Water is Our Most Precious Resource

by John Fefchak

Canada has more lakes than the rest of the world combined.

Water is the life blood of all living things.

It just seems we have so much fresh water in Canada, we don't look after it, as we know we should. (U.S. and Canada need to reduce algae bloom on Lake Erie, WFP 29 Aug)

It is clear that governments have ignored the basic principles of water stewardship for too many years in the pursuit of narrow economic interests.

Lake Winnipeg has become a horrid reminder of devastation, that we are leaving our children and their children to bear alone.

Now Lake Erie has a sickness that has returned.

So many of our Lakes have become diseased.

The name of this disease is 'human complacency.'

Slime on a Lake Winnipeg beach near 

Gimli. PLT photo.

Pollinator Protection - Europe Shows Us How It's Done

Dear Editor, 

Oh, to be in Europe, now that they have put us to shame, once again! 

Member states of the European Union have just voted to clamp a temporary (2 year) ban on members of that "devil family" of bee-killing insecticides known as "neonicotinoids." It is now illegal to use the stuff anywhere over that entire continent! While Europe has finally seen the light, they're still applied prodigiously on food crops in North America. The seeds of crops such as corn and canola are now shot-full of them before they even go into the ground!

Canada's Governing Party Blows a Golden Opportunity to Curb the Brutal Practice of "Shark-Finning" on the High Seas

by Larry Powell

                   Robert Sopuck, MP for Bottom-Trawling & Shark-Finning.                                                                             

It may be deplorable.  But, for the Harper government (and my own MP, Robert Sopuck), not quite deplorable enough.

I'm talking about "shark-finning." Each year, worldwide, an estimated 100 million sharks are caught for their fins, only. The sharks, still alive and bleeding, with their fins cut off, are then dumped back into the ocean, either to die a slow death, or be eaten by other predators. 

Shark fins are considered a delicacy. While shark fishing is legal off Canada's coasts, finning was banned here years ago. Still, tonnes of fins obtained elsewhere in this manner, often from endangered species, are imported, yearly. So an NDP MP introduced a private members' bill to help curb the practice by simply banning imports into this country.

Sopuck (CPC - Dauphin/Swan River/Marquette), spoke at length during the Commons debate on the Bill. First, he made it clear how much he respected his colleague who introduced it, and that finning was not only deplorable, but "abhorrent." But then he announced his Party would not be supporting the Bill.

According to Sopuck, it would set "a very bad precedent, is overly broad and could unfairly target sustainable fisheries around the world." China is already taking action, he claimed. And Canada is "already exploring what can be done." Whatever that means.

Then, (despite winning only 39% of the popular vote in the last election, and despite a recent poll, showing 81 percent of Canadians support a ban) the government used its majority to defeat the Bill.

But this kind of behaviour is hardly new for the Harperites. In '06, shortly after they came to power, they distinguished themselves at the United Nations by helping to scuttle a motion to ban bottom-trawling. That's another brutal practise which basically devastates all sea-life in its path; All this in the face of grave predictions from top marine scientists that, if nothing changes, such life could actually disappear from our oceans in less than half-a-century. 

I guess we're all supposed to assume that the crisis facing dwindling world fish stocks, and the brutal practices that go with it, would be even worse, were it not for "environmentalists" such as Mr. Sopuck, watching out for all of us.

Of GM Foods and Harper's Bully-Boys

Dear Editor,

Is it now old-fashioned to expect those who govern us, to do so in a decent, respectful way? If it is, then call me old-fashioned. Even for someone painfully aware of the depths to which our democratic system has sunk, especially since the Harperites took over, I was shocked to learn about a bullying incident which played out on Parliament Hill earlier this month. 

The Commons Agriculture Committee was meeting to talk about "low-level presence." Before you doze off, it's a topic which everyone who puts food in his mouth, should care about! This government actually wants Canada to start accepting traces of genetically-modified (GM) genes in the food we import, even though those genes have neither been inspected nor approved by our own domestic regulators! A guest appearing before the committee, Lucy Sharratt of the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (CBAN), opposed this idea. This was hardly surprising, since CBAN's very reason for being is to act as a watchdog on the implications of adopting more and more GM-altered food in our country. Her argument was, if this government gets its way, Canada will become the first country in the world to accept such imports. And, by so doing, we are not only inviting contamination of our food imports, but destroying the livelihoods of organic farmers, as well. 

Opposition members of the committee challenged Ms. Sharratt, but at least, they were respectful and let her state her case. Such was not the case when it came to Blake Richards, a gunslinging Conservative MP and committee member from Alberta. Instead of sticking to the topic, he went off on Ms. Sharratt, obsessing over the source of CBAN's funding.  In the words of a veteran journalist covering the meeting, Barry Wilson of the Western Producer, "Richards argued she represents radical American, anti-GM environmentalists, opposed to Canadian interests. The implication was, she has a hidden anti-Canadian agenda." Wilson's editorial accused the Conservative Party of Canada of a “'take no prisoners' vision: you are for me or against me" and that this "vision" was showing through at other committee meetings, not just this one. His verdict on Richard's overall conduct? "It was rude, crude and abusive." 

Meanwhile, the global trend is decidedly leaning toward the domination of Corporate, GM agribusiness, its resultant increase in the application of harmful pesticides and the decline of non-GM and organic methods. Why should we be concerned? Because parents who want nothing more than to minimize levels of pesticides in their children's bodies, are slowly but surely losing that option. And with a wild-west mentality now firmly entrenched in the psyche of the governing, GM-boosting Harperites, it seems nothing short of a concerted effort on the part of us all, to stop voting Conservative,  offers the best path to the future.

Larry Powell

Roblin, MB

How I Spent My Summer Vacation (Letter-to-the-Editor)

Dear Editor,

Remember when school would start and your teacher would ask you how you spent your summer vacation?

While school is now a dim and distant memory for me, last summer is anything but. I spent about ten days of it, flat on my back in the Regina General Hospital, after a near-death experience. 

It all started on a dark and stormy night in late June. Like many other folks living in a huge area of the eastern prairies, we suffered property damage in the thousands when a dangerous "plow wind" of well over 100kph struck about midnight, while we were in bed. 

(Sadly, it was consistent with what our top scientists have been warning us about for decades: That the climate we humans are changing by our addiction to fossil fuels, is bringing "weather events" which have become way more severe and frequent than they once were.) 

The wind buckled our garage door (above), damaged our car inside, blew the tops off several of the spruce trees in our shelter belt and brought down two of the largest, brushing our sun porch and barely missing our house (below). 

Some days later, I was cleaning up the debris when it happened. I developed the kind of chest pain I knew I couldn't ignore. 

A Case for Civil Disobedience

By: John Bennett - Sierra Club of Canada - Wpg. Free Press

OTTAWA — All the benefits Roslyn Kunin attributes to life in Canada in her recent column, including peace and order and good government, came about through civil disobedience. The suffragettes who won women the right to vote did not shy away from it. Details here.

First Nations Protestor - Regina. PLT photo

Hypocricy, Cynicism and Lies Stain the Tory Record in Manitoba (Letter)

Dear Editor,

I never thought I'd say this. But I may be lucky to be living in a riding represented by a Member of Parliament on the government side, (Robert Sopuck - Dauphin/Swan River/Marquette) after all. I say this because the government Mr. Sopuck represents, under Stephen Harper, has decided the Assiniboine River, one of millions of lakes, rivers and streams in Canada, is among the very few designated as "protected" by its new, "Navigation Protection Act."  (It happens to flow through Mr. Sopuck's riding.) 

Shellmouth Dam on the Assiniboine. Could it now be harder to approve such structures in Tory ridings - but easier elsewhere? PLT photo.

The Assiniboine forms Lake of the Prairies, a popular area for cottagers and boaters, just a few clicks west of where I live. This protection means that ice-fishers, anglers and pleasure boaters will keep their historic right, which dates back to Sir John A. himself, to navigate the river without having to deal with any more bridges, mining or forestry equipment, pipelines or dams. At least, any proposed new infrastructure of this kind will need a permit from Ottawa. That apparently won't be the case for all those unprotected waterways. They, on the other hand, will be "wide open for business." 

For example, anyone living in the northern Manitoba riding of Churchill will apparently be left at the mercy of Captains of Industry who want to treat the waterways there as commodities for their own, personal gain. That's because the Churchill River is not on that "protected" list. The MP for that riding represents the Opposition NDP in parliament. Word even has it that over 90 percent of the waterways designated as "protected," fall within ridings represented by government members. I guess that'll teach us who to vote for, next time!

I speak with tongue in cheek, of course. In fact, this kind of government patronage reeks of a shoddy new low, even for the Harperites. And it once again lays threadbare the "cloak of green" Mr. Sopuck likes to put on, to cleverly disguise himself as an environmentalist.  

Also left in tatters is Harper's infamous pledge in his election victory speech, to be a leader "for all Canadians."

