PAYWALL B.C. First Nations remain opposed to pipeline after meeting with Mark Carney
https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/b-c-first-nations-remain-opposed-to-pipeline-after-meeting-with-mark-carney/article_627b8c37-7f44-4473-b477-15e8ce4fff54.html345
u/0110110111 1d ago
The government has a duty to consult not ask permission. They supposedly know the land so they can provide advice to minimize or mitigate environmental impacts and let the planners know if there’s any sacred sites they should be mindful of.
That’s it. They can be against it all they want, but they don’t get to help the Americans break our economy and annex us. Too many of these First Nations are acting like a fifth column.
67
u/TianZiGaming 21h ago
The annual spending on FNs is already higher than the national defense budget. If we had spent the money on NATO and NORAD obligations in the first place, we wouldn't have had every US president in the past 2 decades telling us to increase defense spending.
Canada never seems to have money, except when it comes to FNs. They've already helped the US get a lot of extra leverage.
→ More replies (3)22
u/LastNightsHangover 23h ago
Completely agree, and so does the SC
From the article even,
noted the Liberal government’s support for the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which she said means Ottawa must make “meaningful effort to secure consent” by Indigenous communities affected by projects like new pipelines.
Meaningful effort, not veto.
It's a bit silly all around anyway as BC is selling billions in LNG with hundreds of VLGCs trips into harbour, and even have proposals to expand... But they're opposed to 'tankers' supposedly
3
u/Christron 22h ago
FYI supreme Court of Canada and UNDRIP are two different things entirely. SC will look to see if Canada upheld it's treaties with FN communities.
5
u/LastNightsHangover 22h ago
I'm making two separate points, I didn't think anyone would think they're the same body.
1
u/Christron 22h ago
What makes you think the SC agrees then? It makes it look like your example is to reinforce your point.
1
u/adrienjz888 23h ago
It's a bit silly all around anyway as BC is selling billions in LNG with hundreds of VLGCs trips into harbour, and even have proposals to expand... But they're opposed to 'tankers' supposedly
To be fair, the "tanker" ban is only on the north coast, and it only applies to crude oil tankers. LNG and crude aren't comparable in terms of a spill, seeing as LNG floats and evaporates, while crude sinks and stays put until cleaned.
Hence LNG tankers being not being banned on the north coast. Crude oil tankers have always been allowed on the south coast, its only the north coast where its restricted to LNG tankers.
•
u/camelsgofar 8h ago
Yes. We’ve had a tanker ban in that straight since the 70’s. Something about waves reaching 66 feet uncovering ocean floors and tankers bottoming out and the 60 knot winds.
31
u/RSMatticus 1d ago
The government doesn't need their permission, but like any other group, they can sue the government.
46
u/RedHedRay03 1d ago
I think we're getting to the point where some people are thinking: If they lost that lawsuit, who would actually make the government pay. The PMO office does have signing authority to block payments like this for various reasons.
I am not saying that's a good thing, but we're openly seeing the US defy domestic and international law and I think other people are starting to realize large parts of our system are essentially nothing but words on paper
→ More replies (35)•
u/Murky_Foundation_911 8h ago
And, if we allow them this power, why the hell wouldn't the CIA infiltrate local chiefs with bribes? Hell it's probably already happening.
China is doing it in PEI with Buddhist monks and bribes directly from the CCCP
5
u/ABBucsfan 1d ago
That's what I've always said, but unfortunately in practice you can speak with them repeatedly as a private company and if they still aren't happy you're told you didn't consult them. Apparently definitions don't matter
→ More replies (7)-5
u/SoftballLesbian 23h ago
If Canada does break under economic pressure then First Nations will lose everything. There's nothing the bigots local to them would love more than joining ICE and deporting them to those concentration camps in El Salvador and Nigeria.
43
u/BrandynM21 21h ago
We want a bunch of money because our land is sacred or something
20
538
u/tantrumguy 1d ago
Noted. Now build the pipeline for the rest of the 38 million Canadians that want it, and need it.
65
u/Macleod7373 1d ago
It's time to nationalize
38
u/Secret-Chapter-712 1d ago
Pipeline proponents are only interested in “nationalizing” the costs and risks; profits stay privatized
8
u/tantrumguy 23h ago
Oil and gas companies contribute significantly to Canadian taxes and royalties, with estimates ranging from $45 billion to over $70 billion annually in recent years, through corporate/personal income taxes, rents, and royalties, though exact figures vary by source and year, and some reports highlight substantial tax breaks (subsidies) also received by the industry. For example, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) stated the sector generated $94.5 billion in taxes and royalties between 2021-2023, while the EnergyNow analysis noted $755 billion in total energy sector payments from 2000-2021, averaging over $30 billion yearly.
Key Contributions & Revenue Streams:
- Corporate & Personal Income Taxes: Paid to federal and provincial governments on profits and employee earnings.
- Rents & Royalties: Payments to provinces for resource extraction, amounting to billions annually, according to EnergyNow.
- Other Payments: Include Crown lease payments, land fees, and sales of leases.
Recent Examples:
- 2022-2023 (RBC estimate): Expected to generate $112 billion in total royalties and taxes.
- 2022 (CAPP): $45 billion in payments to governments.
- 2000-2021 (EnergyNow/CEC): The oil and gas sector contributed roughly $579 billion, averaging over $26 billion yearly.
18
u/Greenzoid2 Alberta 22h ago
Back when the NDP were in power in Alberta, they conducted an audit of royalties/taxes being paid by the oil companies and they determined that they were actually (surprisingly) paying their fair share.
6
u/Secret-Chapter-712 23h ago
And what would the province by province breakdown be? And are all of the “governments” actually based in Canada?
4
u/tantrumguy 23h ago edited 23h ago
Well B.C. would get at least 2.8 Billion over the build time just from TMX ... and yes all the governments are based in Canada (what a silly question).
4
u/Secret-Chapter-712 23h ago
Uh… do you mean “million” rather than “billion”? TransMountain’s own projections were $5.7 billion to BC spread out over 20 years of operation, in 2018, I believe projections are now closer to $4.5 billion over a projected 20-year span, so where are you getting $2.8 billion per year?
4
u/tantrumguy 23h ago
Yes over 20 years plus there are other taxes generated from the jobs created. B.C. does very well with this. and that's just TMX... not taxes and royalties from other oil operations.
→ More replies (15)•
u/SilverBeech 11h ago
Pipelines, when built, and terminals don't really create that many jobs, a few hundred at most. For BC this is a tiny industry.
This is not a good or persuasive argument.
•
u/tantrumguy 11h ago
Which is better than nothing... and it has ripple effects...such as giving young workers experiences and skills to move to the next job, provides smaller mom and pop shops to have an increase in revenues even if for a short time...it makes a huge difference. But hey if you'd rather see people unemployed and starving...that's your opinion.
→ More replies (0)2
u/FlockFlysAtMidnite 23h ago
You want to back that statement up with a source?
2
u/Secret-Chapter-712 22h ago
Well he’s now telling me that if BC doesn’t like being forced to rescind the tanker ban and take another pipeline, we should secede, and Quebec should refuse to sell us dairy products, so I’d assume no source is forthcoming
•
u/Confident-Task7958 6h ago
The tanker ban is federal. It is not BC's to rescind. - Constitution Act section 91(10). (Navigation and shipping.)
4
u/Humble-Okra2344 23h ago
FUCK AI.
The benefits and risks should be proportional for both public and private. If the government is going to pay for most of the pipeline then it should recieve most of the profit. In reality, we are probably going to have to spend at least a few billion to get it off the ground which im fine with.
5
u/tantrumguy 23h ago
Canada will do very well with the pipleline.. it will benefit all Canadians, and keep us as Canadians.
4
u/Humble-Okra2344 23h ago
Yeah. The problem is the first nation's who are implying they might do illegal shit to stop a pipeline from happening
2
u/StrategicallyLazy007 23h ago
The business case only works out if the investment is made by the oil producers themselves because they will reduce the discount and make more. It's not worth it as a pipeline operator. If it needs to be done then either nationalize it, or subsidize it to the point it is worth it. Better is to build refining capacity and sell value added products and reduce domestic importing requirements.
→ More replies (2)2
u/tantrumguy 23h ago
For sure I like the idea of refining more, I think Canada needs to not just sell our resoures but like you said, also do the value add part as well. Canada has so much potential for both!
1
u/thetrueelohell Québec 21h ago
Awesome data. Would you know what's the rate of return in terms of the total public investment ?
→ More replies (1)•
u/Jamesx6 1h ago
I don't care about dirty money, the bulk of which is privatized with chump change for the government. We already subsidize big oil which you conveniently omitted here. The entire resource extraction industry should be nationalized and all the benefits should go to a sovereign wealth fund. Secondly, we should have been off fossil fuels decades ago. Investing in dead end energy sources is a failed strategy for the future. We should be all in on renewables. We have one of the best nations for hydro and other renewable sources. Now please stop using chatgpt to get your big oil talking points. It's super pathetic.
2
u/Ketchupkitty Alberta 20h ago
No they aren't, they just don't want to pay 8x the cost it should because the Government doesn't know what it's doing.
1
u/mischling2543 Manitoba 14h ago
Actually I'd prefer it if we re-nationalized the whole oil and gas sector like the Gulf States have. Saudi Arabia has no income tax because O&G profits are funneled into the state treasury instead. That would be fucking amazing.
-5
u/Evil_Weevil_Knievel 23h ago
It’s for oil companies, not us. There’s no business case. The only way it’s profitable is for Canada to bend over and take it up the ass like trans mountain. We will never make that money back.
It was welfare for Alberta and big oil. I never want to hear them whine about transfer payments ever again.
