Harpocracy - PM blasts foreign money, welcomes Chinese money in oil sands

How can our PM, in the same breath, denounce foreign money pouring into oil sands while inviting Chinese "investment" in the oil sands? 

How can our PM blast environmentalists as "radicals" but then throw his radical support behind the Northern Gateway pipeline, "vowing" to ensure its completion, while an "independent" review panel is still assessing the environmental impact.  How independent can those bureaucrats feel, when the Primer Minister is a party, aggressively attacking and crushing all opposition to the pipeline?

Yes, crushing all opposition to the pipeline and trampling on First Nations' rights while preaching free speech in China?  I am embarrassed and offended.  Canadians deserve a slightly smarter, less "ethical" government.  

Tweet Follow @TheIdeasOfMarch

Not respecting First Nations while trying to do business with them can't be ethical (or smart)?

The president of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce Perrin Beatty can be excused for being pro-business and seeing everything that comes in the way of doing business as an obstacle that needs to be removed or overcome.  However he is creating an obstacle for Canadian businesses by disrespecting the very First Nations that they want to do business with.  


Note how casually Perrin Beatty dismisses treaty rights that get in the way of doing business: 

“We need to look at environmental issues, we need to look at whether projects are respectful of treaty rights and so on, but we need to make decisions as well. And what we’re finding today is a process that simply bogs down, and opponents of development use process itself to prevent development from taking place, not on the merits of the case but simply on the ability to delay.”  [emphasis added]

What "decisions" are these that are so important and urgent that treaty rights "and so on" cannot even slow them down? 


He goes on to support Stephen Harper's governments initiative to "reform" the natural resource project review process.  Reading between the lines, it is okay to change a review process (that is necessitated by treaty rights) to allow "fast-tracking" decisions favouring Canadian businesses, but it is not okay if the decisions are slowed down or even suspended due to treaty rights considerations?  


This is just one example of the failure on part of Canadian businesses to treat the First Nations at least with the same respect that one business would show to another business during business negotiations.  You cannot acknowledge and dismiss the rights of the other party in the same breath.  


Ironically, the review process that he is so upset about, has not been any more respectful.    Tyler McCreary points out the omission of native words in the transcript of the hearings of the Joint Review Panel addressing the Enbridge Northern Gateway project.  He raises an important question:  If the panel cannot hear (and accurately record) the words of the First Nations speakers, how can they inspire confidence that they heard the message in those words? 


If this was two businesses interested in communicating with each other, efforts would be made to have accurate transcripts of the communications.  If this was two nations communicating with each other, efforts would be made to have accurate translations and transcription.  


The failure to treat the First Nations as a "Nation" (or even a business), a sovereign group whose rights have been recognized by the Crown and upheld by the Supreme Court, is an obstacle hindering communication and business with them (if they want to do any business in the first place).  One would have thought that businesses and governments wanting to do business on the First Nations lands, and with their co-operation, would demonstrate that they are smarter -- and more ethical -- than the "unethical" tyrannical, oppressive regimes that bully their populace.  Isn't this about the pursuit of "ethical oil" after all? 

Tweet Follow @TheIdeasOfMarch

Northern Gateway: Is the flow of foreign money and interest ethical?

Canadians are rightfully upset.  Foreign money and interests should not be dictating how our country mines its natural resources and how it balances the world's need for energy against the priorities of its people and the economic benefits. 


As Kathryn Marshall wrote, "foreign billionaires don't care" about Canadian jobs and our national ambitions.  She rightfully expresses dismay over the fact that "this horde of foreign and foreign backed groups" don't answer to us, "they answer to their rich, foreign paymasters."


I embarked on some research this week to educate myself about who is meddling into our national affairs and extraction of natural resources.  Here are some of my disturbing findings about the foreign groups operating in Alberta and British Columbia. 

• Petro China buys 100% control of Alberta oilsands project for $680 million.  The Chinese oil giant bought out its Canadian partner's 40% share to take over control of the entire project. 

• Saipem SpA, an Italian engineering and construction giant wins $1 billion contract in 2010 for Sunrise Energy oil sands project northeast of Fort McMurray. Saipem SpA is owned partly by a parent company that the Italian government has a 30% stake in.  In 2011, Saipem was awarded a $500 million contract in the Athabasca region of Alberta.

