Sandra Finley

2024-07-28 this form is consent to receive support . . . why I cannot sign PLUS Rebuttal.

Rule of Law, Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt) No Responses »

Oct 132024

This reply to Request for a signature was followed by a response from Johnson Springs.

My Rebuttal to their response is included below.

July 28, 2024

Hello Doreen,

RE your email of June 27: . . . this form is consent to receive support “…including all and any support and resources required to support my care, including but not limited to; receiving medication, assistance with daily living activities, day programming and/or any medical care required (Dr., calling ambulance, OT/PT, dentist, other medical care)…”

REPLY: Christopher’s needs are not the same as some other of the residents. I do not know what you (Johnson Springs) are attempting to do with this form, in its application to Christopher.

Partly because he lived with me until age 35 and was not on assistance, he is one of the more independent-minded residents.

I don’t like to react hastily. I’ve had time to think about the proposed form, and elicit input from Christopher. I checked out my conclusions with a lawyer, to see if I misunderstand something. I do not.

Out of respect, the following is a comprehensive explanation of why I cannot sign the Consent form; it includes Christopher’s understanding of how the Consent Form impacts him. I trust you will know that this has nothing to do with you. It has everything to do with the rights of people in a democracy.

The Form reminds me of absurdities that arise in George Orwell’s work:

Christopher came to live at Johnson Springs Ten Years Ago.

The Terms of the Support for Christopher were established Ten Years Ago, and on an on-going basis since then.

Of course he consents to the support; he would not be living at Johnson Springs if he did not.

WHY I CANNOT SIGN THE CONSENT FORM

The Consent Form, if signed, would serve no purpose other than to take away rights. The Consent Form is not legal. The Consent form is the Rule of Law in a state of disintegration.
The Requirement to CONSENT IN ADVANCE to indeterminate occurrences would be thrown out by a court of law. Specifics are required.
You cannot coerce someone to sign a form by telling them all the bad things that might happen, if they do not sign.
RE your: “As an organization we need to ensure that Christopher has informed refusal.” . . . “If he chooses not to sign, then Rebecca and I would talk with C about what that would mean for him.”

No, you would not, not without legal guardianship, or a lawyer of Christopher’s choosing, present at the meeting.

“Informed refusal?”. Refusal is the opposite of Consent. “I do not consent” MEANS “I refuse”. The law frames the issue in terms of Consent. There is no such thing in the law as “Informed refusal”. It is a classic example of Orwellian new speak.

If you are recommending something for my medical care, I have the right to informed consent. Yes. But. There’s

Full, Unbiased (e. no conflicts-of-interest) Disclosure and
Free (i.e. no manipulations) Informed Consent and then there’s
What someone else thinks is right for me to do, be damned my Constitutional protections. Johnson Springs should not be asking me or influencing Christopher to sign away Constitutional Rights. Fools sign away their rights.

It would be highly irresponsible of me to do that to Christopher.

RE your: If there is any emergency and C needs medical attention, we have an obligation to call an ambulance. When they arrive they would ask to see his consent form to receive support. If he does not have a consent signed, they would decide on supports based on the severity of C’s condition. I imagine they have their own set of regulations of how to determine when to provide support, etc.

No sense pussyfooting around: the preceding is fiction.

Yes, in case of emergency, of course, Johnson Springs would call an ambulance. Persons would be negligent not to do so. The law would stand behind a complaint if Johnson Springs did not do that. A signed consent form is not required.

Additionally, even if there was a signed consent form, emergency / ambulance workers, as you correctly suggested, have their own regulations that govern their response to the situation. A signed consent form is irrelevant to them.

– – – – – – – – – –

The addition of a WITNESS to the signatures on the Consent form is a SHAM to make the form appear to be a legal document. It’s bogus.

As are the numerous citations from a document created by CARP. CARP has NO JURISDICTION.

Beyond the questions of legality, rights, farce and fraud; and beyond the multitudinous different expressions of medical care, is the ASSUMPTION that there are staff at Johnson Springs who are QUALIFIED to make informed and objective decisions about medical treatments for the individual who is 44-year-old Christopher Luckwell. The assumption is invalid. There’s the example of the easily-identifiable bladder infection, overlooked. Also, the rotation of new house parents and staff from vastly different backgrounds.

Who is the doctor? Not Johnson Springs and not CLBC. (Ref: #2)

Johnson Springs requires definition of the limits on its financial responsibilities. The Consent form signed by Christopher in 2022 has that at its root. (Ref: 8. (2024-07-19) From Doreen Copy of Consent form signed by Christopher 2022-12-15.) This new consent form is a completely different, not benign, animal.

CHRISTOPHER SAYS: I DON’T WANT TO SIGN THE CONSENT FORM

Note: Christopher sometimes anticipates a migraine; he then carries his cell phone with him. If a migraine develops, he can call his House and get back to his room quickly before his vision is completely gone. (Ref: #9)

Christopher says: I am the one who makes the yes and no decisions about my health. I can explain it this way.

THE CELL PHONE EXAMPLE

The rule of having no cell phones at workshop does not work for me due to when I have a migraine I need one. I worked out with Johnson Springs (Ref: 2023-06-07 Christopher ISP, p. 9, para 1) that I deal with my own migraines because I know what to do, and I have to stop the migraine as fast as I can.

It gets in my way if I have to wait for the Workshop Master’s attention, and then for them to call the house, and then to wait for the House Parents. I can call the House myself, faster. I autodial. So, I call – – not the workshop master. (also described as “I stand there waiting for 10 minutes while every minute the migraine is getting worse.)

The rule changed from before. I found out the last time I had a migraine (July 2024). I was stopped from calling my House. I had my cell phone with me, because I knew in the morning that a migraine was likely coming. It made me angry that I couldn’t call by myself, the way I had been doing for a long time. There were never any problems or delays when I did it.

(Antonia (mother) speaking): Christopher likes to please people. He did not display his anger. By establishing a rigid chain-of-command where none is needed, and where the chain-of-command increases the likelihood that he won’t be able to get to the remedies he needs BEFORE he is without vision, he was angry. If you don’t deal with the anger, it will worsen, and it will worsen each time he is prevented from doing what he can do, FOR NO GOOD REASON other than chain-of- command. Johnson Springs is not a military institution. There is NOTHING CURATIVE about THE NEW RULE.

I did not understand why Christopher insists that the July 2024 migraine incident be included in the reply to the Consent Form. The key phrase to understanding why he insists is the Workshop Master’s direction to Christopher, “It’s MY job to call your House Parents. Not yours.” i.e. I do it for you. (Like it’s a good thing – – I am looking after you. . . . reality – no you aren’t.)

Christopher (correctly, I think) understands that the new rule IS connected to the Consent Form: if Christopher can only stand and wait for the Workshop master to act, while time ticks by, the migraine worsens. Understandably, he does not want to sign the Consent Form: Other people would be making decisions FOR him; they are not necessarily the right decisions, in his interest and for his health. There is no mal intent, only chain-of-command / control issues.

SOMEONE ELSE IS SPENDING, I’M PAYING. IF MY BANK ACCOUNT IS OVERDRAWN THEN I’M TO BLAME, NOT THE OTHER PERSON (continuation of Christopher says . . .)

The Consent Form would be like when Helen was making arrangements for foot care.

IF other people were making decisions about money that comes out of my bank account:

(Background from my Mother, Antonia): Christopher has a small bank account that he has learned to manage responsibly by himself. He started years before going to Johnson Springs. Lesson #1 was what happens when you spend more money than you have. During the ten years he has been at Johnson Springs he has not mismanaged his account – – he has maintained his established reliability.

Christopher makes financial decisions for his account based on whether he can afford an added expense. He pays attention to costs, as do most people who have a limited income, which is the large majority of people. Christopher is no different.)

– – – – –

Cont. Christopher says

Johnson Springs wants me to sign a “Consent to receive Support” form. If I sign, then my bank account would get all mixed up.

(Christopher manages his bank account in his head and not like you would manage your account. He knows that he could not figure it out if it got “all mixed up”.)

TWO EXAMPLES: (Antonia writing)

FOOTCARE Helen knows this one from firsthand experience: A new undertaking, a woman from Dixston provides footcare to a group of residents at Johnson Springs. Christopher was told it would include him. He had to pay by e-transfer. He said “No. I don’t do e-transfers.”

