Category: Canada

Gazoduq Pipeline: Just Say Non!

On Tuesday — the day after the federal election — the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada invited the public, and specifically Indigenous groups, to provide feedback on a controversial 780-kilometre natural gas pipeline between northeastern Ontario and Quebec’s Saguenay region.

The Gazoduq pipeline is a key element of a $14-billion mega-project that intends to provide a permanent path for natural gas exploited in the West to be exported in the East.

—You have three weeks to weigh in on a proposed gas pipeline
National Observer, October 23rd.

Pipelines?  But It’s 2019!

The  deadline has been extended to November 22, 2019, giving us a little longer to comment.

Here are the 495 comments so far.   The more comments they get, the better.
https://iaac-aeic.gc.ca/050/evaluations/proj/80264?culture=en-CA

If you care about the climate, just say no!  (Or non!)

Just Say NO to the Gazoduq Pipeline!

What’s it all about?

Fracked Alberta “Natural Gas” brought east through the TC Energy Pipeline (formerly known as TransCanada), will be diverted into the brand new Five Billion Dollar Gazoduc Pipeline at Kirkland Lake, Ontario.

The Gazoduc Pipeline would carry 1.8 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day to its customer, the planned GNL Québec Nine Billion Dollar Énergie Saguenay facility which will liquify the fossil fuel. The resulting LNG will be loaded onto massive tankers that sail through the Saguenay Fjord to the St Lawrence River enroute to hypothetical overseas markets.

pipeline under constructionThe proposed 780-kilometre underground pipeline would pass near or through Indigenous territories as it carries the fossil fuel across forests, ecologically sensitive wetlands and protected provincial areas.

Map showing the pipeline route
The proposed Gazoduc Pipeline (purple) travels from Northern Ontario across Quebec. The Indigenous nations it will pass near or through are listed in green.

Promises, Promises

The Gazoduq project promises to take into account the habitats and species “likely to be designated as threatened or vulnerable.”

Which sounds good until you consider this is not a promise to do no harm.   This project will introduce enormous tankers quadruple the size of the largest vessels currently using the Fjord (for whale watching).

LNG Tankers will ship out through the Saguenay-St. Lawrence Marine Park

These tankers will be sailing through the Saguenay-St. Lawrence Marine Park, which was established to protect marine life, including the endangered beluga whale population.

The Gazoduq project promises to “set a new benchmark in the LNG industry for environmental performance.”

Which really only means it has to be less invasive than previous LNG projects.  The idea here is that the Quebec hydro electricity they expect to use to liquify the fracked natural gas won’t be as nad as burning natural gas to liquify it.

Nevermind that the LNG this project produces will be burnt. Just not here.

It doesn’t matter where in the world we are adding GHGs, they all go into the same atmosphere. And let’s not forget that shipping a cargoes of fracked LNG across the ocean itself generates GHGs.

The Gazoduq project promises it “will help reduce global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.”

Funny claim to make about an industry that exists to increase our use of fossil fuels.  It seems to be based on the unproven assumption the fracked gas shipped to other parts of the world will displace coal and fuel oil.

Even if you believe these companies will try to do this, what happens when coal and fuel oil generated electricity has been eliminated?  Pipelines are expected to last at least 50 years.  Does anyone believe it will close its doors and go home? Especially if it’s only been operating for a decade or two.

The Gazoduq project promises it has “low potential for social and environmental impacts.”

Like “two scoops of raisins,” “low potential” could mean anything.

The construction alone will have an impact, with the introduction of problematic “man camps” as it travels near and through the territory of dozens of First Nations.

Economists don’t think much of the pipeline project’s promise of jobs.  Adding insult to injury:

Remarkably, the project will be eligible for Hydro-Quebec’s electricity rebate, amounting to an indirect subsidy of at least $43 million over six years. This is $7 million more than the $36 million that Gazoduq intends to donate, over the project lifespan, to communities in Quebec and Ontario affected by the pipeline.

—An open letter on GNL Québec: A pipe dream of another Québec pipeline

The Gazoduq project promises that:

“Natural gas is not like oil. Lighter than air, it rises and then quickly disperses in the atmosphere without leaving a trace.”

Without a trace?

Tell that to the climate.

Image Credits:
Public Domain image “Saguenay Mountain Fjord” by cleprovost

Gazoduq Map:
based on Quebec province transportation and cities map by Eric Gaba released under a Creative Commons Attribution Sharalike 4.0 International License 
and
Saguenay–St. Lawrence Marine Park by by Parcs Canada
and
Laughing Beluga by Steve Snodgrass released under s Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 License

Elizabeth May: A Legacy of Leading the Green Party

Elizabeth May: A Legacy of Leading the Green Party:

I am very sad to see Ms May step down as the Green Party of Canada leader; I believe she would make a fabulous Prime Minister, but that was not to be.  On the other hand, she’s certainly put the GPC on the map.  And, for that matter, Greens.  Despite the Defenders of the Status quo who’ve accused her of trying to hog the spotlight.  Since becoming involved with the GPC, I can tell you nothing could have been further from the truth.  Part of the reason there are 3 Green MLAs in BC, 1 MPP in Ontario, 3 MLAs in New Brunswick, and that the Official Opposition in PEI is due in part to the fact Ms May has always spared some of her prodigious energy working to help build the Green movement across Canada.   The problem has not been with Ms May, but with defenders of the Status Quo number the MSM (Mainstream Media), which has generally worked hard to lock Greens out of politics.  They know a strong enough Green influence will disrupt the status quo.  Because Greens do politics differently.   This is a great interview.  Well worth a listen.

VOTE YOUR VALUESFull Disclosure: Bob Jonkman, the 2019 Green…


Laurel & Bob


Bob and our son, Willem (circa 1993)

VOTE YOUR VALUES

Full Disclosure: Bob Jonkman, the 2019 Green Party of Canada Candidate for  Brantford–Brant is my husband.  

I fully support Bob’s campaign (which is why my own projects are languishing until this election is over) because I believe we need Bob in Parliament.  

I can tell you Bob is perhaps the smartest most ethical man I’ve ever known.  If Bob is elected, I believe we will get electoral reform to Proportional Representation.  This is so important because it will make it possible for Canada to begin to actually solve our problems, rather than dance political rings around them as the big parties do.  We need to restore and improve our universal healthcare (and reverse the privatization!).  We need a government that understands the importance of transparent governance and personal privacy.  A government that understands modern technology.  And a government that will restore and honour our Charter Rights.  We all need votes that count.   And most important: we need to get to work on Climate Change now.  Canada can be a climate leader but to be that we need to elect the right politicians. 

This is why I think it’s so important to elect Bob.  

So I will be posting more about Bob through the remaining days of the election.

If you want to see real change in Ottawa, if you want fair voting and real Climate Action that doesn’t include additional fossil fuel pipelines and Fracking, if you want human equity and actual reconciliation, if you live in Brantford–Brant, please consider casting your vote for Bob.  If you’re a Canadian who doesn’t live in Brantford–Brant you can still support Bob with a donation here:  
https://bobjonkman.ca/donate/

And don’t forget to check out the candidates in your riding and
vote for what you want!

The 2019 Canadian Election is on!  Check out Bob Jonkman’s…

The 2019 Canadian Election is on!  

Check out Bob Jonkman’s appearance on the 
Rogers Local Campaign Brantford–Brant Debate!

This is a very different election than we are accustomed to.  Although 2019 is not going to be our first federal election under Proportional Representation as indicated by the #ERRE committee, because it is shaping up to be a minority government, if we elect enough Green MPs, it could actually be the last election under First Past The Post if Canadians vote for what we want.     

As your Green Party MP, Bob will represent Brantford–Brant in Parliament. He won’t just deliver his party’s edicts to the riding.  

One Green MP can make a real difference; with enough Green MPs sitting in Parliament, Canada will take real climate action.

Vote Your Values!

Come join the Brant Greens for drinks and a barbeque!Saturday…

Come join the Brant Greens for drinks and a barbeque!

