Alberta and B.C. announced they’ve reached an agreement today to satisfy B.C.’s five conditions for supporting oil pipeline development in the province.

B.C. Premier Christy Clark has also agreed to sign on to Alberta Premier Alison Redford’s national energy strategy. 

The announcement comes on the heels of all-night meetings between Alberta and B.C. officials. The condition in question was the fifth — B.C.’s call for a greater share of economic benefits from the pipeline in exchange for the environmental risks borne by the province.

However, it appears that condition has been punted to negotiations between B.C. and industry.

In a statement, Redford said: “If the government of B.C. decides to place additional charges on industry that go beyond the federal and provincial restrictions on responsible resource development, this is not something for the government of Alberta to negotiate — it is for the government of B.C. to negotiate directly with producers and industry.”

In reaction to the announcement, Living Oceans executive director Karen Wristen issued a statement saying Redford’s signature on Clark’s conditions is merely symbolic as Redford is unable to satisfy the five conditions (successful completion of an environmental review, “world-leading” marine spill response and land oil-spill prevention, addressing aboriginal legal requirements, treaty rights and opportunities and a “fair share” of economic benefits).

“It really means very little, when we consider that Premier Clark just released a report by Nuka Research that makes it clear that her condition concerning ‘effective oil spill response' cannot be met,” Wristen said. “Quite apart from the impossibility of cleaning up spilled bitumen, there remains the completely unaddressed opposition of First Nations and a majority of British Columbians to seeing supertankers on the B.C. coast.”

Beyond that, there’s the discrepancy between the “five conditions” announced 15 months ago, commonly referred to by Premier Christy Clark, and the province’s final argument to the federal panel reviewing Enbridge’s Northern Gateway project, which was filed just five months ago.

In the province’s final argument — a 100-page report rejecting Enbridge’s proposal and submitted two weeks after the spring election — the B.C. government is much more precise about the hurdles facing proposals to ship oil off B.C.’s coast.

For example, while B.C.’s five conditions call for “world-leading” oil spill response, its final argument clarifies the province’s goal for “effective response” and recognizes effective response isn’t possible in many cases.

Citing an Enbridge witness, the province states: “With respect to…most open ocean spills, no oil from a spill is recovered; the oil remains in the environment.”

Another important point the province makes in its final argument is that the public process regarding Enbridge's review is complete. No changes to the proposal can be probed and tested in a democratic fashion.

With that in mind, the real question to ask today is: given the province's final argument that thoroughly refused Enbridge's project and signaled the end of the public process, how can Premier Christy Clark justify changing her tune five months later after closed-door negotiations?

Image Credit: BC Gov via Flickr

We’ve got big plans for 2024
Seeking out climate solutions, big and small. Investigating the influence of oil and gas lobbyists. Holding leaders accountable for protecting the natural world.

The Narwhal’s reporting team is busy unearthing important environmental stories you won’t read about anywhere else in Canada. And we’ll publish it all without corporate backers, ads or a paywall.

How? Because of the support of a tiny fraction of readers like you who make our independent, investigative journalism free for all to read.

Will you join more than 6,000 members helping us pull off critical reporting this year?
We’ve got big plans for 2024
Seeking out climate solutions, big and small. Investigating the influence of oil and gas lobbyists. Holding leaders accountable for protecting the natural world.

The Narwhal’s reporting team is busy unearthing important environmental stories you won’t read about anywhere else in Canada. And we’ll publish it all without corporate backers, ads or a paywall.

How? Because of the support of a tiny fraction of readers like you who make our independent, investigative journalism free for all to read.

Will you join more than 6,000 members helping us pull off critical reporting this year?

Mines, logging, sprawl — but no wind turbines. Here’s what Alberta is still doing in ‘pristine viewscapes’

Last week, the Alberta government released a draft map outlining new buffer zones prohibiting new wind energy developments, saying "wind projects are no longer permitted...

Continue reading

Recent Posts

Thousands of members make The Narwhal’s independent journalism possible. Will you help power our work in 2024?
Will you help power our journalism in 2024?
… which means our newsletter has become the most important way we connect with Narwhal readers like you. Will you join the nearly 90,000 subscribers getting a weekly dose of in-depth climate reporting?
A line chart in green font colour with the title "Our Facebook traffic has cratered." Chart shows about 750,000 users via Facebook in 2019, 1.2M users in 2020, 500,000 users in 2021, 250,000 users in 2022, 100,000 users in 2023.
… which means our newsletter has become the most important way we connect with Narwhal readers like you. Will you join the nearly 90,000 subscribers getting a weekly dose of in-depth climate reporting?
A line chart in green font colour with the title "Our Facebook traffic has cratered." Chart shows about 750,000 users via Facebook in 2019, 1.2M users in 2020, 500,000 users in 2021, 250,000 users in 2022, 100,000 users in 2023.
Overlay Image