British Columbians have been told the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline and Marine Terminal represents 220 tankers a year when it could be upwards of 340 per year.
We’ve been told that twinning Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain means a tanker a day in Vancouver’s inner harbour, when its possible the project could represent upwards of 475 oil tankers a year.
Taken together the two projects could expose BC to 2 million barrels of crude oil a day by land, and around 800 tankers a year transiting vulnerable coastal waters.
I have prepared an 11 page report–Proposed Pipelines and Tanker Spill Risk for BC–explaining how this could occur if Northern Gateway and Kinder Morgan proceed.
If, after reviewing the report, you are concerned about the volume of crude oil and condensate planned for transport across BC’s and First Nations’ land, freshwater streams and coastal waters, please let Premier Clark know. Please ask her to take back BC’s sovereign right to conduct a meaningful environmental assessment and have the final decision making power as to whether Northern Gateway proceeds or not.
Premier Clark’s email address is premier@gov.bc.ca
On April 19, 2012 I wrote an open letter to Premier Clark requesting she advise Prime Minister Harper that she is taking back—on behalf of the people of BC—our right to have the final say on the Northern Gateway pipeline project.
That right was signed away in June 2010 under an Equivalency Agreement with the National Energy Board, but can be reclaimed with 30 days notice.
This request to the Premier is necessary because the Federal government has informed the Canadian people that Northern Gateway will proceed. To ensure it has the power to enforce its decision, the Harper government has introduced legislation that can over-ride the National Energy Board. Under the previous rules, if the National Energy Board in its wisdom had rejected the pipeline, the project would not proceed.
Since the National Energy Board has not completed its review, and numerous people affected by this project have not yet presented to the panel, the Federal government has violated procedural fairness and the expectations of all involved. This is not just or fair.
In order to rectify this situation and protect the rights of British Columbians the Premier needs reclaim our right to due process and decision making.
The letter to Premier Clark was posted on this blog April 19, 2012.
A reply from the Office of the Premier was received April 27, 2012. The Premier’s Office has informed me that the letter has been forwarded onto the Minister of the Environment, Terry Lake. Minister Lake has the power to reclaim our right. I have posted the reply below.
From: Office of the Premier
To: Robyn Allan
Friday April, 27, 2012
cc Minister of the Environment, Honourable Terry Lake
Subject: BC’s Right to Environmental Assessment Needs to be Reclaimed
Thank you for your email, and attached letter addressed to the Honourable Premier Christy Clark, regarding the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline. Your comments relating to the environmental review process currently being undertaken by the National Energy Board (NEB) and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) Joint Review Panel have been noted.
We appreciate the time that you have taken to share your views and insight with us and have forwarded your correspondence to the Honourable Terry Lake, Minister of Environment, for his review and consideration as well. You can be assured that the specific points you have raised in your letter will be included in related discussions between Minister Lake, members of his senior staff and officials in the Provincial Environmental Assessment Office.
Again, thank you for writing.
Because it is not clear to me that Dr. Lake will reply to my letter once he has discussed it with his officials, I sent the following letter to Dr. Lake.
April, 28, 2012
Dear Dr. Lake,
The Premier’s Office has replied to me and indicated that my letter to Premier Clark has been forwarded to you.
I am following up with you as the reply indicates that you will review and consider the letter and discuss the points with your officials. However, it does not confirm that you will address my comments in a reply to me.
I would appreciate it if you could please confirm that after you have had a chance to review my letter with your officials that you will be responding to the specific points in my letter directly in a reply to me.
Sincerely,
Robyn Allan
cc Premier Christy Clark
Please write Dr. Lake, and copy Premier Clark, requesting that the Province inform the Federal Government that BC’s right to review and decide on Northern Gateway is being reclaimed.
Dr. Lake’s email address is ENV.Minister@gov.bc.ca
Premier Clark’s email address is Premier@gov.bc.ca
April 19, 2012
Dear Premier Clark,
Your government has not spoken out for or against the Northern Gateway pipeline proposed by Enbridge Inc., rather preferring to wait until the National Energy Review Board process is complete. I am writing to you today to explain that, unfortunately the current Northern Gateway environmental and public interest process is flawed and as a result the public interest of BC is not protected.
The Federal government, as I am sure you are aware, has publicly endorsed the project, stated it is in the national interest of Canada, and has systematically demonized individuals and groups who oppose the project. This behaviour has made a travesty of the necessary arms length relationship between government and an independent regulatory body.
As long as there was some sense that the Joint Review Panel (JRP) was independent and had the authority to reject the proposal regardless of the political pressure imposed by the Prime Minister’s Office, a semblance of due process was maintained. That necessary condition was violated when Federal Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver unveiled proposed legislation on April 17, 2012.
The Federal Government now intends to further weaken environmental protection and favour large oil companies operating, primarily, in Alberta. This has betrayed any remaining trust in federal energy decisions as they relate to the province of British Columbia.
With the overhaul of the environmental assessment rules and process, and making final decision on oil pipelines—such as the Enbridge Northern Gateway and proposed Kinder Morgan projects—a Federal cabinet prerogative, there is no confidence that the Government of Canada will make decisions that will be in the best public interest of the residents of this province.
A major change in policy in the midst of nation breaking events such as Northern Gateway or Kinder Morgan requires deliberate action on the part of your Office to protect the public interest trust and rights of BC residents and First Nations.
Certainly when the NEB process for Northern Gateway commenced in June 2010, the BC government thought the JRP would be objective and have the power to recommend a binding decision which would reflect the public interest of British Colombians and Canadians. I can imagine that the safety and efficiency inherent in one independent review body—which the NEB was believed to be at the time—and the belief that our public interest would be protected were reasons why the Liberal government of BC under the leadership of Gordon Campbell, felt it acceptable to sign away our right to conduct an environmental assessment under B.C.’s Environmental Assessment Act.
During my review of the Enbridge economic documents as part of their Application to the NEB, I wondered why there was no real or meaningful review of their case by various ministries of the BC government. The deliberate intent in the Enbridge documents to increase the price of oil for Canadian consumers and businesses, and the lack of concern over the impact our petro-currency has on forestry, agriculture, tourism and manufacturing, appeared to be glaring examples of an economic case intent on presenting only the benefits to the oil industry without due consideration to the economic costs for the rest of us. The development of a strategy to export raw crude to Asia at the cost of value added jobs and control over environmental standards also seemed worthy of provincial comment.
I felt surely, there should be professional economists, paid by taxpayers, that would stand up and present a fair picture of the macroeconomic impact rapid resource expansion and export has on the economy of British Columbia, not to mention the threat to the environment and First Nations rights. That is when I discovered that BC had signed away the right to actively assess the project. I then understood that not only have you, as Premier, elected to remain silent on the issue, but our provincial departments have effectively been muzzled as well.
I draw to your attention the Environmental Assessment Equivalency Agreement signed between the NEB and BC’s Environmental Assessment Office (EAO) on June 21st, 2010. I have attached a link to the agreement for your ease of recall.
Essentially the agreement states that the EAO will accept the NEB’s environmental assessment for four proposed projects, including the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project, which would otherwise have to be reviewed under BC’s Environmental Assessment Act. The NEB’s review would be treated as an equivalent assessment.
If the province of BC had not signed away its right to the NEB, under the terms of the legislation the EAO would have had to undertake a review. According to the EAO, it is a “neutral agency that manages the review of proposed major projects in British Columbia, as required by the Environmental Assessment Act. The environmental assessment process provides for the thorough, timely and integrated assessment of the potential environmental, economic, social, heritage, and health effects that may occur during the lifecycle of these projects, and provides for meaningful participation by First Nations, proponents, the public, local governments, and provincial agencies.”
We have the power within BC to undertake meaningful environmental assessment within provincial jurisdiction, but signed it away. However, not all is lost. Clause 6 of the Environmental Assessment Equivalency Agreement states: ”Either Party may terminate this Agreement upon giving 30 days written notice to terminate the other Party”.
May I recommend that the Government of British Columbia inform the Government of Canada that the province is now exercising its right with 30 days notice in order that it may undertake a proper environmental assessment under the terms of the provincial Environmental Assessment Act, for the Enbridge project, and it will not entertain signing such an agreement for the proposed Kinder Morgan pipeline.
This action will ensure that the public interest of the people of BC will be protected and will not be severely curtailed by the actions of the Government of Canada favouring primarily Alberta’s oil producers.
Sincerely,
Original Signed by Robyn Allan
Robyn Allan
cc. Dr. Terry Lake, Minister of the Environment
Mr. Adrian Dix, Leader of the Opposition
Mr. Rob Fleming, Environment Critic
Mr. John Cummins, Conservative Leader
Mr. John van Dongen, Conservative MLA
Mr. Bob Simpson, Independent MLA
Ms. Vicki Huntington, Independent MLA
What can you do? If you would like Premier Clark to reserve the right for British Columbians to decide what is in our public interest and whether or not Northern Gateway and the proposed Kinder Morgan pipeline should proceed, please write to her. Ask that she take Northern Gateway off the list of projects under the Equivalency Agreement with the National Energy Board and that she make it clear that when Kinder Morgan applies for approval, BC will exercise its right to conduct its own review process on behalf of the people of our province.
The email address is premier@gov.bc.ca. It is also helpful to cc your MLA.
Sincerely,
Robyn Allan
As part of the National Energy Board’s Joint Review Panel process of whether or not Northern Gateway is in the Public Interest, Intervenors are able to submit evidence as to the consequence of the project. In an effort to shed light on the economic consequences of this project as it affects Canadians and Canada, I prepared this report. I had applied for and was anticipating that I would be granted Late Intervenor Status. When that status was not forthcoming I approached the Alberta Federation of Labour and asked them to consider this document as part of their evidence. The evidence was filed as part of the AFL’s evidence on Tuesday January 31, 2012.
The AFL full submission is available here. There is some excellent material regarding the consequence of the project and what we need to do before contemplating Northern Gateway or any other pipelines to the west coast or the US.
Economic Assessment of Northern Gateway January 31, 2012