The Wilderness Committee, Canada's largest member-based environmental organization, honoured hall of fame broadcaster and co-founder of The Common Sense Canadian Rafe Mair with its annual Eugene Rogers Award for outstanding contribution to environmental protection in BC at its AGM this past weekend.

This is the poverty of ethics that undermines the credibility of any promises made by Enbridge. The $500 million in additional improvements came only when the possibility of a failed project threatened to cost the corporation more than the added investment. If Enbridge had really intended to build a state-of-the-art pipeline, these additional safety features would have been included in the first design. Enbridge's motivating objective is to make as much profit as possible with as little investment as possible. The safety of the pipeline was always a calculated consideration, never an inviolable principle.

We can no longer muzzle debate about cancer research and prevention with taboos designed to protect the status quo. The discussion must certainly be imbued with compassion and sensitivity to the pain of losing a loved one to this disease. But we need to be able to ask questions about the ethics of any fundraising initiative and debate the merits of different approaches to taking on cancer. Prevention, through healthy lifestyles and the restriction of environmental toxins, must play a far more prominent role in this discussion. Moreover, Enbridge, a company whose products cause cancer, should not be able to shroud itself in a bullet-proof PR shield by linking itself with cancer research.

Read this story from the Canadian Press on charges emerging from the latest round of National Energy Board hearings into Enbridge's proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline that the company and its consultants have no concrete plans for building the pipeline and addressing environmental concerns. (Oct. 12, 2012)

PRINCE GEORGE, B.C. — For critics, the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline is a moving target — literally — and the uncertainty of everything from the route to the type of steel that will be used in the pipeline is a source of frustration at environmental assessment hearings.

For a third day Thursday, a panel of experts who have worked on the project proposed by Calgary-based Enbridge were questioned under oath at final hearings in Prince George, B.C.

And for a third day, frustrations were palpable on both sides as interveners seeking answers about the $6-billion project came up against experts who simply don’t have definitive answers at this stage of the proposal.

“I can’t help but get the sense from some of the answers that this panel has given that very much what’s going on here is a work in progress, that you’ve put together a proposal and there’s a lot of preliminary process and preliminary design, but with respect to the actual pipeline — where it will go, what it will look like, how it will cross certain streams — that it’s very much, ’We don’t really know at this stage.’ Is that fair?” asked Tim Leadam, the lawyer for EcoJustice, which represents a coalition of conservation groups at the hearings.

Ray Doering, manager of engineering for the Northern Gateway project, said Enbridge has filed a preliminary design and supplemental information, and the review hearings themselves will result in further changes before a detailed design is completed.

“We have provided the preliminary feasibility assessments but we have made it very clear that there is further work and further process that needs to be undertaken to finalize those, crossing methodologies, in this case,” said Doering, one of nine experts sworn-in at the hearings.

Asked for specifics about the crossing of one of nearly 800 water course crossings on the latest incarnation of the pipeline route, Drummond Cavers, the project’s geotechnical engineer, said they are “part way through” geotechnical investigations.

Unable to get specific answers about another part of the route on the Maurice River, Leadam said he is trying to understand the process.

“Because what concerns me and my clients is mainly to what extent there’s continual changes to the design, continual changes to the route. At some point I’m trying to understand what exactly will be built,” he told the panel.

“Now I’m told there’s going to be a route revision V, so that means that there’s a different route that will be built than the one that we’ve all been focused upon, which is U.

“Do I have that evidence right, Mr. Doering, that there’s now a route revision V that’s being contemplated?”

“Yes,” Doering. “We have identified the anticipated changes going from Route U to Route V.”

B.C. Environment Minister Terry Lake had a similar complaint after the province’s initial two days of questioning.

Lake said he was “extremely concerned” about the incomplete responses from Enbridge experts.

“One thing that is crystal clear after the last two days is that Enbridge/Northern Gateway is putting off making commitments about including these systems in the pipeline design until after they get approval to proceed,” Lake said in a statement after hearings ended on Wednesday.

