Tempers flare ahead of B.C. pipeline hearings

Another battle is looming over shipping Alberta oil to the coast of British Columbia. A federal hearing is set to begin, and as Sarah Galashan reports battle lines have already been drawn.

CTV National News: Controversy over oil

Chief Political Correspondent Craig Oliver explains why the pipeline is so controversial and important.

CTV's Question Period: Controversial twin pipeline

Minister of Natural Resources Joe Oliver shares his insights on the controversial Northern Gateway pipeline.

CTV Question Period: Northern Gateway pipeline debate

Terry Teegee, Vice Tribal Chief of the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council, Eric Swanson with Dogwood Initiative, and Kathryn Marshall with ethicaloil.org discuss the Northern Gateway pipeline.

Watch: See all Videos in the Player

A A | Email This Email | Print | Comments (79) Tweet

Eric Swanson with Dogwood Initiative, Terry Teegee, Vice Tribal Chief of the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council, and Kathryn Marshall with ethicaloil.org discuss the Northern Gateway pipeline on CTV�s Question Period Saturday, Jan. 8, 2012.

View Larger Image

CTVNews.ca Staff

Date: Sun. Jan. 8 2012 1:11 PM ET

Tensions surrounding the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline are expected to bubble over this week when public hearings on the embattled project begin.

Discussions will kick off on Tuesday in Kitimat, B.C., site of the project's proposed oil tanker port.

More than 4,300 individuals and groups are slated to speak at the regulatory hearings, which will stretch out over the next 18 months across British Columbia and Alberta.

Stakeholders will weigh the environmental and economic benefits of the project which calls for Alberta bitumen to be transported to B.C. for eventual export to Asia.

The anticipated $5.5 billion project has been lauded for its potential to generate more than 3,000 jobs, loads of revenue and a new market for Canadian crude.

However, much like the proposed Keystone XL pipeline which has divided both Canadian and U.S. lawmakers, concerns abound about the safety of Northern Gateway.

About 60 aboriginal groups in B.C. have vowed to oppose the pipeline, which is slated to run through some ecologically fragile First Nations land.

"It's our traditional territories, it's our land, it's our resources that are at risk," said Terry Teegee, vice-tribal chief of the Sekani Tribal Council (CSTC).

On Sunday, he told CTV's Question Period that aboriginal groups conducted a study in 2005 which concluded the proposed twin pipeline's potential environmental risks outweighed its benefits.

Not all First Nations groups, however, have vetoed the project. Some have inked deals with Enbridge for a financial stake.

In Kathryn Marshall's eyes, it's a fair business deal. As a spokesperson for EthicalOil.org, she argues that opposing Northern Gateway could push oil production to countries with looser environmental standards.

"If you care about ethics then support places like Canada that have environmental laws, have human rights protections, have workers rights protections," she said.

She said the project would allow Canada to export to countries who could, in turn, reduce their dependency on so-called conflict oil.

But Eric Swanson of Dogwood Initiative, which opposes oil tankers on the West Coast, said the project poses both domestic and international threats.

He takes issue with the proposed pipeline shipping Alberta bitumen through First Nations land and onto supertankers, which he said are "bigger than the Exxon Valdez."

Speaking from a Victoria studio, he warned of a potential environmental disaster.

"We don't think that's in Canada's best interests and I'm wondering what is ethical about that," he said in a veiled jab at Marshall's comments.

The Northern Gateway twin pipeline has been called the largest private infrastructure project in B.C.'s history.

Comments are now closed for this story

George in Calgary
said

Those that oppose should step up to the plate with their cheque books open for why should the rest of Canadians have to foot the bill in lost revenues for the few? Those that oppose must keep this in mind. The governments are trying to diversify the market for the oil. Maybe the oil should be trucked to the west coast over whatever road routes the truckers would like to use and of course in all weather. I would think that would be more environmentally unfriendly? Remember: No oil to market means higher taxes or lower equalization payments which means lower standard of living. Less money for such things as First Nations etc etc etc. Think folks! We have a resource based economy. No or lower production of raw materials means higher costs all round. How deep are your pockets????

mahanna ali
said

if you build, it will flow,,,,it's a foregone conclusion that this project will go ahead - i believe construction has already started....

sandra
said

I would really like to know who is providing the financial backing for those protesting against the pipeline. Clearly they have ulterior motives otherwise they would realize the importance this project holds for all Canadians in terms of jobs, government revenue and standard of living. Freezing in the dark and using horses & buggies doesn't hold much appeal to me. Build the pipeline!

Dr.Paul Joseph
said

Enbridge had 80 oil spills last year and averages 70 a year in its pipeline operations.-This proposed pipeline will cross 773 streams between Alberta and Kitimat on our coast. -A spill is guarenteed to happen and will destroy some of these streams. many are fishbearing.- Thousands of species of wildlife will face serious harm when the pipelines spill. salmon , seals , whales , bears etc... Not just people effected by this.-We have landslides all over this province and the pipeline will be running thru many areas prone to slides. -Supertankers destined for China will be navigating a rugged coastline prone to shipwrecks and accidents will happen. -Picture Exxon Valdez and an Alaskan Coast that still hasn't recovered. That's what's coming.Pine Beattle devastation has destroyed most of the forests in the province.Are you ready to kiss our fragile marine ecosystem goodbye so Calgary and Houston can make obscene profits fuelling China's takeover whilst turning BC into Mordor ?This is a shortsighted retarded idea that will end in catastrophy. A disaster guarenteed to happen and my guess is people will die fighting this.Not to also mention that Oil is a finite product, we shouldn't be trying to kill ourselves fuelling China's Rise.

A Koster
said

It is indeed a topsy turvy world where a person stands up out of the blue and places the blame for past past/ongoing conspiracies on the very people that have been fighting the same for how many years now? This isn't about blindly following the right or the left, and it certainly isn't about passively getting spoonfed information that is not the truth... nor is this about writing a comment based solely on rehetoric with no basis in fact. It's all about listening to our consciences and knowing what is right or wrong. In this case, a year or two of jobs here building this pipeline does not justify a China emitting even more filth into the atmosphere while demanding that we need to cut back on our co2. nor does it justify more jobs in China or their enrichment by way of their own ownership in the oilsands. Simply put, why in the hell are we arguing here when there is so little in it for Canada? Time to think for us, in spite of who is in government.

Brad69
said

Money, Money Money, that's all some of these people care about. Because I care about risking the northern part of the province to an oil disaster doesn't make me a left wing whatever trying to steal your country. So you want to sell our resources to China at a dirt cheap price so they can refine it and sell it back to us at a profit so they can serve their people's interests. That sounds like your serving China's and not your countries interests. If we used our resources to bring down our gas prices by even 30 % think of how much that would help the economy in regards to the price of food and other goods skyrocketing up to cover transport costs. We continue to be told how much the increase in fuel costs our economy so why are we giving it away? How about we create jobs building refineries instead of pipelines and then we are oil independent and can control our economy and let Canada be free of outside influences?

Dean
said

They should build a refinery or two and we can keep the oil for ourselves, instead of giving everything away. Than the price of gas will be much cheaper.

Or else they could reduce the project for 40 years until everyone needs it.

mary
said

If you have ever seen what the tar sands have done to Alberta's once pristine wilderness, expect the same to happen to BC. What will be left for the future? Increase in jobs?? who's kidding who? Once the pipeline is built, then what happens to the supposed "job creation" Ha! More will lose their jobs!

Brandon
said

I dont understand why so many conservatives are against this. Its not a conservative idea, lets build the pipeline here and create permanent jobs here in canada and lower the price of gass. The only thing this pipeline benefits is the U.S, transcanada and stephen harper

smiley
said

I have never read so much claptrap in all my life. These new pipelines are fully monitored every inch of its path. They are built with far more reliable technology than any in the past.
And yes BC shares in the jobs jobs jobs that everyone is talking about. And that includes the educated natives all the way. The others are all living in the past, and will oppose anything that the white people want to do. They will also benefit financially very well as a result of this pipeline. Where do they think most of their welfare money comes from.Grow up people and get real.

Peter
said

My daughter's house in Kitimat is almost worthless because there are no jobs, no future. Rich folks down south and environazis need to back off and let folks prosper just as they want to. It's easy to protest when you don't suffer for it. Back off! Build the line!

Trevor
said

Any and all money that Canadians would seemingly make off of this would be lost. The same way Canadians pay American companies for lumber that was ours in the first place. With 14 stills already on the Kingstone XL project (none by vandelism) do we really want to ruin BC the way we did Alberta? There is no money in this for Canadians. If we ship that oil overseas will we be paying 10 fold to put it back into our vehicles. Is 3000 jobs really worth 33 million Canadians paying more at the pump? None of the companies involved are Canadian... Do we want to be as foolish as our so called leaders and believe there is a benifet here? How come no one is talking about support for building our own refineries? What has happened to Canadians that we have lost the rights to ALL of the natural resources that we use on a day to day basis? Why would we support a deal that will make a dozen or so people even more rich and cause ourselves to pay more for our daily expenses?

