DOCSLIB.ORG

Unplugging the Dirty Energy Economy / Ii

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Unplugging the Dirty Energy Economy / Ii Polaris Institute, June 2015 The Polaris Institute is a public interest research organization based in Canada. Since 1997 Polaris has been dedicated to developing tools and strategies to take action on major public policy issues, including the corporate power that lies behind public policy making, on issues of energy security, water rights, climate change, green economy and global trade. Acknowledgements This Profile was researched and written by Mehreen Amani Khalfan, with additional research from Richard Girard, Daniel Cayley-Daoust, Erin Callary, Alexandra Bly and Brianna Aird. Special thanks to Heather Milton-Lightening and Clayton Thomas-Muller for their contributions. Cover design by Spencer Mann. This project was made possible through generous support from the European Climate Fund Polaris Institute 180 Metcalfe Street, Suite 500 Ottawa, ON K2P 1P5 Phone: 613-237-1717 Fax: 613-237-3359 Email: [email protected] www.polarisinstitute.org i / Polaris Institute Table of Contents SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................................. 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 CHAPTER 1 - ORGANIZATIONAL PROFILE ............................................................................................................... 6 1.1 TRANSCANADA’S BUSINESS STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS ............................................................................................... 7 1.1.1 Gas Pipelines ................................................................................................................................................ 7 1.1.2 Liquids Pipelines ......................................................................................................................................... 10 1.1.3 Energy ........................................................................................................................................................ 11 1.2 EXECUTIVES ........................................................................................................................................................... 14 1.3 NOTABLE ADVISORS, EMPLOYEES, AND FORMER EXECUTIVES AND BOARD MEMBERS ............................................................ 14 1.4 TRANSCANADA’S BOARD OF DIRECTORS ..................................................................................................................... 16 1.5 UNIVERSITY & COLLEGE LINKS AND DONATIONS ........................................................................................................... 19 1.5.1 First Nations/Aboriginal grants and scholarships ...................................................................................... 20 1.6 LEGAL HISTORY (SELECTED CASES) ............................................................................................................................. 21 1.7 GOVERNMENT AGENCIES THAT REGULATE TRANSCANADA’S PROJECTS .............................................................................. 25 CHAPTER 2 - ECONOMIC PROFILE ........................................................................................................................ 27 2.1 FINANCIAL RESULTS ................................................................................................................................................ 27 2.2 TRANSCANADA’S FINANCIAL VULNERABILITIES ............................................................................................................. 28 2.3 ECONOMIC VULNERABILITIES OF THE PIPELINE INDUSTRY ................................................................................................ 29 2.4. DIVESTMENT TOOLS ............................................................................................................................................... 30 2.5 TRANSCANADA’S MAIN CUSTOMERS AND MARKETS ....................................................................................................... 31 2.6 MAIN COMPETITORS ............................................................................................................................................... 32 2.7 FUTURE PLANS ....................................................................................................................................................... 33 2.7.1 Expansion Projects - Canada ...................................................................................................................... 34 2.7.2 Expansion Projects – United States ............................................................................................................ 38 2.7.3 Expansion Projects – Mexico ...................................................................................................................... 39 2.7.4 Expansion Projects – South America .......................................................................................................... 39 2.8 JOINT VENTURE PARTNERSHIPS ................................................................................................................................. 40 2.9 CLIMATE CHANGE STRATEGY – CARBON CAPTURE AND STORAGE .................................................................................... 40 CHAPTER 3 - POLITICAL PROFILE .......................................................................................................................... 41 3.1 TRANSCANADA’S LOBBYING DISCLOSURES IN CANADA ................................................................................................... 41 3.1.1 Federal Lobbying Topics ............................................................................................................................. 