Behind it all: the cost was more than Christopher was willing to pay. I tried to find more information for him. He knew nothing about the service being offered; the amount he would pay seemed to fluctuate. From the internet: medical care workers could go to the lady offering the service, pay $2,999, be trained and receive certification to be a footcare worker. Christopher was intransigent; Nope, that footcare was not for him.

SUPPLEMENTS: It’s black-and-white. If you try to force him, he digs in and does not forget the injustice. His position on Supplements is simple and clear: “If it costs more at the Pharmacy (the one engaged by CLBC), I’m not buying it.” And he won’t, just like he wouldn’t sign up for the footcare.

If his bank account was overdrawn, it would be “his fault”, no one else’s. – – But it would NOT REALLY be his fault. He would have been pressured into it, except that he is resistant to being pressured into actions he doesn’t agree with.

And no, he doesn’t need help managing his bank account. He has managed it successfully for about 15 YEARS. He needs fairness. He has a POA.

Look at the Consent form this way: Christopher, You, and I all have autonomy over our own bodies. We have a Constitutional Right to decide which medical treatments we will take.

(A recent Canadian lawsuit, decision appealed, ruling of the higher court judge: covid mandates wrongly forced citizens to put a PCR test up into their nasal cavity. Constitutional Law gives us bodily autonomy. We cannot be forced, tricked, or coerced, to put stuff into our bodies.

From my perspective, the decision is sound: there is a long history, not only from the World Wars, of medical experimentation on orphans, disadvantaged/disabled persons, institutionalized people, poor people who need some money. Not only our ogre enemies do it; we do it. The USA has a repugnant history of such experimentation. Then there’s Pfizer’s out-of-court (i.e. no public disclosure) settlement with the Govt of Nigeria after 100 kids were killed by an experimental injection of Pfizer’s (round about the year 2000).

CONCLUSION: The thin lie underneath the Consent Form, as it applies to Christopher, is “You cannot do things on your own. Ipso facto, we have to have oversight of you. Sign over your Rights to us. We will make decisions FOR YOU. We have to.”

HOWEVER, Christopher is certified to be competent. He has demonstrated competence over 15 years. He has his own POA and Will, drawn up in 2015, a set of legal documents that control what happens in the event of adversity. Johnson Springs was advised, they know this.

There is no reason for him to sign away his rights.

REFERENCES

From previous communications to Johnson Springs, all of which Christopher concurred with, and still does.

(Jan 20, 2024) Christopher has a good grasp of rights and laws behind them. As I have told Johnson Springs before: through the International Conference in Berlin he went to a Nazi Work Camp. It was a huge, graphic lesson on what happens when the Rule of Law disintegrates. Also, a travelling exhibit, “The Diaries of Anne Frank”, came to town. Christopher was fascinated. Ever since, when he comes across literature about Anne Frank, he checks it out. The Consent form is the Rule of Law in a state of disintegration.

(2023-03-13) Email from Antonia. Arises from earlier problems with infringements of rights:

. . . Christopher asked me to explain this. He knows it, but it’s a bit complicated.

(2015) Christopher is certified by a lawyer to be competent to make decisions. (PWD – person-with-disability – – status does not make a person incompetent. Nor does it remove the protection of Law.)

There are legal documents required if you wish to take away privacy and other rights accorded to persons in a democracy.

. . . A lawyer had to determine whether Christopher understands what various, selected legal concepts mean. I was not allowed to be present in the room during this process.

The Outcome: as stated, Christopher is certified as competent. He understands the consequence of legal documents he signed.

NOTE: Christopher has a set of personal legal documents that reinforce his constitutional rights. (POA, Representation Agreement (health care decisions), Will, Executor (Trustee)). Johnson Springs has known since about 2015 that Christopher has a POA and Will drawn up by a lawyer.

Jan 15, 2024: WHY WOULD CHRISTOPHER BE RATTLED BY THE NEWS: “YOU DON’T HAVE TO HAVE GOALS”? (under Attitude)
To: Johnson Springs From Antonia:

People with disabilities are routinely disempowered by statements that infer they can’t think for themselves. Someone else has to do their thinking and make their decisions FOR them.

This is not a true statement. It is expedient, but not true.

(Jan 20, 2024, 2^nd Quarter Interim, page 2-3) Henry offered a reasonable response to allergies. I responded with factors he would not know about. (re Qualifications to make medical decisions for Christopher.)

(2023-06-14) TO Helen. From Antonia. Subject: F/U to ISP, re medications.

. . . Through the years numerous doctors have been consulted about the migraines, including neurologists. Christopher has not only 30 years of personal experience with migraine, but also that of friends.

Information is exchanged – – what worked for you? What didn’t? For how long? Side effects? Even stories of serious conflicts-of-interest between the developer of a migraine drug and its doctor promoters. The decisions made about his healthcare have been carefully considered and continue to be. . . . Few people have time to read or remember the documents. . . . If more paperwork from Christopher’s health practitioners is being required by Johnson Springs, you are over-stepping jurisdictional boundaries:

Who is the doctor? Not Johnson Springs and not CLBC
Privacy: The relationship between a doctor and patient is private; the state (the government) has no right of access to medical records without making a court application. (The relationship between a lawyer and client is similarly protected under the Law.)
. . . the word Medication has been re-defined to include Supplements. Which is to say that Doctors prescribe both. Which is NOT the case.) . . .

Christopher is well-acquainted with allergies, and the search for “removal of cause”. He is 44 years old. He has absorbed a lot of information. You cannot dismiss what he knows.

The “We Unify” Conference in Victoria, June 23 to June 25, 2024. Umar Sheikh was one of the presenters. Court cases won.

(2024-07-19) Copy of Consent form signed by Christopher, 2022-12-15.

From: Antonia Sent: August 10, 2022 7:42 PM
Subject: Request for info from Henry, re Christopher & migraines

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

REBUTTAL

Dear – -,

I appreciate the work that has gone into your reply to me (August 7, 2024). It is helpful to know the Act that governs Johnson Springs

essentially says that every adult in a care facility who is capable of giving consent has the right to consent or refuse medical care, the right to select their preferred type of health care, the right to revoke consent, the right to expect their decision will be respected, and the right to be involved in planning and decision making. As a general rule, a health care provider must not provide any health care to an adult living in a care facility without the adult’s consent.

The preceding summary is fine.

The most helpful I can be is to explain the reason that the Health Care (Consent) and Care Facility (Admission) Act is not a panacea for the Consent to Receive Support Form.

You may not know: I was in and out of various levels of Courts for 5 years, in defence of Charter Rights. I am not a lawyer; I was the defendant. When defending yourself in Court against the Federal Government, even with the assistance of a lawyer, you have to be well-prepared. You learn a lot. I also helped other people defend themselves on the same issue of Charter Rights – – the Right to Privacy of Personal Information.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms sets out those rights and freedoms that Canadians believe are necessary in a free and democratic society. The Charter is one part of the Canadian Constitution. The Constitution is a set of laws containing the basic rules about how our country operates.

“Charter” (also called “Constitutional”) Rights sit at the apex of our laws and regulations. They are the King of the Castle.

If actions arising from clauses in Provincial legislation, regulations, etc. run afoul of a Charter Right, the Charter Right prevails. I am talking about actions arising from this part of your reply, for example:

As per the act, a health care provider may provide health care without consent in these exceptions:

If a personal guardian or representative consents to health care
If a health care professional deems it urgent or emergency health care.
As per the act, health care professional can conduct a preliminary exam without consent. If the adult indicates they would like treatment, or if in the absence of any indication by the adult, the adult’s spouse, near relative or close friend indicates that the adult’s spouse, near relative or close friend wants the adult to be provided with health care, then that is considered acceptable.
Support can be provided without consent if a health care professional deems it major medical care. First, they will consult with a representative, spouse, near relative, or close friend. If they deem major medical care to be needed and there is no representative, spouse, near relative, or close friend that can be reached, this is allowed.
Minor health care can be provided if the health care professional is of the opinion that the adult is not capable of making decisions, if the adult does not have a personal guardian or representative, or if the personal guardian or representative is incapable of giving or refusing consent.

You will understand that it DOES NOT MATTER WHAT THE INTENTION of the Consent Form is, or of the intention of the time and work expended. Nor does what you want matter, if it infringes Charter Rights.

RE: This form is not meant to diminish C’s ability to self-advocate or express preferences. That is the opposite of the intention – this form is meant for him to be able to clearly express these preferences when it comes to medical care.

Christopher can already, legally, self-advocate and express preferences. He does not need this Consent form for authorization to do so.