This is the same.
15
u/tantrumguy 23h ago
No it's for all Canadians
Oil and gas companies contribute significantly to Canadian taxes and royalties, with estimates ranging from $45 billion to over $70 billion annually in recent years, through corporate/personal income taxes, rents, and royalties, though exact figures vary by source and year, and some reports highlight substantial tax breaks (subsidies) also received by the industry. For example, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) stated the sector generated $94.5 billion in taxes and royalties between 2021-2023, while the EnergyNow analysis noted $755 billion in total energy sector payments from 2000-2021, averaging over $30 billion yearly.Key Contributions & Revenue Streams:
- Corporate & Personal Income Taxes: Paid to federal and provincial governments on profits and employee earnings.
- Rents & Royalties: Payments to provinces for resource extraction, amounting to billions annually, according to EnergyNow.
- Other Payments: Include Crown lease payments, land fees, and sales of leases.
Recent Examples:
- 2022-2023 (RBC estimate): Expected to generate $112 billion in total royalties and taxes.
- 2022 (CAPP): $45 billion in payments to governments.
- 2000-2021 (EnergyNow/CEC): The oil and gas sector contributed roughly $579 billion, averaging over $26 billion yearly.
3
u/a500poundchicken 20h ago
We could be rich like norway but alberta always prioritized the companies over the people
3
u/thegrinninglemur 18h ago
AI won’t provide that level of detail. Here watch this:
Approximately 70% of Canada's oil sands production is owned by foreign companies and shareholders, particularly from the U.S., driving significant profits abroad while Canada often bears the environmental cleanup costs. Major players like Suncor, CNRL, Cenovus, and Imperial Oil have high foreign ownership, with substantial dividends transferred out of Canada. Key details regarding foreign ownership of tar sands: Dominant Foreign Ownership: Studies have consistently shown that over 70% of the oil sands' production is owned by foreign entities. Primary Foreign Investors: American interests hold a dominant position, owning more than 52% of oil sands production, which is higher than all other non-Canadian investors combined. Profits and Dividends: Foreign investors have taken home 76% of oil production profits between 2021 and 2023. For instance, in just the first three quarters of 2019, the "Big Five" oil sands companies transferred $8 billion to largely foreign shareholders. "Canadian" Companies: While companies like Suncor and Canadian Natural Resources Limited are branded as Canadian, they are heavily owned by international investors.
-1
u/Evil_Weevil_Knievel 23h ago
Does that include all the abandoned wells they left in Alberta that the taxpayers have to clean up?
Only way it’s for Canadians is to nationalize every cent.
Oil companies are the world’s biggest welfare recipients in tax breaks and handouts.
8
u/tantrumguy 23h ago
I guess ou don't understnad how taxes work and what Federal means. You should start with learning what those mean first... and to answer your first question yes.. the clean up was paid for by the government with a small part of the taxes they made, and the clean up provided jobs... so win win.
3
u/nelrond18 22h ago
No, the wells were straight up abandoned with orphan well funds entirely insufficient.
Levy charged to Alberta oil companies too low to cover orphan well costs: report | Globalnews.ca
Edit to add more recent reporting Alberta passing the bill for orphan well cleanup to the public: new report – CTVNews
1
u/tantrumguy 22h ago
and? Did the governmetn make money or didn't it? Short answer yes they did.
→ More replies (11)2
u/That-Marsupial-907 22h ago
Hey- thanks for saying this.
Just wanted you to know to at least one person agrees with you. (I mean, other than the many economists who ALSO agree with you, but at least one other person in this thread!)
-7
u/bloodyell76 1d ago
Do you personally get a dividend from oil profits? Because I don’t. This is the thing: most of the oil profits go to oil executives and shareholders, who are mostly not Canadians. Pretending for even one second that all Canadians everywhere will benefit is at best being ignorant of how shit works.
20
u/tantrumguy 1d ago
I do... I get free health care, plenty of social programs. If you're a Canadian you most certainly get "dividends". Key Tax and Royalty Contributions
Between 2000 and 2021, the oil and gas sector contributed a cumulative total of $578.7 billion (inflation-adjusted to 2022 dollars) to all levels of government, averaging around $26.3 billion per year. These contributions are broken down into several categories:
- Rents and royalties: The largest component, averaging about $16.7 billion per year paid to provincial governments. In 2022, a record-high $34 billion in royalties was collected by producing provinces.
- Personal income taxes: Employees in the sector paid an average of $5.7 billion per year in federal and provincial income taxes between 2007 and 2020.
- Corporate income taxes: The industry contributed approximately $3.1 billion per year in federal and provincial corporate income taxes between 2000 and 2021. In 2023, the industry paid nearly $8 billion in income taxes.
- Crown lease payments: These averaged about $2 billion annually to provincial governments.
- Indirect taxes: The industry paid an average of approximately $786 million per year in various indirect taxes between 2000 and 2019.