John Carruthers, president of Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines, said outside the hearings that after the environmental assessment is complete, final design and planning continue under the eyes of the National Energy Board.

“We will have spent $300 million getting through this part of the process, to getting to a decision: Is the pipeline in the Canadian interest and what will be the environmental impact of that project,” Carruthers told reporters.

“After those larger questions are answered at this stage, the NEB has a very thorough process as the specifics of construction are decided.”

The company has filed more than 20,000 pages of documents with the joint review panel, more information than has been filed on any pipeline in the past, he said.

“People want to know the specifics, but there’s another phase if the project is approved, then we have to go into the more detailed design and the NEB approves that as well,” he said.

That’s not good enough for those concerned about potential environmental impacts of the 1,100-kilometre twin pipelines that will carry diluted bitumen from the Alberta oil sands to a tanker port on the B.C. coast, and condensate from Kitimat back to Bruderheim, Alta.

Read more: http://business.financialpost.com/2012/10/12/fluidity-of-enbridges-pipeline-plans-a-frustration-at-environmental-hearings/

Damien Gillis discusses the resistance to the Enbridge pipeline, the recent "Keepers of the Water" conference in Fort Nelson, BC, and the increasing impacts on water, human and animal health from natural gas hydraulic fracking with CJSF's Sylvia Richardson. The pair also touch on Damien's documentary film project Fractured Land, currently in production, which examines these issues and the concept of "Canada's Carbon Corridor" - an interconnected web of fossil fuel and mining projects throughout northern Alberta and BC, designed to open up new markets in Asia - told through the eyes of a young First Nations law student. (Oct. 6 - 20 min)

You should read Environment Minister Terry Lake’s op-ed piece in Friday’s Vancouver Sun. If ever you needed proof on the utter incompetence of the Campbell/Clark government this will do it. He gives the government position re the proposed Enbridge pipeline. Lake calls for the the Joint Review Panel to “successfully complete of the environment review process”. What does that mean, Mr. Lake, when the federal government says that Enbridge will go anyway? Don’t you see that the fix is in! Have you ever been to such a meeting, minister? You will find an essential piece missing - namely, can the people of BC give their opinions as to whether or not they wad the project in the first place?

Following an eventful couple of weeks for the Canada-China energy trade file, Stephen Harper finds himself in quite a pickle. The Prime Minster is stuck between his resolute commitment to opening up a carbon corridor to Asian markets and the increasingly politically untenable position of supporting wholesale Chinese state ownership of strategic Canadian resources. With prominent Canadian voices opposing his recent, quietly signed trade deal with China and the tide of opposition to the $15 Billion Nexen buyout deal rising - now including the NDP - Harper faces some tough choices going forward.

Read this story from the Globe and Mail on a new card played this week by BC Premier Christy Clark in her debate with Alberta over shared benefits from the proposed Enbridge pipeline - this time the threat of withholding the electricity required to power the pipeline as it passes through her province. (Oct. 2, 2012)

British Columbia Premier Christy Clark has issued a veiled threat to withhold electricity needed to operate controversial oil sands pipelines if the projects do not meet her demands.

Ms. Clark, when asked Tuesday what steps her province could take to block projects like Enbridge Inc.’s Northern Gateway, went beyond pointing to the 60 regulatory permits B.C. could deny.

“British Columbia’s power would be required to power up the pipeline, from B.C. Hydro – a Crown corporation,” she said while speaking to students from University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy. “There are a whole number of different things the British Columbia government could do.”

B.C. Hydro did not return a call seeking comment.

Ms. Clark is trying to convince Alberta her five demands – three environmental, one tied to First Nations rights, and another linked to economic compensation – must be met if pipelines carrying heavy oil are to snake through B.C.

“You know what, though? To me, all the speculation about how British Columbia would stop it is kind of silly,” she later told reporters. “Because if British Columbia doesn’t give its consent to this, there is no way the federal government or anyone else in the country is going to be able to force it through. It just won’t happen.”

Bruce March, Imperial Oil Ltd.’s chief executive, saluted Ms. Clark’s strategy.

“I think Premier Clark did something really good to set out those five conditions,” he said at a separate conference Tuesday. “Now people have to figure out whether they can be met, should be met, or how they can be met.”

Alison Redford, Alberta’s Premier, has sharply rejected any suggestions that her province would share bitumen royalties or tax revenue with its neighbour. The premiers met Monday for a short minute meeting they both described as “frosty.”

“A 15 minute conversation isn’t going to be enough,”  Mr. March said.  “I think there’s a role for both provinces, the leadership of both provinces, to play and there’s a role for our industry to play, too.”

Ms. Clark also said Tuesday  B.C. is unprepared for marine oil spills even though crude is already being shipped out of a port near Vancouver.

Read more: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/bc-could-withhold-electricity-from-proposed-pipelines-premier-suggests/article4582945/ 

Read this story from CBC.caon BC Liberal MLA John Rustad's recent attempt to inject the controversy around the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline with a new twist - resurrecting the argument for opening BC's coast to offshore oil and gas development. The notion, first posted on the MLA's facebook page, has drawn widespread criticism and dismissal from Rustad's leader, Premier Christy Clark. (Oct. 2, 2012)

Despite the debate already raging between B.C. and Alberta over the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline, one backbench Liberal MLA wants to start a dialogue about offshore drilling in B.C.

Nechako Lakes Liberal MLA John Rustad recently posted a message on Facebook about the merits of oil exploration.

"With the debate raging around pipelines I'm sure there isn't much appetite for offshore oil and gas," he wrote. "However, if B.C. is ever going to become debt free, one day this is going to have to happen."

Rustad wants to put the idea of oil exploration off B.C.’s coast on the table — despite the political consequences.

"If it can be done environmentally sound, if it's something that can meet our standards, if there's a significant benefit, then we should have that conversation and it should be considered," he told CBC News.

No Support from Premier Clark

But the proposition has no support from the premier.

B.C. Premier Christy Clark spoke with Alberta Premier Alison Redford Monday about the five conditions B.C. says need to be met before the province will support Enbridge's bid to build the pipeline, which would run from the Alberta oilsands across B.C. to the port of Kitimat.

Clark is demanding compensation for the environmental risks involved in the pipeline project.

"I think that we've got our hands full with just this Enbridge pipeline," Clark said, adding it’s not an idea she’s entertaining at the moment.

Still, the B.C. New Democrats have jumped on Rustad’s comments.

"Mr. Rustad is being irresponsible by re-opening a deeply divisive debate about bringing further risks to our coastline that would affect the environment, the economy, First Nations, and all British Columbians," NDP environment critic Rob Fleming said in a release.

"While the premier has failed to truly stand up for British Columbia on the Enbridge pipeline, I hope she will at least clarify her government’s position on offshore drilling."

The New Democrats are calling for a continuation of B.C.'s long-term commitment to a moratorium on offshore drilling.

Read original story: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/10/02/bc-rustad-offshore-drilling.html

Since Premier Redford supports the pipelines and tanker traffic and is content to have the federal government cram them past BC opposition - and bearing in mind that Premier Redford has made it clear that Alberta won’t give BC a nickel - the only purpose for Ms. Clark to crash Ms. Redford’s office is to make it appear to folks at home that she’s doing something...The oil revenues from the tar sands belong to Alberta under the constitution. If she were to take some of than money and give it to BC not only would she be a damned fool - Alberta voters would eat her alive. Premier Clark’s bleating about “risks to BC” is bullshit as she and the rest of us know. Even Enbridge admits that the chances of a spill are overwhelming. Clark is playing us for fools.