What was your message at the meeting?
I’m just wondering what points you are trying to get across?
I’m looking at going to the Kitchener meeting this Friday.
Any input would be great.
(I tried to send this to the list server and it never seems to go
through).
Thanks.
Robert Brock
Telecom Administrator, MKS Inc., www.mks.com
Waterloo, ON, Canada
Tel: 519-883-3243 or 800-265-2796 x3243
Fax: 519-884-8861
From: cdn-nucl-l-admin@mailman1.cis.McMaster.CA [mailto:cdn-nucl-l-admin@mailman1.cis.McMaster.CA] On Behalf Of Andrew Daley
Sent: February 14, 2006 4:30 PM
To: 'Cdn-Nucl-LISTSERV (E-mail)'
Subject: Re: [cdn-nucl-l] Nuclear power proposal slammed in Ottawa
MY impression is that the downtown Toronto event was similar to the Ottawa event as opposed to the Missisauga event.
As mentioned previously there were, really, only two pro-nuclear speakers.
The same "interrupt the chair" theatrics were on display and the questioning of democracy.
!
However I think 250 "protesters" (there were quiet nuke supporters) in a city of how many million is actually a good proportion!
Plus when I was talking, the "shout outs", which were very un-democratic considering the opening thoughts were certainly present.
However I love that I was called an "ass" for stating facts.
Ahhh the world we live in.
"Brown, Morgan" <brownmj@aecl.ca> wrote:
A few of us went to Ottawa to the Ministry of Ottawa hearings. As Jeremy noted, Elizabeth May of the Sierra Club (?) leapt to the mike and interrupted the chair right off the bat, saying that an environmental assessment was the on! ly way to have sufficient time to speak. She evidently forgot that there has been an ongoing e-mail and write-in opportunity since Dec 9 (?) when the report was released. Ms May addressed the crowd (strongly partisan, or at least noisy, in favour of conservation [who wouldn't be] and anti-nuclear) to applause. A real soap box opportunity. She interrupted the process again later, with the same comments.
The deputy leader of the Green party said that the Ont gov't doesn't h!
ave a
hierarchy for the OPA plan (though the plan does!), and wanted the order of: conservation, then renewables, then "clean" fossil if necessary, but absolutely no nuclear. He said there is "no such thing as clean nuclear".
When a woman got up and spoke in favour of nuclear (she mentioned medical isotopes), John Bennett (I think) of the Sierra Club told her to "shut up" because she was "telling lies". Someone nearby said "She must be paid by the nuclear industry". These comments reiterated an earlier comment that the video produced by Donna Cansfield's ministry was flawed and full of misrepresentations (the video spelled out the needs, and the mult!
i-faceted
approach to Ont's electricity future). I thought it was very telling that people who, interspersed with their arguments, had been calling for democracy (i.e., saying these public consultations weren't democratic) were unwilling to allow anyone to speak who might be pro-nuclear.
Near the end a math prof expressed his deep concerns about the world his grandchildren faced, where they might be asphyxiated with pollution. Then he said his conclusion was the need for more nuclear.
I didn't speak at the microphone, I'm afraid, but I did pass some info on CANDU reliability to Ministry officials (and expressed my thanks to them for holding the forum). I (and the others) got into discussions with individuals, which was much more tame and worth the effort.
It was worthwhile attending, though it was a bit depressing to see some of the antics. I empathize with people who are concerned with the fate of the planet (that's why I'm in the nuclear field in the first place), but have a hard time reconciling emotional comments and abuse of the!
forum
chair with a cohesive rational process.
-----Original Message-----
From:
cdn-nucl-l-admin@mailman1.cis.McMaster.CA [mailto:cdn-nucl-l-admin@mailman1.cis.McMaster.CA]On Behalf Of McArthur, Randall
Sent: February 14, 2006 10:26 AM
To: 'Cdn-Nucl-LISTSERV (E-mail)'
Subject: RE: [cdn-nucl-l] " Nuclear power proposal not slammed in Mississa uga"
I interpret "slammed" as meaning overwhelming opposition. That is inaccurate as far as Mississauga is concerned. In terms of the floor time spent specifically on the topic of nuclear power, I had the impression that there was a reasonable mix of views
expressed. Randall McArthur
-----Original Message-----
From: cdn-nucl-l-admin@mailman1.cis.McMaster.CA [mailto:cdn-nucl-l-admin@mailman1.cis.McMaster.CA]On Behalf Of Franta, Jaroslav
Sent: February 14, 2006 9:50 AM
To: 'Cdn-Nucl-LISTSERV (E-mail)'
Subject: RE: [cdn-nucl-l] " Nuclear power proposal slammed "
I heard
similar comments from others too -- so would you say that PETER GORRIE AND MIKE FUNSTON's TO Star report was inaccurate ?
Jaro
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^!
-----Original Message-----
From: cdn-nucl-l-admin@mailman1.cis.McMaster.CA [mailto:cdn-nucl-l-admin@mailman1.cis.McMaster.CA]On Behalf Of McArthur, Randall
Sent: February 14, 2006 9:31 AM
To: 'Cdn-Nucl-LISTSERV (E-mail)'
Subject:!
RE:
[cdn-nucl-l] " Nuclear power proposal slammed "
On behalf of the Mississauga meeting, I had the impression that the nuclear presence was reasonably good, judging from the applause for the pro-nuclear statements.
! -----Original Message-----
From: cdn-nucl-l-admin@mailman1.cis.McMaster.CA [mailto:cdn-nucl-l-admin@mailman1.cis.McMaster.CA]On Behalf Of Adam Mclean
Sent: February 14, 2006 9:28 AM
To: 'Cdn-Nucl-LISTSERV (E-mail)'
Subject: RE: [cdn-nucl-l] " Nuclear power proposal slammed "
First off, hats off to the two brave souls that stepped up to the mic to inject some sense and a few tidbits of l! egitimacy to last night's proceedings. Even after 2 hours of anti-nuclear, anti-government, anti-corporate raving madness and propaganda, each point they made was still heckled, showing no respect or dignity to even allow the other side a chance to speak without interruption.
While it was a shame there were so few outspoken nuclear advocates at the mee!
ting,
which I hope will not happen at meetings today and tomorrow (come on people!), at least government figures that attended (local politicians and a number of people from the ministry of energy) had a proper introduction to how these people think - people that will not be happy until Ontario is supplying its power with solar! panels covering all the province's land north of Barrie (would that even be enough?), wind turbines surrounding and blanketing all the lakes, free appliances delivered to their door, all the corporations run out of the province, and the government dissolved.
From: cdn-nucl-l-admin@mailman1.cis.McMaster.CA [mailto:cdn-nucl-l-admin@mailman1.cis.McMaster.CA] On Behalf Of English, Michael
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 8:54 AM
To: Cdn-Nucl-LISTSERV (E-mail)
Subject: RE: [cdn-nucl-l!
] "
Nuclear power proposal slammed "
I hope you're right Jeremy, that the gov! ernment does recognize this as a scripted response. I hope as well that they see right through Dave Martin's comments that "We are getting three days of consultation this week on 11 days' notice and we are expected to produce comments off the cuff and we're being told this is good public consultation" and realize !
that 11
days notice is quite obviously ample time to not only organize 250 anti-nuclear activists at a Toronto meeting, but also to co-oridnate interruption of opening remarks at the same time at two separate public meetings.
I hope as well that the government realizes that while this scripted banter was happening, 15 nuclear units were quietly, efficiently, safely and economically generating better than 10,000 MWe of the 22,000-odd MWe of demand in the Ontario market the IESO was administering at the time.
-----Original Message-----
From: cdn-nucl-l-admin@mailman1.cis.McMaster.CA [mailto:cdn-nucl-l-admin@mailman1.cis.McMaster.CA]On Behalf Of Whitlock, Jeremy
Sent: February 14, 2006 8:28 AM
To: Cdn-Nucl-LISTSERV (E-mail)
Subject: RE: [cdn-nucl-l] " Nuclear power proposal slammed
"
I certainly hope the gov't recognizes a scripted response when the see one. The same thing happened in Ottawa last night, with Elizabeth May (Sierra Club) jumping u! p before the moderator was finished his opening remarks. Fortunately these actors and their scripts are well known. Unfortunately for the rest of us they hijack these events and limit the opportunity for real information to be shared (in both directions).
> -----Original Message----- > From: cdn-nucl-l-admin@mailman1.cis.McMaster.CA > [mailto:cdn-nucl-l-admin@mailman1.cis.McMaster.CA] On Behalf
Of Jaro > Sent: February 14, 2006 7:00 AM > To: multiple cdn > Subject: [cdn-nucl-l] " Nuclear power proposal slammed " > > > > http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thesta > r/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1139871011914&call_pageid! > =970599119419 > Nuclear power proposal slammed > Plan proposes $40B in!
new
Ontario stations Consultation > process described as a sham > Feb. 14, 2006. 01:00 AM > PETER GORRIE AND MIKE FUNSTON, STAFF REPORTERS >
| !
CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED INFORMATION NOTICE
This e-mail, and any attachments, may contain information that
is confidential, subject to copyright, or exempt from disclosure.
Any unauthorized review, disclosure, retransmission,
dissemination or other use of or reliance on this information
may be unlawful and is strictly prohibited.
AVIS D'INFORMATION CONFIDENTIELLE ET PRIVILÉGIÉE
Le présent courriel, et toute pièce jointe, peut contenir de
l'information qui est confidentielle, régie par les droits
d'auteur, ou interdite de divulgation. Tout examen,
divulgation,&nb!
sp;retran smission, diffusion ou autres utilisations
non autorisées de l'information ou dépendance non autorisée
envers celle-ci peut être illégale et est strictement interdite. |
|
CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED INFORMATION NOTICE
This e-mail, and any attachments, may contain information that
is confidential, subject to copyright, or exempt from disclosure.
Any unauthorized review, disclosure, retransmission,
dissemination or other use of or reliance on this information
may be unlawful and is strictly prohibited.
AVIS D'INFORMATION CONFIDENTIELLE ET PRIVILÉGIÉE
Le présent courriel, et toute pièce jointe, peut contenir de
l'information qui est confidentielle, régie par les droits
d'auteur, ou interdite de divulgation. Tout examen,
divulgation,!
&nb!
sp;retran smission, diffusion ou autres utilisations
non autorisées de l'information ou dépendance non autorisée
envers celle-ci peut être illégale et est strictement interdite.
|
|
CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED INFORMATION NOTICE
This e-mail, and any attachments, may contain information that
is confidential, subject to copyright, or exempt from disclosure.
Any unauthorized review, disclosure, retransmission,
dissemination or other use of or reliance on this information
may be unlawful and is strictly prohibited.
AVIS D'INFORMATION CONFIDENTIELLE ET PRIVILÉGIÉE
Le présent courriel, et toute pièce jointe, peut contenir de
l'information qui est confidentielle, régie par les droits
d'auteur, ou interdite de divulgation. Tout examen,
divulgation,!
&nb!
sp;retran smission, diffusion ou autres utilisations
non autorisées de l'information ou dépendance non autorisée
envers celle-ci peut être illégale et est strictement interdite.
|
Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos