First off, you should understand that if British Columbia wanted the pipeline Alberta's hoping to build, I wouldn't say anything.

I think it's B.C's decision to make though.

I don't like the pipeline.

BC can be thought of as a giant mountain range, and stretching a massive pipeline across a giant mountain range, perhaps by hiring people who have closely studied the magic bullet that shot JFK to design it, is too risky, in my opinion, but I'm sure it can be done and that some brilliant minds are currently working on it, nevertheless.

If the people of BC wanted the pipeline, I would perhaps make a comment or two but would accept their decision as a matter of democratic citizenship and quietly move on.

The same logic applies to the oil sands in Alberta.

I made my peace with the oil sands years ago.

I decided that if Alberta wants to decrease oil sand's production, which is incredibly harmful to the environment, it's up to Alberta.

If a grassroots homegrown movement developed inside the province that opposed the oil sands I would follow them closely but apart from that, I think it's Alberta's decision to decrease oil production in the North, not the rest of the country's.

If Alberta wants to keep pumping oil, by all means keep pumping it.

Now, Alberta was furious when Pierre Trudeau introduced the National Energy Program. Alberta then loathed Federal intrusion into what it considered to be a provincial matter and if I'm not mistaken Liberal politicians have struggled to gain votes there ever since.

My question is, "Is British Columbia just as furious about the pipeline Alberta's proposing to build as Alberta was about the National Energy Program, and if so, shouldn't Albertans be listening to BC?"

Once again, if BC wanted the pipeline, I wouldn't have written this.

If anything, this debate is taking a serious look at the left's commitment to both labour and the environment, a multifaceted debate that will likely be studied for generations to come.