BC Hydro

NS News: Not worth a dam

Most of the British Columbia’s corporate media rides the Liberal bandwagon but the Glacier Media paper in my town, the North Shore News, takes a strong position against Site C, the most expensive white elephant ever conceived by bankrupt politicians.

Not worth a dam, April 21, 2017, North Shore News Editorial:

The project, which was approved without a proper review by the B.C. Utilities Commission, is going to cost $8.8 billion we don’t have to produce electricity we can’t use, to power LNG plants that won’t exist, at a cost too expensive to sell to foreign markets…

The fiscal-responsibility-loving premier is actively out campaigning on Site C saying the project is all about jobs, jobs, jobs (mostly hers).

It’s true, that $8.8 billion could create a lot of jobs at Site C – or be spent elsewhere.

We’d suggest starting with things that the province is actually in crying need of: affordable housing, child-care spaces, seismically sound schools, hospital wards, a transit system that doesn’t leave people stranded at rush hour, addictions treatment and mental health services, or a boost to welfare rates that haven’t budged since the time a one-bedroom apartment cost $375 a month.

Or, as Christy Clark is very fond of saying, the money could stay right where it is now, in ratepayers’ pockets.

peace river

Photo by Scott Lough

Categories: BC Hydro, Site C

Tagged as:

15 replies »

  1. with an editorial like that, I’d pay to subscribe. Good on that newspaper chain! At least some one in the newspaper business understands this province’s needs. Thank you for re printing it!


  2. That’s a great angle on the Site C blunder — and it could be used on many of the BC Liberals past or planned megaprojects.

    I’ve been waiting for a review (by you, Norm) of Dr. Bakker’s UBC study that damned the Site C business plan. It was refreshing to see such a detailed study (appropriately timed for release) though it was a bit sleep-inducing.

    My confusion is over why such a relatively small amount would be saved by cancelling the project. Wouldn’t the likely significant cost overruns save us many billion$ more?


  3. At the all-candidates debate in Chilliwack on Wednesday, BC Lib MLA Laurie Throness said he estimated $30 billion of our tax dollars is spent, annually, on those “most in need.”

    I suppose that qualifier could be stretched to describe almost any part of the spectrum. By context, he meant B.C’s poor and down-trodden — so the $30 billion figure was suspicious, in relation to the $9 billion for Site C.

    Norm, is there a handy link to the province’s yearly revenues and budgets?

    Thanks again for your continued efforts to educate BC residents.


      • Please don’t post this if I have this wrong — but I see BC’s annual revenue from all sources is around $50 billion… so “likely” that Mr. Throness was off by at least one zero. I heard him say the $30 billion figure and it is quoted in the Chilliwack Progress as well.


        • Given the previous bon mots inflicted on British Columbians by Throness, it is possible that the issue lies with who he views as “most in need”. Thirty billion dollars may not be far off the mark when you consider that his BC Liberal cronies have an insatiable need, and Christy always ushers them to the front of the line.


          • On rewinding the video I made of the event, I see Throness cast a VERY wide net in identifying the “most in need.” He included the total 19 billion healthcare budget, as well as transit and even roads — in addition to what we typically would think of as the most needy: the disabled, addicted and those on other social assistance.

            He didn’t get the full quote in the paper, so we’ll see if readers notice.


  4. This media you speak of couldn’t recognize what news is even when prompted. It’s a media relecting their opinions and these opinions are nothing news. Hugh McNab


  5. Good article about the Site C. A crazy corruption of the our collective state. What about the private/public boondoggles yet to be realized?


  6. Norm, thank you for your well written and thoughtful articles on this blog, it is a trove of treasures for me! I feel the whole world is watching British Columbia at this time. I maintain that the ‘Pacific Strategy Gateway Plan’ designed by provincial and federal politicians is not for our good. It is purely for pushing out fossil fuel product as fast as possible. In 2012, I went back to school after my second career, motherhood! I attended UAPICBC, UA 170’s private school for piping. I was successful in attaining my foundation in welding. I enjoyed it although it was very challenging physically and mentally. All the students had their eyes set on pipelines, getting their training as fast as possible and going out into the field. It was all about the money. I feel the PSGP is all about the money. I welded for art, I learned for my own education and for having a useful skill to offer others. CC’s plans for jobs in BC are not attainable as they are based on a dying economy.


Leave a reply but be on topic and civil.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s