Thursday, February 02, 2012

Politics/EconomicsCanada: British Columbia: Petition vs Oil supertanker port for Chinese market?

As of this moment, obstructionists are trying to prevent an oil export port from being developed in British Columbia by waging a petition campaign thru the web facility  The obstructionists in BC are a wing of the more general campaign to stop an oil pipeline proposed to carry oil crude (pre-refinement commodity) from southern Alberta thru the USA to Kansas City or some other hub to distribute it in the American heartland.  The reason for the obstructionists BC wingnut operation is a geostrategic manoeuvre of the war against oil and additional supply of the commodity from drilling in North America.  It's also a selfish effort to prevent job-creation (to build the port or the pipeline and maintain them), so that a "Green" utopia may prevail.  I wonder how many of the so-far 445 signers of the petition are laffing it up as they tour around in their automobiles, trucks, snowmobiles, lawnmowers, airplanes, and other oil-fuelled machines.  

Today, I signed a different petition circulated by -- to free Nigerian labour activists (petition sponsored by Damian Ugwu and Social Justice Advocacy Initiative, endorsed by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and a total of 33 Nigerian groups (they are not listed, so I coudn't analyze them). 

Lamentably, one cannot tell from the info that provides whether there is a single Nigerian group among them that advocates a plurality of workers representation where unions get only proportional standing (no monopoly unionism) and are not tied into political cawzes that are not directly and only related to conditions of work, employment standards, workers health and safety in the workplace (checkoff of dues under anti-pluralist monopoly unionism where winner of the workers vote takes all representation power in its relation to the company, the government, and any damn political cawz that the elite or the unquestioning majority of members toward which they want to direct union-collected money -- paid by check of dues of all members).  This is how professional petition circulators deceive the public and benefit from ignorance regarding the cawzes which benefit.  Another nonprofit org that I support, Fairfood, recently tried to get me to sign a petition to oppose child labour in, if I recall correctly, coffee or tea plantation fields in developing countries.  But the problem of child labour where there are no schools, where HIV/AIDs has decimated the adult population, and other conditions is not solved by artificial pressure from the outside that the children working in the fields do not find to be in their own best interest.  Fairfood did not debate its move in the public arena of even its own supporters, as it assumed that the standards of Western industrial relations can be imposed everywhere else in the world, even under very different circumstances.  How about giving the kids who want to work a pay raise, allowing only a half-day's work per day, and increasing the number of adults and kids who get this more advanced daily income.  Maybe the governments involved coud forego personal income taxes on the kids, but then that woud de-incentivize adults from taking these field jobs.

Back to the building of oil-tanker ports in BC for the export of Alberta oil to China and the rest of Asia:  if the Americans don't want Alberta oil (ostensibly to protect the environment but we must ask what hidden agenda is functioning in the prohibition), then let the BC wingnutty envros come up with an alternative that doesn't cut down the job creation that otherwise woud accrue to the BC jobless (and jobless from other provinces as well), instead of keeping them perpetually on welfare handouts to the expense of all the taxpayers.  At the same time, the BC govt should insist that a cash deposit shoud be put in escrow to cover any expenses should a tanker spill its cargo onto the BC coastline.  Thus, emergency workers coud be kept in a state of readiness that woud lead to compensation for them (more jobs) should such a painful situation occur.  But, let's build the oil hub in the best location/s for a BC oil crude export centre.

Back to the oil workers in Nigeria:  what kind of unionism is the left and the "human rights" orgs promoting in Nigeria?  And:  did the charged unionists murder the police officer as the Nigerian govt charges?  We can't depend on the Left to tell the truth, any more than the ideologues of the Right.  We need independent verification, to which dec+dedly does not point us.

— EconoMix

— materials reposted by EconoMix, refWrite Frontpage economics / business columnist

Tell Parliament: 
Keep oil supertanker traffic away from B.C.'s coastline

Targeting: Governments of Canada and British Colombia
Sponsored by: Dogwood Initiative

There are three proposals to bring more and bigger oil supertankers to British Columbia's coast, so that Alberta's oilsands crude can be shipped to China and Asia. If this is allowed to happen, most British Columbians would benefit little and B.C.'s resplendent coast would be threatened by oil spills. 
The Alberta and federal governments are pushing for these oil tankers. They're using a review process that's rigged in their favour. But B.C. has a history of defending its coast and an epic struggle is underway.
You can't eliminate and can't predict oil spills. They happen because humans make mistakes and machines break.
A single oil spill could devastate lives, livelihoods, cultures and wildlife on our coast.
There's no need to accept the risk. Far more jobs would be put at risk than created in B.C., and since oil is non-renewable we think it's better to keep more Canadian oil in Canada for our children to use if they need to.
Together, we can create victory for our coast. Sign this petition to stop more supertanker traffic along B.C.’s coast!

No comments: