Anyone who's been closely following the organized lobby against Canada's ethical oil sands knows that many of the ENGOs (Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations) here in Canada that have been attacking oil sands development are really front groups for big American trusts.
Vancouver researcher Vivian Krause has done excellent work at her blog, Fair Questions, exposing the millions of American dollars that have been funneled northward to fill the pockets of The David Suzuki Foundation and other groups campaigning against Canadian industry. The National Post has written about it here and here.
Vivian Krause's latest exposé reveals just how much money we're talking about: $116 million for just the top 20 grants from U.S. interests to Canadian eco-groups. As Krause writes:
Most of these grants are not among the most telling, nor do they constitute the bulk of the money that American foundations have paid to environmental organizations in Canada. However, what this list does indicate is just how big some of these grants are.
The anti-oil sands Canadian Boreal Initiative alone received US$60 million from U.S. funders.
There's nothing to suggest any of these quiet arrangements where foreigners fund supposedly "Canadian" groups to attack and lobby against Canadian industry are illegal. Whether they should be is another matter. But at the very least, Canadians should know more about them: When groups pretend they're standing up for Canadians, but are actually funded from American billionaires, they're deliberately misleading our citizens. (EthicalOil.org, by the way, accepts no foreign funding.)
Which is why it's great to hear the federal government suggest that it's interested in shining a little sunlight on the murky funding arrangements behind some of these purported "Canadian" ENGOs. As Krause reports on her blog, in an interview with Global TV Vancouver, Prime Minister Stephen Harper suggested that he'll ensure Canada's interests in the Northern Gateway project are "protected" against the influence of murky U.S. funders.
Here's what was said:
Prime Minister Stephen Harper: There are environmentalists who will oppose any of these projects. Obviously, there will be environmental assessments and there always have to be negotiations with First Nations but that all said, this is a critical and important project to Canada as a whole.
Global TV: Canadian opposition may not be the only stumbling block.Prime Minister Stephen Harper: I think we'll see significant American interests trying to line up against the Northern Gateway project, precisely because it's not in the interests of the United States. It's in the interests of Canada.
Global TV: Could they do anything to stop it?
Prime Minister Harper: Well, they'll funnel money through environmental groups and others in order to try to slow it down but, as I say, we'll make sure that the best interests of Canada are protected.
Earlier this month, former senior cabinet minister Jim Prentice told the Financial Post that he thought "environmental organizations based outside the country [should] be required to reveal who gives them funding when they participate in Canada's regulatory process to influence Canada's internal decisions."
We're glad to see the concerns over environmental false-flag operations are getting through to the highest levels in Ottawa. Canadians should be the ones making decisions about the oil sands. We understand the issue far better and only we can look out for our interests; certainly the Pew Charitable Trust and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund couldn't care less about the thousands of Canadian jobs at stake in the oil sands. When it's Canadian policy at issue, Canadians should be the ones in charge. It's great that our government understands that.
Follow Kathryn Marshall on Twitter: www.twitter.com/KVMarshall
Nicholas Ostroy: Alberta's Oil Sands: 'China or Bust!'
Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation sues Shell over oil sands funding
Canada natives sue Shell over oil sands funding
Walt Disney Stakes Claim After Oil Firm Adopts Famous Name
Gary Jason. US energy independence draws near
U of A adds six new research chairs
Energy industry set to cut funding for oil sands environmental watchdog
Using words like 'hijack' and other inflammatory jargon are simply ways to criminalize and discredit legitimate organization through nothing more than buzzwords. These criticisms seem to have little basis in fact.
Another hole in the pro-pipeline argument: allegations that environmental organizations are trying to destroy the Canadian economy and reduce Canadian jobs. If we don't step up and protect the environment, learning how to use our resources sustainably, there won't be anything left to hold up our economy. How long do these folks think the tarsands is going to last? How long can we afford to use 2 barrels of oil to extract 3? To pollute our groundwater and poison our communities through the development of the tarsands and dangerous oil transportation pipelines and tankers?
I have a question for Ms. Marshall: Why is it acceptable for the Canadian oil lobby to pour funds into influencing government process and attacking Canadian/American environmental groups but not the other way around?
The billionaire brothers who are waging a war against Obama.
Koch Brothers Positioned To Be Big Winners If Keystone XL Pipeline Is Approved
Koch Brothers To Spend At Least $200 Million On 2012 Election
Enviornmental Criminologist on the EPA, Koch brothers and Pollution
Koch owned Flint Hills Resources is intervenor in Northern Gateway Joint Review
Koch Subsidiary Told Regulators It Has 'Direct and Substantial Interest' in Keystone XL
Our mission is to work across all sectors—including the oil sands industry—to strike a balance between sustainable use and conservation of Canada’s boreal forest. We bring together Aboriginal communities, scientists, industry and environmental groups to promote balanced, durable solutions for one of the Earth’s most important ecosystems.
We believe that the Canadian public is simply better served by a rational, fact-based dialogues over the optimal role of development and conservation within the boreal region, and we encourage our critics to engage with us on that basis.
http://www.salon.com/2011/12/15/big_oil_and_canada_thwarted_u_s_carbon_standards/
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/10/koch-brothers-to-spend-at-least-200-million-on-2012-election.php
The Koch Brother’s Ties to GOP Presidential Candidates
http://globalwarmingisreal.com/2011/12/07/the-koch-brothers-ties-to-gop-presidential-candidates/
So helping to educate Canadians on the environmental damage caused by exploiting the tar sands isn't in the public's interest? Also, with the billions being invested by foreign companies to develop the tar sands, $100 million spent pointing out flaws with the process seems like a drop in the bucket. I'm not sure why it matters where the funding comes from - you make it sound like these environmental groups are subverting the political process, when in reality it's quite the opposite.
"do we continue to buy Conflict Oil from politically oppressive and environmentally reckless regimes"(taken from the ethical oil website)
Politically oppressive and environmentally reckless seem to describe the Harper Government perfectly, I hope you move quickly to discourage the international community from buying our oil and propping up the current regime.
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2009/03/canadian-oil-sands/kunzig-text/
http://climate-connections.org/2011/10/10/tar-sands-the-ethical-oil-bait-and-switch/
FAIL.
This read's like a paid ad for 'ethicaloil' and not a factual article, which is likely why they are moderating out every post I have made noting such.
http://www.desmogblog.com/
How does Exxon fund, greenpeace or greenwar?
But I take it the gist of your tale is the bogeyman of 'FOREIGN INTERESTS' involved in what you conveniently see as a 'Canadian only matter'? You single out the highly respected David Suzuki Foundation as one that receives such funds and "...other groups campaigning against CANADIAN INDUSTRY" (My caps)
Lets do a comparison of foreign funds between Canadian Eco-groups (who got a paltry 116 million by your account) and this "Canadian Industry"
Over 20 Billion dollars of foreign money (US, French, UK, China, Thailand, Korea and Norwegian) has being invested in the tar sands and that investment will increase. China's 5.5 billion is funding the proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline & that will increase upon approval. China's 1.9 billion bought Athabasca Oil Sands projects. Korea's 4.1 billion bought Calgary's Harvest Energy Trust, plus more money to buy Black Gold Oil Sands leases. The Koch brothers, have Koch Exploration Canada Corporation and are major players on the Keystone XL Pipeline.
This is your 'Canadian Industry" and a Canadian only matter?
1,000 million = 1 billion & a low estimate right now is about 20 billion foreign dollars (and growing) in the tar sands (your idea of ethical oil) But you are outraged by the Environmental groups fighting this Canadian environmental nightmare because they received 116 million dollars from environmental support groups and charities from the US? Excuse me?
By who?
Close exposure to big business and industry in particular shows me quite clearly that the best performance (read large profit/least expense stop looking for more measurements) by the next quarter is incompatible with life in general. This way of thinking isn't even in the best interest of the business. Narrow minded measurements of success really benefit greedy amoral people within the business that can use the numbers to generate justification to increase personal income and power.
On the flip side oil itself is not evil of it's own accord. When we use the wrong criteria in deciding how to get it and use it we are making decisions much like deciding how and when to use a gun.
Anybody else getting censored for discussing the pm, free speech, and surveillance?
LMAO! Harper protect Canada from "American influence" ? Harper IS American influence !!
How come when American companies back oilsand development it's business as usual, but when American environmental groups oppose development it's influence peddling ?
Does the writer not understand the simple concept that some Americans want Canadian oil, and some Americans don't want to see a pipeline run across their country ? Is that so unconceivable ?
Developing the oilsands IS IN AMERICAS INTEREST. They want our oil. The people who oppose the pipeline don't oppose it because they don't want the refining jobs we'll send them, they oppose it because they see oilsand development as high source of pollution and won't want a risky (risky as in they occasionally burst) pipeline run some across their country.
To me it's simple. If we are going to develop the oilsands, it should be refined in Canada and used in Canadian markets and that's it. We can stop wasting our money on foreign oil and give Canadians jobs at the same time. If others want our oil, too bad, it's not for you. Overdeveloping our oilsands will bear too heavy burden on our environment, so beyond filling Canadas oil demands, I wouldn't develop it further.