Saturday October 12th
6:00pm – 9:00pm
Steel Wheel Brewery
105 Powerline Road, Brantford, Ontario Canada

BBQ with local organic beef burgs and beyond meat burgs, potato salad, and some munchies. And of course, the full Steel Wheel selection of local craft brew to go with it! Enjoyable evening of local food, good fun, and generous fundraising.

This is also a fundraiser for the Bob Jonkman federal election campaign!

RSVP https://vote.greenparty.ca/rsvp/eve_6d867eb82

#CDNpoli Polarization

A CBC headline trumpeted, “Political advocacy group North99 uses misleading petitions to gather voter data”

But one of the two founders of north99 wrote an angry Facebook post denying misleading anyone, insisting CBC had made a mistake

“This morning CBC published a misleading and factually incorrect piece about North99. We have already filed an official complaint with the CBC and asked for a correction to be issued.
If you’ve read the piece and are wondering what’s true and what’s not, here’s the facts: people sign up to our email list through issue campaigns, surveys, petitions, and our newsletter. We always make it clear up front what issue or campaign people are joining when they sign up. 

The CBC claimed we were not being clear with people about this, and that we were signing them up for campaigns they didn’t want to be a part of. Let me be clear: this is 100% untrue. It’s as untrue as saying the sky is green.  Their so-called “analysis” of the forms on our website was wrong, and this led them to report a falsehood. That’s unfortunate, and we hope they will correct this embrassing error. Canadians deserve the unvarnished truth from our public broadcaster.

But you know who doesn’t give a damn about the truth? The Conservatives.  And they have already seized on the mistakes made by the CBC to attack us and the North99 community. 
This morning Lisa Raitt — a former Harper Cabinet Minister and the Deputy Leader of the Conservative Party — took to Twitter to attack North99.  She made wild allegations about us — the sort of stuff you’d expect from The Rebel, not someone trying to lead the country. 

Look, none of this is surprising. Our community is disrupting politics in this country, and we have to expect the forces of the right and the status-quo to come after us with everyone they’ve got. Now that we are growing in size and our community is having an impact, people are going to try to tear us down.  Lisa Raitt won’t be the last politician to smear and slander us. They hate what we stand for. But you know what: we aren’t going to back down from a fight.

Here’s my commitment to you: 
1) We take your trust seriously, and we take accuracy seriously. We won’t always be perfect, and sometimes — like the CBC! — we’ll make mistakes. But we’ll always correct them and be honest with you. 
2) We will never stop fighting for a Canada that works for the many, not just the richest few — even when we’re attacked by powerful politicians like Lisa Raitt. As long as you’re with us, we’ll keep on working. 

If you ever want to get in touch with questions or comments, please don’t hesitate to send an email to priority@north99.org. 
Thanks for your support,
Taylor 
Co-Founder, North99
https://www.facebook.com/OntarioVotesToStopDougFord/posts/514137532666333

Perhaps most interesting is how deftly Mr Scollon this message of righteous indignation was transformed into a Conservative attack piece.

While I don’t know the truth of the misleading petition allegation, it is nonetheless clear that the two gentlemen who are behind North99 are indeed Liberals.

A quick internet search revealed that Taylor Scollon had been the U of T Liberals’ communications director
https://www.facebook.com/uoftliberal/posts/taylor-scollon-uoft-liberals-communications-director-reminds-us-its-the-economy-/396372270425866/

and cofounder Geoff Sharpe had been the President of the BC Young Liberals
https://web.archive.org/web/20170728231036/http://abacusinsider.com/canadian-millennials/interview-geoff-sharpe-consultant-navigator-canadian-millennial-watch/

But are they operating with the blessing of theLiberal Party of Canada or are they acting alone in support of it.  Presumably North 99 is a third party advertiser in this, the new “Pre-Election Period” devised by the latter, else they’ll fall afoul of the LPC’s own new law which lays down rules about third party advertisers and possible collusion with political parties.

