Freedom of Information is not what it used to be

The Proposed route of the Northern Gateway Pipeline

It's no secret that the export of oil from Alberta is a controversial issue, however, what should be even more controversial is the lack of transparency shown by the respective governments involved when required by law.


Since the rejection of the keystone pipeline by the Obama administration, new focus has been placed on the Nothern Gateway Pipeline which would see the transport of oil from Bruderheim Alberta to Kitimat BC. As expected, there are those against and those who are pro project.


BC Liberal Environment minister Terry Lake is quoted saying that "Critics are wrong to suggest the provincial government has already decided to support the Northern Gateway pipeline that would carry oil from Alberta to Kitimat." Sounds Reasonable, all options are being weighed: pros and cons.


What bothers me, is when a request was made to access a 371 page document regarding the lobbying and approval process of the above mentioned project,, all relevant info related to options or recommendations from ministry staff had been blanked out. Blanked out? What is the reason for blanking out anything? Does the BC Liberal government have anything to hide? Of course they do.


When did the freedom of information act become the "Selective Freedom of Information...maybe act"? Terry Lake claims no decision has been made. Really? Then why all the secrecy?


All the while the Harper government has been less then subtle as to what their desires are on the matter, labeling opponents of the project radicals. According to the Conservative Party radicals include the First Nations living near Kitimat, David Suzuki and a sizable portion of the Canadian population, likely the 60% of voters that did not vote for the Conservative party of Canada in 2011.

Bankrupting our Future

Fiscal and Environmental Irresponsibility

Let's forget for a moment the environmental consequences of this project. The   Conservative government argues that this project will offer benefits such as
4,100 person-years of direct on-site employment in BC. Why is the Conservative government content to sell crude oil when the product could be refined and sold for a much higher price generating even more jobs and revenues. If we are going to callously put the environment at risk let's at least get the most net benefit out of it. Harper and Co would rather have it refined in California and buy it back at market value. This reminds me of another oil producing country come to think of it.....


Source