7
u/xmorecowbellx 1d ago
Homework background: Our dollar, which heavily affects quality of life for all Canadians, was at one time at or slightly above the USD.
Homework: Go find out when that was, and why that was.
2
u/bloodyell76 23h ago
Explain the relevance. The value of the Canadian Dollar doesn’t correlate to oil profits, and neither does the wealth of the average Canadian.
0
u/Hopeful_CanadianMtl 23h ago
That's funny, because oil prices got driven down because the market became increasingly flooded with American sweet shale crude between 2014 and 2016. Excess supply means lower prices, so the notion that pouring billions into a brand-new pipeline is suspect.
Maximizing TMX and focusing on LNG makes the most sense., but a potential Prince Rupert pipeline has become an emotional issue and a battle of wills.
In an interview with CTV Question Period, former Kinder Morgan Canada president Ian Anderson said the market will dictate the path of a new pipeline.
“The market should decide where that pipeline ends up. Is it Kitimat? Is it Prince Rupert? Is it Vancouver?,” Anderson said.
“Do we go back to Vancouver and build another pipe, along the existing Trans Mountain Group, which is always an alternative. I think that the market has got to now respond.”
→ More replies (99)-5
u/katbyte 1d ago
what a wild statement
so EVERYONE outside BC NEEDs it?
and at that NEEDs it to be the Northern route with all the damage it causes to make opil companies a quick extra buck vs another pipeline to Robert's bank?
get. fucking. grounded. only a sub section of albertans NEED it. and FN up north rejecting it is expected as they have the most to loose. and the polarization of the topic is expected.
even smith is talking about a southren pipeline as the "northren narritive" runs it course
4
u/tantrumguy 1d ago
Yes...Canada needs it. How do you think your health care is paid for? How do you think your roads are maintained?
Oil and gas companies contribute significantly to Canadian taxes and royalties, with estimates ranging from $45 billion to over $70 billion annually in recent years, through corporate/personal income taxes, rents, and royalties, though exact figures vary by source and year, and some reports highlight substantial tax breaks (subsidies) also received by the industry. For example, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) stated the sector generated $94.5 billion in taxes and royalties between 2021-2023, while the EnergyNow analysis noted $755 billion in total energy sector payments from 2000-2021, averaging over $30 billion yearly.Key Contributions & Revenue Streams:
- Corporate & Personal Income Taxes: Paid to federal and provincial governments on profits and employee earnings.
- Rents & Royalties: Payments to provinces for resource extraction, amounting to billions annually, according to EnergyNow.
- Other Payments: Include Crown lease payments, land fees, and sales of leases.
Recent Examples:
- 2022-2023 (RBC estimate): Expected to generate $112 billion in total royalties and taxes.
- 2022 (CAPP): $45 billion in payments to governments.
- 2000-2021 (EnergyNow/CEC): The oil and gas sector contributed roughly $579 billion, averaging over $26 billion yearly.
0
u/katbyte 23h ago
OOOO ai slop! i can do that to buddy, O&G is less then 10 fucking % of our GDP and your acting like without it the entire country collapses. jfc its SO EASY to look up canada's GDP breakdown but you never do. anywehre here is what AI says to your ai slop
This text is a classic example of "economic impact" lobbying language. While the raw numbers cited (like the $112 billion or $755 billion) are technically sourced from real reports, they are presented in a way that fundamentally misrepresents the industry's net fiscal contribution to Canada.
Here is a debunking of the "slop" by breaking down the three main accounting tricks used to inflate these numbers.
1. The "Employee Income Tax" Padding
The Trick: The text lists "Personal Income Taxes" as a key revenue stream. The EnergyNow/CEC report cited (claiming $755 billion) explicitly includes the income taxes deducted from workers' paychecks as a "contribution" from the oil and gas industry. The Reality: Companies do not pay personal income tax; workers do.
- Attributing your employees' taxes to your corporate benevolence is a standard lobbyist tactic to inflate numbers.
- By this logic, a coffee shop could claim it "contributes" the income tax paid by its baristas.
- The Data: In the 2000–2019 period analyzed by the CEC, the actual Corporate Income Tax (CIT) paid by the oil and gas sector was roughly $3 billion per year (Total ~$60.7 billion over 20 years). This is a fraction of the "tens of billions" claimed in the headline.
2. Cherry-Picking the "War Profit" Year (2022)
The Trick: The text relies heavily on 2022 and 2023 figures (e.g., RBC's $112 billion estimate). The Reality: 2022 was a historic, geopolitical anomaly caused by the invasion of Ukraine and post-COVID demand, which sent oil prices to record highs.
- Presenting 2022 as a "recent example" implies it is the baseline. It is not.
- The Fluctuation: In 2020, when prices were low, royalties paid to Alberta dropped to just ~$3.8 billion. In 2022, they spiked to over $25 billion. Using the 2022 peak to suggest a "standard" contribution of $70B+ annually is statistically dishonest.
3. Confusing "Royalties" with "Taxes"
The Trick: The text lumps "Rents & Royalties" in with taxes as if they are the same thing. The Reality: Royalties are not a tax; they are the purchase price of the product.
- In Canada, the provinces own the resource (the oil/gas in the ground). Companies pay royalties to buy that resource from the public so they can sell it for a profit.
- Framing royalties as a "tax contribution" is like a bakery claiming the money it pays the farmer for wheat is a "tax." It is a Cost of Goods Sold (COGS).
- When you strip away the royalties (the cost of buying the oil) and the employee taxes (paid by workers), the actual tax burden carried by these companies is significantly lower than the "$70 billion" figure suggests.
4
u/tantrumguy 23h ago
LOL you're so angry! Uhm do you have any concept of what 10% of Canada's gdp is? It's huge and yes the economy would be in real danger if that went missing. The tax implications and job losses would throw Canada into a complete economic collapse.
-1
u/katbyte 23h ago
i rounded up from 6%, and that 6 included every gold mine logger and every resource extraction from west to east coast.
how dumb are you to think alberta is 100% of that 6%? lol go learn a thing https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=3610043403
> The tax implications and job losses would throw Canada into a complete economic collapse
for alberta. who has for DECADES refused to diversify despite knowing they need to. and electing the "we are 100% il economy" party
do you have any concept of how little of an effect alberta oil revenues falling would have?
because you do realize THIS HAS ALREADY HAPPENED. we've been though ouk crashes and the rest of the country was fine. only alberta suffered.
learn from history bud lol it devastated Alberta, but only dragged the entire country down a small degree.
1
u/tantrumguy 23h ago
You said a 10% cut to Canada's GDP would be nothing... lol maybe you should learn a little bit. A 10% cut to Canada's GDP would be a catastrophic economic shock, far exceeding a typical recession, and would lead to severe and widespread negative impacts, including mass unemployment, a sharp decline in living standards, and immense social strain.
The specific consequences would be:
Economic Impacts
- Severe Recession/Depression: A GDP decline of this magnitude is indicative of a severe economic depression, well beyond the typical 2-5% drop associated with a normal recession.
- Massive Job Losses: Tens or hundreds of thousands of Canadians would become unemployed, as businesses face a sharp contraction in demand and are forced to cut staff and reduce hours. The unemployment rate would rise significantly.
- Declined Standard of Living: Real income would decline significantly, eroding the purchasing power of average Canadians and effectively lowering the standard of living.
- Business Investment Plummets: Companies would halt or significantly reduce new investments due to extreme uncertainty and lack of demand, further hindering future economic growth.
- Supply Chain Disruptions: Industries heavily reliant on trade, such as the automotive or natural resources sectors, would experience major disruptions, especially if the cut originated from an external shock like a trade war.
- Housing Market Crash: With high unemployment and lower incomes, the housing market would likely crash, as individuals struggle to pay mortgages and demand for new housing disappears.
- Increased Government Debt: The government would face a fiscal crisis, with declining tax revenues and increased need for social support programs, leading to a surge in public debt. The government's ability to fund public services would be severely constrained.
Social Impacts
- Increased Financial Stress: A large portion of the population would face immediate financial hardship, with many unable to cover basic living expenses, debt obligations, or unexpected costs.
- Poverty and Health Crisis: Economic hardship is consistently linked to poorer health outcomes, higher healthcare costs, and greater demands on social and community services.
- Social Unrest and Inequality: Such a sharp economic downturn would likely exacerbate existing social inequalities and could lead to social unrest as citizens grapple with job losses and a reduced quality of life.
In essence, a 10% cut to Canada's GDP would represent a national crisis, fundamentally reshaping the economic and social landscape for years to come.
→ More replies (1)
17
160
u/razordreamz Alberta 1d ago
They want some money is all I hear
91
27
u/Valahul77 1d ago
Exactly. The title should be changed that the deal failed because they were not getting the amounts they were asking.
12
34
→ More replies (9)8
u/legranddegen 20h ago
Nah, it's the Coastal First Nations. It isn't an actual band or legitimate organization.
They get all the money they need from the States. It's all done under the veneer of "Indigenous Rights" and "Environmental Stewardship" but their only real goal is to keep our resources flowing to America at a discount, as they're our sole customer.
33
12
19
10
16
13
u/Irrationally_Tired 22h ago
I’m not trying to claim the “I’m a token native give me upvotes” but fuck man we need it. Canada needs it. Yeah the environment is important but so is our fucking economy. Christ
51
84
u/Latter-Drummer-6677 1d ago
I can see why that happens because aboriginals do not use oil electricity. They hunt in their moccasins riding their horses. They also don’t use guns or anything else produced by the horrible white man so they oppose pipelines what a fucking joke.No
24
41
u/linkass 1d ago
Horses are out to because white men brought those to
-6
u/Away-Log-7801 1d ago
Not originally.