In fact, Mr. Sopuck is to speak tomorrow to the "Frontier Centre," where he actually used to work. It is a right-wing, climate-change-denying think-tank, currently being sued for libel by a leading U.S. climatologist. No, his scheduled topic is not, as it should be, about that recent, enormous Hurricane, Sandy or whether climate change played a role in it. Rather, it is the "improvements" his government is making to                             (Above) A PLT creation         environmental assessments and "the need to base decisions on science."

         

The reality is, Ottawa is gutting those assessments to the benefit of resource exploitation, removing habitat protection from many fish species and spitting in the faces of reputable scientists everywhere. For example, it slashed funding to the Experimental Lakes Area project earlier this year. The ELA has, for years, been recognized for world-renowned, ground-breaking research on water quality.

Meanwhile, in parliament, Mr. Sopuck has, in his speeches, helped perpetuate the lie that the NDP Opposition is advocating a carbon tax to help fight climate change. It is not. Even if it were, I'd say, so what? A carbon tax makes a lot of sense. Even sectors of the oil industry seem in favour of this as an effective way to reduce harmful greenhouse gas emissions. While I believe there would be a net benefit in turning to more alternative energy sources, surely we have to resign ourselves to paying some kind of price for a cleaner energy future.

Sadly, Mr. Sopuck's wilful mis-statements simply emphasize the fact that the Conservatives are the only party we can count on to do nothing about global warming, the most dangerous crisis facing the planet today. How many "Frankenstorms" like Sandy will we have to survive, to get him and his government to sit up and take notice?

Their fixation with investment and foreign trade deals, no matter what country we may be climbing into bed with, no matter how much sovereignty we may lose in the process, must end. 

Now.

Larry Powell
Roblin Manitoba

Lake Winnipeg Predicament a Human Creation

Letter to the Editor:

As I read "The province wants public thoughts on environmental plan" in the Free Press, I can’t help, but think that Lake Winnipeg is already green, far too green, in fact.

This is a man-made situation. Lake Winnipeg is not polluting itself. We, the people are the cause for allowing the abuse and pollution to these waters.

It is apparent that respect and gratitude is not a requirement in to-day’s society and how to take care of water that sustains all life. 

We are not alone. There are neighbouring provinces and the United States that also make their contributions of pollution. An action often referred to, as ‘out of sight, out of mind’.

I am skeptical of yet another plan for "Think Saving Lake Winnipeg", and here’s why.

On June 2, of 2011, Premier Selinger presented his Plan to Save Lake Winnipeg. In that plan there was to be an International Summit that would bring together the stakeholders and levels of government throughout the Winnipeg watershed to co-ordinate phosphorus reduction to the Lake Winnipeg waters. This has not been accomplished, and, 16 months have elapsed.

Seemingly, it is much less complicated to keep making plans than doing what is so necessary to accomplish the needed action and results to Save Lake Winnipeg.

This misrepresents the crucial situation that presently exist in the waters of Lake Winnipeg. 

John Fefchak;

Virden,Manitoba.

Please also read: "Why Lake Winnipeg's Degredation is a Prairie-Wide Environmental Calamity"
 

Pork Council Must Focus More on Farmers' Needs

14/04/2012 1:00 AM |     Brandon Sun - PRINT EDITION

Maple Leaf and government policy is to blame for the continued loss of hog producers and a risk to “thousands of jobs” at the Brandon slaughter plant.

Manitoba Pork Council general manager Andrew Dickson would have us believe that the province-wide hog production ban and new manure treatment regulations are the culprits.

Does Dickson forget that the loss of most independent hog farmers started when the Maple Leaf, Hy-Tek and Puratone corporations set up their pyramid scheme-like operations and the conservative Filmon government removed single-desk marketing protection in the late 1990s? Well before a moratorium and phosphorus regulation was put in place.
Further details here.

Robert Sopuck - Environmentalist or Hypocrite?

Dear Editor, 

I've been struck by the irony of recent, published pictures of my Member of Parliament, Robert Sopick. Smiling broadly, he is shown in one, presenting trophies to the winners of a fishing derby and, in the other, in beaming attendance at a sport fishing banquet (below). 

A few days later, the government Mr. Sopuck represents, rammed through the all-purpose budget bill which included the gutting of the Fisheries Act. Now, all the Act will allegedly "protect" are those fish that are part of "a commercial, recreational or aboriginal fishery." The old Act protected all fisheries, presumably because fish don't always stop abruptly at the boundaries they have been designated. How naive! As a recent article from a Canadian professor of environmental law suggests, if the fish don't "obey" the new rules imposed by Harper, they could find themselves in mortal danger of strip mines, oil spills, clear cuts and the other hazards posed by this government's wild west, development-at-any-cost mentality.

