,
9 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
So. I got off the plane to see heated allegations on line that I have betrayed Alberta re C-48 and that I voted against committee travel. That’s not precisely true. Allow me tell you what actually happened, if I may.
When we returned to Senate work last month, the Conservative members of the Transportation committee came up with what you might politely call an ambitious plan for travel on C-48, the tanker moratorium. (It’s actually a ban.)
The Conservatives proposed that we travel to Norway, the Netherlands, Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico. Such a trip would have cost well over $1 million, and I opposed it. I thought it was an unjustifiable expense. I wouldn’t ask taxpayers to stand for it.
Next, the Conservatives suggested we travel to Newfoundland and Nova Scotia. Again, I couldn’t see how that applied to getting information about a west coast tanker ban.
Some of the rest of us on the committee countered with a plan to visit Prince Rupert and Terrace, where we could hear pro and con arguments and see the area in question for ourselves. That was the plan the committee adopted and which was approved by the Senate.
We did discuss a trip to Alberta. One Senator brought a motion to travel both to Alberta and Saskatchewan. Again, I thought that adding Saskatchewan might be an unnecessary expense.
There was a second meeting, where a trip to Alberta was put back on the table. I was unable to attend. The trip to Alberta was voted down; I wasn’t there and didn’t vote against it.
That said, it is vital that we hear from Albertans about this issue. Of course it is. And we are. This week, for instance, members of the Indian Resource Council came and testified passionately against C-48. I had my own meetings on C-48 this week with Enbridge & PSAC.
We will be in Calgary and Fort McMurray next month holding public hearings on C-69. Since several of us are on both committees, we can also do some double duty and talk about C-48 then.
