Cause and effect

Many people cannot recognize the difference between cause and effect and address the effect while the cause continues unabated (and also seem to forget that they are Canadian). Yes the premier of Alberta is acting in desperation to protect the Alberta and Canadian economies and apparently violating interprovincial trade agreements (wine; not Site C dam). That is the effect, the cause is the premier of this province violating Canadian law by trying to stop a project under federal jurisdiction that has already been approved to proceed to construction by the federal and BC governments during the time for approvals.

Premier Horgan needs to decide if he is Canadian or if he wants to hold a referendum on separation from Canada so that he can have sovereign control over a new country; or if he wants to be the premier of a province in Canada and follow Canadian law. Like so many activists, he has no regard for the rule of law and breaks it. He is a politician and so is immune to penalties for breaking the law that we, the people, are subjected to. Activists who try to stop approved construction projects can get arrested. I wonder what premier
Horgan would do if he faced that now.

The premier of Alberta is violating a trade agreement that has lawsuit as a remedy, not arrest. I don’t know what qualifications Mr. Stupka has in this field, other than having lived in Burnaby and Kelowna, or what zebra muscles have to do with this issue. He also writes like a non-Canadian, but a sovereign BC. I would like to know where he gets his information from. As for daylight in an emergency, during the flood of the century in Manitoba they built kilometers of dike around the clock with military helicopters holding flares in the sky all night. I have the book, A Red Sea Rising – 1997. But then, for a spill, floodlights could be set up on the ground like for highway paving during the night. Again, here is an activist exclaiming that the sky is falling and saying whatever to justify it. During my career I did work in the oilsands and they support a lot of Canadian jobs and
spinoff industry jobs, just as pipelines do to construct and permanent jobs to operate (pumping stations, maintenance and patrols). Note that I state my qualifications (Feb 9) as an engineer who worked in these industries, personal experience, and references; not just exclaim things. I worked on the initial feasibility study for the Northern Gateway pipeline. Had I been aware at the time that it was going to open up the Great Bear Rainforest with access roads, I would have refused the work. I did refuse work more than once during my career and ended up looking for a new job.

The federal government rightly refused that pipeline to protect the BC pristine environment. I think that most people can accept that Canada has to find new markets for our petroleum and not be getting ripped off by the USA for it in a single customer market; just as BC needs to ship products east (through Alberta) that also supports the Canadian economy. Winnipeg is a major transportation hub (Symington Yard), and BC products go there by rail and then south to the central and eastern USA and provide Canadian jobs in shipping. Mr. Stupka also states that the pipeline should export useful (refined) petroleum products if it is about Canadian jobs. Does this mean that he would support an upgrader in Burnaby? As I said in my Feb 9 letter, shipping bitumen/oil to China will replace dirtier coal that they burn now and pollute our coast.

Yes we are practically giving away our product now to the USA because they are our only customer. Then they ship gasoline back to the lower mainland. Every time the USA industry hiccups, our prices go up (now). As for the Canadian Chamber of Commerce reference in his letter, please take the time to look at point 3 under ‘Access to Customers’ located here http://www.chamber.ca/advocacy/policy-wins/ . I cannot find his ‘quote’ in their website. I did find this blog when searching for his ‘quote’, http://www.chamber.ca/media/blog/Chamber-Welcomes-Positive- NEB-Recommendation- on-Trans- Mountain/ . Now do you believe Mr. Stupka’s arguments? Note that he was the Green Party candidate for the Kelowna West bi-election. As for Mr. Coleman’s letter, its tone is extremely confrontational down to the personal level and espouses hateful actions against fellow Canadians who live and travel here and support the BC economy. These actions sound more like war mongering against a foreign country. There have
been a lot of people living in the Okanagan and paying into its economy and working in the oilsands who I’m sure, would agree that more sensible actions should prevail to end this issue and who support the BC wine industry.

If Mr. Horgan wants to be the prime minister of BC, rather than the premier; then perhaps he should run in the next election on a platform for a sovereignty referendum if elected. The best alternative for BC was approved in following an existing pipeline in an existing route. Extremists will say no to everything, except our right to ship BC products east.

Jerrilynn DeCock