'No Enbridge' report: Special delivery to Industry Minister James Moore's office
by ForestEthics Advocacy
JRP evidence proves Northern Gateway not in national interest, says new ForestEthics Advocacy report
Vancouver, B.C. – As a decision looms from the Joint Review Panel (JRP) reviewing the case for the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipelines, ForestEthics Advocacy released a report today summarizing evidence from the hearings, which makes it abundantly clear that the Northern Gateway pipelines and tanker project is not in the national interest and must be rejected.
The new report will be delivered in person by ForestEthics Advocacy to the office of James Moore, the federal Minister of Industry and Stephen Harper's BC lieutenant. The delivery will take place at Moore's office (2603 St. John's St. in Port Moody) at 12 Noon Tuesday, Dec. 10.
"We are going the extra mile to remind the Harper government that they still have the opportunity to do the right thing. They have a chance to act on the evidence and the overwhelming opposition from everyone from local fishers to the BC government who have all formally come out in opposition to this project,” said Ben West, ForestEthics Advocacy's Tar Sands Campaign Director, who will be on hand Wednesday to deliver the report.
The report, "Case Closed: Enbridge failed to prove Northern Gateway pipelines in national interest," compiles evidence highlighting Enbridge’s failure to prove benefits and address adverse environmental effects.
“Anyone who participated in the hearings repeatedly heard Enbridge say further planning would be done during ‘detailed engineering.’ It deferred the majority of its evidence until after approval, when there would be no opportunity for public scrutiny,” says Nikki Skuce, Senior Energy Campaigner with ForestEthics Advocacy. “Upon closer review of the evidence, it’s undeniable that the JRP should reject this project.”
Gaps in Enbridge evidence highlighted in the report include outlining an oil spill response plan, defining the pipeline’s proposed route, providing adequate baseline studies, assessing impacts to aboriginal culture and a comprehensive study of the unstable coastal terrain the pipeline would cross. As well, the process did not address climate change or environmental impacts in the tar sands , despite accepting economic evidence based on tar sands expansion.
Given the lack of information provided by Enbridge and compelling evidence and arguments against the project from British Columbia residents, the provincial government, First Nations, municipalities, unions and environmental groups, the report concludes that Northern Gateway should never be built.
“We hope that the JRP will conclude, as most participants in the process did, that Enbridge Northern Gateway is not in Canada’s national interest and must be rejected,” Skuce said. “Overwhelmingly in the process, Enbridge proved that their project would be a disaster for the environment and existing economies, that they do not have the competence to build it safely, and that they have no social licence to operate in northern B.C.”
At the Northern Gateway Project hearings, the NEB heard oral statements from 1,239 people. More than 9,000 individuals and groups submitted letters of comment. Over 220 intervenors registered to test Enbridge’s application and evidence, and submit their own evidence. Overwhelmingly, participants came out against Northern Gateway and the risks associated with this proposed tar sands pipeline and tankers on the northwest coast.
Enbridge submitted its application in May 2011, and the JRP hearings took place over 18 months between January 2012 and June 2013. ForestEthics Advocacy was an active intervenor throughout the process, with representation from EcoJustice and in coalition with the Living Oceans Society and the Raincoast Conservation Foundation.
The panel has until Dec. 31, 2013 to make its recommendations to the federal government, who now has the authority to approve or reject the project regardless of the JRP decision.
—30—
For Immediate Release - Tuesday, December 10, 2013
contact: Ben West, Tar Sands Campaign Director, ForestEthics Advocacy
No comments:
Post a Comment