42 3.1.2 Cabinet Ministers and other notable meetings .......................................................................................... 42 3.1.3 Consultant lobbyists ................................................................................................................................... 45 3.1.4 Lobbying in Canada’s Provinces and Municipalities ................................................................................... 45 3.2 HOW CANADIAN GOVERNMENTS LOBBY IN SUPPORT OF TRANSCANADA ........................................................................... 46 3.2.1 Alberta’s support to TransCanada ............................................................................................................. 47 3.2.2 How Industry defeated tar sands legislation in the US .............................................................................. 48 3.3 TRANSCANADA’S LOBBYING IN THE US ....................................................................................................................... 48 3.3.1 Support from Industry Groups, Oil Companies and the Koch Brothers ...................................................... 49 3.3.2 TransCanada’s lobbying in Nebraska (dollar figures in USD) ..................................................................... 50 3.4 THE REVOLVING DOOR ............................................................................................................................................ 51 Unplugging the Dirty Energy Economy / ii 3.5 INDUSTRY ASSOCIATIONS ......................................................................................................................................... 51 3.5.1 Canadian based Industry Associations ....................................................................................................... 52 3.5.2 U.S. based industry associations ................................................................................................................ 53 3.5.3 Mexican based industry associations ......................................................................................................... 54 3.6 ‘PUBLIC INTEREST’ AND ASTROTURF GROUPS ............................................................................................................... 54 3.6.1 Advertising, PR Firms and Law Firms ......................................................................................................... 55 3.6.2 TransCanada’s engineered positive environmental reviews of Keystone XL .............................................. 58 3.7 CORPORATE WELFARE ............................................................................................................................................. 58 3.8 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ..................................................................................................................................... 59 3.8.1 Municipalities, Local Organizations and the Public.................................................................................... 60 3.8.2 Local Resistance to Regulators ................................................................................................................... 61 3.8.3 Open Houses and the ‘General Public’ ....................................................................................................... 61 3.8.4 Land Acquisition and Landowner Consultation .......................................................................................... 62 3.8.5 Aboriginal Groups ...................................................................................................................................... 64 3.8.6 TransCanada’s Aboriginal Engagement
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Enbridge Responses to ADOE IR No. 1 Page 1 of 4 Transcanada
    Enbridge Responses to ADOE IR No. 1 Page 1 of 4 TransCanada Keystone Pipeline GP Ltd. (“Keystone”) Keystone XL Pipeline Application OH-1-2009 Responses to The Alberta Department of Energy Information Request No. 1 to Enbridge Pipelines Inc. (“Enbridge”) 1.1 Reference: Written Evidence of Enbridge Pipelines Inc., dated July 30, 2009 including the attached Muse Stancil Report and CAPP June 2009 report Preamble: We understand Enbridge’s evidence indicates that generally: (1) an additional one million b/d of take-away capacity from Western Canada on the Keystone Pipeline and the Enbridge system will be built by 2010; (2) while a certain level of excess pipeline capacity is advantageous, the advantage reverses when the cost of capacity outweighs the netback benefits; (3) the Keystone XL Pipeline project would create an unnecessary and unprecedented level of excess pipeline capacity between Western Canada and U.S. markets; (4) if Keystone XL is placed into service in late 2012, it will offload volumes from the Enbridge system; (5) this off loading will increase Enbridge system shippers’ costs, shipping between Edmonton and Chicago, by Cdn$315 million (Cdn$0.75 per barrel); (6) impact could be greater if volume shipped on either base Keystone or Keystone XL were more than contracted volumes; (7) Enbridge asked Muse Stancil to estimate aggregate net benefit to Canada of the Keystone XL Pipeline and Muse Stancil estimates it would only be US$102 million in 2013, as compared to Purvin & Gertz Inc. estimate of $3.4 billion benefit to Canadian heavy crude producers alone; (8) Enbridge is advancing the “Gretna Option” as a modification the Keystone XL Pipeline; (9) the Gretna Option would reduce the capital cost of the Keystone XL Pipeline by approximately US$2 billion and would reduce tolls on Enbridge system by about Cdn$0.35 per barrel; Enbridge Responses to ADOE IR No.
    [Show full text]
  • Keystone Pipeline System Keystone Pipeline System
    Keystone Pipeline System Keystone Pipeline System Keystone Pipeline System An innovative and cost-competitive solution to a growing North American demand for energy, the Keystone Pipeline System will link a reliable and stable source of Canadian crude oil with U.S. demand. Upon completion, the Keystone Pipeline System will be comprised of the 2,151- mile (3,461-kilometre) Keystone Pipeline and the proposed 1,661-mile (2,673-kilometre) Keystone Gulf Coast Expansion Project (Keystone XL). TransCanada affiliates will build and operate the Keystone Pipeline System in four phases. Keystone Pipeline (Phase I) Originating at Hardisty, Alta., Keystone Phase I transports crude oil to U.S. Midwest markets at Wood River and Patoka, Ill. Keystone Phase I began commercial operation in June 2010. The Canadian portion of Keystone Phase I involved the conversion of approximately 537 miles (864 kilometres) of existing TransCanada pipeline in Saskatchewan and Manitoba from natural gas to crude oil transmission service. Along with the construction of 16 pump stations Edmonton and approximately 232 miles (373 kilometres) of new pipeline in Canada, new facilities were also required Hardisty Alberta at the Keystone Hardisty Terminal, including: three Saskatchewan operational storage tanks, an initiating pump station, Calgary Regina Manitoba and interconnections with existing pipeline systems in the Winnipeg Ontario Hardisty area. The U.S. portion of the Keystone Pipeline included the North Dakota Helena construction of 1,084 miles (1,744 kilometres) of new, 30- Bismarck Minnesota inch diameter pipeline and 23 pump stations throughout Montana North Dakota, South Dakota, Kansas, Missouri, and Illinois. Pierre Wisconsin Michigan South Dakota Wyoming Keystone Cushing Extension (Phase II) Iowa Chicago Measuring approximately 298 miles (480 kilometres) in Nebraska length,Ohio Keystone Phase II is an extension of Keystone Phase Lincoln Illinois Indiana I from Steele City, Neb., to Cushing, Okla.
    [Show full text]
  • Pipeline Politics: Capitalism, Extractivism, and Resistance in Canada
    Pipeline Politics: Capitalism, Extractivism, and Resistance in Canada Kristian Gareau A Thesis in the Individualized Program Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Masters of Arts (Individualized Program) at Concordia University Montréal, Québec, Canada December 2016 © Kristian Gareau, 2016 CONCORDIA UNIVERSITY School of Graduate Studies This is to certify that the thesis prepared By: Kristian Gareau Entitled: Pipeline Politics: Capitalism, Extractivism, and Resistance in Canada and submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts (Individualized Program) complies with the regulations of the University and meets the accepted standards with respect to originality and quality. Signed by the final examining committee: ______Ketra Schmitt_____________________ Chair _____ Satoshi Ikeda_____________________ Examiner ______Warren Linds_____________________ Examiner ______Katja Neves______________________ Supervisor Approved by _______________________________________________ Chair of Department or Graduate Program Director _______________________________________________ Dean of Faculty Date December 12th, 2016______________________________ ABSTRACT Pipeline Politics: Capitalism, Extractivism, and Resistance in Canada Kristian Gareau Economic and political pressures to extract Canada’s oil sands—among the most carbon- intensive and polluting fossil fuels on the planet—have increased manifold, while heightened risks of toxic spills, climate change, and environmental degradation
    [Show full text]
  • Regulation of Access to Oil Pipelines 777
