Sunday, July 29, 2018

Government of Canada's Kinder Morgan pipeline facts from 2013 T/F today?

From one of our earlier Posts, September 5, 2013, there was Kinder Morgan with a Press Release beating their chests of just how good they are and then somewhere along the time line they deleted it.  Using the WayBack Machine the Press Release continues to live on.

Are the claims made by Kinder Morgan in the past still holds true today, and does Justin Trudeau's government stand behind the 'facts' today or is it time for an update!!?

3 million
Approximately three million barrels of crude oil travel through Canada’s crude oil pipeline network every day, enough to fill more than 475 million one-litre milk cartons or almost 200 Olympic-sized swimming pools.

Learn More
Number 3
Alberta’s oil sands are the third-largest source of proven crude oil reserves in the world, next to Saudi Arabia and Venezuela.

Learn More
$6.1 Billion
Alberta is expected to invest $6.1 billion in green technology, over the next five years, more than all other Canadian provinces combined.

Learn More
Diluted bitumen has been shipped in the Trans Mountain Pipeline and exported via tanker since the 1980s.
Tariff Requirements
Oil shipped in the Trans Mountain Pipeline must meet a strict set of requirements before it can be transported.

Learn More
$60 Billion
The value of Canadian exports of crude oil was worth more than $60 billion in 2011? (Source: The National Energy Board)
Tanker Scrutiny
Tankers are one of the most scrutinized vessels on the oceans today. Transport Canada inspects every tanker on its first arrival at a Canadian port and then once per year as part of its Port State Control program.

Learn More
1.4 million
Canada supplies 1.4 million barrels of oil per day to the U.S.

Learn More
Oil sands projects recycle 80-95 per cent of water used.

Learn More
Global energy demand will increase by 36% by 2035. More than half of this growth in demand will still be met by fossil fuels. (Source: International Energy Agency)
10 days
It takes almost 10 days for oil to travel from Edmonton to Burnaby through the Trans Mountain Pipeline.
5 km/hr
Oil moves at about five kilometers per hour in a pipeline, roughly walking speed. (Source: CEPA)
Lower density
Diluted bitumen shipped in the Trans Mountain Pipeline has a lower density than both fresh and salt water.

Learn More
Since 1989
Since Canada’s National Ship-source Oil Pollution Fund was implemented in 1989, no Canadian spill has exhausted all sources of cleanup funding. (Source: Office of the Administrator of the Ship-source Oil Fund, 2012)
Preventing corrosion
Pipelines are coated and then protected with a mild electric charge on the outside, to prevent corrosion from wet soil and air.

Learn More
What starts out as petroleum?
Plastics, many pharmaceuticals, chemicals, and oils and lubricants start out as petroleum. (Source: CEPA)
24 hours / 7 days a week
The Trans Mountain Pipeline is monitored 24/7 from remote control centres, equipped with sophisticated, computerized sensing and control systems.
500 BC
The first recorded use of pipeline to transport hydrocarbons was in China around 500 BC. (Source: CEPA)
With proper maintenance and monitoring, a pipeline can be safely operated indefinitely. (Source: CEPA)
Safe & Efficient
Pipelines remain the safest and most efficient method for transporting petroleum products. (Source: CEPA)
Since 1953
In operation since 1953, the Trans Mountain pipeline system is the only pipeline system in North America that transports both crude oil and refined products to the West Coast. (Source: Kinder Morgan)
2.5 times
If laid end-to-end, there are enough underground natural gas and liquids pipelines in Canada to circle the Earth around 2.5 times at the equator. (Source: CEPA)
Canada has a long history of pipeline construction and operation dating back to 1853 when a 25-kilometre cast-iron pipe moving natural gas to Trois Rivières, QC was completed. It was probably the longest pipeline in the world at the time. (Source: CEPA)
1862 World's First
In 1862, Canada would complete one of the world’s first oil pipelines, from the Petrolia oilfield in Petrolia, ON to Sarnia, ON. (Source: CEPA)
Economic Importance

