If they don’t ask for damages the implication is that there’s no damage that needs restitution so no action is necessary from the courts to address the zero harm.

“And so, we simply applied precedent. There’s no magic in the dollar amount. It’s a substantial amount because the breach in this case is substantial …”

Villify these folk however you want but they’re the only thing standing between us and Canada cranking up the climate crisis. I support them 100%>>

This is how bringing a lawsuit works. You need to quantify the “harm” and the amount here is to signify the scale of the harm to the court, not to seek this amount. The lawsuit uses this 100 million amount because of precedent, according to the article, which means similar cases specified similar amounts.

However what they’re asking for is the injunction, not damages; there’s unlikely to be any amount paid. Even there was an awarded amount this would be like a highball offer to start a haggling process, not a final selling price.

With the crisis becoming apparent, and the ever growing number of unemployed and disaffected youth with nothing to lose, you’re spot on.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Blow_Up_a_Pipeline

But no one votes for those politicians 🤷

In the US.

Most countries wouldn’t care at all.

Ha!

If that’s what record setting oil production and a massively over budget pipeline on the federal dime feels like… Smith is a pansy knocked over by a gentle pat.

“Punched in the face”, sure 🤣

No no, it’s actually: Fiscal Responsibility™

Which is completly different from being fiscally responsible.

We can only hope.

Welcome to BC where the Liberals are right-wing cranks, the NDP are neoliberal corporate goons, and the Conservatives are… well… Conservatives

We’ve purposly lit all these fires just to ruin their summer, totally intentional, I swear it.

🤨

I’m rarely pleasant at parties, probably why I don’t get invited to many 🤔

Yeah, let’s give the Military more money 🙄

Disgusting and entirely unsurprising. Canada continues on it’s path of neoliberal hellscape.

Maybe talk to a philosopher of morality and ethics? Sound reasoning and fact checking is the only antidote to questions of bias.

Religions of all stripes have been bent for great good and great evil. There is no certainty when interpreting ancient texts as the context has been lost to time, no matter how good you think your knowledge of history is.

That’s exactly what it is, bullying, by the principal; disgusting.

If they had legitimate grounds for a suspension they wouldn’t have made intimidating comments. The principal wanted to punish the student but knew they had no legitimate reason and hoped the student would quietly acquiesce.

But… all that money we don’t spend on our superfluous culture war policies, surely that’s enough money to go tax free… 🙄

Social Credit Magical Economics™ lives on in these nut jobs.

Are they any better behaved?

Anyone taking bets on how long it’ll be till RCMP officers are on the ground with assault rifles?

That’s where these “meaningful consultations” increasingly end. At some point this will either lead to protest of any kind deemed illegal in these zones, or these zones being closed to the public and militarized 🫤

This absurdity about fire restrictions always bothers me.

I follow the rules and don’t have a fire in the ultra safe, grade-A, sunk-into-a-gravel-pad, and surrounded by a 5m radius of gravel fire pit at a campground.

Meanwhile idiots like this ignore the warnings and do stupid and or criminal things anyways 🫤

But I know why Moe likes to talk about this, it deflects nicely from the “climate change exacerbated” image problem as he pushes for more oil and gas infrastructure.

I’m curious, what is it you’re "boo"ing? 🤔

I mean the house doing anything unanimously makes me think hell has frozen over, but tax cuts are everybody’s farvorite policy.