10 comments

• Sunday, 20 November 2011 20:51 posted by David K

  This is what Rafe/Eric are saying: 55+ B. So you are saying that he is lying. Figures. I never trusted Rafe with his hyperbole and stories - he is a bullshit artist par excellance:
  
  "Below is the Auditor General’s report on BC Hydro, upon which Vaughn Palmer commented this morning (10.28.11).
  Here is the comment by Erik Andersen, economic advisor to The Common Sense Canadian. –
  “…
  This report does not deal with the $55+ BILLION BC Hydro owes to private producers (IPPs) for power it doesn’t need and must dispose of at a huge loss. "

  1

  0

  Report Abuse

  
  
• Wednesday, 09 November 2011 04:48 posted by Damien Gillis

  David K, no I would not support Site C, even if the coal and gas industries paid for it. The Peace Valley has already paid too heavy a price to provide the rest of the province with electricity. The food security values at stake are too high, given our food self-sufficiency crisis in BC (we produce far less than half our food, unlike our electricity). Moreover, the Treaty 8 First Nations have made their opposition clear - that alone should be enough to set this project aside...On your other note, Rafe's number was $50 Billion+, not $55 Billion. This is the figure we've been using based on best estimates - up until the recent A-G report on the BC Liberals' finances pegged the number at closer to $41 Billion, plus a few Billion in other hidden Hydro-related liabilities. To anyone who takes issue with these numbers, I invite them to open up these secret contracts to full public view. We pay for them - we need to see them.

  2

  1

  Report Abuse

  
  
• Wednesday, 09 November 2011 00:54 posted by David K.

  Damian, would you and Rafe agree to Site C if the cost of Site C is borne by the mining and gas industry in BC, rather than the ratepayers? The industry sector is paying 4.5 cents now. They will have to pay 10 cents a kwh which is the cost of Site C.
  
  Would you then agree to Site C?

  1

  1

  Report Abuse

  
  
• Wednesday, 09 November 2011 00:49 posted by David K.

  Damian, thanks for your clarification on Site C.
  
  Now can Rafe explain how he arrived at his $55+ B figure for BC Hydro? Exactly which contracts is he adding up and what are the costs of each contract? Thanks.

  1

  1

  Report Abuse

  
  
• Monday, 07 November 2011 18:04 posted by Damien Gillis

  We're far from mum on Site C, David. We've published numerous editorials and references on the matter and I've spent close to a month of the past year in the Peace region and down here shooting a documentary on Site C coming out in February. For the record, we're opposed to Site C because the power is not for BC citizens, but rather to subsidize the oil and gas and coal industries with cheap corporate welfare electricity - with an enormous cost to be born by taxpayers and Hydro residential and small business ratepayers. That and the destruction of prime farmland and important ecologies, all against the stated will of First Nations. I invite you to search our archive or stay tuned for more coverage of the subject.

  1

  1

  Report Abuse

  
  
• Monday, 07 November 2011 11:59 posted by David

  What is Common Sense Canadian's position on Site C? Do you want this environmental boondoggle that destroys 6000 acres of land to go ahead, or do you prefer more high paying public union jobs get created?
  
  Why are Damien and Rafe mum about this issue?

  1

  0

  Report Abuse

  
  
• Monday, 07 November 2011 11:55 posted by David

  I wonder if Rafe can explain in sufficient detail how he and Eric Anderson arrived at the bogus $ 55+ billion number for BC Hydro's contracts to IPPs?
  
  On BCSEA, an independent accounting shows only $ 7 billion as outstanding contracts.
  
  How does Rafe and Damian and Eric explain the difference?

  1

  0

  Report Abuse

  
  
• Sunday, 06 November 2011 02:12 posted by blinds

  I still hope oneday I'll visit BC, it seems to me so far from Ontario though..

  0

  0

  Report Abuse

  
  
• Friday, 04 November 2011 14:28 posted by Roger Kemble

  OCCUPY demands . . .
  
  http://www.cbc.ca/bc/news/bc-111104-occupy-vancouver-demands.pdf

  1

  1

  Report Abuse

  
  
• Friday, 04 November 2011 12:59 posted by Linda

  It just blows me away. The Campbell/Clark BC Liberals are permitting our wild salmon to be killed off, by dirty diseased fish farms. I had also read, the sea bed under the fish farms looks like a moonscape, nothing survives beneath them.
  
  BC is certainly under siege. The salmon. The Enbridge pipeline, as well as the other two pipelines. The dirty oil tankers from China. Fracking, Prosperity mine. They want to log the Rain Forest. Campbell and Harper have worked on, drilling off shore oil and gas wells. The eco horror of, the run of the rivers. The destruction of BC's valuable farmland, by urban sprawl. A dam we don't need. I have probably missed some of the atrocities, coming to this province.
  
  The Enbridge pipeline have their own experienced workers. The dirty tankers will provide very few jobs. American company's bring their own staff, (the tear down of the Kitimat smelter) is one. China is sending their people to school to learn English. They will work the coal mines.
  
  All the BC people will get, is a polluted wasteland.

  5

  1

  Report Abuse