Pipelines and Politics #2

It was easy to predict that within minutes of the Liberal government’s decision to back the Kinder Morgan pipeline that a preordained cast of characters opposed to any such decision would come out in full force. In fact before I finished watching the announcement and then went on to another news site to read a bit about the proposed pipeline, the perennial complainers of all government’s policy on the environment were condemning the decision and promising to fight it with every means possible.

To be clear - in my opinion it was a poor decision that both sends the wrong message to the rest of the world about the need to cut down on our consumption of fossil fuels and commits Canada to perpetuating the rape and disfiguring of our land. But I am offended by the rhetoric that suggest that it was an unexpected decision (Trudeau had made it clear in his speeches during the election that Canada could not afford to leave trillions of dollars worth of oil buried in the land) or that in some fashion that the decision made in without rational discussion. In fact the government had numerous discussions with groups of people - they just decided to not give extra weight to the environmentalist’s position. The Liberals decided that the need for people to have jobs etc needed also to be considered.

The need for both sides of the argument to demonise the opposition and to use language that at best could be describe as inflammatory does nothing to find reasonable solutions. Some of the comments on Facebook for example are derogatory and if they were printed could almost be labelled as libelous. The comments make gross generalizations and will only ensure that people who want to find solutions or those who agree with the Government’s decisions will stop listening. Surely we can do better than that. This is not about who won or who lost.

The  hyperbole is counter-productive. I understand the need to get people worked up and mobilize to protest the decision but I think there are other steps that can be taken to ensure that Canada reduces its collective carbon footprint as soon as possible.

1. Let the courts decided. I would much rather people send money so that the First Nations communities can hire lawyers ( Most Canadians would have no legal standing in the courts on this issue). It is clear that at least in the recent past that the Supreme Court has stated that such proposals need to be discussed in a meaningful way with local communities. It seems likely that this proposed pipeline will not pass this test.
2. I think someone needs to provide some alternatives in terms of how to replace some of the tax dollars that were raised in Alberta because of their higher incomes etc. and then was transferred to provinces that had lower incomes. Those transfers contributed to our health care, education and social programs. If we are going to say that Alberta is not going to be able to sell its oil - then how  are we going to replace that income federally?
3. We also need to find good, well paying jobs for the 35,000+  (CBC) people who lost their jobs and probably at least an equal number who will lose their jobs when the oil sands are shut down.
4. We need to find a way for Canadians to stop using oil. I would love it if everyone had a battery operated car - but I will never be able to afford one unless there were significant government subsidies.  It would be great if we took off the road all of those big trucks - as long as we accept that for most Canadians such a decision would mean no fresh produce for 6-7 months of the year, no internet shopping and of course no more oil or natural gas heating. If we are going to be serious about reducing our carbon footprint - we need to do it across board - not just to some of the people.

I think all of the above is achievable. But there needs to be a commitment on everyone's part to make the needed sacrifices and adjustments. It is not enough that we say no to pipelines. We need to say that we have working alternatives that can be in place as our oil usage is reduced. It can be done but we need to do it together - something that will not happen as long as we stand on opposing sides on the protest lines.

On the Road Again 2016 - Last trip of the Year

Thousands if not millions of people travel great distances every day. I have to assume that for the vast majority of them their trips are generally successful - else people would not travel in such numbers for less than critical reasons (I just meet a family who it appears had travelled from Sudbury to Tampa, Florida to see a football game). Given that - I am feeling a little bit persecuted by the gods of travel.

Yesterday morning my scheduled taxi that was suppose to pick me up at 8:30 to get me to the bus station by 8:45 was 10 minutes late; the bus that was suppose to pick me up at 9:05 to get me to Nanaimo airport was 25 minutes late. As I had scheduled a lot of extra time into my travel plans, the lateness of the taxi and the bus were not  major issues, but did, I must confess, cause some anxiety.

The plane left on time and arrived at the Vancouver Airport  at the right time. The Vancouver to Toronto plane left 30 or so minutes late because it had come in late from Hong Kong (that is what they said - for all I know they were all having an extra nap), and the plane had to be cleaned etc. Our flight was full and in spite of the fact that I had paid extra to get a seat that had a bit more leg room - it felt very cramped. I swear they have put in an extra row of seats. The person beside me was just a bit big and had very broad shoulders, the isle was so narrow that I don’t think a single person walked by me without brushing against me.

Because I was near the front I got to observe the first class passengers. It seemed to me that the overwhelming percentage of such travellers were men - I assume they were all business people. Which leads me to the obvious question: what is the annual flight bill for some of those companies and how much cheaper would things be if they had to fly economy? I bet there would be a lot less flying! It also seemed to me that they had a better selection of movies to watch. For example I noticed someone watching the new version of Ghostbusters…. I could not find it on my screen. On the other hand, I got to watch one of my favourite old movies “Harvey”.

The flight went by surprisingly quickly - maybe I napped and didn’t notice.

I got to Toronto, had enough time to go to the bathroom and to grab a sandwich. I was feeling pretty much in control and perhaps even a little bit cocky.  As I walked by an Air Canada desk I noticed a large line up. I (unfortunately) paid no attention. I sat down in the right area and read for 30 minutes. I looked up and saw that my flight had been cancelled. Went back to that line up to find that the fog was so bad in Sudbury that planes were being turned around.

I hoped I would get a free hotel room - I didn’t - something about it was a weather related problem and therefore not Air Canada’s fault. It was hard to argue with that logic. I did get two $10.00 food vouchers.

I slept on a couch that was quite comfortable. Unfortunately it was right across from the security area and therefore was occasionally noisy. It was also very bright and American Express who had paid for the couch played the same 30 second commercial all night long. Something about how great their “Cloud 10” service is.

I was up by 5:00 - brushed my hair, beard and teeth and had my free breakfast at Tim Hortons. Ah the good life.

Plane left Toronto on time, arrived in Sudbury almost on time and here I am. Tired, feeling a bit disconnected and ready to visit with family and to write for the next three weeks. I don’t think I will ever be a seasoned traveller. I am much happier hitchhiking where paradoxically I have no control over who is going to pick me up, but I feel far less powerless than I do in an airport.

Politics and Pipelines

No one should ever doubt that in Canada, as in most countries that claim to be democratic, the primary goal of any federal government is (1) to get re-elected and (2) to ensure that the economy remains stable and grows. Without the former - nothing would ever get done and without the latter there would be no resources to do anything. To believe that governments are altruistic , in spite of the rhetoric of such fine speakers as soon-to-be-ex president Obama or those such as Justin Trudeau who appears to speak so clearly from his heart is at best naive and at worst dangerous. Leaders may mean almost everything they say - it is just that their interests and value systems are aligned with the two above stated goals. We only face disappointment if we expect them to make decision on any other basis.

Prime Minister Trudeau has just announced the approval of two new pipelines - both of which had gone through the complex if faulty approval process managed by the National Energy Board. The first approved was really a no brainer. Enbridge, with a number of very clear conditions, was given permission to replace it 1600+ kilometre pipeline that runs through Alberta and the southwest corner of Manitoba to the USA. It was an easy decision in that the present pipeline is fifty plus years old and is in poor shape. If it was running at capacity, the risk of a significant break was very high. The new pipeline will follow the same path as the present one and the environmental impact will be relatively minimal. I suspect that the public outcry will be minimal.

The cabinet today also approved the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline. On the surface this decision almost seems reasonable. There is already a pipeline there - the new proposed  pipeline is just mirroring the present one that travels from just south of Edmonton to Burnaby and the Pacific Ocean. However the pipeline travels though 130 First Nation communities . Only one third of those communities have agreed to the pipeline. It is not clear to me if the remaining communities are concerned about the consequences of another pipeline or if they are still negotiating for a more favourable deal. Lord knows - we have never dealt fairly with those communities and they are right to be cautious. The city of Burnaby also is against any expansion and may have enough political capital to make things difficult.

Blessedly the government did say no to the Northern Gateway pipeline - and to shutting down the number of tankers that sail the inside passage.

