Clark, Redford Pipeline Agreement Overlooks B.C.’s Final Argument to Enbridge Panel

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