In his latest flyer, Mr. Sopuck is appealing to his constituents to fly a flag to show their "patriotism." Since patriotism means accepting your government whether it is right or wrong, I guess he'll be needing as much of that as he can get.

Mr. Sopuck, shame on you! Some environmentalist!

If more voters around here don't soon start connecting the dots between the party they keep re-electing, and the destruction it is wrecking on our beautiful country, God help us all!


Larry Powell
Roblin, MB

A Rural Municipality in Manitoba Gets Served With Freedom of Information Papers

Dear Editor,

I guess only time will tell whether my local government, the RM of Shell River, will opt to build another earthen sewage lagoon, this one in the country west of Roblin, or turn to more modern technology for the treatment of human waste.

        (Read earlier story here.) 

    

A Manitoba company called Blue Diamond Technologies, Ltd., briefed the Council last week on its own, more modern system which is already treating hog waste right here in this province. Three company officials presented details of their technology to the last RM meeting. They explained they are already testing their system on sewage in the Town of Carman. They maintain their way is not only more eco-friendly but likely cheaper than a lagoon, as well.

The Reeve and Councillors gave them a fair hearing and asked questions to get more information.

I've certainly read and heard enough to know, I think, that there are many drawbacks with the old-style lagoons. Given this fact, and based on what I learned in the Blue Diamond presentation, I hope that system, at the very least, gets a closer look.

To their credit, Councillors seem prepared to take that look.

The sad part is, they have brought down a virtual shroud of secrecy over their original plans for a lagoon.

What are the results of drill tests done back in March on a site east of Lake of the Prairies? Is the soil there suitable for a lagoon? Is it impermeable enough, or will it require an expensive liner?

"We sort of know," is the answer. But they won't tell us and won't say why not!

Will the "feasibility study" now being done by a Winnipeg company, J.R. Cousin Consultants Ltd, be made public when it's done?

"Not sure," is the answer.

Is it true that that same firm (Cousin), is also in the running to actually build the lagoon? If so, can a company hoping to profit from building a major project, do an objective job of finding out if it is feasible or not? Will it accurately assess the need for it, or will it be tempted to exaggerate that need?
 

Has the RM given Cousin some kind of commitment to do the job, even before opening it up to any kind of public input, whatsoever? I have no idea and I'm not suggesting they have. I'm only saying, given the current level of secrecy, it's impossible to sort rumour from fact.

Another thing. Is this $600 thousand dollars said to be available to the RM from senior governments for wastewater treatment, transferrable to technology other than a lagoon? No one is explaining that, either. As a matter of fact, no one is really explaining anything.

The secrecy has now built to such a level, I served the RM with papers last week, requesting some answers, under the Government of Manitoba's Freedom of Information Act. The Act provides we, the public, with a right of access to records held by public bodies, including local governments like Shell River. If answers are not forthcoming by June 5th, I will, as the Act provides, be launching a formal complaint with the provincial ombudsman.

I remain eternally hopeful, however, that my RM will do the right thing and voluntarily disclose this information before then, so that such action will not be necessary. This information is also crucial to a wise decision, one which involves the knowledge and participation, not only of our local government, but of all concerned residents and ratepayers, as well.

 

Larry Powell
Roblin, MB
 

Life in a Toxic Town (Letter)

Wpg Free Press May 2 '12
(Fort McMurray, Alberta)....this former small northern town is perhaps the most polluted and....Details here.

The RM of Shell River Will be Told About New Technology for Waste Disposal. Will it Listen?

Dear Editor,

I'd like to extend a challenge to my local government, the Rural Municipality of Shell River. 
(Please read earlier story here.)

I'd like you to prove to myself and my community that you are living in the 21st century and determined to be the best that you can be. So far, you've been moving quietly ahead with plans to build a major, new, earthen sewage lagoon, using technology that is, at least, decades-old.

An expert in the field of waste treatment and water pollution, Prof. Bill Paton of Brandon University, says such lagoons "Do not perform well in Manitoba's climate. I have not found any Manitoba lagoons that meet effluent license requirements. Many of them also leak to groundwater!"

And a former potato farmer I have talked to, Al Baron, says he had to abandon his farm near Carberry years ago when expansion of a nearby lagoon contaminated his land, making it unfit to carry on as a producer.

You didn't tell us much about the project when we appeared before one of your Council meetings earlier this month.

Is there not better technology than the kind you are considering, we asked?  Well, not really. Maybe in Europe, was your vague reply.

Well, it turns out, there is a Manitoba company called Blue Diamond Technologies (BDT), which already has a system up and running, treating hog waste at a barn south of Winnipeg! Furthermore, this company believes its technology can apply to sewage, would be more environmentally friendly and even cheaper than the lagoon you are persuing at a possible cost of $2 million!

I've talked to an official of BDT myself. He says they are quite prepared to meet with your Council, to talk about this promising technology. 

I now understand you have agreed to hear from them at your next meeting.

I am encouraged by this. And I sincerely hope you will actually listen carefully to the presentation and treat it as more than just a formality.

While the lagoon may be built less than a mile upwind of our country home (we are not sure, since you won't tell us the results of the soil-tests done there), that is not really the point. I believe you owe our entire community your best efforts in doing this thing right, no matter where it goes.

As you have apparently held at least one in-camera meeting to discuss this, there are many other details that remain unanswered.

Has there been any kind of detailed study on the need for this project? (Rumours that it was needed to serve a new cottage subdivision being planned for Lake of the Prairies, seem to have been just that - rumours.)

While you do say a feasibility study is underway, you won't commit to making it public when it is finished.

Will there be an Environmental Impact Statement?

Will there be a public hearing?

You have not given us clear answers to any of these things.

On the one hand, we are told not to worry, because everything is "preliminary." On the other, you  are dropping hints that you need to proceed quickly because you may lose government infrastructure money, if you do not.

Which is it?

All I ask is that alternatives be considered more carefully than they appear to have been, to date.

Thank you.

Larry Powell
Roblin, MB

Canadian Pasture and Shelter-Belt Program to Wind Down (Co-operator,April 19) (Letter)

On the chopping block to save money, but not a murmur about the gold-plated Pension Plan that the MP’s have saved for themselves.

Well, it's apparent that Gerry Ritz, born in 1951, never had to deal with the dry and wind years of the 1930’s,when never-ending dust clouds, grasshoppers, and no rain settled on the prairies. 

The settlers of those years knew if they were to survive, changes had to be taken in their farming methods and stop their land base from being blown away. 

The tree and shrub belts were a beginning, but also a challenge, as the scarcity of water, even for themselves and livestock, resulted in many failures and setbacks. But eventually, conditions improved and the trees and shelter belts began to flourish. And they were successful. 

For not only to help prevent the loss of precious topsoil, shelter belts became a refuge and a haven for wildlife, a nesting area and food for birds.

Yes, with modern farming methods and large machinery, they have become somewhat of a nuisance to the aggressive farmers of to-day, so they are ripped away, piled and burned.

The Minister has now proclaimed that shelter belts and pastures are not the way of the future, in that stubble fields and continuous cropping is the salvation for to-day’s producers. 

Guess he's been in touch with Nature at the highest level, and been assured that drought years and winds are a past memory and will never return to challenge, even the modern farmers of to-day.

His crystal ball is due for a cleaning and a complete overhaul. 

If we don’t learn something from lessons of the past, it’s difficult to venture into the unknown future.

John Fefchak,

Virden, Manitoba.


Please also read: "Harperites Chop Trees in Latest Austerity Revelations!"

A Rural Manitoba Municipality Makes Quiet Plans for a Sewage Lagoon - Does the Reeve Have a Conflict?

Dear Editor,
I recently learned I may be getting a new "neighbour" -  a sewage lagoon. 

The municipal plow prepares a way to the site for the drill truck. (l.)             




The grader and truck on the site.(below)

 













The drilling begins. PinP photos

The Rural Municipality of Shell River sent in a drill truck a week or two ago to sink holes less than a mile upwind of my retirement home in the country, north and west of Roblin. The test results will determine whether the site is suitable for such a project. Apparently, it could cost millions of dollars, especially if a liner has to be installed to prevent leakage.*

Turns out, the "quarter" is owned by the Reeve, Albert Nabe.


It's also within a couple of miles of some six farm homes nearby, mostly downwind as well. I was disappointed that no one from the RM council had given me a "heads-up" about this. I heard about it, instead, from a private individual at a social event.

Is this legal, you might ask? Well, I'm told, as long as Reeve Nabe declares that he has a "conflict" and does not vote on the matter, it is.

Is it right that an elected official can benefit financially by virtue of his position?

To me, that's another matter.

But you be the judge.

While I'm writing this, I'd like to take this opportunity to apologize to Keith Radford. Keith asked me to help him fight a similar project near his farm home at San Clara a few years ago. I did not. His appeals to government fell on deaf ears. The project went ahead.

Now, myself and my neighbours face a similar situation.

No less than two R.M. councillors have told me, the lagoon is required by the province, before plans for a new cottage subdivision on Lake of the Prairies, can be approved.

I wasn't even aware there were such plans. Apparently, the province isn't either!

I think an explanation is in order.

