The Harper government is starving the beast of departments that don’t fit into his ideological viewpoints on industry, eliminating positions, eliminating funding, closing down departments or buildings. This has a two fold effect. One, this is money the Conservatives need to help balance the budget. Two, it is eliminating voices of dissent, or any other facts that could create cracks in his vision for Canada. Now groups directly opposed to his vision, not politically, but because that is the purpose of the groups themselves, are being labelled terrorists, accused of fraud, and political scheming, only because it challenges the rhetoric of what the government is trying to do.
Here are some links on muzzling of scientists
This paper shows rather well the muzzling that’s happening
Here is the AB government doing it
Funny how they didn’t want to appeal at all
Why silence environmentalists? If they’re as crazy as the governments say, why not let them say their piece and let Canadians be the judge if they’re crazy or not?
Science has shown that reclamation in the oilsands will not work
What about letting industry and the AB government dictate their own emission rules, and delaying it as long as possible, while the rest of the country has a different set of rules?
What about harpers own appointee saying we’re an ‘environmental rogue state’? That’s someone he hired and vetted.
What of the environment canada report that either left out information, or had misleading data, to confirm the governments message that everything is going good?
Why the deception on emission rates?
What about our poor record on reaching our GHG targets?
Why was the government so sneaky to leave out the oilsands GHG emissions to the UN?
Why were they so quiet when they finally did release that information, and the fact that GHG from the oilsands will quadruple while in other areas it’s falling? Which will push us further and further away from the Copenhagen targets?
Why release press releases from both federal and AB governments about oilsands pollution not being a concern, if the GHG is going to quadruple?
How can science be objective when the oilsands make up our largest group of lobbyists far greater than any other industry?
Why are we allowing industry to rewrite our environmental laws?
Why is the NEB and Transcanada delaying access to information, and hiding information about pipeline spills from 5 years ago?
Why are we selling off land and resources to oligarchies in the USA, why are we spending all this money on advertising, on natural resources promotion, when the Koch brothers will make $100 billion off of our land and resources when average Canadians will never see any of this type of profit?
With environmental regulations gutted, and left to the whims of provinces, will we have more spills like this, that are still leaking after 9 months?
Why does the government spend taxpayers money of all of Canada, to promote a provinces resources that the province owns? Especially if other than tax dollars from the oilsands, only Alberta benefits from it?
Why is all of this money being spent, when John Kerry said that lobbying won’t alter his decision? And he says “The public has a role in this. We’re all accountable to our publics. The democratic process demands that we do that.” If only our government felt the same way.
Why kill wolves to try and slow the decline of the Caribou when scientists have been reporting for a very long time that their loss of habitat is the main reason? Why disregard the reports from scientists, and instead form an industry led body to address the issue?
Why does the NEB keep any environmental concern out of the northern gateway hearings?
Why is the NEB taking over protecting our oceans and fish from industry, an energy regulator, instead of scientists who’ve gone to school for their specific field in the DFO?
Why such a small window to voice concerns over the kinder morgan expansion, oh right those new laws from the government to ‘speed up the review process’?
Why eliminate over 3000 environmental reviews on pipelines and other projects?
Why spy on environmentalists if only because they threaten your talking points and are a lone voice of dissent? Why are tax paying dollars spent spying on Canadians who care about the environment?
I’m sure the lucrative environment industry, the ones who don’t have as much to gain from expansion being approved, are really radicals and ‘ecoterrorists’. Easier to brand your opponents radicals and kooks, than to actually address valid concerns people have.
2010 the advertising budget for natural resources canada, NRCan, was $237,000.
The Harper government has increased its advertising spending to $16.5m in 2012 from $9m in 2011. To $40m in 2013. No other departments have had an increase in spending like that in just advertising, many other departments are facing massive cuts across the board.
We need our government to force oil companies to clean up their act, not buy their ads for them.
While they cut funding and jobs to the DFO in stations that fall along the proposed nothern gateway pipeline that would lead in monitoring, assessments, and remediation if there was a spill.
The government is focusing on telling the world and Canadians that we’re environmentally friendly when they should be showing it by creating and enforcing sound environmental policies not gutting them.
Meanwhile our national debt has exploded since they took power by an additional $169 billion. I wonder if the same thing will happen in 2015 with the promise of a balanced budget as what happened with the promise to drive the debt-ratio down.
[Link to more links to information on our deficit and debt](http://www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments/1vgy9b/hey_reddit_canada_who_are_you_all_voting_for_next/cesn0yq)
The government is targeting environmental groups. Let us not forget that the public relations war is largely being won by those with the most money, and that compared to just the advertising budget of both the federal government and companies who are represented by CAPP (who receive far more foreign investments than NPOs), foreign donations these groups get pales in comparison.
>Calgary-based TransCanada has hired Phil Fontaine – former national chief of the Assembly of First Nations – to help it win the support of native communities from Alberta to New Brunswick.
I would be concerned if I was an environmental group, when the head of the watch dog for our spy agency is lobbying for enbridge.
I would be concerned if I was an environmental group and was being targeted and spied on by our spy agencies and the RCMP.
I would be concerned if I was first nations and instead of listening to their appeals, or trying to find some common ground, then send out ministers to convince band leaders.
I would be worried if I were first nations, and the government when holding meetings essentially didn’t listen to you and talked past you, really only wanting to use you to bolster support and not have to worry about pesky legal battles.
The radicals and ecoterrorists part? Not necessarily about infrastructure bombings and destruction, but just simply voicing their opposition and taking part of the regulatory hearings. The pipelines aren’t even built yet, so it can’t be a concern that they are going to destroy something that hasn’t been built. It’s the possibility that they could derail or put a wrench in their plans
>Oliver says the groups “threaten to hijack our regulatory system to achieve their radical ideological agenda,” stack the hearings with people to delay or kill “good projects,” attract “jet-setting” celebrities and use funding from “foreign special interest groups.”
These aren’t radicals and eco terrorists, these aren’t people threatening to blow up pipelines. These are people protesting, which is their right. These are people who care about the environment, and because it goes against the plans of our government, they are being focused on. Do the groups below have any criminal history? Have they ever committed any violent acts? Is protesting, or voicing opposition a terrorist act in the eyes of the government now?
>Idle No More, ForestEthics, Sierra Club, EcoSociety, LeadNow, Dogwood Initiative, Council of Canadians and the People’s Summit.
They passed legislation so that the CRA could do this…
>The prime minister’s office directed requests for comment to the Canadian Revenue Agency (CRA). Noël Carisse, a spokesman for CRA, said **that since 2012** “the CRA has conducted additional review activities focused on political activities. Audits are being conducted in addition to our regular audit activities, and will include charities from across the entire spectrum of charitable activity.”
>With his announcement this week, Public Safety Minister Vic Toews has increased the concern among environmentalists that Ottawa regards them as implacable adversaries to be monitored and battled, rather than well-meaning advocates to be consulted.
>A document from the Department of Foreign Affairs listed allies of the government’s oil-sands development plans and “adversaries” that included environmental and aboriginal groups.
You’re either with us, or you’re with the ~~pedophiles~~ ecoterrorists.
>”Unfortunately, there are environmental and other radical groups that would seek to block this opportunity to diversify our trade,” Oliver said in an open letter.
>”Their goal is to stop any major project no matter what the cost to Canadian families in lost jobs and economic growth. No forestry. No mining. No oil. No gas. No more hydro-electric dams.”
From the submission that we’re commenting on:
>The Canada Revenue Agency conducts audits for a number of reasons, including in response to outside complaints that an organization is violating federal laws for charities.
>Environmentalists believe that is why so many of them are being singled out. Shortly after the pro-tar sands group Ethical Oil launched a public campaign in 2012 to “expose the radical foreign funded environmental groups’ activities attacking Canada’s ethical oil and industry,” Canadian Finance Minister Jim Flaherty announced an $8 million effort to more deeply investigate nonprofits’ political activity.
>Since then, Ethical Oil has filed formal complaints with the CRA about Environmental Defence, the David Suzuki Foundation and Tides Canada, saying the groups should be “stripped of their charitable status” for “engaging in partisan activity,” according to Ethical Oil’s website.
>Ethical Oil has deep ties to both the tar sands industry and the Harper administration. In 2011, one of the group’s co-founders, Alykhan Velshi, left his job as a spokesperson for Harper’s government to help found Ethical Oil. A few months later, he left Ethical Oil and returned to the Harper administration to become director of planning in the prime minister’s office. Today, he is the director of issues management for the prime minister.
Also interesting how Jason Kenney is paying for Ethical Oils websites…
echnical Data that you can verify
ethicaloil.org — whois ?
Tech Email:email@example.com Name
So who is paying for hosting theses pages ?
See top 5 websites with these affiliate IDs below or click on specific affiliate ID above to see full list for that ID
Domain Alexa Rank IP Google IDs Affiliate/Product IDs Nameserver(s)
jasonkenney.net N/A 126.96.36.199 (56) Google Analytics (Urchin) Id: UA-20233645 (6) ns1.strategicimperativesonline.com (5)
http://www.jasonkenney.net N/A 188.8.131.52 (56) Google Analytics (Urchin) Id: UA-20233645 (6)
Remember, politics is a contact sport, like hockey, so please feel free to add quick contributions, observations and relevant information as a comment below!
Contact us if you would like to contribute to our collaborative efforts or would like to share/submit articles, data or additional content, feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media outlets or email us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca
- Share: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/
- Follow: https://twitter.com/opHarper
- Join: https://www.facebook.com/groups/dumpharper/
- Like: https://www.facebook.com/DumpHarper
- Read: http://paper.li/opHarper/1330339678
- Watch: https://www.youtube.com/user/opharper
This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/