Total Pageviews

Wednesday, February 3, 2016

Western bigots? or self interest corporations

Why is it un-Canadian for Quebeckers to oppose a pipeline?


When B.C. Premier Christy Clark’s government rejected the expansion of Kinder Morgan Canada’s Trans Mountain pipeline earlier this month, no questions were raised about the threat to national unity. When eco-friendly Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson later applauded his province’s decision, it wasn’t seen as “petty politics.”
So why is Montreal Mayor Denis Coderre’s rejection of the Energy East pipeline tagged as “parochial”? Mr. Coderre, speaking for mayors representing the four million residents of the Greater Montreal area, said the project currently on the table is not acceptable. He raised concerns about possible oil leaks in a fragile environment and said the risks, as of now, greatly outweigh the small economic benefits for the Montreal area.
The outrage in many quarters was spectacular. Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall suggested Quebec might return its equalization payments if it so dislikes Canadian oil. Others presented the pipeline as a “nation-building” project. To abandon it would threaten Canada’s very existence, it seems. Is this a new transcontinental railway?
Many mayors and groups across the country, including First Nations leaders, have raised concerns about, if not outright opposition to, TransCanada’s Energy East project. The Ontario Energy Board, in a report last summer, was critical of the pipeline, asked that it be rerouted and said an oil-spill cleanup could cost $1-billion.
You can call it the NIMBY syndrome (not in my backyard); you can debate the fantasy-like concept of zero environmental risk. You can argue that the project is good for Canada, maybe vital to some areas.
But why is it that when the opposition comes from Quebec, it is seen to be un-Canadian?

No comments:

Post a Comment