A new report authored by the federal panel charged with gathering feedback on the proposed Trans Mountain expansion has “backfired” on the government, says the City of Burnaby’s lawyer.
In May, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau tasked a three-person panel to visit communities along the proposed Kinder Morgan pipeline and marine shipping routes, just days before the National Energy Board gave the $6.8-billion project the green light and attached 157 conditions to its approval. The creation of the panel was part of an election promise the Liberals made to implement a new review process for the Kinder Morgan proposal.
The panel’s findings – collected by former Tsawwassen First Nation Chief Kim Baird, former Yukon premier Tony Penikett and former Alberta deputy minister Annette Trimbee – were made public on Thursday. The 58-page document does not lay out recommendations, rather it gives a summary of what was heard at the hearings in B.C. and Alberta.
The report poses six questions to the federal government:
· Can construction of a new pipeline be reconciled with Canada’s climate commitments?
· In the absence of a comprehensive national energy strategy, how can policy-makers effectively assess projects such as the Trans Mountain pipeline?
· How might cabinet square approval of the Trans Mountain pipeline with its commitment toreconciliation with First Nations and to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples' principles of “free, prior, and informed consent?”
· Given the changed economic and political circumstances, the perceived flaws in the NEB process, and also the criticism of the ministerial panel’s own review, how can Canada be confident in its assessment of the project’s economic rewards and risks?
· If approved, what route would best serve aquifer, municipal, aquatic and marine safety?
· How does federal policy define the terms “social licence” and “Canadian public interest” and their inter-relationships?
“I think they’ve posed some very difficult questions for the government,” said Greg McDade, a lawyer for the City of Burnaby.
McDade said the fifth question about the proposed route is an important one.
“I think if the government was to honestly answer that question, Kinder Morgan can’t go (forward),” he said, adding the six weeks left until cabinet has to make a decision is not enough time to seriously consider the report.
“If the government makes the decision in that time period, I think it will be because they ignored those questions. If the government approves this at all, it’s ignoring the report.
“That report has no legal basis, and the panel was mostly a political idea, but I think it’s backfired on the government. If they even make a pretext of listening to it, they have to turn down the project,” McDade said.
Elsie Dean, a founding member of Burnaby Residents Opposed to Kinder Morgan Expansion, echoed McDade’s sentiments.
“How can government give due consideration to these questions between now and Dec. 19?” she asked. “It would take another year before they even began to answer those questions with any knowledge. In my opinion, the panel process was to placate the knowledgeable public and was a waste of taxpayers’ money. We are right back where we were before this report.”
Peter Julian, NDP MP for New Westminster-Burnaby, called the hearings and the report “window dressing.”
“They have listened a bit to the public, but there’s no recommendations; it’s just a series of comments. My sense is that the government really is going to renege on their election promise about approvals around these projects that actually come with a social licence from the communities that are concerned,” said Julian.
For Kennedy Stewart, NDP MP for Burnaby South, there wasn’t anything in the report that hasn’t already been said since Kinder Morgan first submitted its application to the NEB in 2013.
“It was designed to buy the government more time and that’s what it did. It really points what a bad deal this is for British Columbia. You can’t make a business case from British Columbia’s perspective. What kind of deal do you take all the risk and none of the reward?” he said. “If Trudeau says yes to this pipeline, he’s betraying British Columbians. It’s like putting a dump in your backyard and expecting people to like it.”
Terry Beech, Liberal MP for Burnaby North-Seymour, said he’s “somewhat relieved” that the views of his constituents are reflected in the report.
“I think they do a good job of describing some of the issues,” he told the NOW.
Beech didn’t want to speculate on what the federal government’s final decision might be, but said he’s currently talking to all MPs, making sure they’re informed about the implications of a yay or nay. He encouraged anyone in his riding who still has questions or concerns to contact his office.
