Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

DEIDRA GARYK -- An Open Letter to Member of Parliament Elizabeth May; ‘We don’t need saving by you – we want you to leave us alone’



Dear Ms. May,

 

I debated writing to you, but I cannot sit back and allow your hateful speech towards the oil and gas sector and its workers go unchallenged. I assumed by now you would be humbled by the insensitivity of your gaffe and that you would quietly shirk into a corner or would sheepishly apologize to the thousands upon thousands of people you have deeply offended. However, I see you’ve doubled down in your article in the National Post.

 

Saying “Oil is dead.” is not only disrespectful, it’s dishonest. There will be a demand for oil for decades to come, credible studies show this. Demand may taper off once alternative sources of energy become competitive, both from a price and reliability perspective, but that does not mean its use “dies” imminently. Look at coal. Even though consumption has steadily decreased, it’s still an integral part of the world energy mix. It has not “died”.

 

The lockdowns resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic have created an unprecedented drop in fossil fuel demand that is likely to continue for the remainder of 2020. However, the US Energy Information Agency data released on May 12, 2020, predicts oil demand will recover to pre-COVID levels in 2021. Let’s not disregard the significance of the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) comment about why there hasn’t been a decrease in the consumption of renewable energy sources: “Renewables were the only source that posted a growth in demand, driven by larger installed capacity and priority dispatch.” [Emphasis added].

 

You appear to have taken an absolutist, short-sighted view of the consumption data, and that won’t help create quality, long-term energy policy in Canada.

 

You’ve also taken a myopic view of the Canadian oil and gas industry. What you ignore is that the sector is not only oil sands owned by large multinationals. It’s made up of various types of product — crude oil, liquids, and natural gas — produced and serviced by companies of various size, from one person to several thousand.

 

That you focus solely on the oil sands and consider it the “oil and gas industry” suggests your knowledge of the subject matter you speak so authoritatively about is rather weak. This is unfortunate because people in the climate movement, including the media, believe without question the things you say.

 

The Oxford Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment Working Paper that has influenced your opinions may have included a large cross-section of esteemed interviewees, but it did not even consider direct stimulus support for fossil fuels. As a result, it’s hard to compare the impact from those dollars against the twenty-five other “fiscal recovery archetypes” presented. Using this incomplete data could have serious negative ramifications on energy and economic policy.

 

Ms. May, your denigration of Alberta and the oil and gas industry is a personal attack against the very people you pretend to care about – oil and gas workers.

 

We don’t need saving by you, by the way. We want you to leave us alone so that we have a level playing field, not one riddled with regulatory bullet holes and virtuous carnage.

 

Let us do what we do best – innovate and problem-solve – and we’ll figure out the economics.

 

As someone who believes strongly in environmental protection and a diversified energy mix, your ill-informed, misguided comments cut me deep.

 

When politicians don’t strive for honest debate and conversation, but rather for soundbites that get air time, we lose the opportunity to implement sane, well-constructed public policy.

 

Ms. May, you owe Albertans and the oil and gas industry an apology.

 

Sincerely,

Deidra Garyk

 

 

If you agree with this open letter, click the EMAIL Icon below and send this to Elizabeth May at  Elizabeth.May@parl.gc.ca with the words “I agree” or use the email to send your own note to Elizabeth May.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

BC cannot regulate, redesign, and reinterpret its way to a stable forestry sector. Communities need clear rules, predictable timelines, and accountability for results.

Photo credit:  Atli Resources LP   BC’s Forestry Crisis Continues with Closure of Beaver Cove Chip Facility   As industry leaders, Indigenous partners, and contractors gather this week at the BC Natural Resources Forum in Prince George, the gap between government rhetoric and reality could not be clearer. Just hours after the Eby government once again touted reconciliation, certainty, and economic opportunity under DRIPA, Atli Chip Ltd, a company wholly owned by the ’Na̱mg̱is First Nation, announced it is managing the orderly closure of its Beaver Cove chip facility. The closure comes despite public tax dollars, repeated government announcements, and assurances that new policy frameworks would stabilize forestry employment and create long-term opportunity in rural and coastal British Columbia. “British Columbians are being told one story, while communities are living another,” said Ward Stamer, Critic for Forests. “This closure makes it clear that announcement...
Post a Comment
Read more

Stamer: Hope for Forestry Completely Shattered After Another Provincial Review Driven by DRIPA

IMAGE CREDIT:  Provincial Forestry Advisory Council Conservative Critic for Forests Ward Stamer says the final report from the Provincial Forestry Advisory Council confirms the worst fears of forestry workers and communities; instead of addressing the real issues driving mill closures and job losses, the NDP has produced a report that ignores industry realities and doubles down on governance restructuring. Despite years of warnings from forestry workers, contractors, and industry organizations about permitting delays, regulatory costs, fibre access, and the failure of BC Timber Sales, the PFAC report offers no urgency, no timelines, and no concrete action to stop the ongoing decline of the sector. “ This report completely shatters any remaining hope that the government is serious about saving forestry ,” said Stamer.  “ We didn’t need another study to tell us what industry has been saying for years. While mills close and workers lose their livelihoods, the NDP is focused on re...
Post a Comment
Read more

FORSETH – My question is, ‘How do we decide who is blue enough to be called a Conservative?’

How do we decide who’s blue enough to be a Conservative? AS OF TODAY (Friday January 30 th ), there are now eight individuals who have put their names forward to lead the Conservative Party of British Columbia. Having been involved with BC’s Conservatives since 2010, and having seen MANY ups and downs, having 8 people say “I want to lead the party” is to me, an incredible turn-around from the past. Sadly, however, it seems that our party cannot seem to shake what I, and others, call a purity test of ‘what is a Conservative’. And that seems to have already come to the forefront of the campaign by a couple of candidates. Let me just say as a Conservative Party of BC member, and as someone active in the party, that frustrates me to no end. Conservatives, more than any other political philosophy or belief, at least to me, seems to have the widest and broadest spectrum of ideals.   For the most part, they are anchored by these central thoughts --- smaller and less intru...
1 comment
Read more

Labels

Show more