Larry Powell
Roblin
*If it goes ahead, an underground pipeline would carry the treated sewage, called "effluent," from the lagoon, into nearby Big Boggy Creek and then into Lake-of-the-Prairies, a popular fishing, boating and cottage resort.

Farmer says Sow-Stall Phaseout not as Costly as Claimed

Dear Editor,                    

The sad reality for hundreds of thousands of sows is that the cost of getting rid of gestation crates (sow stalls) is being used as an excuse to prolong the cruel practice.

 

Market conditions for raising pigs in a factory setting are changing as Laura Rance pointed out in her February 23, 2012 editorial “The economics of animal welfare.”  People are increasingly less prepared to tolerate the inhumane way pregnant gilts and sows are confined in 2 foot by 7 foot crates on concrete slatted floors most of their lives.

 

The Manitoba Pork Council says producers are willing to adjust to changing market conditions.  But not until 2025, claiming that it will cost $1 million per existing operation to convert from sow stalls to group housing. 

 

Manitoba Agriculture and Food web-posted 2010 cost of production figures for a 500 sow farrow to finish operation show that a new gestation building costs $23.10 per square foot. Total building cost is $311,500.  Equipment costs are $18.90 per square foot or a total of $255,000.  Salvage value on equipment is 10% on a useful life of 10 years.  Buildings salvage for 12% over a 20 year facility life. Thus, a new equipped facility costs less than half of the MPC estimate.

 

Many of the existing barns were built in the late 1990’s and during the rapid expansion years from 2000-2004.  They are due for equipment renewal, are at the end of their useful life or are past middle-age.  The same is true for environmentally problematic liquid manure storages.

 

Group housing requires less equipment and is less costly than a stall system. Even better is a hoop barn system.  Industry has always known straw-based hoop barn housing is dramatically cheaper and sows are “moderately more productive” in this system.

 

Industry has no excuse not to get rid of sow stalls now, re-think how to raise hogs and move to a straw-based group housing system that treats sows humanely and is less problematic to Lake Winnipeg and the environment. 

 

Ruth Pryzner

RR 1

Alexander, Manitoba

"EthicalOil.org" Exposed

Dear Editor,

I see the powerful tentacles of Big Oil are tightening around us again.

The "grassroots" group known as EthicalOil.org is reaching out through a compliant media, to spread its fear campaign that "foreign hordes," not Canadians, are going to decide whether the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline will be approved.

Grassroots, my ass! 

The talented, dedicated group of researchers who publishes *DESMOGBLOG.COM has exposed "EthicalOil.org" for what it is; "A small industry front group with secretive funding sources." As DESMOG explains, EthicalOil's message is being amplified through an "echo chamber" of powerful allies, including Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Sun Media ("Fox News North") to which Harper has close connections. (Not to mention Harper minions like Joe Oliver, whose earlier, infamous letter accused pipeline opponents of being a bunch of "radicals.")

The EthicalOil message? Foreign, deep-pocketed environmental "activists" wanting "veto power" are taking over the public hearings now underway on the project.

If approved, Northern Gateway will carry dirty, corrosive tar from the Alberta "oil sands" to the west coast of BC, then, via tankers, to China.

Conveniently missing from EthicalOil's message are the "hordes" of ordinary Canadians like myself, not to mention the First Nations people living along the proposed, environmentally-sensitive route, who have valid, legitimate concerns about this mega-project.

I guess the People's Republic of China, British Petroleum or Exxon just don't qualify as the kind of "foreign hordes" included in EthicalOil's lexicon! (All of these have monumental amounts of cash invested in either the tar sands, the proposed pipeline, or both.)

The pipeline will have to cross a thousand rivers and streams, at least three prime salmon river-systems, the Great Bear rainforest and the Continental Divide by the time it is completed.

(Enbridge, wanna-be builders of the line, had more than 600 leaks over a ten-year period, in pipelines they already operate! That's over a leak-a-week.)

Once the tar gets to the sea, it will have to be loaded onto huge oil  tankers.The long-standing moratorium on such ocean traffic off Beautiful British Columbia will need to be lifted. But oil installations never blow up, sink or leak, do they? (Just blot out from your mind the big, Italian cruise ship - while not an oil tanker - still has half a million gallons of oil on board, the Exxon Valdez, countless others and, of course, the Daddy of them all, the BP spill in the Gulf and you'll be OK.)

Put that in your next mass-mailing to all the news media you just know won't be asking any questions about your background!