Lucien Goulet Belleville, ON
said

Who gets the benefits from these large projects ?Certainly, it is not the Albertans. Their government is running a large deficit and planning to introduce for the first time a provincial sales tax. The damages cause by the oilsand projects are are almost incomprehensible. What is wrong with the people of that beautiful province.

Trevor
said

So 14 stills in the kingstone XL project is killing the fresh water supply in Alberta and they want to make another pipeline. When did Canadians become so Americanized and only care about money? How many people who support this pipeline would still approve it if it was in their own backyard??

Mark in Newmarket
said

Dirty Oil? Is there such thing as "Clean Oil"? Regardless of how the oil is extracted it is all dirty, however with that said we all need oil whether you think you do or not. Almost every product that you and I use every single day has oil in it, so it isn't hard to realize that we need oil and we need a lot of it until there is a product of some sort that has been developed, that is usable and affordable for the consumers to you, so until then we need oil.

Vinny Vanchesco
said

NO TANKERS ON BC's NORTHERN COAST. The risk is too high. Anyone who knows those waters, especially the Hecate Straight, can assure you that this plan is a disaster waiting to happen. When the inevitable tanker accidents occur, it will be BC left holding the bag, not China or Alberta. And people who supported this will be nowhere to be found.Shipping toxic condensate and bitumen back and forth to China makes no sense. In my opinion, it should be refined in Canada, creating jobs here. I'm not even an 'environmentalist', just someone who has taken the time to find out how bad this plan is and who knows that the tar sands will sell that oil through other routes.

kat
said

As the average canadian taxpayer - I say we need to have a say - after all we are the backbone of this country.

Vanc Guy
said

While I'm not opposed this pipline or the oil industry - I do agree with some other folks here when they suggest we hold onto our oil for future Canadians. If it's not renewable - should we be selling it? Is it really ours to sell? And someone explain to the FN that they have been conquered by fate and events in the past already.

Pip
said

@Tom "I have to wonder if there should not be some way of enforcing both an IQ test and a knowlege check before allowing them a voice." Nowhere in Our constitution or Charter is intelligence required by anyone to live, run for office, vote or express an opinion. One has to question his own knowledge in making such a comment. The whole point of the hearings is to let persons express their opinions on the pipeline, whether pro or con. Based on those hearings, a decision will be made. As anther poster notes: if pipelines and oil tankers are bad for the west coat, they should be bad for the east too, You can't have it both ways.

KarlaBabe
said

Think about the full financial picture folks.When the Alaska cruse shop industry is dead $$$, the various fishing industries are dead $$$, eco tourism is dead $$$, the sports fishing industry $$$ dead, the coastal salmon runs are a memory $$$ will you pro pipeline tanker folk be happy?Along with theses industries will be impact on food services, accommodation and travel revenues. more lost $$$ Revenues, that i might point our we already have.For those of you that support trophy and other hunting, that will go kaput as well if the lands are poisoned with toxic sludge.Those same government yahoos that support the farm fish industry need to decide what they want.. you won't have both..Enbridge has have more the 700 spills in the last decade..The world sees on average, 5 major disasters every year.. Wanna play the odds?A tanker spill the size of the Exxon Valdez (today's ships are larger) will pollute the coast from Alaska down to Washington State.In Prince William Sound there is still oil gunk on the now 20 yr old toxic beaches. The Gulf of Mexico is dying, and taking with it the fishing industries of that region. The effects of that disaster will go on for decades.FYI.. when BP capped the leak the remaining expenses were put upon the US taxpayers! Enbridge has about the same amount of scruples. An oil leak in Michigan was covered over with mesh and sod to hide it.. The poisons were NOT removed. People are sick and dying from it.Take a good look before you go off half cocked about the almighty dollar.. there is no food on the table when the planet is too sick to produce it!

d
said

they should be forced to make it so it can shut off manually and by remote every 10 feet because of what wikileaks said just in case anyone one tries anything ever in the future if they cant do that they shouldnt be able to build it

GHW
said

The world sure is getting crazy and our country is in trouble. In reality this pipeline is the greatest thing since sliced bread in every way for Canadians yet I believe the odds are good the radical left will manage to stop it. The only thing these protesters will accomplish is to contribute to western frustration and divide our great county the likes of which we haven’t seen since Trudeau and his idiotic energy policy. Globally the left will continue to disrupt capitalism in hopes of ushering in its ideologically driven new world order. Their ideology, like a religion, blinds them from the consequences that history clearly displays. Their religion is all that matters to them and they will not feed your families. Fact is we need capitalism, we need business, we need jobs and we need pipelines. Without income from business and projects like this we have nothing. I encourage all Canadians to rise up and take back our country before it is too late.

