‘The proposed project cannot be justified’

A look at arguments over the Northern Gateway pipeline

Special to Financial Post | 13/06/05 | Last Updated: 13/06/05 3:12 PM ET
Douglas Channel, the proposed termination point for an oil pipeline in the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project, is pictured in an aerial view in Kitimat, B.C.

Darryl Dyck/The Canadian PressDouglas Channel, the proposed termination point for an oil pipeline in the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project, is pictured in an aerial view in Kitimat, B.C

More than 40 written final arguments have been submitted on the Northern Gateway project. Here are a sample of submissions to the National Energy Board:

Click here to read our Final Arguments to the JRP

See the full article at http://business.financialpost.com/2013/06/05/northern-gateway-national-energy-board/

Alberta

Edmonton Chamber of Commerce “The benefits of an approved Northern Gateway Project are certain. The prosperity of future generations hinges on the ability of Alberta and Canada to leverage current opportunities for immediate and future benefits.… Today, the opportunities before us are in extractable energy resources. We have a responsibility to satisfy the global demand for those resources and to secure the best price for them on behalf of all Canadians.”

Producers Cenovus Energy Inc., INPEX Canada Ltd., Nexen Inc. Suncor Energy Marketing Inc. and TOTAL E&P Canada Ltd. “The fact that the Funding Participants have made significant long-term commitments in the form of executed Precedent Agreements and Funding Support Agreements demonstrates substantial commercial and financial support for the Northern Gateway Project.”

Strathcona County “Strathcona County is home to Canada’s largest hydrocarbon processing centre and the majority of refining in western Canada happens in Strathcona County. Strathcona County has every confidence based on its long history and excellent relationship with Enbridge, including its recent experience, that this Project will be constructed, operated and maintained in a safe and responsible manner and that Strathcona County and the surrounding area will reap even greater social and economic benefits which will be shared with Alberta and Canada.”

Province of Alberta “Tidewater access through projects such as Northern Gateway is critical to Canada’s energy producers competing in global markets and essential to ensure that Albertans and Canadians receive the full economic value for the development of its non-renewable resources.”

* * *

British Columbia

Haisla Nation “The proposed project cannot be justified or found to be in the public interest. The benefits purported to flow from the proposed project have been inflated, the proposed project is likely to cause significant adverse effects, and aboriginal rights and title have not been addressed.”

ForestEthics Advocacy, Living Oceans Society and Raincoast Conservation Foundation “The Coalition submits that Northern Gateway has failed to demonstrate binding commercial support for the Project, that the risks associated with the Project exceed the potential benefits of the Project and that the Project is contrary to the principles of sustainable development.

District of Fort St. James “We are a community which stands in solidarity with our local First Nations in opposing this project. We rely on the land for our livelihoods and our quality of life. We are not the ‘radical environmentalists’ or advocacy groups that Northern Gateway opposition have been painted as in the media. A strong majority of people in our community are loggers, miners, carpenters, welders and machinists; we are industry workers who live in a resource-based local economy through which we have learned the value of sustainable industry practices. Labour projections already show that we have huge labour gaps to contend with, and is it suggested that Northern B.C. will be facing a labour shortage of nearly 20,000 workers by 2015. We do not want to see temporary foreign workers brought in to work on a project which puts at risk the livelihoods of resident Canadians.”

Province of British Columbia “In these particular and unique circumstances, NG should not be granted a certificate on the basis of a promise to do more study and planning once the certificate is granted. The standard in this particular case must be higher. And yet, it is respectfully submitted, for the reasons set out below, NG has not met that standard. ‘Trust me’ is not good enough in this case.”

Raincoast’s and it coalition partners  are represented by Ecojustice-  Click here to read our Final Argument to the JRP

Investigate. Inform. Inspire.

Publications | Scientific Papers | Reports & Books

Find us & follow

You can help Save the Great Bears: find out how