What will Horgan do with Site C?

[seewood]

I wrote them a letter, and I'm happy to see the questions they've asked BCUC. You seem to be reading something into their questions that isn't there.

As Urbane mentioned the questions really speak for themselves. Issue I see is the BCUC will deflect somehow and put some kind of spin on the answers that won't answer the questions.... Kinda like this thread.....

[flamingfingers]

It's too much money for so little gain.

[Smurf]

FF you consider owning an asset worth billions for decades to come, that will pay for itself while supplying stable, green, renewable, electricity, 24/7/365 for 75 to 100 plus years and probably put $ into the provincial budget to help with health, education etc (which I do not agree with)" for so little gain". But at the same time you want to shut the project down (most likely because of your hatred for Christy Clark) and loose 3.5 to 4 billion dollars with absolutely nothing to show for it other than probably at least a 10% rise in electrical rates and no plan for where the electricity that will be needed will come from.

Can you not see how crazy that sounds, especially to anyone that understands business?

[Urbane]

It's too much money for so little gain.

So you're predicting that Horgan will cancel the project?

[seewood]

FF you consider owning an asset worth billions for decades to come, that will pay for itself while supplying stable, green, renewable, electricity, 24/7/365 for 75 to 100 plus years and probably put $ into the provincial budget to help with health, education etc (which I do not agree with)" for so little gain". But at the same time you want to shut the project down (most likely because of your hatred for Christy Clark) and loose 3.5 to 4 billion dollars with absolutely nothing to show for it other than probably at least a 10% rise in electrical rates and no plan for where the electricity that will be needed will come from.Can you not see how crazy that sounds, especially to anyone that understands business?

That is a problem. I'm just too lazy really to have a detailed look at the business acumen of any in the NDP caucus.
Anyone know of any NDPG members that have held, built or run a company and had to make payroll, deal with cash flow, make a profit? Make plans for future growth of said company? I understand no shortage of "academics" in the caucus but running a business is not for everybody and I respect that, but really in government the members better have a good idea of both sides of a story before making a decision.
This is what we are led to believe regarding site C. Not what happened with the removal of tolls or their desire to remove MSP premiums without a plan to replace the lost revenue... Ideology seems to be running the show, not smart decision making...

[Urban Cowboy]

FF you consider owning an asset worth billions for decades to come, that will pay for itself while supplying stable, green, renewable, electricity, 24/7/365 for 75 to 100 plus years and probably put $ into the provincial budget to help with health, education etc (which I do not agree with)" for so little gain". But at the same time you want to shut the project down (most likely because of your hatred for Christy Clark) and loose 3.5 to 4 billion dollars with absolutely nothing to show for it other than probably at least a 10% rise in electrical rates and no plan for where the electricity that will be needed will come from.

Can you not see how crazy that sounds, especially to anyone that understands business?

It's HST thinking version 2.0

How some people can allow their hatred, to make them feel they are somehow sticking it to the politicians, when in fact their chosen path will end up costing them money out of pocket, is truly hard to fathom.

[hobbyguy]

seewood - I haven't looked at the whole NDP caucus, but the cabinet is pretty indicative. A collection of former union leaders, the dominant educational degrees are political "science" (when I went to SFU they called that "basketweaving 101 - courses you took for credits but required no effort), a couple of lawyers, a failed journalist. Two only with any real world experience, well sort of. Michelle Mungall who ran non profits, but also was on the board of Nelson Hydro. The other is looney Lana Popham the organic vineyard owner. Horgan did a brief stint working for a private power producer.

So indeed, a dearth of management education/experience. They will call up Glen Clark for advice, as they already have done.

[madmudder]

Maybe they should phone Christy Clark and learn how to really screw the people of the province for the benefit of a few businesses that donated to her campaign.

[Jx3]

FF you consider owning an asset worth billions for decades to come, that will pay for itself while supplying stable, green, renewable, electricity, 24/7/365 for 75 to 100 plus years and probably put $ into the provincial budget to help with health, education etc (which I do not agree with)" for so little gain". But at the same time you want to shut the project down (most likely because of your hatred for Christy Clark) and loose 3.5 to 4 billion dollars with absolutely nothing to show for it other than probably at least a 10% rise in electrical rates and no plan for where the electricity that will be needed will come from.

Can you not see how crazy that sounds, especially to anyone that understands business?

It's HST thinking version 2.0

How some people can allow their hatred, to make them feel they are somehow sticking it to the politicians, when in fact their chosen path will end up costing them money out of pocket, is truly hard to fathom.

Exactly!!

[rustled]

Maybe they should phone Christy Clark and learn how to really screw the people of the province for the benefit of a few businesses that donated to her campaign.

Pfft. Child's play! They're miles beyond that small-potato stuff. Used to be they really screwed the people of the province for the benefit of a few unions, and the people of BC would sort it out at election time: a party supported beholden to business donors, or one beholden to union donors?

But that wasn't working in their favour, so now they've graduated to far bigger and better things.

These days, their willingess to screw the people of the province for their own benefit is becoming legendary: no need to rely on donations at all when you can belly up to the tax trough instead!

Which is why Site C is in peril in the first place: now, it will all come down to what's best for the NDP.

[mikest2]

Ooops I put this in the Site C thread first.............

Dr Weaver's last quote in this piece just kills me. I can't believe he hasn't called for a confidence vote yet !

https://www.castanet.net/edition/news-s ... htm#211859

The future of the Site C hydroelectric dam is the subject of pointed questions from labour unions, environmental groups, Indigenous Peoples and high-ranking civil servants with the British Columbia government who want answers about the projected costs of scrapping the $8.3-billion project.

The New Democrats are poised to decide Site C's fate by the end of the year after a review by the B.C. Utilities Commission, the province's independent energy regulator, concluded the dam is over budget and behind schedule.

But one Site C opponent said Friday he already senses the government will complete the megaproject.

Green Leader Andrew Weaver said he does not have inside information, but he is convinced the NDP will decide to keep building the dam, already under construction for more than two years.

"I can't see them giving pink slips to thousands of people on Christmas Eve," he said.

B.C. Hydro, the province's public utility, says more than 2,000 people are working on Site C, which is near Fort St. John.

Weaver said he began to feel the government moving towards supporting the project this week after a group of labour unions said the utilities commission report did not properly calculate the cost of stopping Site C. An estimated $4 billion has been spent on Site C so far.

Weaver said the Greens, who have an agreement to back the minority government in the legislature, will remind the NDP at every opportunity about its change of position if it keeps the project going.

"We'll add that to the collection of things we find really irritating that you've done," he said.

[Urbane]

The writing is on the wall. The Site C dam will likely be completed. From Mike Smyth on Twitter:

Mike Smyth‏Verified account
@MikeSmythNews
Follow Follow @MikeSmythNews

I’d say the debate is done and it’s all over but the crying (by some): The John Horgan gov’t will complete the Site C dam. That’s not official, but it might as well be.
#bcpoli

[Smurf]

I googled polls site C and didn't come up with much but did notice that out of what was there almost all favored continuing with site C. In my opinion Horgan has to pay attention to that. It would be political suicide not to and he is too power happy to not notice that.

[Cactusflower]

I googled polls site C and didn't come up with much but did notice that out of what was there almost all favored continuing with site C. In my opinion Horgan has to pay attention to that. It would be political suicide not to and he is too power happy to not notice that.

Would that be the Castanet poll to which you refer? That one came as no surprise to me, given the political bent of the readership. Unfortunately, most polls are regionalized, and as we see in all provincial elections, the regions are politically divided. The fate of Site C should not be decided politically, but it is, and all because the government of the day decided to bypass a BCUC review before proceeding with construction.

[hobbyguy]

CF - that's a pretty flimsy argument that boils down to "i hate the Liberals and have a crush on the NDP".