    REGULATION OF ACCESS TO OIL PIPELINES 777 THE NATIONAL ENERGY BOARD: REGULATION OF ACCESS TO OIL PIPELINES JENNIFER HOCKING* In the past few years, a number of long-distance oil pipelines have been proposed in Canada — Northern Gateway, the Trans Mountain Expansion, Keystone, and the Energy East Project. This article describes the criteria used by the National Energy Board in approving the allocation of capacity in oil pipelines to firm service contracts while requiring that a reasonable percentage of capacity is allocated for uncommitted volumes (common carriage). It explains the economic theory related to regulation of access to major oil pipelines. It reviews and analyzes relevant NEB decisions, which show that the NEB supports well- functioning competitive markets, but will exercise its discretion to resolve complaints where markets are not functioning properly. The article also explains the economic significance of the proposed long-distance oil pipelines to Canada and Alberta despite the current low price of crude oil. The article concludes with recommendations for a written NEB policy regarding access to capacity in oil pipelines. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. SIGNIFICANCE OF PROPOSED OIL PIPELINES TO THE CANADIAN ECONOMY ................................. 778 A. PIPELINES NEEDED DESPITE LOW PRICE OF OIL ............... 780 B. SHIPPING OF OIL BY RAIL ................................ 781 II. OIL PIPELINES AS COMMON CARRIERS ........................... 781 A. THE NATURE OF COMMON CARRIERS ....................... 781 B. COMMON CARRIAGE OBLIGATION SUBJECT TO REASONABLENESS TEST ............................... 783 C. WHY WERE OIL PIPELINES ORIGINALLY DESIGNATED AS COMMON CARRIERS? ................................. 784 III. MAJOR LONG-DISTANCE OIL PIPELINES TODAY ................... 785 A. ENBRIDGE PIPELINES .................................... 786 B. TRANS MOUNTAIN PIPELINE .............................. 787 C. SPECTRA ENERGY EXPRESS-PLATTE .......................
    [Show full text]
  • ABOUT PIPELINES OUR ENERGY CONNECTIONS the Facts About Pipelines
    ABOUT PIPELINES OUR ENERGY CONNECTIONS THE facts ABOUT PIPELINES This fact book is designed to provide easy access to information about the transmission pipeline industry in Canada. The facts are developed using CEPA member data or sourced from third parties. For more information about pipelines visit aboutpipelines.com. An electronic version of this fact book is available at aboutpipelines.com, and printed copies can be obtained by contacting [email protected]. The Canadian Energy Pipeline Association (CEPA) CEPA’s members represents Canada’s transmission pipeline companies transport around who operate more than 115,000 kilometres of 97 per cent of pipeline in Canada. CEPA’s mission is to enhance Canada’s daily the operating excellence, business environment and natural gas and recognized responsibility of the Canadian energy transmission pipeline industry through leadership and onshore crude credible engagement between member companies, oil production. governments, the public and stakeholders. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Canada’s Pipeline Network .................................1 2. Pipeline Design and Standards .........................6 3. Safety and the Environment ..............................7 4. The Regulatory Landscape ...............................11 5. Fuelling Strong Economic ................................13 and Community Growth 6. The Future of Canada’s Pipelines ................13 Unless otherwise indicated, all photos used in this fact book are courtesy of CEPA member companies. CANADA’S PIPELINE % of the energy used for NETWORK transportation in Canada comes 94 from petroleum products. The Importance of • More than half the homes in Canada are Canada’s Pipelines heated by furnaces that burn natural gas. • Many pharmaceuticals, chemicals, oils, Oil and gas products are an important part lubricants and plastics incorporate of our daily lives.
