Warning: mysqli_query(): (HY000/1021): Disk full (/tmp/#sql_11bb6_22.MAI); waiting for someone to free some space... (errno: 28 "No space left on device") in /home5/canadane/public_html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 2030
B.C.’s top court rules for $6.6-billion Coastal GasLink pipeline, against Indigenous law - Financial Post - Canada News Media
Warning: mysqli_query(): (HY000/1021): Disk full (/tmp/#sql_11bb6_16.MAI); waiting for someone to free some space... (errno: 28 "No space left on device") in /home5/canadane/public_html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 2030
Connect with us

B.C.’s top court rules for $6.6-billion Coastal GasLink pipeline, against Indigenous law – Financial Post

Published

on


CALGARY – The Supreme Court of British Columbia has ruled that Indigenous law is not necessarily Canadian law in a decision that will enable more construction work on the $6.6-billion Coastal GasLink pipeline despite some First Nations opposition.

B.C. Supreme Court Justice Marguerite Church ruled Tuesday that Coastal GasLink has suffered irreparable harm after protestors built blockades and camps to stop work crews from accessing parts of the natural gas pipeline route between Dawson Creek and Kitimat, B.C., where a massive LNG export terminal is under construction.

Church granted both an interlocutory injunction and an enforcement order, which will “provide a mandate to the RCMP to enforce the terms of the order.”

While Wet’suwet’en customary laws clearly exist on their own independent footing, they are not recognized as being an effectual part of Canadian law

Justice Church

The decision doesn’t spell out what the RCMP can do to enforce the injunction but police have been heavily scrutinized over the past year for enforcing a previous injunction granted by Justice Church against Coastal GasLink protestors.

Last January, RCMP officers enforcing an interim injunction order for Coastal GasLink moved on a blockade, arrested protestors and removed obstacles in what became a nationally televised confrontation.

The case has showcased divisions within some First Nations communities, where elected chiefs and hereditary chiefs sometimes jostle to enforce title rights of parts of traditional territories.


Protesters rally last year in Vancouver in support of the Wet’suwet’en, who had set up a checkpoint and camp in opposition to the TransCanada Coastal GasLink pipeline.

Nick Procaylo/PostMedia

In this case, Coastal GasLink has signed agreements with elected First Nations groups along the pipeline route, but a group of Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs have said they oppose the project and tried to use First Nations law to prevent the company from building the pipeline.

In her decision, Justice Church took issue with various First Nations groups and some hereditary chiefs claiming that Indigenous laws give them legal rights to blockade crews trying to access the area.

“They submit that the plaintiff is in their traditional territory in violation of Wet’suwet’en law and authority and their efforts in erecting the Bridge Blockade were to prevent violation of Wet’suwet’en law,” Justice Church wrote.

However, she also noted that Indigenous laws do not become part of Canadian common or domestic law until they are enshrined through treaties, court declarations, statutory provisions or other means.

“There has been no process by which Wet’suwet’en customary laws have been recognized in this manner,” the judge wrote. “While Wet’suwet’en customary laws clearly exist on their own independent footing, they are not recognized as being an effectual part of Canadian law.”

However, the overlap between Canadian law and Indigenous law has not been completely settled and courts across the country have had different opinions on the topic, said Dwight Newman, a law professor at the University of Saskatchewan and the Canada Research Chair in Indigenous Rights and Constitutional Law.

“I think there are some interesting tensions to be sorted out, which is a major issue for Canada in terms of in what ways Indigenous law does or does not become part of Canadian law,” Newman said in an interview.

“In terms of this particular decision, the judge is also saying that there wasn’t very good evidence in terms of what the Indigenous law was,” Newman said, noting the judge found multiple groups claiming rights over tracts of land amid conflicting claims of hereditary lineage.

The group of opposed Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs released a statement saying they would reject the Supreme Court decision, which they said has “criminalized” their Indigenous laws.

“We have a responsibility to enforce Wet’suwet’en laws and to ensure the health of our territories for future generations, as we have done for thousands of years,” the statement noted.

Coastal GasLink and some of the opposed hereditary chiefs came to an agreement on a protocol for accessing the area in April 2019, but some protestors have continued to impede work at the site.

Unidentified protestors had previously contravened an interim injunction, Justice Church wrote in her ruling.

In one case, the judge wrote, masked protestors delayed work by “driving a pickup truck into an active work site at a high rate of speed and close to contractors actively working on the road.”

For its part, Coastal GasLink said in a release it will continue to “abide by the terms” of agreements it signed with opposed groups like the Unist’ot’en Camp and “will continue efforts to engage with any affected groups to ensure public safety while our field crews continue to progress their crucial activities.”

• Email: gmorgan@nationalpost.com | Twitter:

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link


Warning: mysqli_query(): (HY000/1021): Disk full (/tmp/#sql_11bb6_16.MAI); waiting for someone to free some space... (errno: 28 "No space left on device") in /home5/canadane/public_html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 2030
Up Next

Snowbirds file legal challenge against cuts to Ontario government travel insurance


Warning: mysqli_query(): (HY000/1021): Disk full (/tmp/#sql_11bb6_16.MAI); waiting for someone to free some space... (errno: 28 "No space left on device") in /home5/canadane/public_html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 2030
Don't Miss

Oil Dips as 2019 Ends; Big Gains on Year

Continue Reading

Warning: mysqli_query(): (HY000/1021): Disk full (/tmp/#sql_11bb6_16.MAI); waiting for someone to free some space... (errno: 28 "No space left on device") in /home5/canadane/public_html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 2030

Flames, Maple Leafs favourites on Saturday NHL betting lines – Sportsnet.ca

Published

on


The Ottawa Senators will try to snap a nine-game losing streak when they host the Calgary Flames on Saturday as +135 underdogs on the NHL betting lines at sportsbooks monitored by OddsShark.com.

Ottawa’s recent woes continued with Thursday’s 4-2 loss to the Vegas Golden Knights, which marked the club’s sixth straight loss on home ice going into Saturday afternoon’s matchup at the Canadian Tire Centre.

The Senators’ offence has been silent during the team’s longest slide since an 0-9-2 run nine years ago, scoring just eight total goals over their past five contests. However, the Senators defence has tightened up of late, allowing just three goals per game over their past four losses, with just one of those defeats coming in regulation. That has resulted in a steady 3-0-1 run for the under on the totals at betting sites, after the over prevailed in 15 of the Senators’ previous 17 contests.

While the Senators have struggled, the Flames arrive in Ottawa on a high after escaping with a 2-1 shootout victory in Toronto as +125 underdogs on Thursday night. Now sporting wins in six of their past seven contests, Calgary takes on the Senators as -155 betting favourites.

The Flames have been far from dominant during their current surge, scoring two or fewer goals in four of their past five outings, and claiming victory by just a single goal in each of their six recent wins. However, the team has been dominant in recent dates with the Senators, posting wins in four straight meetings while holding Ottawa to a single goal each time.

Elsewhere on the Saturday NHL odds, the Maple Leafs look to rebound from Thursday’s loss to Calgary as they host the Chicago Blackhawks asheavy -210 favourites. Hobbled by injury, Toronto has earned just one win in five contests overall, and has lost three of four at Scotiabank Arena to fall 11 points back of Boston in the hunt for top spot in the Atlantic Division.

The Blackhawks ride a three-game win streak into Saturday’s contest as +175 underdogs. Chicago posted a decisive 4-1 win in Montreal as a +150 wager on Wednesday to improve to 6-1-0 over its past seven road dates, and has taken two straight from the Maple Leafs.

The Canadiens, meanwhile, vie for their fourth win in five games as they host Vegas as +110 underdogs, the Edmonton Oilers welcome the Arizona Coyotes to town as -130 chalk in a crucial Pacific Division matchup, while the Vancouver Canucks put an NHL-best seven-game home win streak on the line as they battle the San Jose Sharks as a -160 wager.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Sonos, PopSockets speak out against Big Tech's dominance – CNET

Published

on


At an Amazon booth at the Las Vegas Convention Center during CES 2020 this month.


Ben Fox Rubin/CNET

As David Barnett tells it, Amazon is an abusive, unfair and uncaring partner to smaller businesses using its platform.

Barnett, founder and CEO of PopSockets, which makes adhesive grips for the backs of phones, on Friday lambasted the e-commerce giant for ignoring issues about counterfeit that he’d raised for months and bullying him to lower his prices. His comments were part of his sworn testimony before the House Judiciary’s Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial and Administrative Law, which has been holding hearings to investigate the potentially excessive power of the biggest tech companies in the US.

“This is tiring, this is tiring week after week,” Barnett told lawmakers at the University of Colorado’s Wittemyer Courtroom, describing Amazon’s threats to extract better prices — a practice that ultimately caused him to end his partnership selling products directly to Amazon.

He says his company is now banned from selling on Amazon’s website on its own and he’s lost countless sales after cutting off the lucrative direct-sales relationship. Other companies, he suggested, would rather put up with Amazon pushing them around to keep getting paid.

Amazon, along with fellow tech giants Facebook, Google and Apple, have all faced tough scrutiny over the past year from lawmakers and regulators, who not that long ago looked at Silicon Valley in a far more positive way. Now officials are raising concerns about these companies’ growing dominance in the market, which could be squashing competition.

This work could bring about big changes in the tech industry, perhaps forcing big players to break up, cutting off future mergers, or creating new regulatory restrictions. Officials say they’re pursuing this work to make sure innovative new startups can thrive and customers can benefit from strong competition.


Now playing:
Watch this:

Google under investigation over its digital ad business

2:07

These tech giants have defended themselves by saying they’re small players in their broader fields, like Amazon being a tiny part of global retail. Facebook has pointed to emerging competition like TikTok threatening its lead in social media.

Regarding its PopSockets relationship, an Amazon spokesperson on Friday said it’s continued to work with PopSockets on counterfeits even after the direct partnership ended, calling the company “a valued retail vendor.” The person said Amazon does require some popular brands to sell directly to Amazon, so the company can ensure the best prices are available for customers.