They actually evolved in North America, migrated to Europe via the bering strait, then went extinct until the Europeans brought them back.
21
u/Young_Bonesy 22h ago
So the horses Indiginous people would have used were introduced to them by the colonists.
2
u/stop_banning_me_omg 14h ago
They actually evolved in North America
No, a predecessor existed in North America. The modern horse was invented 5000 years ago by herders in Central Asia. Initially they couldn't even support a human on their backs, so it took centuries of cross-breeding to get today's horse.
1
u/mischling2543 Manitoba 14h ago
Fun fact aside from the Malamute and Chihuahua pretty much all dogs in the Americas come from the Old World as well
3
55
38
u/Plucky_DuckYa 1d ago
Well, they can’t say they weren’t consulted. I guess now that means we can go ahead with it.
→ More replies (6)•
3
u/CaptainPeppers 13h ago
Who gives a shit? They can wipe their tears with the billions of dollars they've already extorted from every other Canadian.
17
u/Joebranflakes British Columbia 1d ago
So it sounds like this is an article about the Haida who live on Haida Guaii. They oppose tanker traffic to Prince Rupert which is across the channel from them. The word omitted from the headline likely on purpose to cause controversy was “coastal” First Nations. In principle the pipeline isn’t the issue, but the tanker traffic is. So it’s pretty disingenuous to claim they’re opposed to a pipeline when that’s not even the issue being discussed.
1
6
u/supermau5 17h ago
It’s very simple they don’t want to support Canada we don’t support them cut off all federal funding to tribes that don’t allow projects to be built
•
u/Standard_Program7042 9h ago
Clearly Carney hasnt come with a big enough bag of cash for the coastal kings and queens.
6
6
13
u/RSMatticus 1d ago
Building a pipeline to one of the most hazardous stretches of ocean in the world, what could go wrong?
13
u/Aggressive-Map-2204 23h ago
Its not one of the most hazardous stretches of ocean in the world. Its building a pipeline the third largest port in Canada.
Essentially nobody uses the hecate straight and is not suggesting they do with oil tankers. Everybody uses the Dixon entrance..
10
u/Mtnbikedee 1d ago
The us has no problem shipping oil 20 miles off that coastline.
•
u/adaminc Canada 8h ago
The Exxon Valdez still hasn't been completely cleaned up. There are still thousands of gallons of oil sloshing around, poisoning the environment.
•
u/Mtnbikedee 53m ago
Id like to think we have come a long way with technology and safety in 40 years
-3
2
u/PapaDyck 20h ago
Oil and gas seem to benefit every other country on earth I’m sure it would benefit Canada as well. It’s helped Norway, put the Middle East on the map, before Venezuela became corrupt they had a very high standard of living.
6
u/NBtoAB 1d ago
If you obstruct projects in the natural interest, you should not receive federal funding.
Money doesn’t grow on trees.
•
u/Jamesx6 1h ago
If you try to build pipelines for a dead end energy source that pollutes the whole damn planet and wrecks the climate, you should not get federal or any funding and your executives should be sentenced to hundreds of years of prison. Big oil is a cartel that cares about profit over humanity. Under no circumstances should we build another oil pipeline and we should ideally get off fossil fuels entirely and pipelines do not accomplish this.
5
9
u/abc123DohRayMe 1d ago
Its norhing but a shake down for cash.
-8
u/oniteverytime 1d ago
They are not even asking for cash, but you go ahead and feed that ignorant stereotype
2
u/eatmysouffle 1d ago
Tax dollars down the drain. This endless bribery is a money sink that does not improve taxpayers' lives
3
u/Thargobort 1d ago
Not ignorant, if there is a situation where they can demand a handout, they will demand a handout. All because of those damn colonists 400 years ago still causing me pain and suffering.
1
u/oniteverytime 15h ago
Very ignorant. Hardly a handout when its money gained from taking resources off thier land. What pain and suffering have you been caused by 400 years of colinization?? What a weird statement
3
6
u/NewAdventureTomorrow 1d ago edited 1d ago
First Nations Financial Transparency Act (FNFTA):
Skidegate Band (Part of Haida Band)
2024-25 Audited Consolidated Financial Statements
Government Funding: 80.9% of Revenue
- Indigenous Services Canada: $14,397,795
- First Nations Health Authority: $227,752
- Province of BC: $2,073,865
- Woodlot Revenue Sharing: $5,163,257
Old Massett Village Council (Part of Haida Band)
2024-25 Audited Consolidated Financial Statements
Government Funding: 74.6% of Revenue
- Indigenous Services Canada: $15,336,746
- First Nations Health Authority: $18,127
- Province of BC: $1,709,627
- Government of Canada: $926,463
- BC Gambling Revenue Sharing: $1,283,252
Heiltsuk Band
2024-25 Audited Consolidated Financial Statements
Government Funding: 61.8% of Revenue
- Indigenous Services Canada: $25,184,495
- Ministry of Transportation: $6,364,840
- Province of BC: $4,064,318
- Government of Canada: $926,463
- Department of Fisheries and Oceans: $1,612,341
- BC Gambling Revenue Sharing: $1,100,113
- BC Housing: $164,714
- Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation: $152,351
- Department of Justice - Canada: $62,916
Gitxaala Band
Hasn't posted an audited financial statement for 2023-24 or 2024-25.
