<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: NCC&#8217;s official Phase 1 submission to the Board of Directors</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.stopthebridge.org/2009/03/nccs-official-phase-1-submission-to-the-board-of-directors/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.stopthebridge.org/2009/03/nccs-official-phase-1-submission-to-the-board-of-directors/</link>
	<description>No to Kettle Island.  Yes to Healthy Communities.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2010 12:25:52 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Gisèle</title>
		<link>http://www.stopthebridge.org/2009/03/nccs-official-phase-1-submission-to-the-board-of-directors/comment-page-1/#comment-4131</link>
		<dc:creator>Gisèle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:10:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stopthebridge.org/?p=1150#comment-4131</guid>
		<description>Interesting that the NCC report in summarizing Gatineau&#039;s official position does not include this council&#039;s resolution that it is unacceptable to put heavy commercial vehicles on Montée Paiement and their request that Ottawa retain heavy commercial vehicles on the Macdonald-Cartier/King Edward axis. The summary statement is simply that Gatineau approves study of corridor 5 in the next phase. I wonder why? The summary statement of Ottawa&#039;s position, on the other hand, includes all the flip flops Council has taken on the issue over the last two months.
The full resolution of Gatineau&#039;s position is included in the Appendix. 
The NCC report also states that there is potential for consensus on the interprovincial crossing site locatiion among the 5 stakeholders. Ever the optimist...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting that the NCC report in summarizing Gatineau&#8217;s official position does not include this council&#8217;s resolution that it is unacceptable to put heavy commercial vehicles on Montée Paiement and their request that Ottawa retain heavy commercial vehicles on the Macdonald-Cartier/King Edward axis. The summary statement is simply that Gatineau approves study of corridor 5 in the next phase. I wonder why? The summary statement of Ottawa&#8217;s position, on the other hand, includes all the flip flops Council has taken on the issue over the last two months.<br />
The full resolution of Gatineau&#8217;s position is included in the Appendix.<br />
The NCC report also states that there is potential for consensus on the interprovincial crossing site locatiion among the 5 stakeholders. Ever the optimist&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
