Enbridge response to Gitxsan controversy

Enbridge has released a response to the controversy over its agreement with Elmer Derrick of the Gitxsan Treaty Office.

Agreement With Gitxsan Hereditary Chiefs

• Enbridge
Northern Gateway Pipelines welcomes the agreement with the Gitxsan
Hereditary Chiefs on behalf of the Gitxsan Nation. We believe it
demonstrates vision and leadership and will bring significant benefits
to the Gitxsan people.

• The agreement is between the
Gitxsan First Nation as represented by Gitxsan Hereditary Chiefs, and
Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines. The Hereditary Chiefs hold title to
Gitxsan territory and are the negotiating authority for the Gitxsan
Nation.

• The agreement is expected to deliver $ 7 million
in net profit to Gitxsan. Northern Gateway is providing financing. This
commitment to partnership has helped provide foundation for pending
Gitxsan and Enbridge dialogue regarding regional renewable energy
projects

• Aboriginal participation in Northern Gateway is
an important goal, and one we have worked hard to achieve. The design of
our benefits offering reflects years of consultation with First Nations
and Métis communities along our existing and proposed pipeline
rights-of-way.

• We believe these commitments will break
new ground by providing an unprecedented level of long-term economic and
social benefits to Aboriginal communities in the North. We are working
to ensure Northern Gateway will create a positive long-term impact on
the economy and way of life of northern residents, particularly
Aboriginal communities.

• Through equity ownership,
Aboriginal people will be able to generate a significant new revenue
stream that could help achieve the priorities of their people – such as
improved health care, education and housing.

All quotes can be attributed to Enbridge spokesman Paul Stanway.

First Nations support Northern Gateway pipeline, Enbridge CEO says: Edmonton Journal

Energy Politics 

Peter O’Neill writing in The Edmonton Journal reports First Nations support Northern Gateway pipeline, Enbridge CEO says

Daniel, in an exclusive interview with The Edmonton Journal, said critics have seriously underestimated his company’s support among First Nations anxious to take advantage of economic development opportunities in northern B.C.

Enbridge, faced with an aggressive public assault this week from B.C. environmental and aboriginal groups, countered Friday with the Gitxsan First Nation announcement that it is taking an equity stake in the pipeline….

Daniel boldly predicted in the interview that at least 30 of the 45 First Nations along the 1,170-kilometre pipeline route from Bruderheim, near Edmonton, to Kitimat on the B.C. coast, will have deals with Enbridge by next June.

And he said he hopes all 45 will be onside by 2013, when Enbridge hopes to get regulatory approval to start a project that is set to be completed by late 2017.

The article also reports that Prime Minister Stephen Harper once again defended the importance of Canada finding a way to get oilsands bitumen to Asian market.

It concludes with Daniel’s response on the problem of tanker traffic:

I’ve been saying as much as I can publicly that if we can’t do this as Canadians, who can? About 70 to 80 per cent of the world moves by tanker right now, and it moves safely and soundly from countries where you wouldn’t expect them to have standards nearly as good as Canadian standards,” he said.

“Can I give an absolute guarantee? No. But if we can’t do it as Canadians, who can?

Haisla won’t “negotiate” with Enbridge until after Joint Review decision, Ross says

Energy Environment First Nations

640-Ross1.jpg
Haisla Nation Chief Councillor Ellis Ross speaking at the September 2011 District of Kitimat public forum on the Northern Gateway Pipeline.  (Robin Rowland/Northwest Coast Energy News)

Haisla Nation Chief Councillor Ellis Ross said Friday that Haisla will not “negotiate” with Enbridge over its planned Northern Gateway Pipeline until after there has been a decision from the Joint Review Panel on  whether or not the pipeline is in the public interest.

Ross said the Haisla had recently written to Minister of the Environment Peter Kent, asking if the Crown was prepared to enter the constitutionally mandated consultations with First Nations over the pipeline.  Ross says Kent’s reply indicated that there would be no Crown consultations until after the conclusion of the Joint Review Process.

The Joint Review Panel hearings begin in Kitimat on January 10, 2012.   The hearings will proceed in two stages, first hearing presentations from registered intervenors, with the second phase hearing from members of the public who wish to give 10 minute comments on the pipeline project. That stage of the process could take up to three months before the panel can even begin to consider a decision.

Reacting to today’s decision by Gitxsan hereditary chiefs to sign an agreement with Enbridge to take a $7 million partnership stake in the pipeline, Ross said he was surprised by the move, “given the opposition from the public so far, and we’ve be told that in terms of consultation and accommodation [with First Nations].”

Earlier today, in the news conference with Gitxsan heriditary chief Elmer Derrick, Enbridge executive vice president of Western Access Janet Holder told reporters that the company was negotiating with all 50 First Nations along the pipeline route.

Ross disagreed with that term. He said, “The Haisla are not negotiating with Enbridge. You can’t confuse negotiation and talking.” He said without the participation of the Crown there is no real  process for negotiations and accommodation with First Nations over the pipeline.

Ross said any talks with Enbridge by First Nations shouldn’t be considered negotiations unless there is some type of formal agreement saying “we are in negotiations.”

Ross also said  in terms of  possible agreements with Enbridge  “it is pretty easy to negotiate in an area where there will be very little impact.”

The Haisla, he said,  have all three major impacts from the Northern Gateway project, “the pipeline, the terminal and the tankers.  It`s pretty easy to negotiate if you`re not paying the full price.  The Haisla will pay in full if the project goes ahead.”

The Haisla have always  been wary of the Enbridge project but have also been careful in stating their opposition to the pipeline.  At public meeting in Kitimat in September, Ross said, in part.

As far as we can tell, based on oil company’s track records, there will be a spill whether it is pipeline, terminal or tanker.

The only questions are how much oil will be spilled, who will clean it up and who will pay for the cleanup. We’ve been accused of NIMBY but in terms of our concerns, when it comes to a spill, we predict a POTB (Passing of the Buck) will occur…

And ultimately, apart from the acceptable risks that Haisla have already taken on against our will as well as current risks that we are a part of mitigating, why do we want to consider a project that has the potential to destroy the beauty of our resources that are still left?

We are not opposed to development, but in the case of oil export or oil by products import/export, the Precautionary Principle still makes the most sense


Other First Nations also reacted strongly to the Gitxsan chiefs’ decision.

In a news release Chief Na’Moks (John Ridsdale) representing the Wet’suwet’en Hereditary Chiefs said:

Enbridge is just not going to happen. We have said no and banned this pipeline from going through our territories – not only to protect ourselves and our lands, but also all the communities downriver from our lands. We have reviewed the project, and we have made a decision based in our traditional laws that we will not allow the devastation of an Enbridge oil spill in our lands to affect us and other communities further away who are all connected to us through the water.

Chief Jackie Thomas of Saik’uz First Nation, speaking for the Yinka Dene Alliance, stated:

Enbridge has always had a strategy of offering money to lots of First Nations. Lots of First Nations have refused this money. This is just the same old divide and conquer tactic we’ve known for centuries. It doesn’t matter who they get a deal with. The wall of First Nations saying no is unbroken. They plan to come through our territories and we’ve already said no, and we’ll use every legal means we have to stop them.

Their proposed pipeline is against our laws because we refuse to put our communities at the risk of oil spills. Water means more to us than money. We know we have overwhelming support from a large majority of British Columbians for stopping this dangerous Enbridge pipeline.

Gitxsan Hereditary Chiefs take $7 million stake in Northern Gateway project

Energy  First Nations

Note this update: Gitxsan chiefs, band
leaders, “stand in solidarity” opposing Gateway pipeline, say they do
not support Derrick’s Enbridge agreement

Update 2: Enbridge video embedded at end of this story.

Elmer Derrick, representing the Gitxsan Hereditary Chiefs today announced the Gitxsan Nation was taking a $7 million stake in the controversial Northern Gateway Pipeline.

Derrick told a conference call with reporters that the the hereditary chiefs signed the agreement with Enbridge on the basis of a 1997 Supreme Court decision that granted the chiefs “rights and title” to their traditional territory.
  
Derrick spoke about the poverty of the Gitxsan people, especially after the collapse of the forest industry beginning in the 1980s, with the exhaustion of good quality timber, leaving only pulp trees.  He said “the situation was bleak”  with a high number of  youth suicides then said “young people cannot eat Gitxsan rights and title.”

He said the Gitxsan have been looking for economic development partners in many fields, including mining and biofuels and that Enbridge was one of the companies that had approached the nation with a partnership offer.

The agreement, Derrick said, calls for the pipeline to be built and operated safely by Enbridge.

 Under questioning by reporters, Derrick acknowledged that the Northern Gateway pipeline will only a cover a small area of the 33,000 square kilometres of Gitxsan traditional territory,  “five or six small streams that feed into the Babine Lake.”   (Babine Lake itself is largely in the traditional territory of the Dakleh or Carrier First Nation). Gitxsan traditional territory is partly along the upper reaches of the Skeena River.  Enbridge’s plans call for the pipeline to avoid that area altogether by crossing directly west from the Burns Lake area  over and through  the mountains, including using two tunnels, to the Upper Kitimat River.

Derrick said there had been no consultation with the local band councils,  because, he said, the hereditary chiefs have the right and title to the land. He characterized the band councils as the equivalent of municipal councils.

There are six band councils in Gitxsan traditional territory and like many other BC First Nations there are those who support the hereditary system and those who prefer the elected councils.

There were repeated questions from reporters about how much consultation there had been with the band councils and members of the Gitxsan Nation. Asked if the Gitxsan band councils approved the deal, Derrick replied, “I don’t know.”  He did say that the hereditary chiefs had “conferred”  with the elected officials and had “talked to as many people as possible over the past six years.”