With the discovery of an abundant supply of crude oil and natural gas in the west, Canada’s oil and gas industry began expanding its vast pipeline network in the 1950s. This expansion contributed significantly to the development of domestic and international markets, while propelling the Canadian economy forward. (Source: CEPA)
Marine Terminal
A marine terminal is a distribution centre that sends or receives product by ship, barge or pipeline, that usually includes a dock, storage tanks and a connecting pipeline system.
1,400 tanker trucks
It would take 1,400 gasoline tanker trucks per day travelling from Edmonton to Burnaby, that’s one leaving every minute, to transport what our Trans Mountain pipeline can within a 24 hour period.
94 per cent of all Canadian transportation energy comes from petroleum products. The vast majority of passenger vehicles on the road use gasoline as a fuel, while most freight transport trucks use diesel.
60 years
For 60 years, the Trans Mountain Pipeline system has been safely and efficiently providing the only West Coast access to Canadian oil products.
100,000 km network
The Trans Mountain Pipeline is part of Canada’s 100,000 km underground pipeline network that transports almost all of Canada’s daily crude oil and natural gas production.

Monday, July 9, 2018

A Proud River Rock Casino Resort Report: Where the money goes: Two Thirds + One Third = Four Thirds

That's Rich,  River Rock Casino Resort lays out the groundwork of how beneficial gaming revenue is to the City of Richmond

The money can go to "supporting programs like healthcare, education and social services" and "This share of gaming revenue received is available to be used to fund local projects such as:
      policing, road maintenance, civic buildings, and park upgrades.

$50 million just for Richmond and the BC Liberal Minister responsible for BC Lottery couldn't find the money to bankroll the  Integrated Gaming Enforcement Team (IGET) to keep tabs on the money launderers.

Does anyone in Richmond City Hall have a handle on the split today amongst the possible recipients?  healthcare, education, social services, policing, road maintenance, civic buildings and park upgrades?

Where the money goes
In British Columbia, approximately two-thirds of gross gaming revenue from the gaming facilities goes directly back to the government, through the BC Lottery Corporation, for the purpose of supporting programs like healthcare, education and social services.  The remaining one-third of gaming revenue is retained by service providers, such as Great Canadian Gaming Corporation, to pay for wages, building costs, taxes and other operational services.

policing, road maintenance, civic buildings, and park upgrades

Here we are in 2018 and the data above is for 2014/2015.

Any chance of an update from River Rock?   2016/2017/2018?

Is that when the fourth 'third part' took their cut and cleaned out the till?

Wednesday, July 4, 2018

Will Judi ask Gordon to Co-author a sequel to Daggers Unsheathed: The political assassination of Rich Coleman

Background Reference for Sequel:

Google Search Criteria:  Glen Clark raid, Casino gate

It's just been brought to our attention that the title of Judi's next book will NOT be "Daggers Unsheathed" because in the Georgia Straight January 2018 issue .... there was Martyn Brown's column:
... Unlike almost every other person in this position in Canadian history, Rich Coleman has barged right into his party's leadership race, endorsing one candidate and alienating supporters of five others. ....
I bet you're curious to know what a cuban dagger is, right?


If there is a trial involving a politician then there'll be no need for Judi to rewrite two pages on Judge Bennett  who not only sat on the Glen Clark trial, but worked on the BC Rail court case as well until her promotion.

The Legislative Raids Blog:

BC Mary ......   here's Judi Tyabji Wilson's assessment of Judge Bennett in court on June 28, 2002, when listening to final arguments at the end of the 8-month trial of former premier Glen Clark (who was acquitted, btw):

The judge looked less tired than previously. Madam Justice Elizabeth Bennett appeared to be in her late 30s. She was attractive, with an almost shoulder-length cut of thick dark hair. And she had a dimple when she smiled, which was rare. Her dark eyes followed everything in the trial, and her forehead often creased in a thoughtful frown as she processed the information presented to her. Her patience had been obvious in many instances and her written presentations on rulings throughout the trial were thorough, intellectual, and full of legal references ...

Judge Bennett had to be looking forward to the end of the trial, but she gave no indication of her feelings, remaining as stern as ever. She was very careful and very good at her job. She looked like she could clean up in a poker match. At one point, [David] Gibbons [leading defence lawyer] made a joke and everyone laughed, including Bennett. She looked so much younger when she smiled, and very playful. It was as if a mask had slipped, but it had slipped briefly, and she resumed her professional air. Sometimes there was a hint that she had a good sense of humour but clearly she liked to have a controlled, professional atmosphere in the courtroom. Too much humour, or too much posturing, was discouraged by the occasional comment from the judge's seat. Otherwise, she rarely interrupted.

[Daggers Unsheathed, the political assassination of Glen Clark, by Judi Tyabji Wilson, excerpted from pages 265-266.]

Monday, July 2, 2018

April 1, 2010: "Minister of Tourism has been vociferous in his condemnation of gambling in the past" but encouraged millions to be laundered

How is it that BC Liberal Minister Rich Coleman, a former RCMP Officer, failed to see the difference between the problem gamblers maxed out at a Government limit of $9,999 per week from the criminal element arriving with suitcases of $20 bills, in the millions, for the sole purpose of laundering the cash?  Was is it the high class suitcases that foiled fooled him?

BC Hansard:   [ Page 4034 ]

S. Simpson: The B.C. Medical Association has identified 159,000 people in this province who are problem gamblers. Of those, 31,000 people have serious gambling addictions. We also know that the number of people with severe gambling addictions has more than doubled since 2002, yet the B.C. Liberals have cut supports for the programs to assist those people. 

We now have the Minister of Tourism promoting a large new casino to help pay for the half-billion-dollar roof on B.C. Place. We know that this minister has previously raised issues about gambling addiction and the impacts on families. 

Is the Minister of Tourism confident that the government has done all it can to ensure that problem gambling will not increase due to this casino? 


S. Simpson: The Minister of Tourism has been vociferous in his condemnation of gambling in the past, going so far as to suggest people will be dying in the streets. Yet today he's the lead minister to build the biggest casino ever in British Columbia. Where's the hypocrisy in that? This at a time when the gaming policy and enforcement branch notes that B.C. has the highest proportion of problem gamblers over seven other provinces in this country. 

Clearly, the minister has reconciled his contradictions on these positions, particularly when his government does so little to support British Columbians who have gambling problems. 

Can the Minister of Tourism tell us why British Columbians should have any faith in him when he promotes this initiative on one hand after condemning it only a few years ago?

Hon. R. Coleman: I said "until it was brought to your attention," hon. Member, but I know you can't listen, because you're talking too much. But that's okay

The funding that is in place for problem gambling in British Columbia is based on the usage by people who can phone on a 1-800 line or access services for free — whether they get into difficulty with the gambling be it in a legal opportunity, like we offer, under the management of the province of British Columbia, or an illegal activity. The budget is predicated on the usage and is always there for any problem gambler and will continue to be there at the level that the uptake is there. 

 The funding is in place for problem gambling in BC based on the usage by people .....  whether they get into difficulty ....   a legal opportunity..... or an illegal activity!

Laundering money isn't illegal? Suitcases are not illegal?

Source:  Bottom of web page:  April 1, 2010

Sunday, July 1, 2018

1999: Gordon Campbell's, Christy Clark's take, not monetary, no under the table donations, on Casinos

 BC Liberals were on the Opposition benches in 1999 and after storming to the Government side of the Legislature they promised to make sure there wouldn't be a problem with the Casino files.  

Minister Rich Coleman was the front man and he did his very best to assist in dismantling the IIGET up to 2017.

 BC Legislature Search Criteria: Casino 
ps   bcleg search engine???? a licensed Model T would be faster




MONDAY, APRIL 19, 1999


Volume 14, Number 8

Oral Questions


G. Campbell: By now it should be clear to the minister responsible for gambling that the public has no confidence whatsoever in his secret casino approval process. The North Burnaby Inn is a glaring example of how his policy of secrecy has failed. Will the minister agree today to open up all licence applications for gambling and to make sure that the public has all the information and that all decisions are made in public in the future?

Hon. M. Farnworth: Recently, in the past month, there was a 30-day extension to the White Paper on gaming issues in the province of British Columbia. One of the things that I said that I think we need to do is look at how future licensing of casino applications should take place. During that time, we received over 150 different applications that deal with all the issues related to gaming, including the casino approval application. So right now we are taking the necessary time to review those presentations, and shortly we will come in with a response to the White Paper. That will deal with the casino licensing issue.

The Speaker: First supplementary, Leader of the Official Opposition.
G. Campbell: Washington, Indiana and even Nevada require that all casino applications, all discussions, all approval-making processes for gambling licences are done in public. You know, hon. Speaker, there is absolutely no way that a public process would ever have allowed a group that's been involved with Internet sex, with strip clubs and with illegal gaming in the past -- and been convicted of illegal gaming in the past -- to have been granted an approval-in-principle. So my question, again, to the minister is: why won't he announce today that all gaming licence applications -- all those decisions, all the information behind them -- will be made public and that the decision-making will be public in the future so that people can see exactly what happens?

Hon. M. Farnworth: As I said to the hon. member just a moment ago, we've undergone an extensive process of consultation that has resulted in over 150 submissions in terms of how gaming policy should take place in the province of British Columbia, and that includes many submissions on how a licensing process should take place. That will be forthcoming shortly.
What I find really disturbing is that the hon. member stands up in the House and asks these questions. Yet did he at one point avail himself of an opportunity to make a submission that could provide constructive and positive suggestions? No. Did, at one point, any member on that side of the House make one constructive, positive submission into a White Paper for discussion on future gaming policy?
The Speaker: Thank you, minister.
Hon. M. Farnworth: Not once, hon. Speaker.
The Speaker: Thank you, minister.
Second supplementary, Leader of the Official Opposition.
The Speaker: Come to order. Members will come to order.
Member, continue.
G. Campbell: I have a positive and constructive suggestion for the minister responsible for gambling: stop the expansion of gambling today. There is only one plausible reason why this minister will not make public to the people of British Columbia every single bit of information that has led to his approvals-in-principle for gaming. There is only one possible reason, and that's because he knows it won't stand the acid test of public scrutiny. My question, again, to the minister: why doesn't he take his cue from other jurisdictions on the continent? Why doesn't he listen to the public of British Columbia and open up all of his decisions today and forever with regard to gaming?
Hon. M. Farnworth: The only acid, hon. Speaker, is the acid that comes from that hon. member's tongue. The only thing he needs to do is go and talk to the members of his caucus who came and talked to me and lobbied me about having casinos in their own ridings. Has he even spoken to those members? They come into my office to talk about casino applications.
The Speaker: Finish your comments.
Hon. M. Farnworth: We have a White Paper that was under discussion. We've received 150 submissions.
The Speaker: Minister, finish your comments.
Hon. M. Farnworth: From those will come forward the changes that need to take place for gaming to continue in a sound legal framework in this province.
S. Hawkins: The NDP's process in awarding casino licences has been shrouded in secrecy and rightly called into question, given the events of the past few months. In fact, this government didn't hold one single public hearing on the casino applications. My question is to the gambling minister: given the widespread public fears and concerns about the NDP's choices for casinos, will he stand up today and commit to a public review of every casino that received an approval-in-principle by his government?
Hon. M. Farnworth: Just wait, hon. member. We had a great deal of public input -- over 150 submissions. We've heard from the UBCM, the charities, the industry and communities right across the province. We heard from Jacques Carpentier, who said the White Paper was moving in the right direction. The question I find interesting is that the member is saying that the process is secretive and should be opened up to public scrutiny, while she stood in estimates last year and lobbied on behalf of a casino in Kamloops.
Interjections. The Speaker: Order, members.
I recognize, on a first supplementary, the member for Okanagan West.
S. Hawkins: The minister can keep on throwing stones over here, but it's not going to stick. Produce the paper.
The Speaker: Members will come to order.
Continue, member.
S. Hawkins: Virtually every jurisdiction in North America uses a public process in granting licences to casinos. They do that to shine the light on casino applicants, their backgrounds and their plans. You know what? As soon as an application is granted, they hold a public hearing, so that the public can see for themselves who's applying and then have an opportunity to raise their concerns.
I ask the gambling minister again: given what other jurisdictions do -- almost every jurisdiction across North America uses a public process -- why is this minister still supporting a secret process by his government?
Hon. M. Farnworth: I find it really interesting that this member is now suddenly concerned about the process regarding casino applications, because that is the same member who stood up in estimates and said to me: "Is there an investigation going on around a casino application. . .to move in Kelowna?" I said yes, there was. Well, she said to me: "Look, there's a solution. Why don't you implement it before the investigation is complete? We don't have to go through that." Those were her exact words. If she doesn't like it, she can go back and refresh herself by reading Hansard.
The Speaker: Members, come to order.
G. Plant: In response to a question that I asked the gambling minister last Thursday, the minister stated: "There has been no change in the casino approval process in any way, shape or form." Oops! Unfortunately, the minister's answer is directly contrary to the facts. The casino RFP in fact said explicitly that cabinet would select the successful proposals. Won't the minister responsible for gambling stand up and admit that the responsible thing to do is open up the entire process to public scrutiny right here, right now?
Hon. M. Farnworth: The casino applications were scored by the same group of people. They were scored by representatives of the gaming audit and investigation office, by the Gaming Commission, by outside consultants. They were scored by a wide cross-section of people -- 12 people in all. It was done through the same criteria, applied to each and every application. The hon. member knows that if he has information that somehow there were changes Why not present them to the conflict-of-interest commissioner? Every single application was scored in the same process. The decisions were made by the same criteria.
The Speaker: First supplementary, member for Richmond-Steveston.
G. Plant: Only this minister in this government could design a process that would award conditional approval-in-something-like-principle for a gaming licence to a group of people associated with Internet porn sites, strip joints and illegal gambling convictions.  Let's pursue this little bit of openness here, because I think there are lots of questions that the people of British Columbia still need answers to. We know about the cabinet decision on July 29. Can the minister tell us: who did he talk to about changing the approval process? When did he have those conversations?
Hon. M. Farnworth: I guess it's the same answers I gave him last week. The fact of the matter is that there is an investigation underway. There is a lot of information that I want to release. I can't release it at this time, but in the fullness of time it will be released. He will see that every application was treated in exactly the same way as every other application.
The real question is the change in attitude on that side of the House -- how all of a sudden he is so concerned about a secretive process. Yet the member from Kelowna is quite happy to skirt the process when it suits her needs, hon. Speaker.
The Speaker: I recognize the member. . . .
The Speaker: Members, come to order, please.
I recognize the member for Port Moody-Burnaby Mountain.
C. Clark: Thank you, hon. Speaker.
The Speaker: Members, members.
C. Clark: Apparently every New Democrat in Burnaby knew that the North Burnaby Inn hosted illegal gaming. If there had been a public process, maybe the federal New Democrat MP could have come and told them what he knew about illegal gambling at the North Burnaby Inn. Given what has happened in this process in Burnaby, surely it is time for the minister to agree that we've got to drag this process out of the NDP's smoky back rooms and let the light of public scrutiny shine in.
Hon. M. Farnworth: You know, hon. Speaker, once again we see one statement in one section of the province by the Liberal opposition, and then there are other statements in other parts of the Liberal opposition when it suits their needs. They're asking these questions because of statements I made that are obviously in today's Vancouver Sun -- that is, there are changes coming to the way that gaming is regulated in this province. A key part of that is how licences are granted.   One of the things is that there is a White Paper with 150 submissions made. And guess what: as I said before, not one of them made one positive suggestion. Not one of them made one positive suggestion on changing the way that gaming is conducted in this province.
The Speaker: First supplementary, the member for Port Moody-Burnaby Mountain.
C. Clark: There have been nine approvals-in-principle granted by this government for casinos, and already four of them have collapsed for reasons including criminal allegations. If this process is clean, if it is honest, why is the minister so scared to expose it to the full light of public scrutiny?
Hon. M. Farnworth: The only thing that they seem to be exposing to public scrutiny is what they would do on this side of the House if they ever got here. They don't want to talk about how much they'd cut; they don't want to say which services they'd cut. They don't even want to talk about how they would deal with gaming. They were given the opportunity during the White Paper discussion, and not one of them made one constructive suggestion.
The Speaker: The bell ends question period. Members will come to order.
. . . .

Mike De Jong, Finance Minister's take on Casinos

C. James: A few weeks ago, when the minister made the announcement he just spoke of, he said that over the course of 12 months, $119 million in suspicious cash transactions went through B.C.’s casinos. This is despite the B.C. Lottery Corporation’s pledge to use an expensive IT system that was supposed to be in place to catch all of those transactions.

While I appreciate that the minister will get back to me on the specifics around exactly how much that computer system costs, I would like to ask the minister: is the computer system up and running?

Hon. M. de Jong: I’ll confirm that for the member as well. I do, though, want to….

Madame Speaker: Members.
Hon. M. de Jong: I do want to, though, in quoting the figures that she has, make the distinction for the member and the House that the reporting of suspicious transactions can’t be taken as confirmation that a transaction…. I think the member knows that. There is a strict threshold and guideline around which the Lottery Corporation, the gaming agencies, service providers and casinos are obliged to operate, and they are being very diligent about reporting what are construed as suspicious transactions.