The WRONG KIND OF GREEN writes:

“While it shouldn’t be surprising that online partisan front groups stir the pot, what is remarkable is how effective they have been with so little accountability. All of these groups are scooping up massive amounts of data, often directly collecting information through their own cynical petitions on hot issues. These groups show how empty much of the political landscape has become. Digital media strategists are running a shell game that treats ordinary working people as something to be manipulated and toyed with. Forget about all that nonsense about Russians on distorting democracy through social media. We need to look no further than the communication specialists and political parties in this country to see who the true manipulators are.”

The WRONG KIND OF GREEN article  NAVIGATING ONTARIO’S ONLINE POLITICAL FRONT GROUPS looks at North99 and Ontario Proud, and who is behind them.  Yet the closest WRONG KIND OF GREEN gets to revealing who is behind *it* is characterizing itsellf as “a 100% volunteer, critical-thinking collective.”

Whoever WRONG KIND OF GREEN is, I share their concern about who is driving our politics.  Both North99 and Ontario Proud are working to build an us against them political culture that polarizes Canadians, and certainly seems to impose undue influence on our electoral process by demonizing the other side’s politicians.

This is, of course, why we still have the atrocious First Past The Post voting system.  Attacking the enemy is a time honoured strategy that often leads to winning elections and becoming the winner who takes all in our majoritan political system.

The Liberals and Conservatives take turns getting elected by convincing their base and any swing voters they can woo that only they will save us from the other.

But what is it doing to our country?

drawing of gladiators fighting

The #TMX Pipeline Approval and Canada’s #ClimateEmergency

Pipeline approval will likely lead to more legal challenges and protests that will continue to delay and block the controversial project

[guest post by Stand.Earth]

The Canadian federal government’s announcement reapproving the Trans Mountain Pipeline is inconsistent with the government’s declaration of a climate emergency the day before.  This will likely lead to more legal challenges and protests that will continue to delay and block the controversial project, said international environmental organization Stand.earth.

“Approving the Trans Mountain Pipeline is inconsistent with our government’s declaration of a climate emergency. Oil and gas emissions are the largest and fastest growing component of Canada’s emissions. If we are going to fight climate change in Canada, we need to face the fact that we can no longer expand fossil fuel production and infrastructure. Canada’s oil is high cost and high carbon, and it is struggling to compete in a global market. Investing pipeline profits into clean energy? How about you just put the $10 billion directly into clean energy, instead of wasting taxpayer money on this risky investment?” said Tzeporah Berman, International Program Director at Stand.earth. “We stand by city leaders, the B.C. government, and First Nations who oppose this project, and we call on organizations and individuals around the world to stand with us.”

“No matter who forms the next government in Ottawa, the Trans Mountain Pipeline will never be built,” said said Sven Biggs, Climate and Energy Campaigner at Stand.earth. “People care deeply about protecting the BC coast, and British Columbians remain opposed to this pipeline and the risks of a devastating oil spill that come with it. Whenever construction resumes, another wave of protests is guaranteed in British Columbia.”

Pipeline opposition

Opposition to the pipeline remains strong, with tens of thousands of people pledging to stop the pipeline and multiple cities, municipalities, and the province of B.C. also stating opposition.

Project risks

Construction of the Trans Mountain Pipeline and the likelihood of a spill associated with the project poses significant risks to the climate, the public safety of the communities it passes through, the economy, and the critically endangered Southern Resident Killer Whales.

