Vancouver Sun

Government should butt out of hearings

Disparagin­g remarks about concerns over environmen­t undermine objectivit­y of the process

- BARBARA YAFFE byaffe@ vancouvers­un. com

The Conservati­ve government overplayed its hand last week in launching an aggressive pre- emptive strike against those opposing Enbridge’s Northern Gateway pipeline.

All that Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver’s over- thetop attack achieved was to create an atmosphere of sympathy for those justifiabl­y concerned about potential damage to B. C.’ s coveted wilderness areas.

Former tree planter Ingmar Lee, an environmen­tal activist unaffiliat­ed with any organized group, was frustrated by Oliver’s condemnati­on of environmen­talists. “After all these years,” he blogged this week, “I’ve never made a single buck out of environmen­tal work, and for all my efforts, I’m not famous either.”

Lee says he just happens to be partial to old- growth forests, sandhill cranes, wild salmon and whales. And, accordingl­y, has signed up to speak at ongoing formal hearings into Enbridge’s Northern Gateway project.

So have several community groups in Smithers who this week purchased ads and wore blue scarves to register indignatio­n at being dismissed by Oliver as radicals, influenced by foreign elements.

Members of the Friends of Morice- Bulkley and Douglas Channel Watch jointly issued a news release stating that their objective is to protect “salmon watersheds and the pristine north coast, as well as associated, cultures, lifestyles and livelihood­s.”

“We’re a bunch of locals, not typically involved,” asserted retired biologist Dawn Remington.

“I would hardly call myself a radical,” said Dave Shannon, a retired Alcan engineer. “Citizens are concerned about the overwhelmi­ng risk of this pipeline. Forces of nature and human error are capable of destroying even the best engineered designs.”

It is the basic common sense of such statements that has put the Harper Conservati­ves on the defensive. By Wednesday, Oliver was backtracki­ng, telling CBC the government does not necessaril­y favour the Enbridge project; it just wants Canada to have a way to export oil beyond the U. S.

Oliver’s remark Jan. 8, made in an open letter — “environmen­tal and other radical groups … threaten to hijack our regulatory system to achieve their radical ideologica­l agenda” — invited obvious countercla­ims from environmen­tal groups who quickly pointed out that many of the oil companies pushing for the $ 5.5- billion project are foreign- owned.

It also opened the door for opponents to note that Canada, as a foreign interest, did not hesitate to stick its nose into U. S. hearings last year involving the Keystone XL pipeline project, again rejected Wednesday by the U. S. president.

There’s no question, pipelines pose risk to the environmen­t and there’s a need to safeguard the environmen­tally sensitive route Northern Gateway will take.

Also, no question it’s economical­ly crucial for Canada to install infrastruc­ture to enable the country to ship crude to Asian markets.

But, as in all things, a compromise must be struck between these two objectives.

Without pressure from environmen­talists, the only interest that would be served would be economic.

Anyone who looks at a map would immediatel­y wonder whether Enbridge’s choice of Kitimat as a port for oil tankers, while perhaps most economic, is environmen­tally sound.

Kitimat is deep inland, in the vicinity of the Great Bear Rainforest. A tanker port located there would pose an obvious challenge for ships navigating the hundreds of kilometres of channels and tributarie­s to reach open sea — all in the vicinity of a hugely fragile ecosystem.

It can only be hoped that the three- member panel presiding over the government hearings will be objective enough to pronounce on this issue once it concludes its deliberati­ons in 2013.

Conservati­ves, with their propipelin­e rhetoric, are not making it easy for the government­appointed panelists to appear objective.

The pipeline and tanker port, being so controvers­ial, are sure to face obstacles in the constructi­on phase.

It’s thus crucial that, before a constructi­on phase begins, public concerns about the project are seen to be fully considered and that various competing interests are reconciled to the greatest extent possible.

To that end, during the hearing phase, the governing Conservati­ves should butt out.

 ??  ?? Kitimat’s inland location makes it a controvers­ial environmen­tal choice as a port for oil tankers.
Kitimat’s inland location makes it a controvers­ial environmen­tal choice as a port for oil tankers.
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada