What Those Who Killed the Tar Sands Report Don't Want You to Know

[JohnyCanuck]

Why did a parliamentary committee suddenly destroy drafts of a final report on tar sands pollution? Here's what they knew.

Just two weeks ago the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development abruptly cancelled a big report on the tar sands and the project's extreme water impacts. The parliamentarians even destroyed draft copies of their final report.

After listening to testimony from scores of scientists, bureaucrats, lobbyists, aboriginal chiefs and environmental groups, the committee dropped the whole affair like a bucket of tar. (For the record, the Alberta government, a petro-state with Saudi visions of grandeur, refused to show up and testify.)

Killing reports paid for by Canadian taxpayers on a $200-billion backyard development is not the sort of behavior one associates with a "responsible energy producer," but there you have it. While federal panjandrums argue that the tar sands may be key to our economic prosperity, our politicians couldn't put aside their partisan views long enough to complete a national report on the project's formidable water liabilities.

Fortunately, civilians can do what politicians can't. In the interests of accountability and transparency, I read through 300 pages of evidence and pulled out the sort of uncomfortable revelations that Ottawa doesn't want U.S. oil customers, industry investors or Canadian taxpayers to know.

http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2010/07/15/TarSandsReport/?utm_source=mondayheadlines&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=190710

[Odin2005]

1. The treatment of the Native folks there is dispicable!

I heard that they were forcibly resettled for "national security reasons" after they protested.

[sharp_stick]

2. who was forcibly relocated

for protesting what?

[Canuckistanian]

3. Got a link?

'cause I have no idea what you're talking about.

[Odin2005]

4. I read about it in a book on Ecology and Evolution called The Ptarmigan's Dilemma.

The authors are Canadians, so I assume they know what they are talking about.

[Canuckistanian]

5. Fair enough, I'll look it up

Thanks for the tip.

[Odin2005]

6. No problem! It's a great book.

[Canuckistanian]

7. Ok, I've read reviews of the book

Such as here:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/books/review-the-ptarmigans-dilemma-by-john-theberge-and-mary-theberge/article1532710/

And I've read actual excerpts of the book here:
http://books.google.ca/books?id=WQuhE2r3GnsC&printsec=frontcover&dq=The+Ptarmigan%27s+Dilemma.&source=bl&ots=Pq9pbp2EoV&sig=vzo7f4x_D3sflr90o9L2G27ieMI&hl=en&ei=ZRJFTJ3JOoKC8gaGtq0L&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CBsQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false

But nowhere am I finding anything about natives "forcibly settled for national security reasons". In fact, the book's subject seems to be entirely about nature - with an unique viewpoint. Its' a good book, that's for sure.

I'm quite a scholar on my own country's history, including the grave injustices done to our aboriginal peoples. But I can't recall this ever happening in Canada.