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) recently launched a legal challenge to Nova Scotia’s Bill 419:

Under this new law, the Nova Scotia government could decide to issue citizens new health ID cards . . . would contain the personal health information of each citizen.

With its new electronic database, the government could then (for the sake of “safety”) create new regulations to restrict freedom of movement and activity. . . .

During the pandemic, personal medical data was used to prevent some individuals from playing team sports, watching their own children play team sports, travelling by plane to visit a dying parent, working out at the gym, eating in restaurants, and watching a movie in a theatre. . . . Special restrictions could be placed on people who drink alcohol, consume cannabis, eat too much junk food, . . . . People who have not taken an annual flu shot could be banned from airports, train stations, or even public transit.

Canadians have already seen and experienced firsthand the dangers of government using private individual medical information to control people.

In the same vein as Nova Scotia’s Bill 419, B.C.’s HPOA (Health Professions and Occupations Act) is under court challenge. 2023-11-15 Doctors warn British Columbians about the province’s tyrannical health care act. As more British Columbians learn about health outcomes from covid shots, the HPOA Act, and a couple of other egregious pieces of legislation, the Government is falling in the polls.

GULLIBILITY

RE: we want C’s preferences and requests to be accurately reflected in C’s consent for medical care.

We can create that together, so if you have any suggestions on how we can make the form more suitable for C, then we can talk about that and create a version that you and C are both happy with and that meets the legislation requirements. In the version I created for C, it indicated a list of things that C does not consent to. I understand your concern about giving consent and not knowing what you are giving consent to. Therefore, we could consider going about it in the opposite way and instead list only the medical care/supports that C is consenting to receive.

. . . We are committed to finding a solution that both meets the regulations and makes you and C feel comfortable.

I “feel”, and I AM highly threatened by the removal of Charter Rights. It is not up to Johnson Springs to make me feel comfortable with a removal.

Surprise. My memory goes back 4 years. Mandates. Safe and effective vaccines.

I keep a partial record of vaccine injuries and deaths, starting with Government-reported data. Then adding some personal stories.

According to the Government of Canada’s own COVID-19 vaccine special interest safety reporting, as of January 5, 2024, there have been a total of 488 reports with an outcome of death following vaccination.

The stories behind the deaths are tragic.

Gullibility isn’t one of my outstanding attributes. You will understand that,

given what is known today about what happened during the covid years, and

given the slickness of the propaganda generators,

Christopher needs the protection of Charter Rights for his personal safety.

I do not think you can argue with the 14 References below (out of thousands of possibilities). Look at JUST ONE; try Item 6. All in all, I have a well-informed basis for my view:

I am completely comfortable with protections provided by Charter Rights. I cannot envision circumstances under which I would sign them away.

From my perspective, there is no problem. Surely, given the sampling below under References, you will understand that, especially as a Mother, I will never sign away Charter Rights.

With that, we can wrap up and all get on with our work. There is no need for signatures on a Consent to Receive Support Form.

Best wishes, . . .

REFERENCES

(Copied from REFERENCES 2024-07-28 Consent to receive Support. No. Page 6):

Privacy: The relationship between a doctor and patient is private; the state (the government) has no right of access to medical records without making a court application. (The relationship between a lawyer and client is similarly protected under the Law.)

2. 2024-06-26 Covid VISP REPORT #4. Feds compensate $14M to victims of the vaccine campaign.

The Liberal government has paid out multi-millions to the victims of the COVID-19 safe and effective vaccine marketing ploy, representing a small fraction of total claimants who have suffered debilitating injury or death.

Reported side effects following COVID-19 vaccination in Canada The URL for this one is https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/vaccine-safety/#specialInterest. If you have time, take a look around the Govt website. It took me quite a long time to figure out that there are at least 3 Govt sites related to vaccine-caused “side effects”, including death.

REPORTED SIDE EFFECTS Cherry-picking by me (this is GOVERNMENT DATA):

- - Overall, most adverse event reports were from females
  - Within the youngest age groups (<18 years of age) the reporting rate is similar in males and females
  - The higher proportion and rate of adverse event reports for females has been observed in the United States, the United Kingdom, Israel, and other countries.
  - By age group, the largest number of adverse events are in the 40 to 49 year-olds. The second largest group – 50 to 59 year-olds; third largest age group is 30 to 39 year-olds.
  - Deaths from the vaccines – – scroll way, way down. Under heading Safety signals identified and other safety updates, just above Acknowledgements, click on DEATHS:

Up to and including January 5, 2024, a total of 488 reports with an outcome of death were reported following vaccination. Although these deaths occurred after being vaccinated with a COVID-19 vaccine, they are not necessarily related to the vaccine.

4. 2024-07-05 Ontario man (Hartman) sues Pfizer & Health Canada for wrongful death of son following COVID vaccination. Hartman sent tissue samples to American pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole. Lawyer Umar Sheikh representing.

5. 2024-07-09 covid: Yes, Pfizer and Moderna can be sued for vaccine injuries — here’s how. B.C. lawyer Umar Sheikh.

2023-03-21 Manitoba family files lawsuit against AstraZeneca . Jordan Reimer, 21 yr old son working at Whistler. Got the shot, Brain hemorrhage. Blind. And Worse. Local newspaper reporter, with photos.

7. 2024-07-06 US courts across the board rule against COVID mandates. By Jen Hodgson, Western Standard.

8. 2024-06-25 Bonnie Henry pushed COVID jabs on Canadians after BC CDC withheld vaccine injury data Unannounced to Canadians, newly released FOI documents reveal COVID-19 vaccines caused 16-times more adverse events and 14-times more hospitalizations compared to flu shots in British Columbia.

9. 2024-06-19 Update: Helen Grus trial, w/ Bath-Shéba van den Berg & Dr. James Thorp (Lavigne Show). PLUS July 3rd interview of Lawyer van den Berg by Tamara Ugolini.

10. 2021-05-27 Emergency doctor, Patrick Phillips: They’re rejecting my COVID vax adverse reaction reports. By Tamara Ugolini. PLUS (2) 2023-06-07 ‘Incompetent’ northern Ont. doctor loses his license to practise medicine and fined $6,000. By Darren MacDonald, CTV Northern News. (just 2 of the doctors who tried to tell BC Health that there are very serious problems with covid shots. Their reward for speaking up? The Healthcare system got rid of them.

11. 2022-01-26 Covid: Toronto Board of Health scrubs vaccine reaction story (death) from public archive. Tamara Ugolini

12. 2024-06- 17 Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach accuses Pfizer of misleading vaccine marketing, filed a civil lawsuit against Pfizer. By Grace Hills, the Kansas Reflector.

13. 2024-06-10 Employees Can Sue L.A. Schools Over COVID Vaccine Mandate Because Shots Don’t Prevent Transmission, Appeals Court Rules. From CHD.

14. 2024-05-27 Police Detective Penalized for Investigating Vaccine Status of 9 Sudden Infant Deaths (Helen Grus story continued)

Now the system (Premier Eby and the Govt, down to Island Health, down to CLBC, down to Johnson Springs) wants me to sign a Consent to Receive Support form that gives THEM authority in matters of my son’s health.

Even without the TESTAMENT of the Government’s own data, I have to say, “Ya gotta be kidding.”

It is unconscionable that the Government continues to push the vaccines, given what is known.

HEALTH is a PERSONAL MATTER, FOR GOOD REASON.

We have Charter Rights, for good reason.

2024-10-06 Our Preference is to CREATE INDUSTRIES and SPECIALTIES that are DEPENDENT upon the CREATION of sick and disabled, the more the merrier.

Health No Responses »

Oct 132024

This may be of benefit in your work. 2 quotes from Women Who Run With the Wolves, are appended

They speak to the Return to WHO I AM (your theme). /Sandra

– – – – – – – – – – –

THE DILEMMA

Our society is producing children with disabilities and disease FASTER than we can develop the CAPACITY to care for them. Which to me is apparent through the experiences of family & friends; and which the data emphatically affirms.

No one would use the word “intelligent” to describe our behavior, no matter how many doctoral degrees are behind the policies under which this production was, and continues to be engineered.

Our Preference is to CREATE INDUSTRIES and SPECIALTIES that are DEPENDENT upon the CREATION of sick and disabled, the more the merrier. That’s what we have – – higher proportions of sick children every decade. Read the statistics. A child who is free of disease is an anomaly.

