fbpx

Tag Archive for: NEB

Posts

Now’s our chance for smarter environmental and energy reviews

/in , , /by

August 2017

Right now, we’ve got a once-in-a-generation opportunity to raise our voices for stronger environmental protections. The federal government is reviewing key laws and processes including the environmental assessment process and the National Energy Board.

These changes will impact Canada’s environmental and energy decisions for years to come. Please add your voice. Together we can let our MPs know we care about making these changes!

Let’s make sure Canada fixes the National Energy Board

The NEB review of Kinder Morgan was hopelessly biased towards corporate interests and denied many people the chance to speak. Sierra Club BC’s Credibility Crisis report outlined its many flaws, revealing an industry-captured regulator determined to approve the project.

Right now, the NEB review process makes it almost impossible for community voices to be heard. The NEB has far too much power when it comes to reviewing projects like pipelines. It should respect the rights and authority of Indigenous peoples and work for people, not industry.

You can help make sure upcoming changes to the National Energy Board go far enough to restore public trust in the NEB.

Tell your MP: “Keep Canada’s climate promise and fix the NEB” 

Sign Now

Let’s make sure environmental reviews of pipelines, dams and mines are strong and fair

We also have an opportunity to provide input into the federal environmental assessment review to improve protection of Canada’s natural environment.

It’s time for governments to get serious about climate action by incorporating a scientifically rigorous climate test in environmental assessments. A climate test would analyze greenhouse gas emissions related to a project (both upstream and downstream) and assess whether a proposed new energy project fits within national action towards decarbonization, or if instead it will prevent us from hitting climate targets. It asks “does it make climate change worse?” If the answer is yes, the project doesn’t get built.

Environmental assessments should also advance reconciliation and co-governance with Indigenous peoples, respecting Indigenous rights by engaging communities early in the process.

Tell your MP: “I want a next-generation environmental assessment law for Canada” 

Sign Now

Want to do more?

The federal government has also mandated reviews of other environmental laws. Learn how you can advocate for strengthening Canada’s Fisheries Act and the Navigation Protection Act.

This public comment period closes August 28. To learn more about this process, visit the government’s feedback website.

Want to help take Sierra Club BC’s climate action work to the next level? Sign up to volunteer or become a member today.

Kinder Morgan panel report raises crucial questions for cabinet

/in , , /by
Donate

By Caitlyn Vernon

November 3, 2016

Do you remember those hastily-arranged, poorly-organized meetings that the federal government set up in the dog days of August to get input on the Kinder Morgan pipeline and tankers proposal?

You know, the meetings in which an ad hoc ministerial panel was charged with the task of compensating for the enormous shortcomings of the National Energy Board’s process, conducted under the Harper government? The meetings at which 91.4 per cent of speakers opposed Kinder Morgan?

Well, the panel released its report this week, and it raises a series of crucial questions for the federal cabinet. Simply put, these questions make approval impossible.

The panel asked that Cabinet consider how building this pipeline can be reconciled with Canada’s climate change commitments. Spoiler alert: it can’t—you can’t build pipelines and be a climate leader. End of story.

#StopKM rally in Victoria

Rally at the summer meeting in Victoria. Photo by Kat Zimmer.

The panel also asked how cabinet could square approval with a federal commitment to reconciliation with First Nations. Again, you can’t, given the numerous First Nations who adamantly oppose this project.

The panel pointed out recent oil spills and the inadequacy of response and suggested that “the Government must decide whether the Trans Mountain Pipeline is a worthwhile risk.”

The panel asked how the federal cabinet can be confident of its decision given the flaws in the NEB process and public criticism of the ministerial panel’s own review. Good question.

The reality is that the report from the Ministerial Panel does not provide the basis for Cabinet approval of Kinder Morgan. We can only imagine how Prime Minister Trudeau, Natural Resources Minister Jim Carr, and Environment & Climate Change Minister Catherine McKenna are scrambling to figure out how to spin this.

In fact, approving this project would be abandoning Canada’s commitment to real climate action, would impose a death sentence on the southern resident orca population and would invite ecological and economic disaster in the form of an inevitable tanker spill.

