While British Columbia’s municipal governments and environmentalists turn up the heat on plans to export Alberta oil sands crude from the Pacific Coast, the most pointed criticism of the projects has come from a former senior cabinet minister in the Canadian government.
The Union of British Columbia Municipalities voted 51.3 percent to 48.7 percent at its annual convention to pressure the B.C. government to use “whatever legislative and administrative means are available to stop expansion of oil tanker traffic along B.C.’s coast.”
That followed action by a coalition of five environmental organizations which filed a lawsuit requiring the Canadian government to enforce its own legislation to protect endangered wildlife and habitat along Enbridge’s Northern Gateway pipeline and shipping routes.
The case also applies to Kinder Morgan’s plan to expand its Trans Mountain system, which is due to start public hearings before the National Energy Board in February.
First Nations the issue
But the heaviest blow of all came from Jim Prentice, a former senior cabinet minister in the Canadian government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper, an expert in aboriginal law and, for the past two years, vice chairman of the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, one of Canada’s five largest banks.
Prentice is also one of the most outspoken advocates of opening up Asian markets for Canadian crude, rating the diversification of markets and the quest to attract investment capital to the oil sands as “one of the most important — and certainly one of the most challenging — initiatives our country has encountered in decades.
“We need to ‘un-gum’ market access with the United States and we need to build our market access to the Asia-Pacific,” he said.
But he delivered a harsh assessment of the short-sightedness and complacency within government and energy industry circles which he accused of failing to prepare for the “seismic shift” taking place in the worldwide energy sector and to “engage First Nations in a meaningful way.”
Prentice was emphatic that the failure to consult with First Nations, as required by landmark ruling of the Supreme Court of Canada, could undo the pipeline plans.
“Take it from me, there will be no way forward on West Coast access without the central participation of the First Nations of British Columbia, including attempts to negotiate an agreement that ensures aboriginal communities can support the projects without affecting their unresolved land claims.
Ecojustice focus on species threats
Meanwhile, Ecojustice, on behalf of the David Suzuki Foundation, Greenpeace Canada, Wilderness Committee, Wildsight and the Sierra Club of British Columbia, said its lawsuit will focus on the threat to species such as white sturgeon and humpback whales.
The federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans said the risk posed by Northern Gateway to fish and fish habitat can be managed through mitigation and compensation measures.
But concerns among environmentalists have increased since Environment Minister Peter Kent said in early September that his government is preparing an overhaul of the species-at-risk law that was enacted in 2002 to make it more efficient, without indicating what he had in mind.
That followed sweeping changes included in the 2012-13 federal budget affecting environmental laws and the Fisheries Act, including fixed deadlines on streamlined regulatory reviews, which environmentalists argue put resource development ahead of the environment.
Ecojustice said 87 recovery strategies for 188 at-risk species are overdue by more than five years.
“While failing to meet (that) legal responsibility … our government has nevertheless found plenty of time and resources to vigorously promote the Enbridge pipeline proposal,” George Heyman, executive director of the Sierra Club, said in a statement.
Gwen Barlee, policy director with the Wilderness Committee, said taking the government to court over its refusal to protect Canada’s endangered species “is a last resort for a desperate situation.”
Ongoing NEB hearings
At ongoing National Energy Board hearings in Edmonton, Enbridge said Sept. 25 there is a 70 percent chance of a pipeline, marine terminal or tanker oil spill during Northern Gateway’s 50-year operating life, refuting the 93 percent claim by an attorney for Coastal First Nations.
The municipal leaders were divided over the threat of an oil spill from the pipelines or a tanker accident and the potential loss of jobs and revenues from the pipelines.
Shari Green, the mayor of Prince George, the largest city along the Northern Gateway route, said that even if British Columbia is able to block the pipelines, crude from the oil sands would likely make its way to the North American West Coast through the Lower 48 states or Alaska, where the environmental rules might not be as stringent as in Canada.
“Oil is going to come out of the ground in Canada and find its way to markets,” she said. “I would be confident knowing we as a province have more say in the oil going to our coastline.”
Des Nobles, regional district director at Skeena-Queen Charlotte, whose region embraces tanker routes planned for Northern Gateway, said “we rely solely and wholly upon the oceans for its many resources. It allows us to sustain ourselves despite the economic (situation).”
Adrian Dix, leader of the opposition New Democratic Party, who is strongly placed to defeat British Columbia’s governing Liberal Party in May 2013, told the convention that if elected he will scrap the current federal environmental review of Northern Gateway and conduct his own provincial hearings.