I tell my child: YOU have to do the self-advocacy work. I have to help fight for Government, Regulators, Enforcement and Public Institutions that serve THE PUBLIC INTEREST in a clean environment. The dis-ease is feedback. It tells us that a frightening number of children are dis-eased. This was not the case a few decades ago. ONE friend in my school years got sick and died (small community; families know other families and follow each other’s fortunes. ONE sick friend who died in my 12 years of school. I do not remember a fellow student who died of dis-ease during my post-secondary education.)

Is it even POSSIBLE that we love our children? – – if we did, would we not band together, fight the propaganda, and refuse to elect Political Parties that do not put the health of our children ahead of all else? At this point in the game, there is no room for compromise. Being “nice” isn’t nice; it’s a cop-out. “GDP” and “economic growth” that are dependent upon escalating numbers of sick, disabled, and dead is really sick.

I don’t know if there is anything in my words for you.

The Appended quotes, beginning with “A healthy woman is much like a wolf . . . “ is more likely.

Best wishes, and bless you all for your contributions to Health-full Living, . . .

APPENDED, 2 quotes from Women Who Run With the Wolves

speak to The Return to WHO I AM

1. RE: Women Who Run with the Wolves, by Clarissa Pinkola Estés

Scroll down in the above posting to:

“A healthy woman is much like a wolf: robust, chock-full, strong life force, life-giving, territorially aware, inventive, loyal, roving. Yet separation from the wildish nature causes a woman’s personality to become meager, thin, ghosty, spectral. We are not meant to be puny with frail hair and inability to leap up, inability to give chase, to birth, to create a life. When women’s lives are in stasis, ennui, it is always time for the wildish woman to emerge; it is time for the creating function of the psyche to flood the delta…It means to establish territory, to find one’s pack, to be in one’s body with certainty and pride regardless of the body’s gifts and limitations, to speak and act in one’s behalf, to be aware, alert, to draw on the innate feminine powers of intuition and sensing, to come into one’s cycles, to find what one belongs to, to rise with dignity, to retain as much consciousness as we can.”

– – – – – – —

Women Who Run With the Wolves, 1992 by Clarissa Pinkola Estes

Excerpt from Posting at https://sandrafinley.ca/blog/?p=2348

(The “young woman” is the naive in all of us, men and women. Read this as “gender-inclusive”!)

“.. though the young woman attempts to follow the orders of the predator, and agrees to be ignorant about the secret in the cellar, she can only comply for so long. Finally she puts the key, the question, to the door and finds the shocking carnage … And that key, that tiny symbol of her life, suddenly will not cease its bleeding, will not cease to give the cry that something is wrong. A woman may try to hide from the devastations of her life, but the bleeding, the loss of life’s energy, will continue UNTIL SHE RECOGNIZES THE PREDATOR FOR WHAT IT IS and CONTAINS IT.

When (women or men) open the doors of their own lives and survey the carnage there, in those out-of-the way places, they most often find they have BEEN ALLOWING SUMMARY ASSASSINATIONS of their most crucial dreams, goals, and hopes. …

… when such a gruesome discovery is made… we can be sure the natural predator … has been at work methodically destroying a woman’s most cherished desires, concerns, and aspirations.

In fairy tales, the animal groom character is a common motif that can be understood to represent a MALEVOLENT THING DISGUISED AS A BENEVOLENT THING. This or some proximate characterization is always present when a woman carries naive presentiments about something or someone. When a woman is attempting to avoid the facts of her own devastation, her night dreams are likely to shout warnings to her, warnings and exhortations to wake up! or get help! or flee! or go for the kill!”

2024-04-09. Updated 2024-10-12 A list of “PFIZER” postings from my blog, in case you’re wondering about their Earned Reputation. First one Sept 2004. (My Dad taught me that you don’t make deals with crooks.)

Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt) No Responses »

Oct 132024

EARNED REPUTATION: “Pfizer” postings since the April list below.

1. 2024-07-09 covid: Yes, Pfizer and Moderna can be sued for vaccine injuries — here’s how. B.C. lawyer Umar Sheikh. Report by Drea Humphrey, Rebel News.

2. 2024-07-24 23 Year-Old (Trent) Killed by Pfizer COVID Vaccine, CHD

3. 2024-07-05 Ontario man (Dan Hartman) sues Pfizer & Health Canada for death of son (Sean) following COVID vaccination. Hartman sent tissue samples to American pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole. Lawyer Umar Sheikh representing.

4. 2024-06- 17 Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach accuses Pfizer of misleading vaccine marketing, filed a civil lawsuit against Pfizer. By Grace Hills, the Kansas Reflector.

5. 2024-06-10 Employees Can Sue L.A. Schools Over COVID Vaccine Mandate Because Shots Don’t Prevent Transmission, Appeals Court Rules. From CHD.↓↓

6. 2024-04-16 Important legal case, USA (I am Brook Jackson) has the potential to remove Pfizer’s immunity from lawsuits

From: Sandra Finley
Sent: August 8, 2020
To: The House at CBC.CA radio
Subject: Will I be joining those who don’t sign up for a covid vaccination?

Dear Chris Hall (host of The House),

I will be joining those who do not sign up for a covid vaccination.

I have followed the vaccine question for at least 15 years.

It has been announced that Canada has signed up with Pfizer and Moderna. Are you afraid to ask the Minister of Public Procurement, or the medical authorities, about contracting with a company that has a decades-long public record of big-time corruption?

One Pfizer story to make the point: In 2007 the news of the criminal charges against Pfizer was little heard in western countries. It was eclipsed by a same-day scare-story about tuberculosis. The Globe & Mail carried the latter, for example; they did Not report the news of criminal charges against Pfizer for the 100 dead Nigerian children. (When large corporations have bad news, their “Communications Specialists” sometimes manipulate their public image by using fear-mongering press releases to run their bad news off media front pages (bury the bad news).

The criminal charges against Pfizer were initiated by the Government of Nigeria.

In 2009 there was an out-of-court settlement.

PFIZER TO PAY £50m ($75 million) AFTER DEATHS OF NIGERIAN CHILDREN IN DRUG TRIAL EXPERIMENT, 2009-04-06 The Independent (UK newspaper) headline.

Out-of-court settlements come with a gag order. Convenient? Absolutely. There is no public record; “no disclosure”. “Disclosure” is an extremely important source of information for the public.

The book and movie, “The Constant Gardener”, is based on what Pfizer did to the Nigerian children, during the chaos and confusion of a meningitis outbreak. Pfizer tested their new “blockbuster” drug Travon, on human guinea pigs. Illegally, using trickery; deadly. In a different context it would be called manslaughter or murder.

Pfizer is ruthless in the pursuit of money. You will know the long list of outrages brought by the pharmaceutical industry. They are now in the white-washing business, “partnering” with organizations and institutions to sanitize their image.

The corruption in the vaccine (pharmaceutical) industry appears to be immune to media scrutiny. But good news (potentially).

The earlier talk of mandatory vaccination against covid has been dropped. I suspect polling results played a role: the numbers of people who will not comply is too high to attempt forced vaccination.

You may remember what happened not too long ago when the Government of New Brunswick was going forward with a mandatory vaccine schedule for children, desired by Big Pharma. When confronted by the evidence of the dangers, risks, and inefficacies involved, the Legislature did not pass the legislation.

There are very good reasons for not making a potential covid vaccination mandatory.

What we can now expect is a “communications” plan to convince Canadians of the safety and efficacy of vaccines. The “new”. The campaign is already underway. Expect more clever propaganda and manipulation, some of it coming through the schools.

If it doesn’t work, scare tactics will be employed.

Sincerely,

Sandra Finley (contact info)

UPDATE: the changed communications strategy is to address “vaccine hesitancy” (there was no success using phrases such as “anti-vaxers”; “vaccine choice” which is the actual position put forward, is not acknowledged.

So now the arguments address why, in childish ignorance, people may be “hesitant” about vaccines.

Jesus! What we need is honest discourse, an effective assault on the corruption, and Governments that will do the job assigned to them: protect the public interest. Educate (which is different from Communications Specialists and propaganda). REGULATE and see that regulations are ENFORCED. . . I have to laugh, sorry! It seems funny because the basics seem kind of easy.)

“November 28th email (“URGENT Petition regarding Pfizer appointment to the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR”))

2024-10-08 NWMO (Nuclear Waste Management Organization). Video, Gordon Edwards Sept 23 2024: “Nuclear Waste – An Overview”

Nuclear No Responses »

Oct 112024

PREFACE, from Dr Gordon Edwards:

Friends and Colleagues –

The Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO), representing Canada’s nuclear waste producers, is mandated by the federal government to find a “willing host community” to accept the burial of all of Canada’s high level radioactive waste (used nuclear fuel) in a Deep Geological Repository (DGR).

All but 2 of the original 22 candidate sites (from 12 years ago) have been dropped off the list. NWMO hopes that one of the two remaining candidates will be willing to take the last step in the next few months.

– – – – – – – – – – – –

This talk by Gordon Edwards is one of several intended for residents of the northernmost candidate site, the Revell Lake site, between the towns of Ignace and Dryden, in the heart of Treaty 3 Territory of the Anishinabek Nation.

Date of presentation: September 23, 2024.

Nuclear Waste: An Overview

https://youtu.be/LuhqrXivHl4

(NOTE, Sandra: I receive an inserted small screen from Youtube when I click on the link. Click on the “X” in the upper right. And just proceed. Whatever the message is, it goes away.)

2024-10-05 Jeffrey Sachs interviewed by Glenn Greenwald. The Deep State Problem is SEVERE.

Corporatocracy or Democracy or Administrative State or WHAT? No Responses »

Oct 052024

2024-10-03 ABOUT NUCLEAR POWER, UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR B.C. (short version, Oct 3/24)

Nuclear No Responses »

Oct 032024

ABOUT NUCLEAR POWER, UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR B.C. (short version, Oct 3/24)

Excerpt from a posting on www.sandrafinley.ca

I love those people in San Clemente. They are my stars. (The San Onofre Nuclear Reactor – video)

PLEASE forward to people in B.C. They should not unwittingly give a mandate for nuclear development by keeping their mouths shut.

B.C. PROVINCIAL ELECTION

Final voting day is Saturday, October 19, 2024.

I recommend: the recent video by the people of San Clemente, Calif. There is free streaming until Oct 13; the link is in the posting “I Love those people . . “ (https://sandrafinley.ca/blog/?p=30148).

The San Onofre Nuclear site is on the beach of the Pacific Ocean not far from San Clemente.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

2. Excerpt from the posting 2024-09-28 Nuclear plan for B.C. Using the B.C. Election

The Premier of Japan during the Fukushima Disaster traveled to San Clemente to be able to participate in person at the Hearings. After Fukushima he understands that nuclear is an INTERNATIONAL issue, hence his travels. His experience as head-of-state convinced him that the only option is NO MORE nuclear plants. Which is what Canadians and others have been saying for decades: globally, we must STOP PRODUCING radioactive waste. There is no answer for it. There is nothing small about it.

The posting illustrates the corrupting nature of the industry. The ONLY way it is a viable industry is through access to mountains of Government (our) money. . . .

If I know the provinces that have fought against nuclear and won – – the extent of the dedicated “no to nuclear and nuclear waste“ across Canada, the Political Parties know, too. Below, I am using information that has ALREADY happened. It’s what THEY DID DO, not what THEY MIGHT DO.

“Nuclear . . will continue to play a key role in achieving Canada’s low-carbon future.”?. . Why would a political party in Canada promote the nuclear industry? The provinces, moving from the West going east:

B.C.’s Clean Energy Act, passed in 2010, bans nuclear power from being used to meet the province’s energy needs. Dr. Bob Woollard played a significant role in the research that led to the moratorium; the risk and health impacts of nuclear power are too great. (Do a Cost – benefit analysis MINUS the propaganda.)
Albertans fought down nuclear reactors on the Peace River. Four years of intense effort, from 2007 until 2011. Result: Bruce Power completely bailed out of efforts to build reactors in Alberta.

Saskatchewanians fought down nuclear reactors planned for the North Saskatchewan River near Paradise Hill, 2009. They also fought down 3 separate attempts by the industry to build a deep geological Repository for high level radioactive waste disposal in northern Sask.
Manitobans gained their experience at Pinawawa (“Whiteshell”) in 1978. “No.” And their High Level Radioactive Waste Act was assented to in 1987. It is illegal to import radioactive waste into Manitoba.
The citizens of Ontario have had enough experience to know the high cost of nuclear energy. . . .

Mayors of Cities around the Great Lakes, on both the Canadian and American sides, banded together to stop the transport of radioactive waste through their water supply bound for disposal on the other side of the Atlantic. I don’t know the number of communities in Ontario that have said “No” to the disposal of radioactive waste anywhere in their vicinity. For fifty years the industry has been trying unsuccessfully to get rid of their waste. Meanwhile the old reactors in Ontario have to be dealt with, as they near (and are past) end-of-life.

The Province of Quebec put an end to nuclear reactors. And

prohibited import of radioactive waste for storage in Quebec.

Point LePreau has been a financial sinkhole for the people of New Brunswick.

WHY are Canadians so opposed to nuclear energy? . . . The ECONOMICS don’t make sense, among other reasons. Most Ontarians, Quebecers, and New Brunswickers, provinces that have had nuclear energy, understand that. And the rest of us learned from their experience. With uranium – nuclear, Citizens become paupers, in more ways than one.

Tell me what bona fide business could shoulder an existing liability for WASTE disposal of more than $24 billion?

(The nuke industry did it. The sleight-of-hand: REDEFINE the waste by using a legal document. Create the NWMO, (Nuclear Waste Management Organization). Transfer the industry’s liability to VOTERS to manage and pay for. My! But we have creative Government and Business “professionals”.

I’d say the industry is in desperate need of new customers to create a revenue stream. To pay for

CONTINUANCE of the multi-million dollar salaries for the “1%” (Cameco website, 2016, CEO Tim Gitzel, remuneration is $6 million. Gotta keep the gravy train (Govt money) flowing.). From 2013 to 2014, Executive compensation, in total, rose from $10 to $15 million.
Pay-offs for “the ol’ boys. Anne McLellan was brought onto the Cameco Board in 2006. You may recall Anne – – for years, the only federal Liberal elected in the West (Edmonton). Served 4 terms. Federal Minister of Justice, of Health, of Natural Resources, Deputy Prime Minister, under Paul Martin and Jean Chretien. A Liberal of Influence. After politics she went on corporate boards. Her position on the Cameco-Bruce Power Board alone is worth a million dollars. Some Provinces don’t have laws to prevent Corporate & Union contributions to Political Parties (the FEDERAL Govt does have such laws).
the cost of new reactors (no investment fund or insurance fund will touch them. You have to be in on the scam.)
disposal of 50 years of accumulated radioactive waste (no investment fund or insurance fund will touch that). The San Onofre Documentary is an excellent view into that existential dilemma.
de-commissioning of the old reactors and disposal of the associated radioactive waste

In a Ponzi, the last man in, gets left holding the bag. Read the evidence. There is lots more. REASSURANCES and PROPAGANDA do not work. Democracy fails in the face of chronic corruption.

The only sane person who would invest in the Industry is one from whom information is withheld. Or one who is in on the game, in a sleaze to join the 1%.

It is all dependent on an UNinformed citizenry, propaganda, and serious corruption – – extinction – – of the public interest. It is dependent upon the impotency of Elected Representatives, the existence of a “not-democracy”.

A STARTING PLACE FOR STOPPING CORRUPTION IN CANADA?

Stand up and Speak up. Don’t AGREE to be ignorant and stupid. Even if you like rich guys. Don’t vote for hands in the public purse, pigs at the trough. I don’t like to use those words. Sometimes plain-speaking is called for.

Sandra Finley 250-594-9898

2024-10-02 I love those people in San Clemente. They are my stars. (The San Onofre Nuclear Reactor)

Nuclear No Responses »

Oct 032024

Could you please help spread the word on ANOTHER NUCLEAR ATTEMPT?

B.C. PROVINCIAL ELECTION

Final voting day is Saturday, October 19, 2024.

send to every Canadian you know,
for forwarding to everyone they know in B.C.

TO: the people in B.C.

FROM: Friends in San Clemente, Calif.

May an unending line of beautiful, loved grandchildren bless you, the people of British Columbia, Canada.

The story of the San Onofre Nuclear Reactor was made by us, the people of San Clemente, for you and all the Earth’s grandchildren.

Small Modular Nuclear Reactors (SMNRs) are being sold to the people of B.C. in the 2024 Provincial Election.

We honour your intelligence. A nuclear reactor produces radioactive waste, no matter whether it’s a big reactor or a small reactor. And mathematically, the more little nuclear reactors, the more radioactive waste produced.

Our story is cautionary. If only someone had told us don’t buy; love your children better.

