Lax Kw'alaams supporting OIL pipeline but not LNG?


#1

So let me get this straight…Lax Kw’alaams first nation are supporting an oil pipeline that will bring Alberta crude oil to Grassy Point near Port Simpson,…yet they are against an LNG pipeline and shipping from Lelu Island, when there is SOLID science behind PNW proposal that would not harm salmon in anyway.

How can this band on one hand say they are protecting salmon by refusing to allow an LNG pipeline and terminal to be located on Lelu when they are are fully backing the native-proposed oil refinery that would see an oil pipeline literally within feet from the Pacific Ocean. An LNG spill would cause absolutely ZERO environmental damage…a small oil pipeline leak would be catastrophic and would likely destroy their way of life.

What exactly is going on here? Are they just being massive hypocrites? Is anyone really taking anything this band is doing/saying seriously?

thenorthernview.com/news/304001521.html


#2

Why would they support a Pipe line , has any one seen the post regarding oil spill in California , one little glitz and our waters and your neighbors land will be or can be fucked . Does that bull shit money mean more then what our future generation and the land that we have enjoyed for generations .


#3

I have two thoughts about this.

One is that the oil proposal is something that they are heavily involved in, have a certain amount of control over, and likely stand to profit heavily from.

Secondly, the fact that they’re willing to support oil, which has been such a contentious issue across the country, does show that they are open to responsible resource development. With that in mind, it makes me feel a lot more confident that PNW LNG will proceed. The proponent has indicated that they are willing to help find a solution to the issues and concerns surrounding Flora Bank, including modifications to their existing trestle. If those concerns can be addressed and Lax Kwaalaams still refuses to agree to development at Lelu, then I’ll say it’s hypocritical.


#4

also there is a little infighting at Lax , Helin which is eagle clan if I remember supports both LNG and the oil but for some reason Reece claimed that the voting was unanimously against it, I don’t think the majority of the ppl trust Reece and his council due to the infighting, hell Reece and the band council negotiated with Petronas on the deal they voted on but when it failed he claimed the plant was in the wrong site, then why negotiate?


#5

I am sure Port Simpson will benifit more with a refinery at Grassy Point rather then 1.4 Billion offer they received for LNG that they turned it down. This proves its all about the money rather than the environment. Sad.


#6

Lax Kwa’alaams will no doubt profit immensely if development happens at Grassy Point. Good for them. Sure there are environmental concerns, but there are always environmental concerns.

There are far too many environmentalists who are complete hypocrites. They do not want any development where they can see it or where it might affect them but they are quite happy to use and consume: the petroleum products, the mining products; the wood products; and the power products that make our world.


#7

So if you eat meat or fish, you’d be a hypocrite if you didn’t want a rendering plant built next door?
I’m not taking sides, just pressing for legitimate points to be used in debate/discussion. Tired of the Michael Moore is fat, Al Gore is rich, Justin isn’t ready, Suzuki makes a living, so and so is a leftist bullshit.


#8

[quote=“herbie_popnecker”]
I’m not taking sides, just pressing for legitimate points to be used in debate/discussion. [/quote]

Thank you. Well said! :smile:


#9

well first off if the land you built your house next to is zoned for a rendering plant then tough bananas, Lelu island was considered by the port for development, now will there be any damage to the salmon? I have no idea, one study says yes another says no, so the answer must be somewhere inbetween, but last I checked the salmon run has always been affected by one thing or another, whether man made, overfishing, destroyed habitat or just nature in general, if Petronas does move the dock another 100 metres into the channel that should make everyone happy because the pilings will no longer be next to the eel grass, but i’m sure someone will always find something wrong no matter what, if environmental impact of industry in salmon bearing rivers is so bad then why does the fraser river has such an abundance of salmon runs? after all the salmon habitat is impacted by the industries up and down the fraser river.


#10

[quote=“bthedog”]So let me get this straight…Lax Kw’alaams first nation are supporting an oil pipeline that will bring Alberta crude oil to Grassy Point near Port Simpson,…yet they are against an LNG pipeline and shipping from Lelu Island, when there is SOLID science behind PNW proposal that would not harm salmon in anyway.

What exactly is going on here? Are they just being massive hypocrites? Is anyone really taking anything this band is doing/saying seriously?

thenorthernview.com/news/304001521.html[/quote]

No disrespect, but I don’t think that you have it straight. This discussion appears to be proceeding from flawed premises.

Lax Kw’alaams has an elected mayor and council that has a long history of negotiating with government and the private sector, sometimes takes issues to court and is generally quite forthright about their positions. What I read in the Black Press article, though, are statements of support not from the mayor and council but from various individuals who have chosen to speak in tribal or personal capacities.

So, for instance, Helen Johnson identifies herself on this issue as a “Matriarch”, although she is an elected council member and Deputy Mayor no less < laxkwalaams.ca/elected-council/ >. If she was speaking as Deputy Mayor (for instance if Mayor Reece was unavailable) that would have to be taken as very seriously. Her comments as a “Matriarch” are far less persuasive. All I conclude is that she and some others like the idea of shipping oil from the coast.

According to the article, Eagle Spirit has asked for approval of an “exclusivity and benefits agreement” with the community.

Exclusivity agreements typically come at a cost; they’re not handed out for free. For instance, Watco paid $2 million for an exclusivity agreement with the City (now the subject of a court case) and Watson Island LNG paid $500,000 for a much shorter exclusivity agreement that apparently expired in December without a final agreement being reached.

Whatever is on offer has not been compelling enough for the mayor and council to issue a media release saying that they accept and look forward to receiving their first payment from Eagle Spirit.

Those in Lax Kw’alaams who like the idea of oil pipelines and tankers on the north coast should be crossing their fingers hoping that the Harper government is re-elected with a majority, considering that both the Trudeau Liberals and the NDP are on record as opposed to that happening.

Overall, the Eagle Spirit proposal strikes me as being about promotion more than anything else: present an idea, put some of the pieces in place, including by seeking community support, then try to sell the idea to bigger players with very deep pockets who are actually in the production side of the business and have all of the technical wherewithal that goes with that. Eagle Spirit in contrast is by all appearances an “energy” company in name only.


#11

they are in name only but with Aquilini group as partner in the company, and i’m sure if Trudeau or Mulcair would support oil pipeline if a native owned company had the support of natives whose territory the pipeline went through approved of it.


#12

Building an oil pipeline and a refinery would be an enormously expensive undertaking. In little ole BC Aquilini group is a big deal no doubt, with a net worth of about $5 billion, but compared to a major energy company that’s not much at all. To take an example with a Rupert tie-in, Exxon makes more than that just in quarterly profits.

As for Trudeau and Mulcair, they are both pretty smart guys who would like to form a government. With the three parties so close in the polls, votes in BC will matter. The idea of exporting oil in tankers that periodically spill their cargoes and make a horrendous mess isn’t exactly a vote getting proposition in those parts of BC where most voters live. Trudeau and Mulcair are not going to reverse themselves on this.


#13

[quote=“BTravenn”]

Building an oil pipeline and a refinery would be an enormously expensive undertaking. In little ole BC Aquilini group is a big deal no doubt, with a net worth of about $5 billion, but compared to a major energy company that’s not much at all. To take an example with a Rupert tie-in, Exxon makes more than that just in quarterly profits.

As for Trudeau and Mulcair, they are both pretty smart guys who would like to form a government. With the three parties so close in the polls, votes in BC will matter. The idea of exporting oil in tankers that periodically spill their cargoes and make a horrendous mess isn’t exactly a vote getting proposition in those parts of BC where most voters live. Trudeau and Mulcair are not going to reverse themselves on this.[/quote]

Harper is on the unpopular side on many things, but if you lean his way he is the only option. On the other side most can vote greem, ndp or liberal depending on their stances on the topics on election day.


#14

[quote=“BTravenn”]

Building an oil pipeline and a refinery would be an enormously expensive undertaking. In little ole BC Aquilini group is a big deal no doubt, with a net worth of about $5 billion, but compared to a major energy company that’s not much at all. To take an example with a Rupert tie-in, Exxon makes more than that just in quarterly profits.

As for Trudeau and Mulcair, they are both pretty smart guys who would like to form a government. With the three parties so close in the polls, votes in BC will matter. The idea of exporting oil in tankers that periodically spill their cargoes and make a horrendous mess isn’t exactly a vote getting proposition in those parts of BC where most voters live. Trudeau and Mulcair are not going to reverse themselves on this.[/quote]

I imagine we will learn a lot more about what they have planned, as Eagle Spirit Energy is having a press conference this morning in Vancouver.


#15

[quote=“chookie”]
Harper is on the unpopular side on many things, but if you lean his way he is the only option. On the other side most can vote greem, ndp or liberal depending on their stances on the topics on election day.[/quote]

I’m not willing to call it for the NDP or Liberals as I think that Harper has a better than average chance of forming the government on October 19th. I felt the same way when pundits were writing off Clark prior to Dix’s apparent coronation.
I am hopeful that the moderate parties are able to influence voters in the multitude of swing ridings where Harper came up the middle and won in 2011.
Interesting days ahead.


#16

Forming government? Possible. He’s just going to have a harder time governing.

[size=60]src: threehundredeight.com[/size]


#17

[quote=“PLA”]Forming government? Possible. He’s just going to have a harder time governing.
[/quote]

The way I see it Harper will likely keep a lot of his base although I read that some die hard Tories are upset about Bill C-51. The NDP and Liberals will need to work very hard to capture every seat they can. This one is too close to call at the moment.


#18

This is what was announced at the news conference. ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/eagle … 00611.html


#19

Build it I say and let the jobs show up, and to all those first nations that would not support Enbridge but do support Eagle Spirit, welcome and thanks for being hypocrites


#20

This debate is important, but, name calling accomplishes nothing other than having this thread transferred to the Wasteland. Let us not escalate this thread into a mud slinging match. Thank you.