[thymebalm]

Originally Posted by Chill Cosby

The only thing I don't really feel you've answered (that I'm honestly just curious about) is why now?

Murray didn't cause the spill. Everyone knows that, but he was financially involved with the company that did. That's undeniable.

That much I understand. I gather that you're upset that Murray is involved with a company that can have a negative environmental impact. This however, isn't new or different than anything that has been happening for more than a decade. That's where you lose me.

He has more involvement than anyone in the oilsands. Tailing ponds are nothing new to him, and have been destroying the environment in Northern Alberta for years.

So why now? You said it wasn't about it being close to you, so why haven't the critically damaging oilsands, which Murray has been far more personally involved in than Imperial Metals, been the source of your moral dilemma?

I wasn't aware (and am still not fully aware) of Edwards track record environmentally speaking. As his name appears in the newspaper and I get more information that helps me make my decision.

I'm not ashamed to admit that I didn't know until this week that his company CNRL had 4 (possibly more) pipeline leaks in the last year. I'm glad that the current incident prompted me to further investigate his portfolio so I can weigh it against my own moral compass. It's a tragedy that a public figure like Edwards isn't pressured by the public more to protect the land he profits so greatly from.

So, why now? Because sometimes you wind up looking a little closer at things following a disaster. Education and information.. it's an ongoing process of discovery. It was the disaster that prompted me to look closer at the connection between Flames ownership and their dealing with the environment. Had I been hit hard with connection last year, or ten years ago, I may not have reacted the same. As I carve my own ethical path, decisions that were once easy or irrelevant to me become more complicated.

I didn't understand the impact my consumption has ten years ago the same way I understand it today. I feel the need to add here that I expect my understanding to continue to change as I grow, my relationship with the planet changes, and as the world around me grows as well.

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Maybe you missed it.

But there have been several posters now who have asked you about how and why you have determined Murray Edwards' own personal culpability in this disaster, and what you know about his own direct involvement in the day-to-day operations of Imperial Metals, and if this at all matters to you.

Edwards' culpability in this is yet to be determined. In fact, when I first asked the question of what do I do about this dilemma, I think the best advice I was given was to wait. That it was still too early to determine fault.

What is being uncovered day by day is that Edwards was not passive in his connection with Imperial Metals. It is starting to appear as though he heavily financed a political party who then changed the province's mining legislation to appease corps like Imperial Metals.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/dermodt...ef=bc-politics

This weekend, the Vancouver Sun reported that Alberta billionaire Murray Edwards helped organize a $1 million fundraiser for the B.C. Liberal party at the Calgary Petroleum Club last year. Rapidly becoming a household name in B.C., Edwards of course is the controlling shareholder of Imperial Metals, which operates the Mount Polley Mine.

...

Since 2005, Imperial Metals has donated at least $149,890 to the B.C. Liberals. With a win, place and show wager, that total includes $2,500 to each of the leadership campaigns of Christy Clark, Kevin Falcon and George Abbott. It also tossed $3,000 into the kitty for Bill Bennett's 2009 re-election campaign.

Mount Polley got in on the action as well, with the mine topping up donations to the Liberals by $46,720.
...

The article goes on to discuss how following a presentation from Imperial Metals in 2012 the BC Liberals started to change their attitudes about environmental protections needed to be hurdled to start a mine...

This past January in a speech to the B.C. Association for Mineral Exploration, Premier Clark took it further, promising a review of B.C.'s environmental assessment office to make it "more effective and efficient," claiming that "over the years, the environmental assessment process has gotten so long, so difficult and so complex that communities, proponents, can't get a yes, can't get a no."

We are starting to look back and question how all this money influenced our political figures, environmental protections, and mining policies.

At this stage I think its fair to say Edwards' culpability based on his actions and influence is higher than 0%. I can't hold him directly accountable for the breach, I know he didn't jump up and down on the dam to break it, and I know it's not in his best interests to have his mine fail so tragically.

But its fair to question how Edwards business practices created an environment with less protection, less regulation, and ultimately, made it easier for his own mine to fail.

Others have asked about why this specific tragedy has precipitated this sudden response, especially in light of the environmental impact that oil sands extraction has had in the North for decades now—a business that Edwards is much more clearly directly involved in.

Hopefully answered above.

Further, there have been questions posed to you about how you imagine the NHL is at all involved. Why should they respond and how, and on what basis should they involve themselves in matters that do not pertain to their own business?

I don't see the NHL as being directly involved. But I believe they could become involved. The connection I'm making to the league is that to me it seems flimsy to release a big report about how important the environment is to the sustainability of your business, while your ownership group involves themselves in activities that can and do have such negative impacts on the environment you are attempting to steward.

In the same way the Clippers ex-owner was canned for something that had nothing to do with the NBA, the league has an image to maintain, and the NHL has included environmentalism in that image.

You have been heavy handed in your delivery of ire and blame, but not so much in your measure of reason.

I find you much more fun to read when you play your text-critic game with other posters, but I hope I answered your questions.