Our special documentary film, “S.O.S. – The San Onofre Syndrome” tells what we discovered. And what we did about it. The San Onofre nuclear plant is on the shore of the Pacific Ocean near the city of San Clemente.

Our documentary is available for free streaming with no charge and no registration from September 26 until October 13. Enjoy the viewing.

https://globalcinema.online/programs/global-nonviolent-film-festival-full-program-2024

For our Grandchildren, with love.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

TO VOTERS IN B.C. from CANADIAN EXPERIENCE

2024-09-28 Nuclear plan for B.C. Using the B.C. Election

In the above posting,

I tried to explain why and how these neophytes in the political game are being had by the people who are pushing the nuclear agenda. How they ipso facto are selling out to corruption, which is not their intention.

And then there’s this you should know about plutonium:

2024-09-30 Plutonium vs Democracy: A Necessary Debate Submission to CNSC (Cndn Nuclear Safety Commission) by Edwards & O’Donnell

2024-09-28 Nuclear plan for B.C. Using the B.C. Election. My cards on the table.

Nuclear No Responses »

Oct 032024

TO young, would-be Political Operatives:

. . . A couple of days later I caught the announcement about the B.C. Conservative Party’s promotion of nuclear – uranium for B.C. (2024-10-02 B.C. Conservatives, Powering B.C., Nuclear Plan)

The nuclear-uranium decision is an unwise one. I doubt you are aware of the consequences. This is a high-stakes game that affects the future – – well beyond your life span. The San Onofre Documentary speaks clearly to that point.

. . . I believe you to be good and well-intentioned people. IMHO you are being used.

Sandra Finley

MY CARDS ON THE TABLE

Serendipity! Just released. A very good documentary re mobilization of the community of San Clemente California. The high level nuclear waste from the San Onofre nuclear plant is stored close to the shore (on the beach of the Pacific Ocean) near the city.

The Premier of Japan during the Fukushima Disaster traveled to San Clemente to be able to participate in person at the Hearings. After Fukushima he understands that nuclear is an INTERNATIONAL issue, hence his travels. His experience convinced him that the only option is NO MORE nuclear plants. Which is what Canadians and others have been saying for decades: globally, we must STOP PRODUCING radioactive waste.

The SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR EXPERIENCE, DOCUMENTARY

WITH GRATITUDE

TO THE PEOPLE OF SAN CLEMENTE, CALIF.

https://globalcinema.online/programs/global-nonviolent-film-festival-full-program-2024

This is a good opportunity to see the film.

Free streaming with no charge and no registration from September 26 until October 13, 2024.

– – – – – – –

2024-10-02 B.C. Conservatives, Powering B.C., Nuclear Plan

says: outdated legislation which prohibits nuclear from even being considered in our energy mix.

What makes the legislation outdated?

This is an INDUSTRY that CORRUPTS. No new reactors? Big OR small . . UNLESS . . . unless the industry has access to the public purse to foot the bills, they’re hooped.

I (Sandra) am antsy about the Elephant-in-the-Room, Corruption – – not the fault of those running to be elected. But it has to be acknowledged and dealt with, if ever we are to get better government.

I wish to find ideas from us, for tackling corruption.

My Suggestion to Voters in our electoral district

Getting a handle on Corruption. How about

USING THE URANIUM – NUCLEAR INDUSTRY AS AN EXAMPLE?

This 2024 Election is being used to promote Nuclear for B.C.

The uranium/nuclear agenda is about impoverishing us. OTHER people get rich. It’s kind of cute how it’s done. A legal sleight-of-hand.

The industry created a Mountain of Waste, a huge liability. NO ONE INVESTS THEIR OWN MONEY in that industry.

SO! take all the LIABILITIES and wrap them up nice. Then RE-DEFINE: use a legal document, create a Government Agency (Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO)) – – like magic! the industry is no longer responsible for their waste, VOTERS are! (This transfer was done years ago.)

You will cry when you learn how many BILLIONS upon BILLIONS the multi-millionaire Executives of Uranium – Nuke have already foisted onto us. Now they want our dollars for “new!” SMNR’s (“small” modular nuclear reactors) . . . Uh uh, Oh no, they don’t. It’s about the gravy train. Top Executive Tim Gitzel, as long ago as 2016 was pulling down $6 million a year in compensation. He and his buddies don’t want the gravy train to stop running.

From their own website – in one year 2013-14, Executive compensation increased by $5 million (from $10 to $15M).

In addition, using the Cameco-Bruce Power example, the CORPORATE BOARD is used as a vehicle for rewarding spent politicians.

Anne McLellan? She was brought onto the Cameco Board in 2006. You may recall Anne – – for years, the only federal Liberal elected in the West (Edmonton). Served 4 terms. She was Federal Minister of Justice, of Health, of Natural Resources, Deputy Prime Minister, under Paul Martin and Jean Chretien. A Liberal of Influence. After politics she went on corporate boards. Her position on the Cameco-Bruce Power Board alone is worth a million dollars.

Watch the San Onofre documentary. At least one Canadian provided input. Canadians and Americans work cross-border to stop the insanity of nuclear power. Another example, the Americans came to Saskatchewan to collect info for the decision on whether or not to extend the Moratorium on nuke-uranium in Virginia (2011). The industry MIS-informed our American guests (National Academy of Science (NAS) (U.S.)) simply by withholding details – questions that the scientists from the Academy would not know to ask. Canadian Citizens filled in the gaps. It’s the same story as the San Onofre experience.

I am telling you that WE, VOTERS, need to take STEP 1 in addressing Corruption. Tell the Nuclear Story to others. The Billions of Dollars in subsidization are Billions of Dollars that are NOT AVAILABLE for the common good. If the Propaganda is not challenged, we WILL have nuclear.

Use the San Onofre documentary; it is a gift. It reveals a much deeper CORRUPTION, at a moral level that deeply wounds the spiritual. This is about what we humans will or won’t do, to protect our children. Literally.

If I know the provinces that have fought against nuclear and won – – the extent of the dedicated “no to nuclear and nuclear waste“ across Canada, the Political Parties know, too. Below, I am using information that has ALREADY happened. It’s what THEY DID DO, not what THEY MIGHT DO.

“Nuclear . . will continue to play a key role in achieving Canada’s low-carbon future.”?. . Why would a political party in Canada promote the nuclear industry? The provinces, moving from the West going east:

B.C.’s Clean Energy Act, passed in 2010, bans nuclear power from being used to meet the province’s energy needs. Dr. Bob Woollard has played a significant role in the research that led, eventually, to the moratorium.
Albertans fought down nuclear reactors on the Peace River. From 2007 until 2011. Result: Bruce Power completely bailed out of efforts to build reactors in Alberta.

Saskatchewanians fought down nuclear reactors planned for the North Saskatchewan River, 2009. They also fought down 3 separate attempts by the industry to build a deep geological Repository for high level radioactive waste disposal in northern Sask.
Manitobans gained their experience at Pinawawa (“Whiteshell”) in 1978. “Absolutely Not.” And their High Level Radioactive Waste Act was assented to in 1987. It is illegal to import radioactive waste into Manitoba.
The citizens of Ontario have had enough experience to know the high cost of nuclear energy. . . .

The Province of Quebec put an end to nuclear reactors. And

prohibited import of radioactive waste for storage in Quebec.

Point LePreau has been a financial sinkhole for the people of New Brunswick.

WHY are Canadians so opposed to nuclear energy? . . . The ECONOMICS don’t make sense, among other reasons. Most Ontarians, Quebecers, and New Brunswickers, provinces that have had nuclear energy, understand that. And the rest of us learned from their experience. With uranium – nuclear, Citizens become paupers, in more ways than one.

Tell me what bona fide business could shoulder an existing liability for WASTE disposal of more than $24 billion?

(They did it: The sleight-of-hand – REDEFINE, use a legal document, create the NWMO, transfer the liability to VOTERS to manage and pay for. My! But we have creative Government and Business “professionals”.)

I’d say the industry is in desperate need of new customers to create a revenue stream. To pay for

CONTINUANCE of the multi-million dollar salaries for the “1%”
the cost of new reactors (no investment fund or insurance fund will touch them. You have to be in on the scam.)
disposal of 50 years of accumulated radioactive waste (no investment fund or insurance fund will touch that). The San Onofre Documentary is an excellent view into that existential dilemma.
de-commissioning of the old reactors and disposal of the associated radioactive waste

In a Ponzi, the last man in, gets left holding the bag. Read the evidence. There is lots more. REASSURANCES and PROPAGANDA do not work. Democracy fails in the face of chronic corruption.

The only sane person who would invest in the Industry is one from whom information is withheld. Or one who is in on the game, in a sleaze to join the 1%.

By promoting nuclear as an answer to climate change (which it is not) and other things, the Government and Industry are DELIBERATELY running up even higher, the costs that eventually fall to citizens to pay. Meanwhile those smart people will continue to collect their multi-million-dollar salaries and perks.

“. . . the CRA went after Cameco: the uranium producer estimated it avoided declaring $4.9-billion in Canadian income, saving it $1.4-billion in taxes, over the last 10 years. (6 years ago.) (The tool used? Off-shoring)

The game is: Heavy-duty, long-term subsidization by Voters. Call it successful Business.

The Liberals appear to be gambling that they can use spin doctors and count on ignorant voters. Can they? . . Does it matter? Now it’s the Conservatives who are riding the uranium – nuclear plank. The industry greases all the potential palms.

INSERT, Oct 13. Background:

2009-11-29 NUKE 2. Panel decision – more Govt funding for the industry. Medical isotopes. Hyperion. Small reactors. UDP. University of Saskatchewan.

2009-11-29 NUKE 3. The Chronology IMPORTANT INFORMATION

A STARTING PLACE FOR STOPPING CORRUPTION IN CANADA?

Stand up and Speak up. Don’t AGREE to be ignorant and stupid. Even if you like rich guys. Don’t vote for hands in the public purse, pigs at the trough.

And good luck to us all.

Sandra

P.S. When you look behind the rhetoric of “rapid response”, “highly-trained emergency teams”, “most heavily regulated industry“, to “the real world” what you find is farce. (washing high-level radioactive waste into any water supply, let alone a River that is the water supply for 40% of the province’s people. Stupid is as Stupid does. That demo for the cameras had me, and others rolling in laughter!).

In 2011, the National Academy of Science (NAS) (U.S.) came to Saskatchewan to collect information. The state of Virginia was under petition to lift its 30-year moratorium on uranium/nuclear. Saskatchewan has Experience.

Presentations in Saskatoon, by the industry to the delegation from the NAS, relied on the NAS “not knowing”. Oh yeah, we have people of integrity in Canadian business circles. The same tactic as is being used on the Voters of B.C. today.

Economic arguments, once they become known to citizens, win the day. The reactors are boondoggles, through which a few well-placed engineers (ever hear of SNC Lavalin?), people in the industry, the Government, selected local government and the University, are enriched.

The San Onofree Experience

Free streaming with no charge and no registration from September 26 until October 13, 2024. https://globalcinema.online/programs/global-nonviolent-film-festival-full-program-2024

No new reactors? Big OR small . . UNLESS . . . unless the industry has access to the public purse to foot the bills, they’re hooped. This is an INDUSTRY that CORRUPTS. It is the ONLY way it can keep the gravy train rolling.

– – – – – – –

TO: (the lady) REGARDING CORRUPTION & SNC LAVALIN, Etc.

I think the (Political Party) can be reassured that if they persist in partnering with crooks they will be exposed.

CLARINGTON, ON, Jan. 27, 2023 /CNW/ – Ontario Power Generation (OPG) has partnered with GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy, SNC-Lavalin, and Aecon to construct North America’s first Small Modular Reactor (SMR) at the Darlington New Nuclear Project site. A rendering of the BWRX-300 small modular reactor.

– – –

By Gordon Edwards

Covered for the first time in Canada’s national press, the SNC-Lavalin scandal involving charges of criminal corruption and federal government collusion has been directly linked to charges of mismanagement of radioactive waste at Chalk River.

In 2013, SNC-Lavalin was found guilty of a pattern of bribery and corruption in several countries by the World Bank, and the corporation was banned for 10 years from bidding on any contracts funded by the Bank. Despite this fact, in 2015 the Conservatives under Prime Minister Stephen Harper put SNC-Lavalin and its corporate partners (also accused of corruption) in charge of Canada’s eight-billion-dollar radioactive waste liability as well as all federally-owned nuclear facilities.

Receiving almost a billion dollars per year of federal taxpayers’ money, the consortium of multinational corporations (including SNC-Lavalin) has proposed permanent storage of a million cubic metres of mixed radioactive wastes on the surface at Chalk River, right beside the Ottawa River – a plan that has been opposed by 140 municipalities in the area as well as by NGOs and nuclear experts, including a number of scientists who worked for decades at Chalk River in senior positions.

It appears that the federal government, under both of Canada’s major political parties, has chosen to abdicate responsibility to private corporations when it comes to the long-term management of radioactive wastes. There is a complete policy vacuum at the federal level regarding what is allowed and what is not allowed when it comes to fission-generated radioactive wastes other than spent nuclear fuel.

Moreover, the same consortium of private companies is actively working — with federal government cooperation and approval — to build, test and deploy a whole new generation of “Small Modular Nuclear Reactors” (SMNRs) using federally-owned lands and facilities to do so. Canada’s nuclear regulator, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) has actively lobbied the government to exempt most of these new reactors from any independent environmental assessment under the newly enacted Impact Assessment Act. That exemption is now a fait accompli.

CNSC reports to the Minister of Natural Resources (NRCan), whose mandate includes promoting nuclear power. Last November (2018) NRCan published a “Road Map” for SMNRs, which envisages hundreds of such nuclear reactors deployed widely in Canada.

In July 2012, Japan’s Parliament (the Diet) published a massive report stating that the primary cause of the Fukushima triple meltdown in 2011 was a pattern of inappropriate collusion between the nuclear industry, the regulator, and the government. Such collusion proved to be at the expense of public safety and environmental protection. There are clear indications that a similar pattern of collusion is now occurring between the private consortium (involving SNC-Lavalin), the CNSC, and Canada’s federal government.

= = = = = = = =

2024-09-30 Plutonium vs Democracy: A Necessary Debate Submission to CNSC (Cndn Nuclear Safety Commission) by Edwards & O’Donnell

Nuclear No Responses »

Oct 032024

Plutonium vs Democracy: A Necessary Debate

(Excerpt) The security measures needed to safeguard society from the threat of nuclear terrorism when plutonium becomes an article of commerce are so severe that our democratic way of life will be seriously threatened. Enforced secrecy, intrusive surveillance, and privately maintained security forces equipped with military-style weapons, are not what Canadians have come to expect from their energy suppliers.

by Gordon Edwards and Susan O’Donnell

submitted to the CNSC on September 30 2024

www.ccnr.org/CCNR_CNSC_Plutonium_Paper_Sept_30_2024.pdf

The following appeal was inserted into the document:

———-

An Appeal for Public Consultation

There is a growing pressure on the government of Canada to allow the civilian use of plutonium as a commercial reactor fuel. Such a move requires extracting plutonium from used nuclear fuel, thereby making it accessible. Once accessible, plutonium can be used as a nuclear fuel or as a nuclear explosive. Even a crude explosive device using plutonium is capable of causing enormous destruction and killing thousands.

The security measures needed to safeguard society from the threat of nuclear terrorism when plutonium becomes an article of commerce are so severe that our democratic way of life will be seriously threatened. Enforced secrecy, intrusive surveillance, and privately maintained security forces equipped with military-style weapons, are not what Canadians have come to expect from their energy suppliers.

In the last two decades, Canada has seen the wisdom of eliminating weapons-usable uranium entirely from civilian use, thereby obviating the need for extreme security measures otherwise needed to keep that material out of the hands of criminals and terrorists. In the same way, keeping plutonium out of circulation is the best way to prevent the further growth of a powerful nuclear security regime that is becoming increasingly militarized, with access to prohibited weapons under Bill C-21.

We urge CNSC to advise Parliament that there is a need in Canada for a broad public consultation or debate on the social desirability of moving toward the civilian use of plutonium in Canada or choosing to avoid that option altogether. As in the case with highly enriched uranium, we believe that there is no demonstrable need for plutonium with or without an expanded nuclear industry. Given the stakes, it is up to the people of Canada to decide the issue by democratic means. That requires a mechanism of consultation that goes far beyond public hearings.

Rumina Velshi, a past president of CNSC, has said ““Reprocessing is going to be a huge, huge deal for this country. We need to be clear: If this is not an area that this country is interested in pursuing, put a stop to it. And if there is a possibility, then let’s at least start that conversation”

As an Agency whose legal mandate is to serve the public interest rather than the interests of the industry, we urge the CNSC to speak out publicly on this important matter so that Canadians are not blindly led into a future that they may live to regret.