The Ministerial Panel report makes clear that there is no way to approve this pipeline without undermining commitments on climate and indigenous rights.

If cabinet takes the report’s questions seriously and bases its decision on the best available science, there is no way this pipeline will be built.

And yet rationality has been lacking lately. It’s distinctly possible that the federal government will announce approval in the next few weeks, just as it approved the Petronas fracked gas plant and the Site C megadam (which will power the fracking fields in the Peace), and just as it adopted the grossly inadequate emissions targets of the Harper government.

But stay tuned, because along with the 91.4% of people who voiced their opposition to the panel, we aren’t going anywhere. This is our home, and the fight is far from over.

Please donate today to help us keep up the fight.

Donate

Feature image by Gerry Gaydos.

Kinder Morgan report raises questions that make pipeline approval impossible

/in , /by

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

November 3, 2016

Victoria, B.C.—Sierra Club BC released the following statement from campaigns director Caitlyn Vernon.

“The report by the ministerial panel, released today by Natural Resources Canada, highlights the failures of the NEB process and raises a series of crucial questions for cabinet’s consideration.

“These questions make approval impossible.

“In answer to the panel’s question about climate change, the science is clear: building this pipeline would make it impossible to meet Canada’s climate commitments. You can’t build pipelines and be a climate leader.

“Regarding the panel’s question about how cabinet could square approval with a federal commitment to reconciliation with First Nations, the answer can be found in the numerous First Nations who firmly oppose this project.

“The panel also raises the question of how cabinet can be confident in an assessment based in a process full of flaws, both the NEB process and the ministerial panel meetings themselves.

“The panel asks—given recent spills and the inadequacy of spill response—whether this pipeline and tankers project is worth the risk.

“They also note the evidence presented to the NEB that the project would have significant impact on southern resident killer whales that are protected under the federal Species at Risk Act.

“This panel was no remedy for a flawed NEB process, and this report does not provide the basis for a federal cabinet approval.

“Approving this project would be abandoning our commitment to real climate action, imposing a death sentence on the southern resident orca population and inviting ecological and economic disaster in the form of an inevitable tanker spill.

“If cabinet takes these questions seriously and bases its decision on the best available science, there is no way this pipeline will be built.”

-30-

 

See attached backgrounder for a summary of flaws in the ministerial panel processes.

 

Contact:

Tim Pearson

Director of Communications, Sierra Club BC

250-896-1556

tim@sierraclub.bc.ca

 

Backgrounder:

The problems that Sierra Club BC and other organizations have identified with the ministerial panel’s approach include the following:

Lack of clear mandate

  • Panel had no mandate to make recommendations based on their findings, and therefore no clarity for participants on how the government would use the information it compiled, how it would be compiled, or how it might impact Cabinet decision-making.

Inadequate outreach to key participants

  • Some local First Nations leaders and municipal officials only heard about the meetings through Facebook and other unofficial channels, while others were informed on short notice.
  • Meetings of “experts” were scheduled, but no outreach was made to experts who had concerns about the project. They were left to self-identify.

Panelist conflict of interest/perception of bias

  • Panel Chair Kim Baird had a past business relationship with the proponent, was a registered LNG lobbyist, and penned a pro-pipeline op-ed in a national newspaper while the panel process was underway.

Unreasonable, late stage interference in submissions process

  • Approximately 55,000 people submitted comments and letters, but 2 days before the comment deadline, the Panel sent letters to numerous individuals and citizens’ groups that said they would not consider repetitive letters initiated by third parties. The B.C. Civil Liberties Association found this “dismissal is an unreasonable interference in expression of freedom of individuals and their participation in a public consultation process.” After the BCCLA letter, the NEB reversed its decision, but the experience left participants with a continued sense of government bias against citizens opposed to the proposal.

Poor Meeting Organization

  • Meetings were announced on short notice in the middle of summer. The online process to register was cumbersome and a deterrent to participation.
  • Locations in many communities were difficult to access and no provisions were made to make access easier. Due to time and room capacity limitations, hundreds of attendees were not able to participate.
  • No translation was available for French-speaking participants until the last 2 days of meetings.
  • No official records (no stenographer or audio-video recordings) were taken and the Panel’s mandate was broad and poorly defined, amplifying concerns of process bias.

-30-

/in , /by

SUBJECT: Ministerial Panel On Kinder Morgan: Two Bad Processes Equal One Good One… Right?

DECISION SOUGHT: Which Friday at 4:45 pm BC-time would be the best one for approving this albatross.

PURPOSE and/or ISSUE: Kinder Morgan did kind of a crap job of their proposal and GoC process wasn’t much better, but damn the torpedoes!

BACKGROUND

  • Previous GOC helped move things along by appointing a Kinder Morgan consultant to the NEB Board. We one-upped them by appointing an LNG lobbyist with close ties to Kinder Morgan CEO to our three-person Ministerial Panel.
  • Special meetings were held for First Nations, municipal officials, experts and the public. Is it our fault they didn’t know about them?
  • Only 91.4% of speakers at Ministerial Panel meetings in BC were against Kinder Morgan! We were anticipating 95%!
  • The PM promised to redo Kinder Morgan under a new and better NEB process and then we kind of didn’t do that. See consideration below.
  • We are supposed to protect endangered orcas but the NEB process doesn’t and nor does our Ministerial Panel. People like them, so this could become a thing.
  • The NEB analysis didn’t take our Paris climate commitments into consideration and the Ministerial Panel had no mandate to re-examine such matters. Hey look! We didn’t live up to our electoral reform promise either, why start committing to things now?
  • The Kinder Morgan proposal is really, really, really, really, really, really unpopular in Burnaby and we have a newly elected MP there.

CONSIDERATIONS:

  • The panel wasn’t tasked with taking notes, and to the best of our recollection we don’t feel that many people were opposed… nudge, nudge, wink, wink.
  • Can the PM be held accountable for his election promises? After all, he made them back when young people liked him.
  • How much would an ad campaign cost about how dangerous and mean orcas are? How about “Oil Tankers: At the Front Lines of Protecting Fish Farms From Hungry Orcas” or “Orcas: They Poop Where you Swim!”
  • With the climate warming, the seasonal window for appearing shirtless will only increase.
  • Our Burnaby MP has already been invited to the Liberal Caucus Christmas Party. Awkward! Maybe he could run in Alberta in 2019?

OUTLOOK: Sunny, as per PMO orders.

RECOMMENDATION: 1. Approve. 2. Hide. 3. Announce something distracting, like a spill response plan that pretends we can clean up bitumen even though (shhh) we know it will sink.

Kinder Morgan faces wall of opposition in BC

/in , /by

When the Canadian government decided to throw together last-minute public meetings on the proposed Kinder Morgan pipeline during the height of summer, they seemed to hope the meetings would float serenely under the radar.

Packed Victoria town hall on August 23. Photo by Kat Zimmer.

Packed Victoria town hall on August 23. Photo by Kat Zimmer.

The meetings were poorly promoted and the timelines were inadequate to allow people to properly prepare presentations. The locations weren’t clear and the meeting structure and online process to register were unwieldly and off-putting. Several meeting dates changed and more dates were added due to an outcry about some communities being excluded. The meetings had an ad hoc feel and it wasn’t clear to anyone how the government would use the information it compiled, or even how it would be compiled. Local First Nations told us they heard about the meetings only because organizations such as Sierra Club B.C. alerted them.

Despite all this, it was genuinely inspiring and heartening to see a passionate determination on the part of ordinary citizens to have their voices heard and to stand up for this coast. About 400 people showed up to the Victoria public meeting, many driving several hours to be there. Yet more than 100 people were shut out of the room, denied their chance to be heard.

In all the meetings, 418 people were opposed, with only 39 speaking in favour – a decisive 91.4 per cent against Kinder Morgan’s proposal. In addition, 17 First Nations were opposed, as were 21 local governments.

Over 100 people were shut out of the Victoria town hall. Photo by Kat Zimmer.

100+ people shut out of the Victoria town hall. Photo by Kat Zimmer.

 

The federal government had billed these meetings as an effort to compensate for the multiple shortcomings of the original National Energy Board hearings. The NEB recommended approval of the pipeline and tankers proposal despite widespread opposition.

Sources close to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau say he is determined to approve a pipeline – and Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain is the likeliest candidate. We can’t let the federal government use this latest panel to provide an air of legitimacy to the NEB’s deeply flawed process.

Prime Minister Trudeau has said that “governments grant permits, communities grant permission”. With each of the meetings along the pipeline and tanker route, it became more and more clear that permission has not been granted. British Columbians prefer a commitment to real Sunny Ways, without the fossil fuel haze and economic malaise of the Kinder Morgan pipeline.

The public meetings provide the Prime Minister with an excellent opportunity to make a change in policy direction. His government now has community backing to drop its support for Kinder Morgan and bring Canada’s economic policy into alignment with his commitments on climate. Their mandate to move boldly and decisively on climate and the economy has been confirmed. The climate math is strikingly simple: It is not possible to be a climate leader and build tar sands pipelines.

Saying no to Kinder Morgan would be to say yes to our Paris climate commitments, to protection of BC’s environment and economy from the threat of catastrophic pipeline and tanker spills and to repositioning BC and Canada as job-growth leaders in the emerging renewable energy economy.

VIDEO: Victoria environmental roundtable on August 23, courtesy of Ed Johnson at the Saanich Report

At 4:40, our climate & energy campaigner Larissa Stendie takes on the impossibility of spill response and the panel’s bias.

At 19:00, our campaigns director Caitlyn Vernon talks about the climate change implications of the pipeline.

 

Featured image (Top): Victoria Mayor Lisa Helps spoke at a large, peaceful action outside the Victoria townhall organized by Sierra Club BC, Wilderness Committee, and Greenpeace. Photo by Kat Zimmer.

 

Hundreds Rally Behind First Nations Against Enbridge

/in , , /by

Over 500 people gathered on the steps of the Federal Court of Appeal in Vancouver on Thursday to rally in support of eight First Nations on their first day in court against the federal government.

Lawsuits launched by Haisla, Haida, Kitasoo Xai’xais, Heiltsuk, Nadleh Whut’en, Nak’azdli, Gitga’at and Gitxaala nations, assert that the federal government acted unconstitutionally when it approved the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipelines and oil tankers project.

“The federal government has mismanaged the Enbridge file from the beginning,” said kil tlaats ‘gaa Peter Lantin, President of the Haida Nation in a press release from the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs (UBCIC). “We are in court to hold the federal government accountable to the highest law in Canada – the Constitution. We believe they are shirking their duties and responsibilities to First Nations in pursuit of corporate deals and board appointments.”

The rally was organized by UBCIC and the Yinka Dene Alliance and was attended by supporting nations, environmental groups and other allies who want to see the Enbridge pipeline stopped. Many supporters travelled hundreds of kilometres including a huge contingent from Haida Gwaii in particular.

“Today we’re fighting an unlawful environmental assessment and review process that failed to meet its constitutional obligations to First Nations,” said Chief Councillor, Arnold Clifton of the Gitga’at First Nation in the UBCIC press release. “Of the 209 conditions placed on Enbridge by the federal government, not one of them reflected our community’s concerns about the project. We owe it to our children to defend our rights and our way of life from the dangers of oil tanker traffic.”

Sierra Club BC, together with RAVEN trust has been fundraising for these legal challenges through the Pull Together campaign and supported the rally with online promotion, flyering and #UnitedAgainstEnbridge signs.

“These judicial hearings challenge the flaws in the joint review panel process which did not constitute real consultation with First Nations,” says Sierra Club BC outreach coordinator Galen Armstrong. “It’s important to have strong environmental assesments that people can trust, in order that we can make decisions that make sense for our society. These hearings could push Canada back in this direction.”

United Against Enbridge Collage

MENU