Funny, isn't it. Your pompous bragging about the tar sands being "ethical" obviously assumes the following:

    •    Bulldozing of vast, pristine boreal forest is also "ethical."
    •    Widespread destruction of habitat for woodland caribou, migratory birds and other wildlife is "ethical."
    •    Damaging the "lungs" of our planet, hindering her very ability to "breathe," is "ethical."
    •    Poisoning of the waterways and killing fish is "ethical."
    •    Making those who live downstream sick, is "ethical."
    •    Using our life-giving atmosphere as a dumping-ground for increasing volumes of polluting greenhouse gases which cause catastrophic climate change, creating an uncertain future for our children is "ethical." (After all, the ravages of climate change/global warming stop obediently at international boundaries, don't they?)
    •    When the shoe is on the other foot, lobbying by Harper operatives (such as his Ambassador to the US, Gary Doer, former "environmentalist-turned tar sands promoter"), to get the US to weaken its resolve to protect its own air, water and soil and approve a pipeline through that country, is "ethical!"

Once again, the mass media needs to be reminded, it is we opponents of these mega pipelines, which would carry tar to the far reaches of our planet, who have science on our side, not the EthicalOils of this world.

They are obviously four-square behind a continuance of our nearly-total addiction to fossil fuels and unprepared to even consider a greater role for renewable, sustainable energy sources in our future. Nope, let's not talk about that. Let's not even look at conservation. Let's just continue with our orgy of gas-guzzling and diesel-burning as if there's no tomorrow.

In short, the EthicalOils of this world want it all.

One should also note that EthicalOil describes itself, not as an "activist" group, heaven forbid. Rather, they are a "grassroots, advocacy" organization.

Yeah, right!



And, make no mistake, EthicalOil, I say keep the damn tar in the ground. And I'm no rich, foreign radical. I'm an ordinary Canadian. I'm a senior on fixed income, I get no "hidden funding" from shadowy sources. At least I am who I say I am. You, on the other hand, are not.

*The stated mission of these DESMOG folks is to "Clear the PR pollution that clouds climate science." In this era of climate cranks, vested interests and lying propagandists, they have their work cut out for them. As far as I'm concerned, they deserve a medal!

Larry Powell
Roblin, MB  
If you like my blog, please consider a donation. Thanks! Larry

The Rise and Fall of our Manitoba Water Stewardship Ministers.

Dear Editor,

I think the Government of Manitoba has some explaining to do. 

With Lake Winnipeg's water quality getting progressively worse through the years, why has Premier Selinger done away with the Ministry of Water Stewardship?

Former Premier Gary Doer created the Department almost a decade ago. Since then, the government has bragged about it being "the first in Canada," suggesting it was needed to deal with mounting problems such as floods, agricultural and industrial impacts, eutrophication, excessive algae bloom, climate change and a growing population. 

Then, with the stroke of a pen last week, the Premier has reduced Water Stewardship to a branch of the Department of Conservation. Why?

It seems to me that the stewardship of Manitoba waters was the beginning of a life line for the survival of Lake Winnipeg. Now it has been taken away.

At no time in Manitoba's history has there been such a need for a Department of Water Stewardship as there is now. 

I believe there is a requirement for leadership to truly save Lake Winnipeg and our precious waters, rather than just the advertisements. The people of Manitoba have a right to stand up and fight for what is right, and what is honourable and decent,as do all the people in Canada.

The abuse and pollution of our water sources has been tolerated and accepted for far too long, and government actions have not been successful to indicate any beneficial recovery of Lake Winnipeg waters.

It is long past time for all politicians to dedicate themselves,and work together in an all out effort to do whatever is necessary to clean up Lake Winnipeg and save our Manitoba water sources. It is time to put their political identities aside and help bring back the health,the beauty and colour of Lake Winnipeg.

So, come clean, Mr. Selinger. Why did you do it?

John Fefchak;

Virden, Manitoba.

The People's Corporation Loses the Common Touch

If you like this blog, please consider making a donation. Thanks! Larry

Dear Editor,

It's sometimes referred to as "the people's corporation." I don't believe the CBC deserves that endearing title any longer.

Just last night, we were treated to another spectacle on "The National."

Each member of the high-profile "At-Issue" Panel, to one degree or another, pooh-poohed almost every question posed by viewers as part of a year-end special.

No, they chimed, there is no serious gap between the rich and poor in this country. On the contrary, Andrew Coyne informed us, huge progress is being made in reducing poverty in Canada. 

Rex Murphy seconded the motion, reminding us, we've actually never had it so good! (Rex seldom opens his mouth but to change feet!) 

No, the Occupy Movement has had no real impact. (No one offered, of course, that this might be because blind, narrow and stupid politicians refuse to recognize good, new ideas even if they are there for all to see.)

