11 Comments
User's avatar
Dave Makichuk's avatar

Wow! Very interesting ... thank you, Mr. Ivison for going into detail ... and explaining what is really going on here ... and, what needs to be done ... brilliant! ...

Expand full comment
Barrie Murdock's avatar

Must follow this story as it will test the ability of all parties to work together for the benefit of all.

Expand full comment
Richard Sculthorpe's avatar

Another instance of Common Sense having no bearing on what should be a given.

Expand full comment
Madom's avatar

It will be interesting to see how the government handles this.

Expand full comment
Kim's avatar

Two other hurdles to go: Carney and Quebec.

Expand full comment
Merlin M's avatar

Wouldn’t it be standard operating procedure that someone qualified would have actually read what needed signing? It’s not like I’m a lawyer but who would sign something that left a back door open to add an exclusivity clause at a later date? Three choices: a moron, a government official, a crook. Most times all are interchangeable.

Expand full comment
Britannicus's avatar

This borders on criminality . . . but no one will go to jail.

Expand full comment
Embeetee's avatar

Surely the First Nations involved and presumably the federal agencies which were involved in final approval, have a legitimate legal claim that the Port willfully - fraudulently? - withheld the exclusivity clause, knowing it might impact those approvals.

Expand full comment
John Ivison's avatar

It’s before the courts now. One would think so. But that won’t be decided for years, in all likelihood.

Expand full comment
Unfiltered's avatar

Not Carney / Trudeau Liberals again.

Expand full comment
Susan Miller's avatar

Prepare for more "woulda, coulda shoulda". Liberal Ottawa just doesn't know how to Like it or Lump it and dig in.

Expand full comment