  • Climate change: If built, the Trans Mountain Pipeline would expand the production of Canada’s oil sands, and the increase in emissions would be the equivalent of putting 2.2 million cars on the road. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued a report in late 2018 showing that Canada has just 12 years to reduce its climate emissions by 40%. Meeting those climate objectives is simply not possible if Canada continues to build new fossil fuel infrastructure like the Trans Mountain Pipeline.
  • Spill risk: If the Trans Mountain Pipeline is built, it will lead to a 700% increase in oil tanker traffic in the Salish Sea, with the likelihood of an oil spill in the 50-year lifespan of the project as high as 79-87%. A major oil spill would expose the entire Vancouver population to human health risks due to inhalation of toxic chemicals.
  • Public safety: A potential tank fire at the Burnaby Mountain Terminal poses a significant risk to nearby high-density neighborhoods, elementary schools, and Simon Fraser University. Proposed increased storage capacity could cause multiple tanks to ignite during a fire.
  • Economy: An oil spill would put at risk the 98,000 coast-dependent jobs in British Columbia. By comparison, the Trans Mountain Pipeline would create an average of 2,500 jobs a year for two years during construction, with 90 full-time jobs after construction.
  • Tar sands markets: Economists have questioned Trudeau’s claims that the pipeline would help Canada reach new markets in Asia, instead of simply expanding into existing U.S. markets in California and Washington, where opposition to the pipeline is heating up. Last week in California, the Protect the Bay coalition launched to oppose an increase in tar sands tankers in the Bay Area. In May, the California Assembly threw its support behind AB 936, a proactive measure to protect California’s critical marine and freshwater resources from harms caused by a spill of non-floating oils like tar sands, which if passed, would join similar legislation in Washington state on non-floating oils. In Washington, the King County Safe Energy Leadership Alliance sent a letter to the Department of Ecology to strengthen oil spill response requirements for dilbit, specifically calling out the Trans Mountain Pipeline. The letter includes signatories from multiple city mayors, city and county councilmembers, and state senators.Save Orcas
  • Endangered orcas: Even without a spill, the increased tanker traffic and the resulting underwater noise disturbance will have a huge impact on the endangered Southern Resident Orca population, and could push the struggling population toward extinction.

Republished from Tzeporah Berman: Approving the Trans Mountain Pipeline is inconsistent with Canada’s declaration of a climate emergency

Image Credits

White Rock, BC – Coast Salish housepost and Haida totem pole © by Joe Mabel is licensed to share under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.

Oil Flag of Canada © by Laurel Russwurm photographed at Jobs.Justice.Climate 2015 Toronto is licensed to share under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license.

#FridaysForFuture Save Orcas © by Laurel Russwurm, photographed at #FridaysForFuture Waterloo (2019) is licensed to share under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license.

Canada’s MMIWG report spurs debate on the shifting definitions of genocide

Lorelei Williams responds to the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls report.
Lorelei Williams, whose cousin was murdered by serial killer Robert Pickton and whose aunt went missing in 1978, sheds tears while responding to the report on the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls.  |  THE CANADIAN PRESS/Darryl Dyck

by Andrew Woolford, University of Manitoba

When the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls released its final report, it described the ongoing violence as a Canadian genocide. In the aftermath of the report’s release, many public intellectuals and journalists in Canadian news outlets and others on social media have contested the use of the term genocide.

I am a genocide scholar who has written widely about settler colonial genocide.

Genocide, originally defined near the end of the Second World War in 1944 by Polish-Jewish lawyer Raphael Lemkin and consequently taken up by sociologists, historians, lawyers and others, is for Lemkin “a co-ordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves.”

As a sociologist, I’m not interested in adjudicating this case according to an official legal definition of genocide. Rigid legal concepts can interfere with understanding the social nature of group destruction. It can flatten the analysis of group relations. It can serve as a hammer to pound a complicated history into a singular event.

Two women sitting in the audience sadly embrace during the MMIWG report ceremonies.
Two women embrace during ceremonies marking the release of the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls report in Gatineau on June 3, 2019. | THE CANADIAN PRESS/Adrian Wyld

One genocide is never the same as another, and therefore a static law or a fixed concept of genocide is of little use to protect us from its horrors. Understanding genocide as a process can help Canadians grapple with the ongoing threat faced by Indigenous peoples in Canada and Indigenous women and girls as outlined in the final MMIWG report.

Legal professionals over time have had to adjust their reading of genocide law. Since the Second World War, contesting ideas and debate have brought about changes to how legal scholars and courts interpret genocide. The authors of the genocide supplement for the MMIWG report draw upon these interpretations but also pose new challenges to the laws of genocide.

These questions are necessary because the history of settler colonialism in Canada includes a variety of efforts to remove, assimilate, starve and erase Indigenous nations. When one approach failed, the settler colonial mesh recalibrated.