    [Show full text]
  • Core 1..196 Hansard (PRISM::Advent3b2 10.50)
    CANADA House of Commons Debates VOLUME 144 Ï NUMBER 025 Ï 2nd SESSION Ï 40th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Friday, March 6, 2009 Speaker: The Honourable Peter Milliken CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) Also available on the Parliament of Canada Web Site at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 1393 HOUSE OF COMMONS Friday, March 6, 2009 The House met at 10 a.m. Some hon. members: Yes. The Speaker: The House has heard the terms of the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Prayers Some hon. members: Agreed. (Motion agreed to) GOVERNMENT ORDERS Mr. Mark Warawa (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment, CPC) moved that Bill C-17, An Act to Ï (1005) recognize Beechwood Cemetery as the national cemetery of Canada, [English] be read the second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development. NATIONAL CEMETERY OF CANADA ACT He said: Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by seeking unanimous Hon. Jay Hill (Leader of the Government in the House of consent to share my time. Commons, CPC): Mr. Speaker, momentarily, I will be proposing a motion by unanimous consent to expedite passage through the The Speaker: Does the hon. member have unanimous consent to House of an important new bill, An Act to recognize Beechwood share his time? Cemetery as the national cemetery of Canada. However, before I Some hon. members: Agreed. propose my motion, which has been agreed to in advance by all parties, I would like to take a quick moment to thank my colleagues Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Alberta Hansard
    Province of Alberta The 27th Legislature Fifth Session Alberta Hansard Monday, March 12, 2012 Issue 15 The Honourable Kenneth R. Kowalski, Speaker Legislative Assembly of Alberta The 27th Legislature Fifth Session Kowalski, Hon. Ken, Barrhead-Morinville-Westlock, Speaker Cao, Wayne C.N., Calgary-Fort, Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees Zwozdesky, Gene, Edmonton-Mill Creek, Deputy Chair of Committees Ady, Cindy, Calgary-Shaw (PC) Kang, Darshan S., Calgary-McCall (AL), Allred, Ken, St. Albert (PC) Official Opposition Whip Amery, Moe, Calgary-East (PC) Klimchuk, Hon. Heather, Edmonton-Glenora (PC) Anderson, Rob, Airdrie-Chestermere (W), Knight, Mel, Grande Prairie-Smoky (PC) Wildrose Opposition House Leader Leskiw, Genia, Bonnyville-Cold Lake (PC) Benito, Carl, Edmonton-Mill Woods (PC) Liepert, Hon. Ron, Calgary-West (PC) Berger, Hon. Evan, Livingstone-Macleod (PC) Lindsay, Fred, Stony Plain (PC) Bhardwaj, Naresh, Edmonton-Ellerslie (PC) Lukaszuk, Hon. Thomas A., Edmonton-Castle Downs (PC) Bhullar, Hon. Manmeet Singh, Calgary-Montrose (PC) Lund, Ty, Rocky Mountain House (PC) Blackett, Lindsay, Calgary-North West (PC) MacDonald, Hugh, Edmonton-Gold Bar (AL) Blakeman, Laurie, Edmonton-Centre (AL), Marz, Richard, Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills (PC) Official Opposition Deputy Leader, Mason, Brian, Edmonton-Highlands-Norwood (ND), Official Opposition House Leader Leader of the ND Opposition Boutilier, Guy C., Fort McMurray-Wood Buffalo (W) McFarland, Barry, Little Bow (PC) Brown, Dr. Neil, QC, Calgary-Nose Hill (PC) McQueen, Hon. Diana, Drayton Valley-Calmar (PC) Calahasen, Pearl, Lesser Slave Lake (PC) Mitzel, Len, Cypress-Medicine Hat (PC) Campbell, Robin, West Yellowhead (PC), Morton, Hon. F.L., Foothills-Rocky View (PC) Government Whip Notley, Rachel, Edmonton-Strathcona (ND), Chase, Harry B., Calgary-Varsity (AL) ND Opposition House Leader Dallas, Hon.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Response Canada
    Take Action NowJUNE 2013 Global Response Campaign Alert Canada Gathered at Teztan Biny: Xeni Gwet’in Elder and Healer Gilbert Solomon, Xeni Gwet’in Councillor Marilyn Baptiste, Xeni Gwet’in Youth Tamara William, Kwicksutaineuk Ah-kwa-mish First Nation Chief Bob Chamberlin, and Peyel Laceese, a youth from Tl’esqox (Toosey Indian Band). Photo by Garth Lenz, www.garthlenz.com Canada Save Teztan Biny (Fish Lake)—Again! he lands of the Tsilhqot’in Nation, whose name means “People of the River,” are rich in history, natural beauty, and abundance. Situated on the Chilcotin Plateau of south central British Columbia, Canada, the Tsilhqot’in Nation encom- Tpasses a wide range of forests, rivers, grasslands, and pristine glacial lakes, including Teztan Biny, commonly called 'JTI-BLF CFDBVTFPGJUTVOJRVFBCVOEBODFPGåTIJUJTIPNFUPBCPVU 3BJOCPX5SPVU*UJTBMTPBQMBDFPGFOPSNPVT cultural and spiritual signi!cance for the Tsilhqot’in Nation, where generations have traditionally come to !sh, trap, skin, and gather as a community. “If they put an open pit mine here it would be just like cutting somebody’s heart out,” says Edmund Lulua of the Xeni Gwet’in community. That’s exactly what Vancouver-based Taseko Mines Limited plans to do: a massive open pit gold and copper mine with a tailings pond just two kilometers upstream from Teztan Biny, the proposed “New Prosperity” mine would turn Teztan Biny into a lake on life support. The Tsilhqot’in have already saved their lake once. After more than two decades !ghting for their land rights, people from all walks of life have stood alongside the Tsilhqot’in. Jim Prentice, then Canada’s minister of the environment, rejected an earlier iteration of the project, which had planned to drain the trout-!lled lake and use it as a waste dump.
