Custom Search
Top Stories
Go to Site Index See "Top Stories" main page
REPORTING · 14th September 2012
Merv Ritchie
In a vote Friday evening, September 14, 2012, at the board table of twelve Regional District Directors of Kitimat Stikine, the majority (8 to 4) determined to support the resolutions of the Union of BC Municipalities (UBCM), but more specifically the motion read, to oppose the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project.

In favour of the motion; Dave Brocklebank (Area D Telegraph Creek, Iskut, Klappan, Bob Quinn), Diana Penner (Area C Rural Terrace and Kitimat), Joey Waite (Area F Dease Lake North), Dave Pernarowski (Terrace), Alice Maitland (Village of Hazelton), Bruce Bidgood (Terrace), Linda Pierre (Area B Rural Hazeltons) and Chair Harry Nyce (Area A Nass Valley).

Opposed; Corrine Scott (Kitimat), Billy Ann Belcher (Stewart), Ted Ramsey (Area E Thornhill) and Gail Lowry (New Hazelton).

This vote against the Enbridge Northern Gateway adds to other elected representative bodies opposed. The Skeena Queen Charlotte Regional District, the City of Prince Rupert, the City of Terrace and the City of Smithers besides of course the resolution passed at the UBCM made by the Village of Queen Charlotte on Haida Gwaii.

Comment by Rory Brown on 17th September 2012
Tom, you sound shocked the a member of Kitimat council would tell the residents of Kitimat a non-truth. Not only is council taking a position without the backing of the voters, but are members taking position without the backing of their council or their knowledge? Who made the decision for Councilor Scott to attend this meeting and vote any position.
This is not an issue of if you support the pipeline or not. This is an issue of representives of Kitimat not representing the voters correctly. Councilor Scott should be "directed" to explain herself pubically.
Neutral = non-alliance......
Comment by Thomas Campbell on 17th September 2012
A neutral policy is defined as a declaration that is made in order to be NON-ALIGNED to something that is quarrelsome; in this instance the Northern Gateway Project. By their own explanation, city council’s intention behind their "neutral policy" was to remain impartial and allow the process to do its job. BUT the policy of being NEUTRAL or NON-ALIGNED has specific constraints on it in return for the recognition of the right to remain “NEUTRAL”. Councilor Scott (as the representative of Kitimat Council on the RDKS) by voting as she did Friday demonstrated that Kitimat Council is antagonistic towards opposition of the Northern Gateway Project and therefore has removed the right to be recognised as “neutral”.
Comment by richard on 15th September 2012
all but three.....nice retirement for them that get the grease. you know who you our . enough said.....dam shame....lies ,lies,lies.two yrs of greasy bs,and it still more bs to come. people need to speak up.....certain busniesses seem to think they own it. MCC milking cash , cows .nice retirment, Lng will polute the air we breath while burning all that gas, (hope they pay there carbin tax) the pipeline will polute the waters . there goes my drinking water,were i fish. taking the food i use to feed my family and friends who can`t ,afford it.fresh sea food. how long you figure before it would be edibly,or drinkable after we do somme frackin..... is there any end to the destrution to this coast line. as it is a private,rio-tinto port and friends.
Kitimat Council's Neutrality
Comment by Corinne Scott on 15th September 2012
Thomas Campbell and Danny Nunes provided comments on this article on Terrace Daily On line, to which I've replied. Instead of rewriting the comments, I encourage people to read them on the Terrace Daily On Line.