Amazon also pointed to an IDC study, which Amazon funded and which was released Thursday, that discusses the sales growth of small- and medium-sized businesses on Amazon’s platform.

This theme of imbalanced, dominating business relationships kept resurfacing during the hearing. As part of their relationship, Sonos CEO Patrick Spence told lawmakers, Google tried to restrict his company’s innovations and wanted insights into Sonos’ future product plans. Sonos this month sued Google, claiming the company stole its wireless speaker technology.

“There’s such a dominant power that exists with these companies that really even as a company of our size you feel like you have no choice,” Spence said.

A Google spokesperson responded: “Sonos has made misleading statements about our history of working together. Our technology and devices were designed independently. We deny their claims vigorously, and will be defending against them.”

Kirsten Daru, general counsel at Tile, and David Heinemeier Hansson, chief technology officer of Basecamp, offered similar complaints that tech giants Apple and Google so thoroughly dominated their markets that it was virtually impossible not to work with them. Those companies then use that power to make unexpected and unfair changes that can harm smaller businesses, they said. 

For instance, Hansson complained that Apple has been able to charge developers a 30% fee for paid apps for years because it faces little competition. Barnett, of PopSockets, said other online marketplaces that rival Amazon certainly exist, “but most of them are really tiny.”

Fred Sainz, an Apple spokesman, said Friday that the company built its App Store as a safe, trusted place for customers, and a great business opportunity for developers.

Rep. David Cicilline, a Democrat from Rhode Island, who’s chairman of the subcommittee, has already raised serious concerns about these companies’ power, using terms like “economic nightmare” and “one algorithm tweak away from ruin” when talking about them on Friday.

Rep. Ken Buck, a Republican from Colorado, shared these concerns, showing there’s bipartisan cooperation on this issue, but he warned against unnecessary government interventions.

For now the chance that any of these tech giants could get broken up is remote, and Wall Street has pushed all these companies’ stocks higher despite this negative attention. Still, when Microsoft went through similar antitrust reviews 30 years ago, the process lasted for a decade, so it’s anyone’s guess what the outcome will be over such a long timeline.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Over a thousand 'likely' infected by Wuhan virus in China: study – Al Jazeera English

Published

on


The number of people infected by a mystery SARS-like virus that has killed two people in China is likely hundreds more than officially reported, researchers have said on Friday.

The news comes as Chinese health authorities said on Saturday that they have discovered four more cases of pneumonia following an outbreak of what is believed to be a new coronavirus strain.

The four individuals were diagnosed with pneumonia on Thursday and are in stable condition, the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission said in a statement published shortly after midnight. Saturday’s statement marked the first confirmation.

More:

Chinese authorities previously said that the virus has hit at least 41 people in the country, with the outbreak centred around a seafood market in the central city of Wuhan.

But a paper published on Friday by scientists with the MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis at Imperial College in London said the number of those affected in the city was likely to be well over a thousand.

The scientists at the Centre – which advises bodies including the World Health Organization – said they estimated a “total of 1,723 cases” in Wuhan would have been infected as of January 12.

The researchers took the number of cases reported outside China so far – two in Thailand and one in Japan – to infer how many were likely infected in the city, based on international flight traffic data from Wuhan’s airport.

SARS virus taught scientists new lessons

“For Wuhan to have exported three cases to other countries would imply there would have to be many more cases than have been reported,” Professor Neil Ferguson, one of the authors of the report, told the BBC.

“I am substantially more concerned than I was a week ago,” adding, however, that it was “too early to be alarmist”.

“People should be considering the possibility of substantial human-to-human transmission more seriously than they have so far,” he added, saying it was “unlikely” that animal exposure was the main source of infection.

Airport screening 

Two people are known to have been killed by the virus, a pathogen from the same family as the deadly SARS virus – even as health authorities around the world sought to assure the public that the overall risk of infection remained low.

Authorities in Hong Kong have stepped up detection measures, including rigorous temperature checkpoints for inbound travellers from the Chinese mainland.

The US said from Friday it would begin screening flights arriving from Wuhan at San Francisco airport and New York’s JFK – which both receive direct flights – as well as Los Angeles, where many flights connect.

The latest outbreak comes ahead of the Lunar New Year holidays, when many of China’s 1.4 billion people will be travelling to their home towns or abroad.[File: Andy Wong/AP]

So far, health officials do not consider the new virus from China to be as lethal as SARS, but the investigation is evolving and much is still not known about whether the virus can spread easily from person to person.

“This is the stage of the investigation where we need to proceed cautiously and be prepared for any eventuality,” said Dr. Nancy Messonnier, an expert in respiratory diseases at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the US.

SARS originated in southern China in 2002 and infected more than 8,000 people in 37 countries before it was brought under control.

Nearly 800 people died worldwide. China was accused of covering up the case.

The latest outbreak comes ahead of the Lunar New Year holidays, when many of China’s 1.4 billion people will be travelling to their home towns or abroad.

The Chinese government expects passengers to make 440 million trips via rail and another 79 million trips via aeroplanes.

SOURCE:
Al Jazeera and news agencies

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending