Raincoast RSS Raincoast Twitter Facebook icon

Controversial exhibit stays at city hall

April 18th 2013

Global News Hour Calgary

Tue, Apr 16 : A controversial art exhibit at city hall can stay right where it is, even though under normal circumstances it would be forced out. The show has ties to a group that is against the northern gateway pipeline. Global’s Reid Fiest reports.

Click here to watch the video from the Global News broadcast.

Tags: , ,

2 Responses to “Controversial exhibit stays at city hall”

  1. Ron Craven says:

    It is very easy to say lets have a oil free coastline. However Canada’s resources play a major part in our employment and finacial stability including medical services and education. Which of these are you prepared to give up? Are you prepared for double digit unemployment? What future are you chosing for our young generation.
    We need to be in a position to ship oil to countries who weren’t as fortunate to have abundant supplies as Canada. Do you not think another country would take our place and supply oil using waterways?
    I support people who look for alternate solutions to challengesw. e.g. How can we make pipelines safer. How can we reduce the potential for spills which are with a few exceptions minor given the volumn transported by land and sea. The proposals of suspending pipeline constuction in the North and eliminating shipment of oil by tankers are not supported by 90% of the people I know. Looking for safer ways to accommodate oil movement is supported.


  2. Misty MacDuffee says:

    Hi Ron
    This is an important dialogue that needs to occur at a national level. Even though our concerns are rooted in the unacceptable risk to the coast, the problem is not just a pipeline and oil tankers. The problem is that the tar sands oil economy has far most costs locally, regionally and globally than can be justified by the profits that are garnered by the very few and the trickle down theory that this serves Canada. Tar sands development is one of the world’s most environmentally destructive activities. It destroys massive amounts of habitat, requires huge quantities of water and energy, and creates toxic waste water- all of these things compromise the livelihoods of people and communities often relying on the soil, water, air and resources being compromised by the tar sands (not to mention human health). Burning oil and pumping more fossil fuels into the atmosphere further threatens the planet’s ability to support life. These costs are not being borne by us, but by our children. I also don’t buy the argument that there is a choice between financial stability, employment education and sustainable energy alternatives.

    Canada is in a perverse situation where we are currently importing oil from foreign sources (primarily to meet energy needs in eastern Canada) when we should be utilizing our own oil resources to meet our own domestic needs, not shipping it to offshore markets. We need a dialogue about our domestic energy future. It needs to be driven by Canadian citizens, not representatives for oil companies. Opposing pipelines and tankers is about ecological, social and economic cost of our oil economy. The tar sands are a strategic resource that Canada will need for its own utilization in bridging the gap to an alternative energy economy/society.

    Mining the tar sands, piping it to the BC coast and shipping it to offshore markets doesn’t just poison the planet, it also undermines our energy security. Can you imagine the sustainable energy initiatives that could be implemented with the kind of money going into squeezing the last drops of ancient sunlight from the ground? That’s the conversation we need to have.

Leave a Reply


This site is powered by WordPress, and Pink Sheep Media