Lz in Edmonton
said

Build the pipelines already. The only thing great about an environmentalist is that they use gas to get to where they want to go. Hipocrates all of them.

marshall01
said

What i don't get is the fact that the canadian goverment and it seems like tha average canadian want to export all this oil out of canada .. Why not sit on it for a while and let the rest of the world supply dwindle and then canada will be the king of the pile energy speaking . This would allow us to be the manufacturing leader as we have the oil and hopefully at a reasnoble cost for transportation to export concidering the distances that we have to transport goods . I'm not wanting another national energy program here but why is it that we as a major exporter of oil have to pay such a high price for something that we have in abundance ? I think that a good part of the profits are going across the border to " big oil " elsewhere .

Johnny Kananaskis
said

Len,
Are you forgetting the pulp and paper industry who have done everything you want to protect.

J.C.
said

I believe there should be a very deep indepth study by neutral third parties of everything involved before jumping to build not just a pipeline but also a shipping port for oil. A study that would also involve any possible scenarios and what precautions could or should be taken to ensure absolutely no hazards or minimal damage to the environment especially since BC has a rain forest. Then there is the possibility of earthquakes or sabotage in that region as well. What steps would be taken to ensure safety due to such circumstances should they occur? Loved the rainforests when we visited last year and experienced them for the first time. There are also environmental concerns in the offshore waters as well. There is much to consider in such a sensitive region for sure! Certainly this cannot be a rush project. We did not get to the northern areas during our BC trip ( a big beautiful province, a lot to see) but I am sure they also have many sensitive areas as well.

kim
said

because of our selfishness, nature is suffering and it is (will)coming back to us. we have to realize that nature and we are inseparable and interconnected. Without human, nature can survive but without nature we can not sustain our life. Jobs and money are important but we can not sacrifice the mother nature to gain those.

Wilkie7
said

So when the Yankee ecoterrorist that disrupted the XL pipeline show up will our Border services let this scum into Canada to join the Vanocentric black anarchist disturbed children that rioted during the Olympics and the Stanley Cup. They'll be walking of course to make sure they have the tiniest carbon foot print.
Ya right! Thank God the Fiberals and Dippers aren't in charge Federally.

Me
said

How are the environmentalists going to feed the country and pay for medicare when we can no longer sell our oil to the US due to their inevitable and impending bankruptcy? Look into the facts instead of falling for the hype and propoganda/fear mongering of the naysayers. Canada needs to be able to sell our oil to another customer other than the US - or we are all doomed.

Peter I. Katzenstein
said

Gate way pipelines.Lets move on and build these pipelines. Forget the enviromentalists. They are nothing but trouble. We have seen this in the US, Nebrasca. Canadians and US needs jobs and they need natural resources Canada has plenty of.

A Koster
said

rick in ab said, "If this pipeline doesn't get the green light, something is seriously wrong. There are ways to persuade everyone into building this project, if the right imagination is applied.Harper !" ... It's called propaganda rick as exemplified by the current bombardment of ads by the BC government in support for the Asia Pacific project. Be quick or you won't have noticed that China, after an initial investment sanctioned by Harper himself, of $1.2 billion 2 years ago, has managed to pour approximately another $11 billion into ownership of the oilsands, including 100% ownership of the MacKay River project. China was giving instruction to it's people on how to refine heavy oil 2 years ago from the time of that initial purchase.. you might even say that's it's been a foregone conclusion on their part for this pipeline to be constructed... and isn't it just what they need while they churn out the world's worst pollution already.. the only thing you have to ask yourself I guess is whether you're willing to take that temporary job to build the pipeline just so you can enrich the Chinese even further, or are you going to stand up and fight for our environment.

testy
said

Once again, we are suppose to blindly accept an unwise plan in the name of the "oh mighty" jobs it will create. As if there are no other factors to consider... There are other very important factors to consider and other areas in which we could support job creation, apart from Oil and Gas. Somebody should remind Harper that Canada isn't only Alberta. You'd think that the only thing the REFORMERS care about are is making Alberta strong and the rest of Canada precarious.

