Kelowna-Westside constituents, must read!

[A_Britishcolumbian]

A law was just passed that gives oil, gas and mining companies the power to open up BC’s provincial parks for industrial activity. Resource companies will now be able to drill exploratory wells, build roads and dig giant test pits, all in the name of pipeline and transmission line “research”.

follow the link to learn more. http://sumofus.org/

christy clark has betrayed us. we were not consulted about this change, and i cannot stand by as the bcliberals change our beautiful, supernatural parks into oil and gas fields, and pipeline routes.

[Treblehook]

A law was just passed that gives oil, gas and mining companies the power to open up BC’s provincial parks for industrial activity. Resource companies will now be able to drill exploratory wells, build roads and dig giant test pits, all in the name of pipeline and transmission line “research”.

follow the link to learn more. http://sumofus.org/

christy clark has betrayed us. we were not consulted about this change, and i cannot stand by as the bcliberals change our beautiful, supernatural parks into oil and gas fields, and pipeline routes.

Do you drive, fly, heat your home, use anything manufactured where the process uses petroleum? If you do, perhaps you should consider your own use of oil and gas that has to come from somewhere.

[Daspoot]

Fortunately life isn't all or nothing, black or white. Just because you drive a gas-burner doesn't mean you have to be in favour of oil exploration in Parks.

One can be in favour of environmental measures and still keep their furnace on.

The Republican-Light Governments we're dealing with both Provincially and Nationally are selling off anything they can at the direct expense of the future, just to be able point to the books and say "hey, they're balanced" I guess that's good as at the rate it's going the books are going to be all we have left.

It's pathetic, and it's even more pathetic that some are still falling for it.

[KL3-Something]

A law was just passed that gives oil, gas and mining companies the power to open up BC’s provincial parks for industrial activity. Resource companies will now be able to drill exploratory wells, build roads and dig giant test pits, all in the name of pipeline and transmission line “research”.

follow the link to learn more. http://sumofus.org/

christy clark has betrayed us. we were not consulted about this change, and i cannot stand by as the bcliberals change our beautiful, supernatural parks into oil and gas fields, and pipeline routes.

Do you drive, fly, heat your home, use anything manufactured where the process uses petroleum? If you do, perhaps you should consider your own use of oil and gas that has to come from somewhere.

That doesn't mean one should support exploration in Parks and Protected areas. This kind of defeats the purpose of protecting the areas to begin with.

And what if they find something of significance in those areas? Then what? "We need to dig up your park here for our financial gain, but in exchange we'll give you this little piece of land over there that we're already done with."

[GEW]

I'm sorry but I support their move. The liberals campaigned on a platform of rescource extraction and economic development and that is what they are doing. The pendulum has swung in the favour of protection of the environment over protection of jobs in this province for far too long and we are losing people to Alberta because of it. So Christy may have betrayed you but she didn't betray me; I voted to stay in bc and protect my job.

[GEW]

With roughly 925285 square kilometres of land in bc we can afford to do a little more exploration. There are pipelines all over the place; I bet you can't find them. Just because there is a gas well or a pipeline in the ground doesn't mean the land above it is lost forever. I support environmental stewardship and responsible / sustainable development. I also support rescource extraction in parks; as long as it isn't done all at once, everywhere.

[LoneWolf_53]

The pendulum has swung in the favour of protection of the environment over protection of jobs in this province for far too long and we are losing people to Alberta because of it. So Christy may have betrayed you but she didn't betray me; I voted to stay in bc and protect my job.

I tend to agree. The matter of betrayal simple comes down to which side of the fence a person is on.

[Daspoot]

The pendulum has swung in the favour of protection of the environment over protection of jobs in this province for far too long and we are losing people to Alberta because of it.

Ouch, we should be more like Alberta? Have you been to the Oil sands? You want that here?

The pendulum may have been a touch on the protective side, but I'm fine with that over the other way around with regards to non-renewable resources, and many renewable ones.

[GEW]

Ouch, we should be more like Alberta? Have you been to the Oil sands? You want that here?

The pendulum may have been a touch on the protective side, but I'm fine with that over the other way around with regards to non-renewable resources, and many renewable ones.[/quote
------------------

Did I say I wanted the oil sands here? No I didn't ; it would be impossible anyway since we have zero oil sands below our feet on this side of the Rockies anyway.
It doesn't have to be all or nothing. Left wing drama queens tend to think that you can either have a socialist utopia that fits their ideals or a giant oil sand pit. I think most rational people realize we can find a balance between the two .
I can also guarantee you that 95 percent of BCs parks will never see any kind of exploration, because they are not sitting on any economically viable land. This law was designed to make it easier to build pipelines to the coast and bring some revenue to the province. Which is exactly what they should be doing. Once they are built, nobody will know they are there.

