said the email, which echoed the response sent to the panel.
"The Department notes in its submission that the proponent has conducted a reasonable ecological risk assessment and provided useful information on the risks that an oil spill (in either marine or freshwater) would pose to fisheries resources."
Hutchings found it odd that they're so sure.
"Well, how can you make that judgment when you have not yet conducted a complete review of all proposed crossings?" Hutchings said. "Again, from a science perspective, I don't see how it's possible to be able to draw that conclusion."
So once again, Harper proves he could care less about an honest, scientific review. Approval is a foregone conclusion, it would appear - democratic process be damned.
Unless we raise hell - get your letters in to the Panel!
"Save wild salmon - can the D.F.O." - tee shirt from Pacific Net and Twine
Here is a good analysis of the Harper "weaving and ducking" manoeuvres around Enbridge. The fact that he is shifting his stance so much from one foot to the other indicates the tidal wave of opposition to this project is having an effect. Let's keep it up!!
http://elizabethmaymp.ca/news/public...he-shell-game/
I have no idea how my thoughts might help. The fact that one of the scientists from the hydrographic center told me that the last 7 yrs all the work they had been ordered to do was find a way for the super tankers to make it in to kitimat. This makes me think that the government wouldnt have funded this is they knew it wasnt going to go threw. The fact that he told me all there 'science' that they could get threw (which they said should work) is just THEROY! How is that science!
What about the fact that there is major fault line running right under the proposed route! How are they going to monitor changes to the ocean floor. This guy was pro pipe line. The only info I picked up off him is that if 'our side' found that some harm was going come to some oceanic species they might not be able to go threw. These changes pushed threw on the omnibus bill probably took care of that. I cant believe Canadians are so placid about the omnibus bill and this pipeline.
Damning Enbridge, U.S. spill report fuels opposition to Northern Gateway pipeline:
"I think the provincial government has to wake up. If she (Premier Christy Clark) doesn't wake up on this, then she's done. British Columbians aren't going to tolerate this kind of incompetence."
-Art Stearritt, Coastal First Nations
Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/...#ixzz24wzTKYId
GET YOUR LETTERS IN!
"Save wild salmon - can the D.F.O." - tee shirt from Pacific Net and Twine
Sent my letter in thanks for the link
New bumper sticker
"I think politicians should wear uniforms,
you know, like NASCAR drivers, so we could
identify their corporate sponsors."
That’s hilarious.
It would also be nice if all political parties once a year published the bribes they take in the major papers. Pardon me, they call them “Political Party Donations”.
Beyond that, if MP’s MLA’s etc. take one of those cushy fat Govt. pensions, often for only a few years of service that should be it. They should be allowed absolutely nothing after that for life. No sitting on corporate boards, no starting a business that could benefits from their contacts or benefit for the support they gave some corporation or industry while in office and no lobbying. No working for a corporation or any business. No going back to practicing law and servicing industry. No opportunity to be repayed or profit in any way from the decisions they made or the contacts they developed. That would help ensure they work for the voters not self interest. Not sure what could be done about benifit going to family members. It won’t happen of course; corruption is built into the system.
Last edited by Rockfish; 08-30-2012 at 07:16 AM.