• China National Off-shore Oil Corp (CNOOC) pays $2.1 billion to buy OPTI Canada, a Canadian oil-sands company.  In the words of Globe & Mail, this hands over "another slice of the world's second largest oil reserves to CNOOC". 
• Chicago Bridge & Iron Company (CBI), an American engineering and construction giant wins a $0.75 billion contract in 2012 for the Kearl Oil Sands Expansion Project in Alberta.

• France's Total SA gets $9 billion dollar oil sands project approved, as the energy giant was given the green light by Alberta to continue with the development of the Joslyn Oil Sands project. 

Over the last couple of years, that adds up to giant corporations from France, China, Italy and USA snapping up projects and ownership stakes worth more than 15 billion dollars!  And this is not an exhaustive list.  I just got tired of finding many similar deals and contract awards. 

What I found particularly appalling was in one of the reports, it mentioned the environment minister Joe Oliver saying that a "there remains a two weeks consultation period with local First Nations regarding implementation."  Seriously?  You allow a foreign corporation to proceed with a 9 billion dollars contract allowing only 2 weeks for consulting with the people who own this land, live there and will be affected by this project?

Kathryn Marshall hits the nail on the head when she says that these "foreign billionaires" don't care about Canada and are answerable to their "rich, foreign paymasters".  The question is who does our environment minister answer to?  Why is he (and her for that matter!) not focusing on these billions of dollars of investment by foreign corporations in our country?  Are we to believe that these billions are being invested without any politicians being lobbied and influenced by foreign interests and foreign money?  

Should we not fear the foreign intentions, interventions and influences of French, Italian and Chinese companies (often backed by their governments) a lot more than a bunch of 'radical environmentalists'?  

Tweet Follow @TheIdeasOfMarch

Vision

"Beware the ides of March, Caesar!"  

Soothsayers have warned the mighty before.  The warnings have been ignored before. Power and success creates blind spots leading to arrogant dismissal of good counsel.  

The Caesars

Compliant governments have allowed North American corporations to reap disproportional economic gains, turning them into modern-day Caesars in terms of power and influence.  Can they afford to ignore the soothsayers?  

The Soothsayers

I am not a 'tree-hugging hippie' or 'angry anarchist'.  I am: 

• Academically, an economist; an MBA from a top-ranking business school.  
• Professionally, a part of the Fortune 100 corporate elite. 
• Financially, in the 1% tax bracket that the 99% is unhappy with.  

Since I pay more in annual taxes than a lucrative paycheck, I have a high stake in holding corporations and governments accountable for my contributions and a vested interest in the environmental health as a global citizen. 

The Warnings

When the 1% shares the concerns of the 99%, something is 100% wrong.  Corporations are listening with social media monitoring tools.  It is important to add your voice through social channels as each voice contributes to the overall 'sentiment'. Eventually, the crowd's roar echoes the soothsayer's warning to corporate Caesars:  "Beware the Ideas of March."

The Ideas

Disregard for sustainability and CSR sets most corporate agendas at odds with ecological values.  Due to their lobbying influence, governments fail to act as trustees of their people and the environment.  Governments can only deliver on this duty if they are transparent and held accountable.  This sadly leaves indigenous / aboriginal people as the best custodians of the environment while corporations ignore ecological realities as economic 'externalities'.  Hence, this blog is a space for ideas related to: 

• Open government, transparency and accountability 
• Ecological and economic sustainability 
• Rights of indigenous / aboriginal people 
• Corporate practices and intentions adversely impacting the above 
• New ideas that corporations can learn and benefit from

YOU

Whether you are among the 99% or the 1%, speak up.  Be counted, be heard.  Share your ideas with me.  Share my ideas with others.  Subscribe via social channels below not just to stay in touch but to add your voice to mine, so our collective voices are amplified.

THE GOAL

Who is it in the press that calls on me?

I hear a tongue shriller than all the music!

Speak! Caesar is turn'd to hear...

(Caesar)

Follow @TheIdeasOfMarch