Pipeline proposal raises vexing questions
Written by Jeannette Paterson
Prince George
Thursday, 18 June 2009
Wanting to get a better sense of how or if the Enbridge pipeline would benefit the majority of British Columbians, I looked back at the Thomas Berger Inquiry held in the 1970s regarding the Mackenzie Delta natural gas pipeline.
It was, of course, recommended that a 10-year moratorium be put in place until the aboriginal people living in the area had completed their land claims and then, from a position of ownership and power, the project could be revisited.
At that time environmental concerns were the major impediment to aboriginal approval. But times change and as late as 2001 the Arctic aboriginal population now wanted a lifestyle no longer dependent on traditional attachment to the land and a desire for the economic prosperity attached to the oil/gas business.
There is still no Mackenzie Pipeline but we are being asked to favourably consider the Enbridge pipeline which, unlike the Mackenzie, does not intend to deliver oil to southern Canada and the U.S., but to Asia. Direct benefits seem to be in the form of initial construction jobs and then maintenance of necessary installations. And unlike the aboriginal land claim settlement in the Arctic, B.C. has yet to settle many land claims.
Aside from Albertan interests and/or those who act on the fringes becoming very wealthy from this project, there appear to be so many unanswered questions that may remain so.
If aboriginal people in B.C. do not actually have ownership of the land, how can they be guaranteed a legitimate stake, such as do the people of Nunavut who have an official government voice in wildlife management, water issues, planning, surface rights, etc.?
What level of government, exactly, will take responsibility for damage to B.C.'s environment and to the ocean? Will it have to be a mix of provincial and federal? And if so, how complicated and unworkable will that be?
And will all those British Columbians whose lifestyles could be affected have any real voice in this decision? As can be seen from oil companies' powers in Alberta, landowners appear to have no rights when it comes to oil interests.
As we are told what great benefits await us from huge corporations that have never in history demonstrated they care much beyond their profit line (and yes, what are current gas prices?) we should ensure that all the many questions, and many I have not thought of, are answered to our satisfaction.
Jeannette Paterson
Prince George