No, paid corporate lobbyists aren't really all that bad, either.  (Try reading "The 10 Worst Corporate Lobbyists" & see if you agree.)

And no, there are no major problems with our present, non-elected Senate. (Never mind that it is now dominated by trained Harper seals, some embroiled in blatant conflicts of interest, which have dragged on, unaddressed thanks to an impotent "Ethics Commissioner.")

And no, a switch to proportional representation is just not in the cards for Canada. The panel's inference seemed to be, we probably don't need it anyway, because we are all in such darn good shape without it!

So who are these panelists, anyway?

Well, Andrew is a columnist for the ultra-conservative National Post and son of James Coyne, former Governor of the Bank of Canada. While these things should not, in and of themselves, disqualify him as a "man of the people," they sure do make it harder!

Rex is a courageous defender of multinational corporations, a vicious critic of environmentalists and climate scientists, and a mass distributor of false information about global warming. (When not appearing on programs on CBC Radio or TV, he also contributes to the same, right-wing paper as Andrew, the National Post.)
Rex Murphy caricature (L.) courtesy of By the Bay Art Studio 

Chantal Hébert, also a print journalist, has been a voice of reason before. But lately, she seems more interested in protecting the status quo, including our antiquated electoral system, than anything else.

Bruce Anderson, the "new guy," is not even a journalist. He apparently has a background in public relations. And we all know PR people are never known to "spin" the facts.

Sadly, it was Peter Mansbridge himself, (CBC photo r.) the panel moderator, who put the icing on the cake. Apart from a weak attempt to reign in Andrew on the rich-poor topic, he failed to mention that, earlier this month, he had himself reported: "The gap between earnings by the rich and the poor is widening in almost all OECD countries, including Canada, where the top 10 per cent of Canadians earns 10 times more than the bottom 10 per cent." 

(Please also read: "Canadian CEOs vs. the 99%. No Contest When it Comes to Pay.")

For whatever reason, I believe the CBC (esp. TV news) is fast losing its "common touch," retreating instead into a comfortable and smug cocoon of self-importance. Sadly, it too seldom speaks any longer for ordinary Canadians and too often for those who can already afford to speak for themselves.

I would expect this of "the corporate media." 

The CBC is supposed to be different.

Larry Powell
Roblin, Manitoba CA

Canada's "Law and Order" Prime Minister (Letter to the Editor)

If you like my blog, please consider a donation. Thanks! Larry

Dear Editor,

If Stephen Harper is so keen on becoming a "law and order" Prime Minister, why does he seem to have so little regard for the law, himself? Since coming to power about six years ago, his government has been riddled with a litany of dirty tricks, domestic and international crimes.

The most recent is his scandalous decision to withdraw from the Kyoto Accord, a legally binding, international agreement to limit human emissions of greenhouse gases, which are causing catastrophic climate change. (Have you noticed Manitoba's tragic and terrible flooding lately?)

Even China put Canada to shame at the recent climate talks in Durban, showing a willingness to "step up" and show some environmental leadership while Harper showed none. His "operative" at the talks, Peter Kent (who I now refer to as our "Minister of Environmental Destruction"), once again proved, neither of them really works for you, me, our children or our planet, for that matter. Make no mistake, they are, quite simply, the handmaidens of the likes of Syncrude, Suncor, and other big, rich, powerful players in the Alberta tar sands, earth's largest energy project and quite likely its dirtiest. 

His administration has been muzzling climate scientists since day one, threatening them with dismissal if they speak out about the gravity of the situation.

Then there was the court ruling which declared that the Harper government had broken the law in the way it is clumsily proceeding with the dismantling of the Canadian Wheat Board. It was just the most recent in a string of court decisions that ruled against the government on this matter. Rather than pausing to consider compromise or co-operation in the face of all of this, the Prime Minister is ruthlessly pressing ahead with a court appeal and a clamp down on democratic debate with heavy-handed measures like closure.

On top of this, there were the concerted efforts by Conservatives to subvert the Committee system in the Commons, as well as serious election fraud. (Remember the crafty "in and out" scheme to fund elections?) While some of the "dirty tricks" may not strictly speaking, be "crimes," it is the leader of a party and a government who sets the tone and creates the "culture" for what happens down the line.

It is against this backdrop that Harper is committing billions of our tax dollars to new prisons, fighter planes and warships, as if he has the moral authority to act as policeman to the world, let alone enforce tougher laws on we ordinary Canadians.

And we wonder why there's an "Occupy Movement!"

Perhaps some space needs to be reserved in Harper's shiny new "slammers" for himself and his accomplices, er, I mean, cabinet ministers, for all the crimes they are committing against us!

Larry Powell
Roblin, MB