Clearly the Liberal government believes that the two pipelines approved will both engender political support in the areas that they need it (Alberta) while not losing too many votes in BC, and create some economic  growth. I suspect they are right. Recognizing that any time one transports oil, there is a risk of environmental damage and that some parts of Canada need a boost to the economy, the Liberals may have made the best decisions possible.

Of course the better decision would have been to shut down the oil sands, stop shipping the crude across Canada in rail cars and to not build any pipelines at all. But for that to have happened, the rest of Canada (not just Alberta) would have  to tighten our belts a few notches - do with less services and pay more taxes. If we truly want to live in a carbon neutral country that does not use oil to burn for fuel or to sell to keep out economy stable, then we will need to find a way to generate income at a national level; we will also need to find an alternative way of moving both our goods and ourselves across vast distances.  I do not think there is an easy or a quick fix to either of those realities.

 In the upcoming weeks, especially because of the example of anti pipeline protests at  Standing Rock in the US, there is going to be the temptation to create a similar protest movement in BC. I think we need to be careful. The First Nations communities need to take as much times as they need in their negotiations with Kinder Morgan before they are forced into a position of protest. Non-indigenous peoples running off to protest camps "to support their Native brothers and sisters"  may be premature and problematic.  We should not be telling those communities how to act.

Before we protest - let us make sure that we are doing everything we can to reduce our community's dependency on oil. Let us make sure that before we throw out the bath water that the baby is safely somewhere  else. And that means having a reasonable solution to at least most of the problems. We need to stop looking to others to solve our problems. If you don't like the oil sands - stop using a car (bus, train, airplane), stop heating your house with carbon based products and stop using plastics.

What to Do about Trump

As the American election cycle was drawing to a close - I  wrote that I was glad the whole damn thing was almost over. I was naively hopeful that perhaps the mainstream and alternative media would start to focus on more important (and quite frankly) more interesting topics. I was, of course, wrong. The election of Trump did nothing to quell the endless drivel that spouts from people's lips. If anything the flow of absurdities has increased both in volume and in its polarizing content. There is no doubt that the ever increasing flow of outrageous comments from pundits, movie stars, politicians and want-to-be's is in large measure driven by the incredible and incompetent statements and decisions made by the president elect. It is truly frightening when such a person nominates people for his cabinet that are not only profoundly unqualified for those positions but in fact may be dangerous. When incompetent/ignorant/misguided people are allowed to shape public policy in such areas as education, women's health care, and the environment, then the gains of the last 60 years will be lost - perhaps never to be found again. One can only weep for the children of the USA and all of their lost opportunities.

However, those Americans who are now complaining about the injustice of Trump's win need to own some of the responsibility for the failure of the American electoral process. Their system of electing a president is bit strange. In fact it is so strange that a surprising number of Americans that I have spoken to in the past fifteen years cannot explain it. But just because it is strange or hard to explain does not mean that it is without merit. The electoral college has the singular advantage in that it ensures that parts of the country with the largest number of people, do not control the country. If the election was just based on number of people voting for whom, New York and California would always elect the president and there would be no point in anyone from the smaller stats voting. It is one of the legitimate complaints against the Canadian system. Just ask anyone from B.C. when Quebec and Ontario vote the same way.

But the real issue is not whether or not electoral college system is fair or whether or not they should trust in the popular vote (2 million voters out of 230,000 million voters is a rather small percentage), someone should be concerned about the 40% plus of American voters who did not bother to vote. No one who did not vote should give themselves the right to protest in the streets, demand recounts or otherwise tilt against windmills. 40% is a lot of people - if they had all voted perhaps the results would have been different. But at least those individuals would have the right to be upset in an, at best, unwieldy system.

Unless the three recounts change something dramatically (and no one is saying that they will) - the world is stuck with Trump. That does not mean that the fight is over. Neither citizens within the USA or the rest of us need to bow down and accept the chaos that is bound to come. We need to ensure that  our parliament honours the international environmental agreements we have made, that we continue to demand that our citizens and those from other countries have the right to live in freedom and dignity, and that we continue on a path of reconciliation with our First Nations. We must resist the temptation to accept the lowest common denominator when it comes to the environment or to our medical, educational and social services.  