[Daspoot]

Did I say I wanted the oil sands here? No I didn't

Hence the question mark I used, that makes it a question, not a statement.
For future reference;
? = question
. or ! = Statement

it would be impossible anyway since we have zero oil sands below our feet on this side of the Rockies anyway.
It doesn't have to be all or nothing. Left wing drama queens tend to think that you can either have a socialist utopia that fits their ideals or a giant oil sand pit. I think most rational people realize we can find a balance between the two .
I can also guarantee you that 95 percent of BCs parks will never see any kind of exploration, because they are not sitting on any economically viable land. This law was designed to make it easier to build pipelines to the coast and bring some revenue to the province. Which is exactly what they should be doing. Once they are built, nobody will know they are there.

I'll leave this drivel for what it's worth, you mention a balance, but your post shows that's not what you after at all, and people who disagree are Left Wing Drama Queens. Still, you're entitled to your views, and a vote, I guess.

You see you want to check the parks for resources (then what?), you want a pipeline, and that's not a balance, that's not a compromise, That's you getting what you want and the other side and maybe, (can you agree to maybe?) the environment not getting what it wants.

You mentioned:

we are losing people to Alberta because of it. So Christy may have betrayed you but she didn't betray me; I voted to stay in bc and protect my job.

Hence my question about you wanting BC to more like Alberta, in which the biggest current draw that might be germane to the discussion of parks vs. natural resource extraction is the Oil sands, see, simple, obvious, not a Flow'r Push'n Hippy trying to repo your diesel dually or something like that, so relax.

You voted and posted because it's germane to your job and it's important to you, fine, I find the great outdoors in a natural state is important to me, so did a lot of others, so they sort of reserved a few parts from not getting turned into "resource extracted lands" Now they want to say, "but what if there are some really prime resources in there, we should check...."

Well that kinda goes against the whole original idea.

[maryjane48]

Do you drive, fly, heat your home, use anything manufactured where the process uses petroleum? If you do, perhaps you should consider your own use of oil and gas that has to come from somewhere.

do you live on planet earth? mabey you should consider leaving it if you want to destroy it :)

[A_Britishcolumbian]

so they were breaking the law and violating our parks, and pushing these amendments through was their way of making things 'right'.
truly sad.

Turns out the Liberals were trying to provide legal cover for some of the decisions they were already making on what is and is not permitted in provincial parks.

“We’ve been advised that the granting of the permits as we have done likely would not stand the test of a judicial review,” Polak explained. “Therefore, we need to amend the Park Act ... so that we would not be in a case where either the granting of or the denial of the application for a permit could be successfully challenged and overturned based on our lack of authority.”

http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Va ... z2xdXiYhgc

[GEW]

Hence my question about you wanting BC to more like Alberta, in which the biggest current draw that might be germane to the discussion of parks vs. natural resource extraction is the Oil sands, see, simple, obvious, not a Flow'r Push'n Hippy trying to repo your diesel dually or something like that, so relax.

You voted and posted because it's germane to your job and it's important to you, fine, I find the great outdoors in a natural state is important to me, so did a lot of others, so they sort of reserved a few parts from not getting turned into "resource extracted lands" Now they want to say, "but what if there are some really prime resources in there, we should check...."

Well that kinda goes against the whole original idea.[/quote]
-----------------

I enjoy the great BC outdoors as well, and in fact I spend a great deal of time there. That is the thing though; I want to be able to do that a lot and not just once a year when I come for an annual vacation from some prairie crap hole. If there is a 3000 hectare park, I don't feel that running a 30 foot wide strip through an area that large for a pipeline ruins the entire park.

Also, although I might agree with you that parkland should be protected forever, the fact is the left wing in this province have opposed nearly every single economic opportunity that has been offered to BC.
An example: in 2006 in Princeton somebody wanted to build a coal fired power plant using coal that is already being extracted from nearby coalmont. Of course environmentalists opposed it even though coal is already being burnt in Kamloops at the LaFarge cement plant and nobody even knows it. So now the coal is being shipped to Asia where it is being burned in less efficient plants and the jobs are gone with it.
There are many other examples including Ajax mine, Prosperity mine and Red Chris mine where academics and native leaders opposed the projects. This is pretty smug considering their salaries In many cases are funded by tax dollars. I might note that none of these projects were located in protected parkland.
My point is, I am tired of a vocal minority constantly chasing economic progress and the future of this province away from us. For this reason alone, I support opening protected areas to "exploration".
*removed*

[Rwede]

The only ones that feel betrayed are the ones who voted NDP.

It's funny that the OP suggested betrayal, as the OP is as NDP as they get.

The majority (and that majority is even larger than the previous election) voted for economic development, and rejected Dix's NO! NO ! NO! on every single development proposal.

The democratic process has supported this legislation.

[LoneWolf_53]

^^ Yes, and one can see how capable the NDP are, when a former NDP Premier, the Bingogate leader no less, rips up his membership card. LOL

I'm sure there's some back story being spun about that, as I type. 8-P