For example, residential schools mutated into child removals and mass incarceration. Moreover, the strands of the mesh continue to entrap and strangle communities long after the supposed end of any one manifestation of group destruction.

This is the destruction to which the report draws our attention.

United Nations Convention on Genocide

The 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide (UNGC) is the basis for both international and national laws on genocide. The law is the product of a socio-political moment. In the meetings leading up to the convention on genocide, delegates from colonial nations such as South Africa, Canada, the U.S., Sweden and New Zealand voted against inclusion of cultural genocide (Article III) in the genocide convention..

Colonial and masculine assumptions are evident in genocide law, as is the political will of the drafting parties to protect their own nations from accusations of genocide, hence the withdrawal of Article III from the final document.

Despite these beginnings, the law develops as people engage with it, and genocide case law has gradually addressed some of the limitations of the UNGC.

For example, through decisions from bodies such as the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, the groups protected from genocide have been expanded beyond narrow understandings of ethnicity, nationhood, religion and race.

As well, the social death caused by mass rape has been interpreted as genocidal.

The MMIWG final report seeks to bring a grassroots, gendered and Indigenous reading of these laws to the discussion of MMIWG and how Canada’s actions and omissions contributed to their deaths.

This is a valuable contribution and pushes the boundaries of the definition of genocide. Thinking on this topic always needs to be pushed.

Genocide is a transgressive act. It overturns all expectations, violates social norms and continuously mutates to take on new and surprising forms. Different readings and interpretations of genocide are needed to truly confront the many evolving methods of group destruction.

BC MLA Melanie Mark and her daughter listen as Indigenous women and allies respond to the MMIWG report.
British Columbia Minister of Advanced Education and Skills Training Melanie Mark, B.C.‘s first female First Nations MLA, and her daughter Makayla, 8, listen as Indigenous women and allies respond to the report on the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, in Vancouver, June 3, 2019. | THE CANADIAN PRESS/Darryl Dyck

Genocide as a process

Many genocide scholars view genocide as a process rather than an event. In my book, This Benevolent Experiment: Indigenous Boarding Schools, Genocide, and Redress in Canada and the United States I focus on “cultural genocide,” though I treat cultural genocide as one technique of genocide rather than as a separate and distinct type.

I chart the development of Indigenous residential and boarding schools in North America and highlight the settler colonial practice of attempting to assimilate children through education.

Residential schools can be seen as situated within a series of nets that operated on all levels in society, including at the upper echelons of society among elite social influencers, and also through government and missionary institutions as well as individual teachers, principals and communities. There was a complex coordination of activities, habits, ideologies, motives and intents that were generally directed toward eliminating Indigenous peoples as distinct peoples.

These layers of destructive action can be likened to a settler colonial mesh constructed to entrap Indigenous peoples within an assimilative project. But the mesh is prone to snags and tears allowing for the emergence of resistance and subversion. Indigenous people were not passive; parents refused to send their children, children ran away and communities sometimes preserved their cultures when conditions allowed.

Impact on group destruction

The MMIWG report is about the results of such processes and their effects on community and family relationships: harmful relations established through settler colonialism, their impact on intimate and everyday group relations and the possibility of better relations in the future.

It demands more of genocide law, and more from Canadian society, to address the intersecting settler colonial and hetero-patriarchal wrongs that have led to the injustice of MMIWG.

Rather than staunchly defend a narrow conception of genocide, it is time to demand this concept to do what it was intended to do: enable human thriving through respectful collective relations.

Andrew Woolford, Professor, University of Manitoba

Creative Commons License
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 3.0 Unported (CC BY-ND 3.0) license.
Read the original article.

The Conversation

Here is what Sir John A. Macdonald did to Indigenous people

Here is what Sir John A. Macdonald did to Indigenous people:

I’m a Canadian settler.  My paternal ancestors settled on Turtle island (aka North America) before Canadian Confederation.  

Canadian government policies are continuing Canada’s Indigenous genocide today.  It is *not* something in the past.  It is something that needs to stop.

Now.

It is not going to stop so long as settlers continue being afraid to acknowledge it for what it is.