Gordon Edwards and Susan O’Donnell, September 30 2024.

2024-09-27 B.C.’s Conservative Party wants the province to reconsider its nuclear energy ban. But does it make sense? By Shannon Waters, The Narwhal

Nuclear No Responses »

Oct 032024

John Rustad says nuclear energy has to be part of the province’s power mix to meet emission reduction goals, but many experts beg to differ

By Shannon Waters

Sept. 27, 2024 7 min. read

Amidst all the name-calling and mud-slinging in B.C. politics as the Oct. 19 provincial election approaches, candidates from across the political spectrum can agree on at least one thing: B.C. needs more power.

BC Hydro estimates electricity demand will grow 15 per cent by 2030, driven partly by efforts to provide cleaner power to emission-intensive industries like liquefied natural gas (LNG) and mining.

To meet the expected demand surge, BC Hydro has put out a call for power generation proposals such as wind, solar, biomass and geothermal. That’s on top of energy from the $16-billion Site C hydro dam, which is nearing completion on B.C.’s Peace River after more than nine years of construction.

But BC Conservative Party Leader John Rustad says the province should consider another source of power — nuclear energy.

“Wind and solar can be part of the mix, but they’re not baseload, they’re not reliable,” Rustad recently told attendees at the Union of BC Municipalities convention in Vancouver. “We’re going to actually have to have a conversation about the possibility of using nuclear power in British Columbia if we want to be able to increase the ability to have affordable, reliable, clean energy.”

Investigating problems. Exploring solutions

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for a weekly dose of independent journalism.

Rustad isn’t alone in suggesting B.C. should take a look at nuclear.

The Canada Energy Regulator reached a similar conclusion in its Energy Futures 2023 report, which explored how Canada can meet its 2050 emission reduction targets. Achieving those targets would require nuclear power to become part of B.C.’s power mix by 2031 and account for about 13 per cent of power used in the province by 2040.

BC NDP Leader David Eby rejects that conclusion, pointing to B.C.’s abundant clean energy options, from long-standing hydro power generation to wind, solar and potentially geothermal.

BC Green Party Leader Sonia Furstenau is similarly dismissive of Rustad’s suggestion the province needs nuclear power, calling it “a nonsensical conversation to be having in B.C.”

“We have everything we need in B.C. to create an abundant amount of clean energy,” Furstenau told reporters at the convention. “We should lean into that with everything we’ve got and get moving into the 21st century.”

So which is it? Does B.C. need nuclear power or are nuclear power proponents just blowing smoke?

Rustad critiques nuclear energy ban implemented by BC Liberal government

About 15 per cent of the energy used in Canada comes from nuclear, but only Ontario and New Brunswick have operating nuclear plants.

B.C.’s Clean Energy Act, passed in 2010, bans nuclear power from being used to meet the province’s energy needs.

Rustad, who was a member of the BC Liberal government that implemented the ban, now calls the decision to take nuclear off the table a political move rather than one grounded in good policy.

BC Conservative Party Leader John Rustad says B.C. needs to have a conversation about the role nuclear energy could play as the province seeks to boost its power production. Photo: Union of BC Municipalities

Margareta Dovgal, managing director of Resource Works Society, a B.C. non-profit group that promotes resource development such as LNG, also wants the province to revisit its ban on nuclear generation.

“We know our energy needs are going to continue to go up and we need to have options to fulfil that — everything from solar, wind, small scale run-of-river, geothermal, nuclear and even hydrogen should be considered as part of that mix,” Dovgal said in an interview.

“It’s a clear no-brainer for me that we should at least have the pathway to allow nuclear electricity here in B.C.”

Dovgal called nuclear power “a well studied, well deployed technology with a large [and] really robust safety record globally” and suggested the private sector could step in to build nuclear in some circumstances if the government doesn’t want to.

But when things go wrong with nuclear power plants, the consequences can be severe. The legacy of nuclear disasters like Chernobyl and Fukushima is still top of mind for many.

“Whichever community lives near [a nuclear power plant] needs to realize that there is a small possibility that they may have to clear out of their houses because of radioactive contamination [and] never come back,” M.V. Ramana, a professor at the University of British Columbia’s School of Public Policy and Global Affairs, said in an interview.

A 2023 survey by Angus Reid found a majority of Canadians — including 58 per cent of B.C. respondents — were comfortable with the thought of nuclear power being produced in their province and half had no qualms about living within 100 kilometres of a nuclear power plant.

Renewables a cheaper alternative to nuclear energy in B.C., experts say

With renewables an established power source in B.C., ramping them up to quickly meet increasing demand seems like the best bang for the government’s buck to Julie MacArthur, an associate professor in Royal Roads University’s faculty of management whose work focuses on energy transitions and the political economy of energy projects.

“We have all this pent up interest from across the province to develop other forms of power that are so much cheaper [than nuclear],” MacArthur, who is also the Canada Research Chair in reimagining capitalism, said in an interview.

“I’m not against conversations but I don’t want us to spend so much time talking and waiting and planning for some new future, not ready to roll out technology that we miss the opportunity to transition as quickly as we can, given the tools we already have that are quite effective.”

When it comes to getting new energy sources online quickly, nuclear power doesn’t win any races. The province would have to alter legislation and establish regulations for the nuclear power sector before serious planning for a nuclear power plant could get underway.

“If B.C. were to decide next year to start building a nuclear power plant, the earliest we would get electricity from that is in the 2040s and that’s not a solution to [the] energy demand crisis right now,” Ramana, who wrote a book on why nuclear power is not viable solution to the climate crisis, said.

By comparison, wind and solar farms generally take just two or three years from the start of construction until they produce power, Ramana pointed out.

An array of solar panels stand on a slope in front of a modern building with wood siding — Renewable energy sources like solar are cheaper and quicker to implement than nuclear energy. Photo: Province of B.C. / Flickr

“We don’t have the luxury of time when it comes to dealing with climate change. Climate scientists on the intergovernmental panel on climate change, all of them tell us that we need to reduce our emissions very fast, and the timescale it takes to build nuclear power is not compatible with that.”

Merran Smith, a member of the BC Climate Solutions Council, a group advising the government on climate action and clean economic growth, said efforts to position nuclear as a viable power source for B.C. could divert time and money from more efficient power sources.

“We need to focus on existing technologies like solar and wind that are cheaper and are going to keep the electrical grid affordable and can be constructed in a timely way,” Smith, president of New Economy Canada, said in an interview. “There may be a role for nuclear, but let’s not get distracted by shiny objects for the future at this point.”

Cost comparisons don’t work out well for nuclear power either. Wind and solar power are cheaper than ever, costing between 3.2 cents and 13 cents per kilowatt hour. Nuclear power ranges from 19 to 30 cents per kilowatt hour, according to a 2023 assessment by financial analysis firm Lazard.

A view of Lake Ontario with Pickering Nuclear Generating Station on the horizon — Ontario’s Pickering Nuclear Generating Station is one of just four nuclear power plants operating in Canada. Several of its reactors are scheduled to shut down this year. Photo: Christopher Katsarov Luna / The Narwhal

Rustad and other nuclear power proponents point to small modular reactors (SMRs) — a new nuclear technology that promises to cut construction costs and timelines — as an innovation that could make nuclear power more competitive with renewables.

Small modular reactors, like traditional nuclear plants, produce energy via nuclear fission, but on a much smaller scale, which allows components to be made in a factory and transported to sites for assembly.

There are no small modular reactors operating in Canada. Installations in China and Russia have experienced construction delays and cost overruns, according to Ramana, while work to build one in Argentina started in 2014 and has yet to produce any power.

“We do have a little bit of data and this data all supports the idea that small nuclear reactors will not fix the problems of nuclear energy,” Ramana said, adding nuclear power tends to be heavily impacted by economies of scale — the bigger the plants are, the cheaper the power they produce.

“They are some of the most expensive nuclear power,” Smith said of small reactors. “They really will only make sense in remote locations, for example, for mines where the cost of building hundreds of kilometres of transmission line doesn’t make sense.”

The Alberta government is keen to deploy small nuclear reactors to help decarbonize its oil and gas industry, although a feasibility study concluded the technology might not be ready for a decade.

MacArthur doesn’t see much chance of nuclear stacking up favourably against renewables like wind and solar in B.C.

“We do want people to be aware of the options, but for me, it’s a pretty quick answer to say that [nuclear] isn’t the one we want to be focusing on for the province.”

Older Entries Newer Entries