Roxy ...
said

I bought shares in both Transcanada Pipelines & Enbridge because I have more faith in capitalism than socialism to provide jobs & wealth ... If those people who are always complaining want prosperity , they should buy shares in those companies , support them and quit complaining !!! ....

Canadian Bob
said

Yes... those pipelines are perfectly safe. Unless of course they are the victim of sabotage... which is more and more likely to happen with each day the Conservatives are in power. As for those supertankers, again... completely safe, unless the captain is drunk and drives the ship onto the rocks, or a storm or ballast system fails, and "well looky here, another oil tanker sinks and spills its crude up and down the shorelines of British Columbia". You pro "everything Harper does" people are not only getting tiresome, you're getting dangerous in your misguided mindsets. Considering only 24% of voting Canadians put that incompetent PM in office, perhaps you should just sit back, zip it, and listen to the MAJORITY on this issue as much as you expect the rest of us to honour the silly majority parliament we're all stuck with.

Kitimat Rersident
said

I was born and raised in Kitimat and have recently moved back to take advantage of all the opportunity here. RioTinto Alcan is currently undergoing a 3.3 billion dollar moderization project here, apache and encana are building a LNG plant and shell has just purchased the Methanex Methanol plant site and is proposing an even bigger LNG plant, this is just the tip of the iceberg in this region....However The Northern Gateway Pipeline is not welcome here, the opposition in this region is almost unanimous, the risk to our precious and rare ecosystem is to great and for what? so Harper and his friends at big oil can get on with their hidden agendas while not lowering the price of gasoline in our own country? we should be refining our own oil and creating tens of thousands of jobs for canadians instead of a few thousand temporary ones and billions in profits for a few. This project is not needed to benefit the people here, instead we need to protect one of the last untouched ecosystems on earth....the head of the Douglas channel is where the Queen of the North sank, a ship that pales in size to the tankers proposed to be entering the inside passage. Its not a matter of "IF" but "WHEN", not to mention this is bitumen sand oil which is known to eat through pipelines (michigan) or sink to the bottom of our ocean floor resulting an impossible cleanup and destruction of the last wild salmon habitats on earth

Don
said

Don't let them do it. Keep it in Canada. It'll keep us warm for a long, long, time. Every time there's a pipeline people are pushed out of the way in front of monster, soukless bulldozers; and there's always spills. And it gets worse when it's loaded on rusted out tankers.

Big Bob in Ottawa
said

Good on Bruce from Alberta. What's the point in building a pipeline when peoole can't affford gas in their cars anyway? This won't drop the price at the pumps and the people of China and the far east will be the net beneficiaries. In years to come when we've mined out the oil sands we'll be left with the scars and pollution. Better to promote tourism or tree farm the area. At least we don't make it toxic. My grandkids will NOT benefit from this because their grandfather is not an oil company stock holder.

CY See
said

The environmental arguments are exaggerated fear-mongering (again). Yes pipelines leak. Very, very infrequently compared to total volume transported daily. Yes there are accidents, Valdez, BP in the Gulf, etc. Does this ruin the earth forever? Should we stop buying gas now? It might happen again! There are hundreds of thousands of pipelines all over North America, delivering your oil, refined products and natural gas to you every day. There are hundreds of oil tankers on the high seas every day, and near precious coastlines too. So let's shut down our economy? So that we can lower our risk from very small to zero?

LC
said

There is nothing in it for me. My taxes will continue to rise with our without this project. A bunch of other people making a bunch of money. I simply have no vested interest in this project to support it. Even if more revenue was collected by govt they would just spend it on something stupid - maybe an aircraft carrier.

Andrew
said

I agree that we need to protect BC's wilderness, but its a narrow pipeline, that would match the millions of KM of cut lines, hydro lines, and other necessary cut outs in the forest. If the Native people dont use any oil, dont drive vehicles, dont wear clothes, dont heat their homes with petroleum, and live completely off the grid than they are not contributing to the problem. The simple fact is that they consume just as much oil as any other Canadian, and therefore need to allow expansion of critical pipelines. Enbridge is not clear cutting the forest or raping the land, just cutting out a narrow band amongst the millions of hectares of pristine forest. For every day that every Canadian lives, they are calling for pipelines by their inevitable consumption of oil. Get real people.

Jobs
said

Jobs; Jobs & more Jobs. Go Enbridge go.

Heathertuite
said

The Gitxsan people have been protesting outside their treaty office for over a month (24/7, including Christmas) since they found out that their leader had signed a deal with Enbridge without allowing any sort of public consultation.
The majority of the residents in Northern BC are opposed to this deal. These are not radicals that do not believe in oil. These are regular people who depend on the rivers and ocean for food and often livelihood.
No one should be so closed minded as to say that no industrial projects should get the go ahead. No one should be so closed minded as to say that ALL industrial projects should get the go ahead. This is a bad idea. Look at the crisis in the Kalamazoo river, and all the other pipeline breaks that Enbridge is responsible for. Why would we take that risk in BC?

David from Edmonton
said

Enbridge already has a bad track record (the pipeline leak south of Wrigley, N.W.T. for example). Why should we put B.C.'s beautiful wilderness areas at great risk to supply a country with a bad track record in human rights?

Wes
said

People should fly over northern BC/Alberta and see that the pristine wilderness is crisscrossed with sismic lines.People need to educate themselves and look up Kitimat LNG.

rick in ab
said

If this pipeline doesn't get the green light, something is seriously wrong. There are ways to persuade everyone into building this project, if the right imagination is applied.Harper !

Rob Western Canadian
said

And some day these same people will be crying, we don't have any work, we can't heat our homes. Shoe will be on the other foot then.

DRR
said

Fact is there is already a pipeline moving Alberta oil to the BC coast, it been doing that for the last fifty years with no problem, and that is with fifty year old tech. Oil tankers are already moving oil down the BC coast from Alaska to the lower 48 on a daily basis. At the price of oil no one in the oil industry wants or will accept the building of a pipeline that will leak the black gold.If you don't want the oil industry,, stop buying products produced from oil, that includes sienthitic fur, materials, fabrics, plastics, fuel for that trip south, or anything else produced from oil. The oil industry only produces because we demand and buy what they produce.

Hilton Shand
said

The claims that increasing petroleum production is necessary for Canadas economic growth are not supported by the facts. Nations with limited petroleum and coal reserves would prefer to develop renewable energy, rather than continue to import petroleum and coal. The cost of renewable energy technology has continuously declined; and in many locations is competitive with a coal fired electricity production per MW hr. The cost and reliability continues to decline with advances in technology and economy to scale. Canada should be focused on innovation, manufacture and export of renewable energy technology.

Terry
said

Alberta stands to reap the bulk of the economic gains while BC shoulders most of the environmental risks. Until BC sees more of those economic benefits, this pipeline is dead in the water.

BobBLee
said

At the end of the day Actual $$$ > Potential Risk. at the end of the day this will happen.

Doug
said

Len from Ontario has obviously never spent much time in BC. I lived there for many years. Most of it is definitely not pristine. There are roads from mining and forestry everywhere. Years ago they left piles of garbage, pieces of machinery, scarred open mountainsides. On an abandoned rail line near my house I found a huge pile of trash that had been bulldozed off the edge of the right of way. It included over 100 cans of paint. So don't give us pristine.

The pipeline industry has stringent standards that prevent this, and the foothills area of Alberta where I now live is much more "pristine".

BigBiz
said

@Imo, well said. I agree that we have safeguards in place and can monitor the pipeline. We do have many pipelines in Canada already, and they are not springing leaks every other week.I think that the environmentalists are being hypocritical to complain about the pipeline, yet driving and using petroleum-based products. And I think it is unethical for foreign groups to fund the enviromentalists to disrupt the hearings.As for the First Nations, all the talk about "traditional land use" is ridiculous if they are not living according to their traditional culture and hunting, fishing, etc. They seem to want all the modern conveniences of society, but will use the "traditional land use" argument to get money from the government. I would like to see the pipeline go ahead.

tdsellers
said

I too am a consultant in the pipeline industry. Never the less this pipeline must be stopped. Enbridge must be stopped. Yes they can mitigate the pipeline impacts if enough money is thrown at it. They can double wall it for the entire length if they want to. But it is not the pipeline it is the port and the tanker traffic that will cause unimaginable impacts to pristine marine resources.To those who say any one opposed to the pipeline should not drive vehicles or use hydrocarbons....wake up, it is going to China.If Canada must sell it oil to other markets fine, do so by the current or twin the existing Kinder Morgan pipeline to an already existing port with a much more open navigational route in and out of.

Bill
said

The tar sands criticizing others for injecting foreign influence into Canadian politics?Claiming tar sands is ethical oil when it destroys the Canadian environment?Ethical oil when a accident of a tanker off BC would destroy the fish industry for decades not to mention the devastation to countless species?Ethical oil when native populations are already seeing illness from pollution and it will only escalate?Ethical oil when the plan is to export to the communist that puts all western nations at threat.?Leave it to the corporatist oil addicts and money changers to always accuse others of what they do themselves.The environment does not recognize the 49th parallel so any group who feels this decision will effect their well being not only has the right but the obligation to do what they can to stop it.