    [Show full text]
  • Alaska Natural Gas Transportation System (ANGTS)
    Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Proposals (North Slope to Market) Chronology of Events: 1984- by Betty Galbraith 7/15/09 March 7, 1984 The Joint Oil and Gas Committee met to receive briefings on the status of transporting and marketing North slope natural gas. Yukon Pacific Corporation's TAGS project for exporting gas to Pacific Rim countries was discussed as an alternative to ANGTS. March 10, 1984 Legislative digest: A Forecast and Review reported that testimony before the Alaska Joint House-Senate Oil and Gas Committees indicated that natural gas markets in the U.S. and elsewhere would have to improve substantially before financing of the gas pipeline could be financed. Dec 15, 1984 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issued an order conditionally approving an extension of the importation of natural gas from Canada for another 4 year period. April 3, 1986 HCR 8 encouraging the Governor to consider a gas pipeline from the North Slope to Fairbanks with spurs to other communities as an alternative to other energy proposals, passed to become Alaska Legislative Resolve 36 Nov 1, 1986 The Bureau of Land Management published a notice in the Federal Register, of their intent to prepare an environmental impact statement for the TAGS pipeline proposal. Dec 5, 1986 Yukon Pacific Corporation issued its Trans-Alaska Gas System Project Description. The project involved a pipeline to transport North Slope gas to tidewater, a facility in the Valdez area to liquefy the gas for ocean transport to Asia. The project would be phased in over a period of years. Dec 5, 1986 Yukon Pacific Corporation filed an application with the Bureau of Land Management and the Army Corps of Engineers to construct a large diameter pipeline between Prudhoe Bay and Anderson Bay (Valdez) to export LNG.
    [Show full text]
  • Government of Alberta News Release
    Government of Alberta News Release October 6, 1997 Edmonton, Alberta "Education, like the society it serves, must continue to evolve to meet the needs of students in a changing world. It is vital we work together-sharing common concerns, ideas and opportunities to address the increasing globalization of our economies and cultures." Gary G. Mar Minister of Education Global education the focus of Asian trip Gary Mar, Minister of Education, will be travelling to Japan to attend the Pacific Education Conference with an Alberta delegation of 33 students, teachers and parents as part of the Premier's Mission to Asia, October 7 - 23. The conference, held October 14 and 15, is the first of its kind and will bring together participants from Japan, the United States, Australia and Alberta. Mar will also travel to China, including Hong Kong. He will be promoting both the Alberta and Canadian education systems, and meeting with leaders to share Alberta's experiences and successes, as well as discussing global issues facing education. Alberta educational institutions are well recognized throughout the world for their high quality and standards. About 1400 foreign students studied in Alberta high schools last year and about 2491foreign students attended Alberta universities and colleges in 1994 - 1995. The Minister's trip to Japan will also include meetings with the Governor of Hokkaido, senior officials of the Hokkaido and Sapporo Boards of Education, visits to schools, and participation in the Canadian Education Fairs in Tokyo and Hong Kong. In Hong Kong, Mar will participate as a panel member at the Corporate Training Forum on October 17, giving an address on Canadian education initiatives in Asia.
    [Show full text]
  • Border Crossings of Natural Gas Pipelines, North America Cruces Fronterizos De Ductos De Gas Natural, América Del Norte
    140°E 150°E 160°E 170°E 180° 170°W 160°W 150°W 140°W 130°W 120°W 110°W 100°W 90°W 80°W 70°W 60°W 50°W 40°W 30°W 20°W 10°W Border Crossings of Natural Gas Pipelines, North America Cruces Fronterizos de Ductos de Gas Natural, América del Norte E l l e s m e r e I s l a n d 70°N Passages Transfrontaliers de Pipelines de Gaz Naturel, Amérique du Nord Í l e d u E l l e s m e r e 70°N 60°N A l a s k a 60°N N o r t h w e s t Te r r i t o r i e s Yu k o n Te r r i t o i r e s d u N o r d - O u e s t N u n a v u t 50°N 26 N e w f o u n d l a n d a n d L a b r a d o r 50°N 25 Te r r e - N e u v e e t - L a b r a d o r A l b e r t a 23 B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a S a s k a t c h e w a n P a c i f i c C o l o m b i e - B r i t a n n i q u e Ve r m o n t M a n i t o b a 24 40°N O c e a n 22 N e w O n t a r i o Q u é b e c P r i n c e E d w a r d I s l a n d H aÎ ml e - d up P r isn c eh- É dio ura red 1 N e w 2 3 B r u n s w i c k 4 6 8 9 N o u v e a u 11 B r u n s w i c k O c é a n o 27 W a s h i n g t o n 7 P a c í f i c o 5 10 26 M a i n e 12 13 25 N o v a S c o t i a M o n t a n a N o u v e l l e - É c o s s e N o r t h D a k o t a 23 M i n n e s o t a Ve r m o n t 40°N N e w 24 H a m p s h i r e 22 M i c h i g a n 20 N e w M a s s a c h u s e t t s O r e g o n I d a h o W i s c o n s i n S o u t h D a k o t a 19 Yo r k A t l a n t i c 18 C o n n e c t i c u t 14 16 21 30°N O c é a n W y o m i n g R h o d e I s l a n d O c e a n 15 17 P e n n s y l v a n i a P a c i f i q u e N e b r a s k a I o w a N e w J e r s e y O h i o I n d i a n a M
    [Show full text]
  • SFU Thesis Template Files
    The Right to Authentic Political Communication by Ann Elizabeth Rees M.A., Simon Fraser University, 2005 B.A., Simon Fraser University, 1980 Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the School of Communication Faculty of Arts and Social Science Ann Elizabeth Rees 2016 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY Spring 2016 Approval Name: Ann Elizabeth Rees Degree: Doctor of Philosophy Title: The Right to Authentic Political Communication Examining Committee: Chair: Katherine Reilly, Assistant Professor Peter Anderson Senior Supervisor Associate Professor Catherine Murray Supervisor Professor Alison Beale Supervisor Professor Andrew Heard Internal Examiner Associate Professor Political Science Department Paul Thomas External Examiner Professor Emeritus Department of Political Studies University of Manitoba Date Defended/Approved: January 22, 2016 ii Abstract Increasingly, governments communicate strategically with the public for political advantage, seeking as Christopher Hood describes it to “avoid blame” and “claim credit” for the actions and decisions of governance. In particular, Strategic Political Communication (SPC) is becoming the dominant form of political communication between Canada’s executive branch of government and the public, both during elections and as part of a “permanent campaign” to gain and maintain public support as means to political power. This dissertation argues that SPC techniques interfere with the public’s ability to know how they are governed, and therefore undermines the central right of citizens in a democracy to legitimate elected representation by scrutinizing government and holding it to account. Realization of that right depends on an authentic political communication process that provides citizens with an understanding of government. By seeking to hide or downplay blameworthy actions, SPC undermines the legitimation role public discourse plays in a democracy.
    [Show full text]