For our neighbours to the south....a suggestion. Follow the path of Thoreau and Trump. When the government of the day were about to embark upon, in Thoreau's mind, an unjust war - he refused to pay his taxes. He was prepared to go to jail for it. Be like Trump- don't pay your taxes. But be like Thoreau and be prepared to go to jail for your beliefs. Just imagine - the system would grind to a halt if 100 million people (white, middle class especially males) stopped paying taxes AND plugged up the legal system.

Just a thought.

Grieving for an Old Dictator?

So Castro is dead. In spite of the media headlines, I wonder how many people actually care or for that matter have any sense of who or what he was. I have to wonder in light of the mini tempest that was caused by Trudeau's ( the younger) comments upon Castro's death, why anyone bothers to  pretend they are interested.

For those of us who belong to a certain spectrum of the Baby boom generation, Castro and Cuba might evoke a specific set of memories. I can remember, when I was quite young in elementary school, being taught how to hide under my desk if and when the nuclear bombs started to fall (one would think that adults who had seen pictures of Hiroshima or Nagasaki would have had more sense than to waste time teaching us such silly manoeuvres). I can remember somewhere in the dark recesses of my mind my father talking about him trying to get home if there was such an attack. When the Cuban missile crisis occurred - I can remember being scared and wondering if those lessons would be needed. The news was full of dark comments and the adults I knew seemed to be worried. At that time the geo-political complications were beyond me. I know I took the danger as being real and that my world as I knew it was at risk. I had no understanding that it was all a game of political chicken that had gotten a bit out of control.

Five years later, some people of my generation were in university - and starting to incorporate into our conversation the parts they had "cherry picked" from Marxism that they were comfortable with. Then we liked Cuba and Castro. Or rather it was not that we liked Castro (or in fact understood very much at all about the revolution) but we knew that anyone who was anti the USA must be good (the enemy of my enemy must be my friend). We railed against the corporate/capitalist elite and cheered on the long suffering Cubans who were struggling against them. We somewhat smugly hung posters of Castro and of Che Guevara in the safety of our warm and comfortable bedrooms. It was "in" to quote how well Cuba was doing after the revolution. Noticeably we did not talk about the low standard of living, or the oppression that must come with any type of dictatorship no matter how benevolent or that the revolution was only possible because the Soviet union was financing it for its own political machinations.

When our hip and somewhat anti-establishment prime minister (the elder Trudeau) visited Cuba in 1976. I suspect that most Canadians were proud. It was one more desperately needed proof that Canada was different than the USA.

However, in the next 40 or so years, with the exception of Canadians who flew to Cuba for cheaper winter holidays, most of us spent very little time thinking about Cuba or their revolutionary leader. Cuba was a destination to escape the cold weather. It was a place for the slightly more adventurous traveller who wanted the opportunity to experience visiting a developing country without any real danger. We admired their free medical help ( and their way of providing it), we were perhaps envious of their technically free education (their literacy rate according to UNICEF is 100%) and we could admire how they coped with a world that, especially after the fall of the Soviet Union, provided little assistance.

It has long stopped being fashionable to cheer on Castro and his revolution. Perhaps because Canadians have grown up a little, we no longer look to support countries that are different from the USA. There have been countless revolutions since - most of them far less successful than Cuba's. We have perhaps become too at ease with the concept that larger, more powerful countries chronically, perhaps somewhat obsessively, meddle in other country's affairs. We have given up trying to understand why who is doing what to whom. We seem incapable of either understanding the causes of inequality, of poverty or of political oppression or looking for long term solutions to those issues. Those political powers will continue to support revolutions because they are incapable of finding other solutions.  

I suspect that Castro and his long ago revolution is not relevant to the vast majority of Canadians. Those who care beyond a tourist level are well into their 60s if not older. For the rest - there are, rightly or wrongly, far more pressing issues than to revisit the heroes and villains of half a century ago. We didn't learn anything from that revolution and the characters it spawned. Not surprisingly, we have a new pantheon of minor gods and devils to worry about.