BC John
said

Fossil Fuels have saved the world from environmental crisis. a few hundred years ago, Europe had few trees. They had been cut down to use as fuel. The forests began to grow when coal began to be used. The world would be fairly treeless by now if it weren't for oil, gas, and coal. Yes, BC would probably be quite a different place than it is now.. So, for the sake of the environment, go ahead with the pipeline and do it well.

Donaldbain
said

Interesting that no one is protesting the refinery in Halifax harbour or the offshore oil dock in the gulf of Maine between Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. Probably because there have been no problems there even though they have been operational for years. Out west it's all about how much money native groups and tree huggers can squeeze out of the companies and the government before we will let this go ahead. The oil tanker argument is just as stupid. Loaded tankers ply the BC coast on a daily basis. This includes ultra large crude carriers, petroleum product ships and chemical tankers. What should really be questioned is the federal government cutting the coast guard marine safety and vessel traffic services, the people who watch over our coast lines to prevent accidents from occuring and ensuring timely responses when they do happen.

hollis hound
said

i am all for building this pipe line, but we should also be building one from alberta to the east coast. that way canada would be able to produce all its own oil needs. of course we would have to build more refinerys along the way. this would produce lots of jobs. every one of us uses oil in one form or another. even the first nations people.

KC BC
said

It is just fine to speak against a pipeline such as this. However, I rarely see any commitment from said complainers to "walk the walk" . They still use their vehicles, heat their dwellings with carbon fuels, and use public transit supported by carbon fuel. Surely there are compromises to make to ensure safety and minimal impact on the environment. In the Rockies, all electrical grids are above ground and take up a considerable land allowance. Stakeholders must ensure utmost safety but this can be done and costs passed on to the carbon consumer. I would be happy to pay more for gasoline or pay more in carbon tax to make this project work. This is good for the whole nation.

Just Saying - Ottawa
said

Too think that there are millionaires along with movie stars from the USA sending $$$$ to "stop" what we want to do in our Country...they should NOT have the right to do this. The USA depend on our energy and if they want to stop this pipeline then it is high time to "stop" providing them with Canada's Energy... one example is "Quebec Hydro" -

S in Vancouver
said

I think a huge component of the opposition is that this pipeline is moving dirty oil sands oil - this pipeline is legitimizing that product at a time when there is significant worldwide opposition to the filthy methods used to extract it. Were this a 'regular' pipeline, you'd still see the opposition out there, but not as large and organized as they are to this project.

Tom
said

when we have the blind rants of certain parties (len and others) who know nothing about the subject, nothing about the areas affected, and a complete lack of any sense of responsibility influencing the debate, I have to wonder if there should not be some way of enforcing both an IQ test and a knowlege check before allowing them a voice.

ron in victoria
said

i wonder how many of these nay-sayers walked to kitimat-----nuf said

Stan
said

So I guess we should have an east coast and St. Lawrence tanker band too?Ooooh, wait, if that happened the Saudis wouldn't be able to sell oil in central Canada.

John
said

And so the WAR begins. The left is coming out swingin!. Ever wonder and bang your head against the wall trying to figure out the cluelessness of the left. This segment of society does not get it and never will. They believe the world is a big big fairy tale with good and evil. Just watch the nightly news about healthcare issues, educational issues and they start to froth at the mouth about the inhumanity of it all. They are like the people of Greece and other European countries, They want it all and with no compromise. problem is there PIXIE dust economic policy has no way of paying for it. They will never get it. The first nations will get it once there is enough money on the table (THANK GOD FOR THAT). The left has this trump card also that they bring into the frey and that is what are we leaving for our Grandchildren etc. Good question. Mounting debt, 7-11 jobs and eventually austerity measures like the world has never seen. Time to get out of the fairy tale and live in the real world you brainwashed, lefties

Stan
said

More Saudi funded protesters meddling in Canada's business.

Max
said

The First Nations are right in all their demands. They are this country indigenous people and should be given most of the profits. Remember, you are extracting resources from their land!. They were assaulted, then cheated and robbed, and now some people seems displeased with native people's reaction? How dare you???

Vancouver Girl
said

What TEA from Sask said "Wonder how many of the naysayers drive vehicles and heat their homes with fossil fuels?". Totally agree.

Bruce from Alberta
said

My whole life I've always been for progress. Make Canada a stronger place and increase the standard of living for everyone. In theory this pipeline will do that, but I have watched for awhile now as cost of living spirals out of control, people go in massive debt. It's hard to even own a house and car anymore.There is no point to risk our wildlife so some greedy rich people get richer.

Doug
said

THe Economy will always come before the Environment no matter what the tree hugggers say. Get use to it!

lee
said

Seems to me that a modern technology pipeline access is a lot cleaner transport than large tanker trucks that will carry the oil to the coast. You can't deny the fact that the oil will be removed and sold to China. It's about the delivery, and a pipeline is cleaner, safer and more efficient. Get your heads out of the sand people.

TEA from Sask
said

Wonder how many of the naysayers drive vehicles and heat their homes with fossil fuels?

James
said

Len, you said it all.

lmo
said

As a person who has spent the last 20 years working in the pipeline industry, and someone who understands how the remote controls and safeguards with leak detection work on pipelines to protect the enviroment and the companies that transport the oil using pipelines. I see no problem with this Pipeline. Enbridge has state of the art control systems to prevent leaks. However if a leak does happen they know very quickly because of the state of the art detection systems they and all Pipeline companies have in place to minimize the impact.There are also many Pipeline Integrity programs that are in place and are not vollutary but enforced by regulators ERCB in Alberta and the NEB for cross province pipelines. Although in my experience almost every Pipeline company I have worked with go way further than the minimum.Also in my experience any major spills we the result of People not following the procedures after the detection systems alert them. There are literally millions of miles of pipelines in North America and yes sometimes accidents do happen but they overall percentage of risk is very small with the controls in place. You likely have a greater chance of winning the lottery than having a major spill as a pipeline company.In case your wondering I don't work for any specific Pipeline Company but as an independent consutant in the industry so I guess you could say I have some skin in the game that's fair. But I am also someone who has been involved in and seen the improvements over the years. I can only speak for the Pipeline portion as I don't know the safeguards in place in the Super Tankers but I would be very suprised if they were any less dilligent.

MikeInBC
said

My take is that the First Nations are funded by taxpayers through the Federal and Provincial Governments. These funds are generated through the taxpaying citizens of Canada and the Corporations/Businesses. If this pipeline and shipping overseas does not happen there will be less tax revenue generated by companies and their employees as well as less tax revenue generated by other businesses and their employees that will be supplying the oil companies and Enbridge. So if that happens there will be more of a tax burden on the rest of Canadian taxpayers. So if that happens perhaps the First Nations should not get all the money that they currently get from the Federal Government. It should be reduced by the amount of tax revenue lost. This is called accountability.

Len
said

I agree 100% with these protesters. Even though being from Ontario I do not want to see the pristine reaches of the B.C. coastline, the majesty of their forests and the invaluable stretches of mountains and high terrain ruined, wrecked, destroyed in the name of a few dollars in profit, and also to an area and country that is considered to be unfriendly to us. We, as Canadians, must be wise and not allow this travesty to occur.

Mitch
said

The first nations will only hold the project for ramson until they get enough money for it in jobs and kickbacks. We are all just a human resource to be exploited to extract the resources that once belonged to us all (first nations included). The first nations understand this better then we do. The rights to our resources have been sold to any and all foreign corporations. Petro Canada was Canadian owned and sold to Suncor, a US company. I would really like to see our crude refined here in our own country and sold in our own country. it is rediculous to be shipping crude to another country to be refined and then shipped back here for us to be held ransom by a so called world market. For the enviromentalists to oppose refining in this country is hypocritical as shipping to another country for refining doesn't change pollution levels as weather patterns disperse the pollution around the entire planet.. wake up people, we need a refinery for our crude, not a pipeline!

Borpo
said

Simple. All opposed to the pipeline can sign a cotract stating they will not use ANY petroleum based products for anything. that will leave enough plenty for those who like their cars 9and need them) as well as heating etc.problem solved.

TomMcIn
said

Marshall's argument that taking the risks in Canada would reduce the environmental damage in other countries is wrong. Like drug dealers, those other countries will continue to pollute and drive down the cost of oil. Eventually Enbridge will have to cut corners to recoup any money they put into the project and Canada will see an increased risk of disasters.

jogc
said

What big oil wants big oil gets.

Today's Top Stories

Labour Minister Lisa Raitt speaks in the House of Commons in Ottawa on Monday, May 28, 2012. (Adrian Wyld / THE CANADIAN PRESS)

Pick your location

Top Stories -

News Sections

News Programs

Features

Browse: