Poll finds 80 percent of British Columbians oppose Enbridge pipeline

VANCOUVER, B.C. - Enbridge should be looking at opinion polls and events in the United States instead of filing for federal approval to build a $5.5 billion pipeline from Alberta to a marine export terminal at Kitimat, says one opponent of the project.
Nikki Skuce of the environmental group ForestEthics says all Enbridge will do is spend millions of dollars and years of time promoting its Northern Gateway plan when people don’t want it.
“We’re clearly disappointed they’re ignoring the majority of the people of B.C. and First Nations,” said Skuce.
Her comments are based on a May opinion poll conducted for ForestEthics indicating that 80 percent of British Columbians don’t want oil tankers coming into and out of north coast waters.
Skuce is not convinced the pipeline review, to be conducted by a three-person panel through the federal National Energy Board, will be unbiased enough to produce a suitable document.
“Who pays for the National Energy Board? The proponent, the industry,” said Skuce. Skuce also questions the need for any kind of review given that various First Nations have conducted their own assessment of the project and have judged it unwanted.
The Dogwood Initiative, a Victoria-based public interest group which shared the cost of the opinion poll, said “We cannot imagine a scenario where Enbridge, or any proponent, is able to overcome the political forces organized against a new West Coast pipeline. And we consider ourselves a fairly imaginative group of people,” said Eric Swanson.
The poll results were part of a Mustel Group omnibus random telephone survey of 500 British Columbians in May 2010. Results on a sample size of 500 are considered accurate to within +/- 4.5 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
Here is the first question: “Since 1972, the Canadian federal government has banned oil tankers from transporting crude oil through B.C.’s inside passage to protect the coast from oil spills. Now, Ottawa is considering allowing oil tankers to transport crude oil through our coastal waters. In your opinion, should we ban or allow oil tanker traffic in B.C.’s inside coastal waters?”
Of those who responded, 15.4 per cent would allow traffic, 80 per cent would ban it, four per cent did not know and 0.6 per cent refused to answer.
The second question was: “Based on what you currently know, would you say you support or oppose Enbridge’s proposal to build an oil pipeline from the tar sands and bring oil tanker traffic to B.C.’s North Coast? Would that be strongly or somewhat?”
Responses were 8.1 per cent who would strongly support it, 25.6 per cent who would somewhat support it, 19.3 per cent who were somewhat opposed, 31.7 who were strongly opposed, with 13.5 per cent who don’t know and 1.8 per cent who refused to answer.

Native group calls for boycott of Enbridge Northern Gateway line

CALGARY, Alta. - A small first nation group in Canada’s British Columbia has made a personal appeal to Alberta energy companies, China and other governments to oppose the proposed Northern Gateway crude pipeline. Northern Gateway is a proposed Enbridge Inc. pipeline that would export oilsands crude to Asia.
The 1,170-kilometer project would bring crude from Alberta to the northern B.C. coast, where it would be loaded onto very large crude carriers (VLCCs) for transport to Asian refiners.
The project offers oilsands producers an appealing alternative market to the United States, where climate change legislation has brought some uncertainty.
On some of the pristine, salmon-rich lands Gateway would cross - safely, Enbridge says - first nations are voicing growing concerns that the line will damage the environment and leave little in return.
One of those nations, the Wet'suwet'en, took to Calgary on Jan. 15 in hopes of persuading energy companies to boycott the project. About 140 km. of Gateway would be built on Wet'suwet'en traditional territory, and the group believes the environmental approval process for the pipeline will infringe on their constitutional rights, since it does not include a mandate to look into aboriginal rights and title.

Canadian Joint Review Panel Agreement issued for Northern Gateway Pipeline

OTTAWA - The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency and the National Energy Board on Dec. 4 issued the Joint Review Panel Agreement, including the Terms of Reference, for the environmental and regulatory review of the Northern Gateway Pipeline Project proposed by Enbridge.
The joint review panel process will provide an opportunity for all hearing participants to make their views known on the project in an open forum. Public and Aboriginal groups are encouraged to bring their views on the Northern Gateway Pipeline Project forward to the Joint Review Panel once the Panel is established.
The Agreement was issued for public comment before being finalized. The Agreement describes the Panel's terms of reference as well as the process to be followed for conducting the joint panel review.
The Panel has a broad mandate under both the National Energy Board Act and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act to consider whether the project is likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects and if it is in the public interest.
After conclusion of the review process, the Panel will prepare a Panel Report setting out its conclusions and recommendations relating to the environmental assessment of the project.
Following the government response on the Panel Report, the Panel will then issue its reasons for decision under the National Energy Board Act.

Environmental groups ask public inquiry into Enbridge Gateway line

CALGARY, Alta. – Canadian West coast environmental groups on Aug. 17 demanded that the federal government create a public inquiry to look into crude oil pipelines in northern British Columbia.
“Canadians deserve a decision-making process for the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline that is independent, comprehensive, and has the freedom to decide if the proposed oil pipelines and supertankers are right for BC and Canada's Pacific North Coast,” said Josh Paterson, staff counsel at West Coast Environmental Law in a press release.
The letter sent to the government was signed by ten different environmental groups including West Coast Environmental Law, ForestEthics, the Pembina Institute, Living Oceans Society and others. It stated that the proposed model for environmental review of the pipeline is not adequate.