 Derrick said that the $7 million dollar would go into a trust fund, likely for the education and training of younger members of the Gitxsan First Nation. He could not give specific details, but did add that the whole community would be consulted about the trust fund.  That number is based on an offer from Enbridge of  a total of 10 per cent equity in the pipeline project.  With 50 First Nations along the route, Derrick said the Gitxsan will be getting approximately one fortieth of that ten per cent. The pipeline project is estimated to be worth $5.5 billion Canadian.

He said there was no estimate of the jobs that the Gitxsan Nation would get as a result of the agreement.  He noted that the members of the Gitxsan nation travel across northwestern BC in search of work and said that if  Gitxsan worked for the pipeline project, that wouldn’t be much different from other jobs. In response to a question about rumours that the Gitxsan had been in negotiations with Enbridge about operating the “pig”  the robot that monitors the interior of a pipeline for maintenance and safety purposes, he said that was no part of this deal.

Derrick also said he did not anticipate any problems with neighbouring First Nations that have expressed opposition to the pipeline.

Derrick said there was no connection with the announcement Thursday by 131 First Nations from across North America that they opposed the Northern Gateway Pipeline, saying he wasn’t even aware of the Save the Fraser Gathering until asked about it. Derrick said the news of the deal was released “because of the opportunity to sign today.”

Janet Holder, executive vice president of Western Access for Enbridge emphasized to reporters that it was the Gitxsan making the announcement, not Enbridge. Like other, unspecified, agreements with other First Nations along or near the pipeline route,  the Gitxsan agreement had confidentiality clauses and it was up to the First Nations to make public whether or not they had agreements with the company.   Pressed by reporters how many other First Nations had agreements with the company, Holder would not even give a rough figure.

She said “we are making good progress along the right of way and we’re optimistic from our discussions that the majority of First Nations support the project.”
   

An earlier news  release from Enbridge says:

“Over time we have established a relationship of trust with Enbridge, we have examined and assessed this project, and we believe it can be built and operated safely,” said Chief Derrick. “We believe that the construction of this pipeline is of vital importance to the future of Canadian energy security and prosperity.”

The agreement is expected to deliver at least $7 million in net profit to the Gitxsan people. Enbridge will be providing financing at favourable rates, and the partnership will provide a solid foundation for an ongoing dialogue between the Gitxsan and Enbridge regarding regional renewable energy projects.

“Let me stress that all decisions we make in pursuing business on Gitxsan land remain faithful to the laws of our people, said Chief Derrick. “Those who wish to do business in Gitxsan territory will be held to Gitxsan standards.”

Janet Holder, Executive Vice-President of Western Access for Enbridge, welcomed the announcement and the support of the Gitxsan Nation. “I want to acknowledge the vision demonstrated by Chief Derrick and the Hereditary Chiefs,” said Ms. Holder. “The most significant way in which Aboriginal people can benefit from the Northern Gateway project is by owning a stake in it and sharing in the net income it produces.”

The announcement comes a day after 61 First Nations declared their opposition to the Northern Gateway pipeline. According to the Vancouver Sun by the end of the day Thursday, that number had grown to 131 First Nations.

Enbridge video of Janet Holder and Elmer Derrick (via Youtube)


Coalition of First Nations stands against Northern Gateway pipeline

Energy Environment Politics

An alliance of up to 130 First Nations from across North America say they will oppose any efforts to construct the Northern Gateway pipeline from the Alberta bitumen sands to the port of Kitimat.

641-fraser_declaration.jpg

Vancouver Sun: First nations claim alliance is barrier that pipelines won’t break
 

On Thursday, signatories to the initiative called the Save the Fraser Gathering of Nations, said they had increased their roster to 130 from 61 western Canadian first nations that oppose not just construction of Enbridge Inc.’s Northern Gateway project, but any project to increase Canada’s exports of oilsands crude, on the grounds that they infringe on aboriginal title.

“I have news for you [Prime Minister Stephen Harper], you’re never going to achieve your dream of pushing pipelines through our rivers and lands,” said Chief Jackie Thomas, of the Saik’uz First Nation, and head of the Yinka Dene Alliance, a key spokeswoman for the group in B.C.’s interior.

“It doesn’t matter what route you take, you can’t get a pipeline around opposed first nations. The path is blocked, and it’s going to stay blocked,” Thomas said.

Globe and Mail: B.C. natives form front to fight oil pipelines

First Nations say they fear the consequences of a spill from the pipeline, which would pass through some of Canada’s most spectacular mountain landscape. They also oppose the idea of shipping oil from British Columbia ports.

“First Nations, whose unceded territory encompasses the entire coastline of British Columbia, have formed a united front, banning all exports of tar sands crude oil through their territories,” more than 60 aboriginal groups said in a statement.

Thursday’s declaration could also affect a planned expansion of Kinder Morgan Energy Partners’ Trans Mountain oil pipeline, which runs from Alberta to Vancouver. The company is seeking commitments from potential shippers for the project.

Canadian Press First Nation leaders say they are closing B.C. borders to Gateway pipeline
 

Chief Art Adolph, of the St’at’imc Nation, said he’s opposed to any plans by the federal Conservative government to push the pipeline through.

“If they are serious about respecting our rights, the government of Canada must stop pushing the oil companies’ line that this is in the public interest, and the government of B.C. should step up to the plate too and begin protecting our rivers and coastlines from further environmental damages that violate our basic human rights,” he said.

Related: Save the Fraser website

Alaska media is reporting halibut quotas must be halved, stocks in bad shape

Environment Fishery

A number of media outlets in Alaska are reporting that at today’s meeting of the International Pacific Halibut Commission, scientists have said that the population can only sustain  harvest quotas at half the current level.

The story comes mainly from the Kodiak Daily Mirror, with additional information from other media outlets.  There is currently no news release on the IPHC website.

The Associated Press, quoting the Mirror
, says:

Biologists say without adjusting for past overestimates, 2012’s Pacific
halibut limit would be set at 33 million pounds, down from 41 million
pounds in 2011. If an adjustment was made for past overestimates, the
sustainable catch limit may be as little as 15.3 million pounds across
the entire North Pacific.

Biologists do not know why their estimates have been consistently too high

Station KSTK, an Alaska Public Radio station is saying that the IPHC wants a 13.3 per cent cut in British Columbia’s quota to 6,633,000 pounds.

Alaska Dispatch says halibut harvest levels could go down to levels not seen since the 1930s.

The news website says: “Adult flatfish are disappearing from the population at unexplainable rates…”

Alaska Dispatch quotes IPHC biologist Steven Hare as saying that the real problem is “unspecified mortality.”

Halibut are disappearing from the population for reasons managers can only guess at. “It’s troubling,” Were managers to take these mystery disappearances fully into consideration, he added, they would be forced to recommend drastic cuts in commercial harvests.


One model that does this, he said, suggested setting catches “28 percent lower than the lowest level since 1935.” Catches, or at least legal catches, have already been pushed down 55 percent in the past decade, and they are for sure going down again

Proposed quotas according to KSTK

The staff’s 2012 catch recommendations for each area include:

  • 989,000 pounds in the Pacific Northwest area 2A which is up 8.7%.
  • 6,633,000 pounds in British Columbia area 2B which is down 13.3%.
  • 2,624,000 pounds in area 2C which is up 12.6%.
  • 11,918,000 pounds in the Central Gulf Area 3A which is down 17 %.
  • 5,070,000 pounds in the Western Gulf Area 3B which would be a drop of about 32 %.
  • 1,567,000 pounds in the Aleutians area 4A which is down about 35 %.
  • 2,180,000 pounds in the Aleutians area 4B which is 14 % down.
  • And 2,465,000 pounds in the Bering Sea areas 4C, D, and E a reduction of about 34 %.

The board will make a final decision on 2012 catch limits at a meeting in Anchorage from Jan. 24-27.

Harper says “American interests” lining up against Gateway

Energy Environment

Vivian Krause, the blogger who has chronicling the American foundations who help fund Canadian environmental groups has reached the ear of Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

In her latest blog, Crause, tells Prime Minister Stephen Harper on American Funding of Canadian Environmentalists Against the Northern Gateway Enbridge Pipeline Krause publshes a transcript of an interview with Harper by Global TV.

Here’s what Prime Minister Stephen Harper told Global TV:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper: There are environmentalists who will oppose any of these projects. Obviously, there will be environmental assessments and there always have to be negotiations with First Nations but that all said, this is a critical and important project to Canada as a whole.

Global TV: Canadian opposition may not be the only stumbling block.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper: I think we’ll see significant American interests trying to line up against the Northern Gateway project, precisely because its not in the interests of the United States. Its in the interests of Canada.

Global TV: Could they do anything to stop it?

Prime Minister Harper: Well, they’ll funnel money through environmental groups and others in order to try to slow it down but, as I say, we’ll make sure that the best interests of Canada are protected.

That also seems to imply that Stephen Harper considers the completion of the pipeline in “the best interest of Canadians.”

Krause concludes “Glad to hear it said.”

Alberta premier says Northern Gateway critical to Canadian economy

Updated below with transcript of Alison Redford’s speech.

 Bill Graveland of Canadian Press reports in  Alberta premier says Northern Gateway pipeline critical for Canadian economic development.

In an address to the Calgary Chamber of Commerce, which CP says was her first major address in Calgary since becoming premier, Alison Redford said that the Northern Gateway pipeline project is of national importance and is critical to Canada’s future economic strength.