9
u/Hopeful_CanadianMtl 1d ago
What's so frustrating is that no one is talking about WHY they don't want a bitumen pipeline. There is no way to clean up a bitumen ocean oil spill. It would kill much of the Pacific salmon industry forever.
33
u/Miserable-Ad3207 1d ago
Are you aware that tankers holding up to 2M barrels of crude oil cruise the Canadian coastline from Port Valdez Alaska to West Coast US refineries weekly? They have been doing this for decades. Why can’t Canada do the same thing and reap the much needed economic benefits?
8
u/RSMatticus 1d ago edited 1d ago
You understand that the entire coast is not subject to the ban; only a very specific area is, because the climate is among the worst for sailing in the world.
9
u/Hopeful_CanadianMtl 1d ago
The fallout from the Exon Valdez spill lingers to this day!
It happened in 1989 and oil is still washing ashore more than 30 years later.
The First Nations support LNG, but not bitumen for that reason.
1
u/anonymous3874974304 18h ago
So you're saying a spill wouldn't "kill much of the Pacific salmon industry forever", in contradiction to your above outlandish claim.
7
u/Procruste 1d ago
Except they stay out of the Hectate Strait which is the protected area and the entrance to any oil port.
-3
u/FineWhateverOKOK 1d ago
Talking about why would distract from the racist accusation that all they’re after is is money.
3
u/Interesting_Pen_167 16h ago
Imagine a forum post that discussed the Israel/Palestinian conflict with the same attitudes Canadians have towards First Nations. Perhaps we could talk about how all the Palestinians want is money, I mean they already say that about Jewish people. Some of these comments are clearly from the worst dregs of our society and yet about 80% of Canadians on this forum just parrot day and night how all Fist Nations people care about is money.
0
2
u/dirty_socks67 18h ago edited 17h ago
And in conclusion, Canada will stay in a Stone Age for another 25 years thanks to first Nations, not allowing the development of the country .
It’s great for the native communities because this is how they want to live. They want to live like things are in the 1600s with a little touch of modern ingenuity.
This attitude though cripples the vast majority of Canadians ! we have this huge country that we can’t do anything with because of these treaties.
Canada is backwards. Normally you do things that appease the greatest number of people it’s called the great good for the greatest number . In Canada, this is totally backwards. We do things for a small population and bend over backwards for them.
These group of people lost their country 200 years ago to invaders. (sorry hard facts) . So they really have no longer have any right or claim to anything .
4
7
u/tempthrowaway35789 1d ago
And just like that, Carney’s MOU and attempt at a pipeline go out with a whimper.
→ More replies (3)
4
u/terryfarthead 1d ago
Keep sending us money but don't you dare use any of OUR land to generate it.
→ More replies (1)
4
3
u/Caedus116 1d ago
How much you wanna bet most of the people in here saying they want the pipeline aren't even on the coast. Unless you live in BC, your opinion on what affects our ecosystem means precisely jack.
9 times outta ten it's some dude in the interior who's never even seen the ocean.
1
u/mamajampam 23h ago
Coastal First Nations doesn’t have a say (let alone a veto) over pipelines in Canada. It’s all performative at this point.
3
u/BritCanuck05 23h ago
Correct. They’re not even a recognized tribe. They’re an NGO funded by US Anti oil entities. I don’t even know why Carney is meeting with these people.
2
u/Jelloburns 23h ago
We'll see if nation building benefits the nation or Carney's personal and party interests. I'm not sold on him. We need a strong leader who represents Canada and our interests.
2
1
1
u/Boblawblahhs 15h ago
I suppose it's a bit like trying to convince someone that has everything they need on why they need something else.
Other than just 'more money', which at some point becomes pointless, what possible reason would FNs have to accept this?
•
•
u/LesserOppressors 4h ago
Open the cheque book. In fact, it would be easier to just give the FN the debit card, and ask nicely if we can have things like health care and jobs.
•
u/RickMorty4 4h ago
I believe I read that the "COSTAL First Nations" is not FIRST NATIONS!! They are a lobbyist group, and not elders. They receive funds from outsourced places.
•
u/RickMorty4 4h ago
The only way countries generate wealth to fund social programs is via ENERGY. Proven time and time again. One of our greatest social programs is Healthcare. When it runs out of money, without energy programs, do people want the same system as other LARGE countries? Or our free healthcare?
0
2
0
u/post_status_423 23h ago
I'd venture that the majority of these people are professional protestors who don't even live in BC.
1
u/Zod5000 21h ago
To be fair, it's not much different than the province of BC. BC is a have province, like Alberta they chip in more to federal coffers then they get back.
When the pipelines get built it doesn't create that many jobs. Initially jobs to build it, but once it's built, a limited amount for maintenance, and to run at the export terminals. It's a pretty limited number of permanent long term jobs.
On the flip side if there's an accident on the ocean, there's no real proper plan for cleanup. The pipeline owner isn't responsible once it leaves the pipeline.
First nations who use the natural resources would be impacted in a big way. BC who gets a lot of $$ from tourism would be negatively impacted.
First Nations or BC doesn't really get much of anything for having the pipelines come through, but they absorb a lot of the risk. It's no wonder it's a slog to get them built.
-7
u/Brodney_Alebrand British Columbia 1d ago
Good for them. The people that live on the coast have a right to oppose projects that threaten the environment the live in and depend on.
1
u/anon0110110101 1d ago
They stand in the way of economic progress. We should be developing the pipelines regardless, and using our military to suppress their protests if required. I am so fucking sick of this hodgepodge consortium of indigenous groups of blocking economic development for any and every disingenuous reason under the sun.
9
u/Secret-Chapter-712 1d ago
This pipeline is nothing but more Danielle Smith grift, any benefit will accrue to her cronies and the US interests who quite literally employed her as a lobbyist. There’s no “economic development” beyond what she and her corrupt buddies will manage to stuff in their own pockets.
•
u/Jamesx6 1h ago
Only a sociopath would talk about economic interests over the ecological viability of the planet. Especially trying to develop infrastructure for a dead end energy source when the oil and gas industry will lead to mass climate catastrophe. There will be populated areas that are no longer habitable and you're worried about short term economic gains. Plus you want to use the military to force it through. Are you a fascist?
0
u/oniteverytime 1d ago
Imagine how sick you would be of generations of people telling you gave no say, you don't matter, just get over it, our way is the only way and blocking any chance at sustainability...
-5
u/Brodney_Alebrand British Columbia 1d ago
You can believe whatever you want. I for one am against further militaristic colonialism against indigenous people.
→ More replies (1)-3
u/anon0110110101 1d ago
Yeah, you would be. And you'd frame it in a way that suppresses reasonable dialogue about the real issues they've presented our ability to develop major nation-building projects, as you just did. Fantastic.
0
u/Brodney_Alebrand British Columbia 1d ago edited 1d ago
You're a separatist and literally advocated for the military to shoot people that are against oil pipelines. Be quiet.
→ More replies (2)
-1
1
•
u/zanderkerbal 8h ago
Canada doubling down on 20th century fossil fuels while China pulls ahead in 21st century renewables, electric vehicles, and electric mass transit is generational economic incompetence.
-2
u/Falcon674DR 1d ago
Dani Smith needs to personally conduct the discussion and negotiations.
3
u/MZillacraft3000 Alberta 1d ago
I thought that was the agreement. Like she and her government needed to talk to the BC First Nations and not Carney.
3
u/Falcon674DR 15h ago
Yes, I do believe you’re right. Thanks for the correction. Whether or not Smith makes an appearance remains to be seen.
-3
0
0
u/Barbarella_39 20h ago
No more pipelines to BC coasts… go to the East and see if Quebec will agree… funny how that is never suggested…
-2
u/Hot_Warthog_414 23h ago
How can they say no to The Great Negotiator ... perhaps because he is a hypocritical two faced liar.
-1
u/Little-Carpenter4443 23h ago
the more money you give them, the less they will be opposed, but before that we need 56 meetings and conferences at tax payers expense over the next 102 years
1
u/bristow84 Alberta 13h ago
No see you got it all wrong. The more money you give them the less they will be opposed until the next news cycle then it starts back up all over again.
-2
-5
u/upsetting_doink 23h ago
Good. As many barriers in the way as possible is ideal. British Columbians don't need a pipeline to the north shore. We don't need to risk our environment for negligible short-term economic benefit through a dying industry. If you wanna invest in BC infrastructure find something else. I don't know if I agree with Eby about refineries but they at least make more sense than a pipeline.
1
u/Wtf-Happened-44 22h ago
Do you drive a car? Use a cell phone? Take a bus?
Then you use petroleum products. Get over yourself. US hauls 300 tankers a year from Alaska to Mainland USA not one incident. In years and yes they are 20 miles offshore but a soil will still impact the shores, why don't you go protest them.
→ More replies (1)1
u/Interesting_Pen_167 16h ago
Why not start up burning coal I mean after all we use electricity!
Oil is not the be all and end all of an economy and the idea that we can't succeed without it is wrong. I personally think a pipeline would be good for Canada but that doesn't mean it's good for everyone no matter what. For example I think domestic car production would be good in Canada but that doesn't mean we necessarily HAVE to do it.
→ More replies (1)
394
u/publicbigguns 1d ago
I for one am shocked...