“We need to be able to talk about why the success of this pipeline becomes critical to our economic success in the next two years. But we are going to have to separate the wheat from the chaff because we know there are going to be a number of interveners who have very particular political agendas,” said Redford in a question and answer session following a lunch-hour address to the Calgary Chamber of Commerce.

Redford was referring to the large number of people who have registered either as intervenors or to give comments at the Joint Review hearings. She added:

The agenda that I think matters to most Canadians is the agenda for economic growth at a time when the rest of the world is in very uncertain circumstances and we just don’t have to be.”

CP says Redford called on other Canadians to lobby on behalf of the Keystone and Northern Gateway pipelines.

“I don’t think it’s appropriate or even necessary for only Alberta or only Alberta interests to be out lobbying with respect to this pipeline. We’re trying to ensure it succeeds. This is an issue that takes on national importance and my expectation with people in Ottawa including the prime minister is they understand that,” she said.

Update one

A few hours later, columnist Don Braid writing in the Calgary Herald in It’s sinking in that Redford is different notes how the powerful of the Alberta oil patch were eager to hear the premier’s speech, as compared to former premier Ed Stelmach.

Braid notes that:

It’s just beginning to sink in that Redford is radical in the Alberta context, a national diplomat of an entirely new order.

She does not say, like the old Reform party, that the West Wants In. She assumes that Alberta already is in, and offers to lead without the resentment born of grievances from the old National Energy Program to current attacks on the oilsands.

Although Braid’s column goes over Alberta’s old grievances with the federal government, and how perhaps the premier is diplomatically working to overcome them,  he closes with an ominous threat to British Columbia:

Redford might someday have to show a brass knuckle inside her velvet glove.

She might even suggest, along with former minister Lloyd Snelgrove, that B.C. has a lot of nerve rejecting Alberta oil, when B.C.’s natural gas is routinely shipped through Alberta pipelines to the United States.

Snelgrove isn’t recommending a ban, oh no, but he says: “Maybe people need to think about that when they say they won’t take our oil.”

Maybe they do; or maybe Alison Redford’s olive branch will bring peace and prosperity to the land.

There is widespread support for the LNG projects in Kitimat and across the northwest and the KM LNG partners project has much better relations with First Nations than Enbridge.

However, last week’s blockade by members of Wet’suwet’en First Nation clans of a Pacific Trails Pipeline survey crew at Gosnell River, over fears that the PTP project could open the gates, so to speak, for the Northern Gateway pipeline, means that nothing is certain.

Perhaps Don Braid and Lloyd Snelgrove should be careful what they wish for.


Update 2 Transcript of Premier Redford’s speech.

Premier Redford does not mention Northern Gateway in the actual speech ( the news reports are from a question and answer session).

She does say, however:

“The world will need fossil fuels for a long time to come. The oil sands, as one of the few energy-rich areas outside the unstable Middle East poised for growth, will be essential, as the International Energy Agency publicly recognized this month. The second is that there is no Canadian Energy Strategy without our partners.
The infrastructure we need to get our oil and gas to market must cross other provinces’ lands. And the federal and provincial regulations that will inevitably shape how Canada’s environment is protected, how our energy is extracted and how it is transported will require input from everybody to have the greatest net positive effect.

We must rise together. There is no other way.

Alberta’s success depends on partnership with the province.”

Thank you for that introduction, Nancy (Southern). Ladies and gentlemen, distinguished guests, it is a pleasure to be here with you. Thanks to the Calgary Chamber of Commerce for asking me to be here today.

I am pleased to have the chance to speak to you today about the province’s economy and our place in uncertain times.

The global population is growing, and its needs and wants are expanding too. We have 7 billion people on this planet, and many of them aspire to a higher standard of living.

And those who already enjoy it want to do so more responsibly. They want to mitigate the impact of their consumption, and they expect producers to respond.

The world needs food and energy, in greater quantities with fewer consequences for the environment.

Alberta is uniquely placed to meet this demand and excel, despite the short-term negative impact of our neighbours’ woes on our finances.

We can become preferred suppliers on a global scale.

The mechanisms we need to achieve this are already in place.

Our agricultural sector maintains a sterling reputation. And our energy industry is at the leading edge in production, innovation, technology and compliance, all areas this government is working to improve even further.

In both areas, we have a skilled workforce capable of expanding production in an environmentally and socially responsible, and economically sustainably manner. Our resources are therefore not just profitable, but strategic.

Simply put, Alberta is opportunity. And so long as we begin laying the foundations now to establish this province as an international hub for commodities and expertise, this will remain true for a long time come.

But we can’t forget why we are doing this.

Our search for new markets can never overshadow our highest priority: improving the quality of life for all Albertans.

It is our responsibility to ensure that every Albertan shares in the benefits our capabilities afford us.

The wider we spread prosperity, the more we gain.

You understand this as well as I do, which is why I have been saying “we” all along.

Quality of life is not purely a matter for government. In a place as independent-minded as Alberta, the private sector plays a major role.

Many of the individuals in this room have achievements that go far beyond the professional sphere. You sit on the boards of non-profits, generously provide them with financial support and tap your personal networks to find still more.

You devote a significant part of your lives to giving back, strengthening the bonds that hold Calgary together by reaching out to the less fortunate in love and compassion, in the hope of making a positive change in their lives. You make a difference in this city every single day.

Government must support your efforts by making things easier for you, so you can do the same for others, and complement the public sector’s work.

There is one way to go about this: growing Alberta’s economy.

Expanding industry, investing in innovation and tuning our tax structures to support business ? these are the methods we use to fund our public services and deliver community supports.

These are also the tools we need to build Alberta’s wealth and create opportunities, for philanthropy, for personal fulfillment and for nurturing the community relationships that make Calgary a city worth living in.

Despite the tenuous world economy, we can still protect and preserve these aspirations.

Alberta has incredible natural advantages that allow us to accomplish things that no other province can hope to achieve. We can use them to build even as others struggle to stay afloat and that’s exactly what this government will do.

We have the ability and the will to sow the seeds of a brighter future, the one Albertans have told us they want.

During our recent public roundtables on the budget, Albertans overwhelmingly indicated that health and education remain their highest priorities.

They expect high-quality public services, a comfortable standard of living and fiscal responsibility, without deep cuts.

We can deliver, without soaring expenditures and long-term debt.

Alberta has the distinction of being the most economically free jurisdiction in North America.

We have low unemployment, strong job growth and a reliable economic engine, positioning us to lead Canada.

Our tax regime is one of the most competitive in the developed world.

Even as other economies flounder, we are attracting investment and skilled workers.

Our small businesses are second to none, accounting for almost a third of provincial GDP and over three-quarters of all enterprises with employees.

And our large businesses continue to thrive and invest in innovation.

Of course, not everything is coming up roses. We have a tough budget ahead of us.

The costs of core services like health care and education continue to grow.

And our largest trading partners are weighed down with unsustainable debt loads, anaemic growth and high unemployment. Alberta can’t help being affected to some degree.

In the current fiscal year, provincial revenues will be $1.2 billion more than predicted, thanks mostly to increased land lease sales. However, our forecasted deficit will be $3.1 billion, $1.8 billion higher than first quarter projections.

This is largely due to international factors beyond our control. The US, our main customer, remains weak. American debt now exceeds $15 trillion and cross-party efforts to find mutually acceptable spending cuts have led only to more acrimony. Unemployment remains stubbornly high and growth stubbornly low, while a solution seems farther away than ever.

I was in Washington last week and let me tell you, the despair was palpable.

Europe’s troubles add to the mix. Despite the international bailout package the European Union has put together, there is still a strong expectation that Greece will default on its debts. Other EU members such as Italy and Portugal are struggling to avoid the same situation.

And from a provincial perspective, government has seen increased outlays due to disaster relief, especially from the wildfires around Slave Lake, and our renewed commitment to primary education.

We are not living in the best of times, but neither are we mired in the worst. And however grim are partners’ economic struggles, they do not define our destiny.

The Alberta Advantage will ensure we stay in an enviable position of strength.

We will make the most of the province’s unique characteristics to deliver what Albertans want.

We will keep taxes low while maintaining strong public service and a wealth of opportunity.

Our plans for stable, multi-year budgets for these services will bring unprecedented discipline to public spending. Other governments have talked about doing it. We will make it happen.

Hard decisions on the part of past governments have allowed Alberta to eliminate its long-term debt and build up a savings account, the Sustainability Fund, to see us through rough patches.

We will conduct regular budgetary reviews to search for savings wherever we can, managing our finances to protect future Albertans from debt.

And we remain committed to balancing the budget by 2013-14, without the sharp cuts Albertans fear.

This government will never lose sight of Albertans’ needs, or back away from providing supports to our most vulnerable, and services for all, no matter what the outside world throws our way.

We will keep working for Alberta families.

Their hopes and dreams demand no less.

I know this government can surpass them.

Even if the fog of another recession descends, we have a clear path back.

Diversifying our customer base to focus on hungry developing nations is the key to our long-term success.

We must pursue opportunity wherever we find it, searching for new partners in new markets and promoting Alberta on the global stage.

Even as the western world falters, other economies are thriving.

Asia’s star is rising and Asian nations are poised to dominate the 21st century. Best of all, they are eager for our resources and our know-how, particularly in energy.

We can deliver, in a safe, secure and environmentally friendly fashion. But we can’t go it alone.

The rest of the provinces can join our efforts and escape the trap of low growth and high debt, into which so many others have fallen.

Canada is an energy-rich nation, blessed with an incredibly array of resources, from the oil sands to hydro, natural gas, nuclear and renewables.

No single source is better than any other or can stand on its own.

Innovation is the key to developing our capacity to produce them all at competitive rates. Collaboration is the key to developing the infrastructure necessary to get our energy to market. The more the provinces work together to harness and transport their respective resources, the greater our shared prosperity will be. We need a Canadian Energy Strategy.

The provinces must begin a dialogue to develop shared outcomes that their energy systems can serve. Collectively, they should use energy to foster national economic growth and competitiveness, seeking out new markets.

Canadians all face similar challenges notwithstanding the different forms of energy under development such as international market uncertainty, fiscal issues, public opinion, environmental protection and regulatory concerns.

Untangling the web of self-interest that divides this great nation will not be easy, but if the provinces are willing to work together, they can transform Canada into a global energy leader, drawing sustainably on multiple sources in a way that benefits the world and our citizens, without compromising anyone’s quality of life. We can become models for countries dealing with similar issues.

It is time to leave old antagonisms behind.

The oil sands have come in for particularly sharp criticism from the rest of Canada. We must be willing to forgive and forget, to work together for our mutual benefit.

We must ally with the other provinces to attain the greatest possible prosperity, but we can’t dictate terms. This must be a genuinely cooperative endeavour, from which everybody gains.

At the end of the day, we must recall two things:

One is that there is no Canadian Energy Strategy without us.

The world will need fossil fuels for a long time to come. The oil sands, as one of the few energy-rich areas outside the unstable Middle East poised for growth, will be essential, as the International Energy Agency publicly recognized this month.

The second is that there is no Canadian Energy Strategy without our partners.

The infrastructure we need to get our oil and gas to market must cross other provinces’ lands. And the federal and provincial regulations that will inevitably shape how Canada’s environment is protected, how our energy is extracted and how it is transported will require input from everybody to have the greatest net positive effect.

We must rise together. There is no other way.

Alberta’s success depends on partnership with the provinces.

And the health of each and every province is inextricably linked to the strength of the global economy.

On every level, we are stronger together than apart, because far more unites us than separates us.

Although Canada can’t entirely escape the downward pull of its long-suffering trading partners, this doesn’t mean the rest of the country is doomed to suffer, any more than Alberta is.

We have a way out, and it’s time we used it. It’s time to stand up and show others how Alberta and Canada can lead globally on all fronts, from the economy to the environment to energy.

Our shared future Canada’s future is worth infinitely more than our quarrels. Together, we can shine.

To ensure Canadians’ prosperity, the provinces must translate this realization into action. I pledge to you: Alberta’s government will.

Thank you.

First Nations are calling for a complete overhaul of the Northern Gateway Joint Review process

Energy Environment

British Columbia’s coastal First
Nations are calling for a complete overhaul of the Northern Gateway
Joint Review process and have a filed motion that calls for the hearings, scheduled to begin
January 10, be adjourned until the proceedings are reformed.

Motions were filed between
October 28 and November 14, with the JRP by the Coastal First
Nations, an alliance of coastal aboriginal nations, the Haisla First
Nation in Kitimat, the Gitxaala First Nation in Kitkatla and a coalition of
environmental groups known as the Sustainability Coalition that
includes the Living Oceans Society, Raincoast Conservation
Foundation, ForestEthics.

A number of reasons emerged in
recent weeks that led to the motions.

The First Nations and environmental
groups spent the summer studying the hundreds of thousands of pages of
studies, plans and other documents filed by Enbridge and its
consulting firms with the Joint Review Panel.

The Haisla First Nation, Gitxaala
First Nation, the Coastal First Nations coalition and the
Sustainability Coalition then filed a series of questions and
requests for clarification with Enbridge based on those documents.
It soon became clear that there was no time for Enbridge or its
consultants to respond to the questions before the hearings are
scheduled to begin on January 10, 2012.

The Joint Review Panel also recently
rejected a request from the Haisla
that the First Nations’ evidence
and oral comments be heard at the same time.

Art Sterritt, executive director of Coastal First Nations
addresses the

Solidarity Gathering of Nations at Kitamaat Village, May
2010.

(Robin Rowland/Northwest Coast Energy News)

633-Art_sterritt.jpgIn September, Enbridge CEO Pat
Daniel did meet with the Coast First Nations and according to Art
Sterritt, executive director, asked for a “fresh start” in the
company’s relationship with First Nations. Sterritt said that Daniel
admitted to the meeting that Enbridge had not listened.

Sterritt said he asked Daniel to
support Coastal First Nations request for a delay and overhaul of the
Joint Review Process. Daniel promised to get back to them. There was
no hints of any other deal in the offing as reported on Tuesday,
November 23 by The Globe and Mail and other media.Gateway pipeline,
contradicting
media reports that a deal with Enbridge was in the offing.

In
a news release issued Wednesday, Nov.  23, Sterritt, said:

The Coastal First Nations categorically oppose Enbridge’s
Northern Gateway Project  ….we unequivocally maintain our ban
on oil tankers on the coast.”

It was Mr. Daniels, of
Enbridge, who spoke of wanting a fresh start with the Coastal First
Nation.

Sterritt, on behalf of the board, told Daniels that a
fresh start from the Coastal First Nations perspective meant having
Enbridge ask the Joint Review Panel (JRP) to stand down. “The
Joint Review Process is seen by the Coastal First Nations not as
objective, rather as a process that advances the Enbridge
Project.
 
Subsequently the Coastal First Nations has been
informed that Enbridge is not prepared to ask the JRP to stand down
or reveal who the other proponents are, he said.

In August of
2009, Enbridge stated that the proposed project would not go ahead if
First Nations communities opposed it, said Sterritt. “None of
our communities support the project. Nor do any First Nations along
the pipeline route.” “Why would we support a proposal that
would put our rivers, oceans and lifesource at risk?” Sterritt
said. “It’s time Pat Daniels and Enbridge take the correct
action and give us the fresh start they promised. It’s time to shut
down the Joint Review Process and the Northern Gateway project.”

Sterritt told Northwest Coast Energy News that they had heard
nothing from Daniel for two to three weeks and had to contact his
office, and then were told that Enbridge could not agree to a delay
in the Joint Review Process nor could it reveal, for confidentiality
reasons, who the other “proponents” are.

The first motion to the JRP, filed by the Haisla First Nation on
October 28, concentrates on the long list of questions and
clarifications, calling for Northern Gateway to provide a “full and
adequate response” to their concerns by a fixed date and until
that happens

an amendment to the Hearing Order that sets new and reasonable
deadlines for information requests and written intervenor evidence,
oral testimony and final hearings once the Northern Gateway has
provided all the information required….

The other motions are similar. The Gitxaala motion also calls
for release of studies that have not yet been filed on the Northern
Gateway site, asking that “Northern Gateway provide copies of
pending studies referenced in its various responses to information
requests from the Gitxaala and the Government of Canada.”

The part of the motion looks like the First Nations want to be able to forgo the often overly formal National Energy Board legal process to allow both presentation of evidence and oral comments from First Nations members, as the Haisla requested.

The flexibility in deadlines is also needed because, so far, Enbridge has not clarified its announced plans for a possible natural gas pipeline to the west coast and how that might affect the Northern Gateway.
(See Editorial, Oct. 7, Lawyers have a lot to be thankful for )

The Joint Review Panel did extend the deadline for information
requests for the four groups filing the motion notwithstanding the
previous deadline of November 3.

Other intervenors have until November 30 to file their own
comments. Northern Gateway can respond by filing comments up until
December 9, and the four that filed the original motions can respond
to those comments by Dec 20.

All other written evidence must filed by December 22, in
compliance with the original order.

Given the Christmas and New Year’s holiday, any decision to
postpone the Joint Review hearings will have to come quite close to
the January 10 opening date.

Enbridge had no  comment on the notice of motion or its discussions with the
group, spokesman Paul Stanway told Reuters:”We
remain committed to the consultation process and to the regulatory
review. We’re talking to a number of first nations and we will continue
to talk to them.”


JRP letter summarizing motion files by Haisla Nation, Coastal First Nations, Gitxaala Nation and the Sustainibility Coalition (pdf)


Haisla Information request(pdf)

Haisla notice of motion (pdf)

Coastal First Nations reaffirm opposition to Northern Gateway and tanker traffic

Energy Environment

Updated at  1630 Nov.  23, with First Nations are calling for a complete overhaul of the Northern Gateway Joint Review process

The Coastal First Nations have reaffirmed their “categorical” opposition to the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline, contradicting media reports that a deal with Enbridge was in the offing.

In a news release issued Wednesday, Nov.  23, Art Sterritt, executive director said:

The Coastal First Nations categorically oppose Enbridge’s Northern Gateway Project  ….we unequivocally maintain our ban on oil tankers on the coast.”

It was Mr. Daniels, of Enbridge, who spoke of wanting a fresh start with the Coastal First Nation.

Sterritt, on behalf of the board, told Daniels that a fresh start from the Coastal First Nations perspective meant having Enbridge ask the Joint Review Panel (JRP) to stand down. “The Joint Review Process is seen by the Coastal First Nations not as objective, rather as a process that advances the Enbridge Project.
 
Subsequently the Coastal First Nations has been informed that Enbridge is not prepared to ask the JRP to stand down or reveal who the other proponents are, he said.

In August of 2009, Enbridge stated that the proposed project would not go ahead if First Nations communities opposed it, said Sterritt. “None of our communities support the project. Nor do any First Nations along the pipeline route.”
“Why would we support a proposal that would put our rivers, oceans and lifesource at risk?” Sterritt said. “It’s time Pat Daniels and Enbridge take the correct action and give us the fresh start they promised. It’s time to shut down the Joint Review Process and the Northern Gateway project.”

More to come