Poll says Most B.C.Residents Oppose Pipeline
Monday, March 12, 2012 @ 9:20 AM
Ottawa, Ont. – A new Mustel Group poll shows the majority of residents in B.C. believe the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline project will not create long-term employment.
61% of respondents to the Mustel poll believe that “most jobs are short-term and many long-term jobs will be lost because unrefined oil is being shipped to other countries for refining.”
This result contradicts an earlier Ipsos Reid poll conducted in December 2011. In that poll, respondents cited employment and economic reasons to be the main benefit.
“People get that the project will not create permanent jobs,” said MP Nathan Cullen (Skeena-Bulkley Valley). “We certainly want jobs in my riding, but people are not going to settle for short-term cash instead of long-term value-added jobs.”
It its initial submission to the Joint Review Panel, Enbridge states that the project will offer less than 80 direct permanent jobs in B.C.
“Most have understood that this project poses major risks to the environment. These poll results show that British Columbians see that there would be economic losses as well.”
The poll also showed that the majority of B.C. residents are aware of the proposed pipeline project, and that opposition outweighs support for the project.
A total of 87% are familiar with the proposal and have read or heard something about it. 46% oppose the construction of a pipeline in contrast to 37% who support it. The remaining 17% are undecided or do not have an opinion.
“The results convey what I’ve already heard on the ground,” said Cullen, who commissioned the survey. “There is simply too much at risk to push the project through.”
These findings also contradict the earlier Ipsos Reid poll where only 42% of respondents were somewhat or very familiar with the project. It also showed that only 32% opposed the pipeline.
“It appears that at the same time knowledge of the project is growing, so is opposition,” said Cullen.
The Mustel survey was based on 500 interviews completed by telephone (landlines and cellular) January 25 to February 8, 2012 with a margin of error of +/-4.4% at the 95% level of confidence.
A delegation of First Nations’ Leaders is in Ottawa today to discuss the impacts of this proposed project on their northern communities in B.C.
Comments
So Enbridge commissioned the Ipsos Reid poll, and everyone made a big deal about that. Who commissioned this one?
You can pretty much make the poll results say anything you want depending on how you ask the questions.
âThe results convey what Iâve already heard on the ground,â said Cullen, who commissioned the survey. âThere is simply too much at risk to push the project through.â
Looks like it was commissioned by Nathan? Maybe it’s designed to give him more leadership votes? Who knows.
If people have been on the land that this proposed pipeline goes through and are familiar with Enbridge’s past history of spills and neglect of cleanup, they will vote no to it. Its that simple.
The story states that Cullen commissioned the survey.
There is now talk of running a pipeline to Eastern Canada, and exporting oil from Eastern Ports. This is being pushed by the Wild Rose Party of Alberta. I think thats the way it should go.
80 permanent jobs! Just think of all the jobs that will be created when there is an oil spill. Clean up crews, spin doctors, lawyers, the ensuing media circus, tailors to make teflon suits for all those that said it could not happen; etc. etc.
Lets shut down all the thousands of miles of pipelines already in BC!!! Oh wait how would my Timmie’s get supplied?
I still think most of you pro pipeline people don’t really understand the whole issue, seamutt. It is not JUST the pipeline that is opposed by many, but it is the greater consequence of using oil tankers in a strait that is known to be very very perilous for shipping. So without a port and oil tanker traffic off our northern west coast, there is no need for a pipeline to the coast. Since there is very very little benefit to the province as a whole, why on earth would anyone who lives in BC want this? Only those who stand to gain financially at the expense of the majority would be in favour of this proposal. There are too many people out there who are only thinking of themselves because a 3 or 4 year job for 80k-100k/yr is not worth the years of risk and damage just to send oil to the far east and the US. I could get one of those jobs myself, I have experience in a lot of the areas they will be needing and it would top off my retirement plans just about perfect, but I will go without a job like that because I wouldn’t like to say I gave in just for the short term money. The native communities are saying the same thing. Bribes won’t work this time and it’s time enbridge figured that out. And not one pro pipeline person has ever answered my question regarding prove to me there will be any substantial long term gain for BC. They can’t, and since it is BC taking the risk then BC should be able to stop it. We won’t be just rolled over because it’s a pet project for some politicians.
YEAH!
That’s in answer of the above post…….
But: “And not one pro pipeline person has ever answered my question regarding prove to me there will be any substantial long term gain for BC.”
All kinds of info on the Northern Gateway site if you cared to check it out.
http://www.northerngateway.ca/economic-opportunity/benefits-for-british-columbians/
Is running a pipeline to eastern Canada really an environmental victory? It would be a longer pipeline and cross more streams in total. There are already tankers off BC’s North coast and more to come. Sounds more like NIMBY to me. As if the stormy, ice-choked north atlantic is any safer.
But it is good to see some rational thinking finally start to trickle through. Take away the US-funded environmental hysteria and its not such a big deal.
Yes I have been to thier site. Those numbers (and those are the best case scenario) aren’t so impressive when broken down. As I said, I have no doubt that short term is good for a lot of people in the const phase. 560 long term employment (which I suspect is very optimistic) boils down to creating a total of 18 jobs a year for 30 years. 1.2 billion in taxes to the province which boils down to $10 per person per year. And isn’t it nice how they show ALL the taxes going to Health, Education and Jobs. I stand by my opinion. Not enough in it for ALL of BC to make it worth the risk.
“As if the stormy, ice-choked north atlantic is any safer”
This statement acknowledges what we already know: that the West Coast of the Pacific is not safe either!
All it takes is one Exxon Valdez like spill!
The “ice-choked north atlantic” is not safe and the West Cost is as unsafe or even worse!!
Solution: Don’t ship the stuff from either coast! Both routes are not safe!
Even pipelines across level ground rupture regularly, according to Enbridge spill statistics, compiled by Enbridge itself and the EPA.
Enbridge is only responsible for the pipeline and has stated that they will not be responsible for any oil spills from tankers.
@ But
Your arguement is clear and concise. This is exactly why BCer’s, First Nations, Environmentalists will take a stand.
We will drag this on and on through our court system for years – Count on it!
Fact is, the Keystone XL will go through, and I’m quite happy someone stateing the obvious, send it back east for refining.
Spills to the environment are a definite possibility.
What is a definite CERTAINTY is that the Enbridge project is about sucking the natural resources out of this country with the minimum investment (kinda like raw log exports). And Harper supports this? Build the refineries here, support Canadian families working IN Canada and send the Chinese whatever finished products they would like to buy.
BTW, spills of refined petroleum products are far less damaging to the environment than raw crude.
But, I never said I am pro pipeline. Just the misinformation I comment on. Ships have been traveling Douglas Channel since the fifties and I can’t find a record of any incidences. Oh and these ships have been and will be under a lot less direct operational control than the tankers.
About construction jobs, when workers finish with one job they move onto another, right, therefore permanent jobs. There is always construction somewhere unless the fibs tank our economy.
About refineries that would be a good idea, but would involve multiple pipelines to move the refined products. I can hear the screaming already.
I do agree BC should get more from moving this product but BC already has a lot of oil and gas passing through, maybe we should get even more there also.
I did not hear any complaining when pipeline capacity was increased through Jasper recently
The entire project stinks. We are exporting jobs and not only are those job that are created temporary and of special skills we are also exporting a product that is going to a country that only thinks about money and dont care how much pollution goes up into our atmosphere using the product.
Cheers
“Build the refineries here, support Canadian families working IN Canada and send the Chinese whatever finished products they would like to buy”
Sorry whelen but that would mean less millions of dollars in the pockets of the oil companies. Can’t have that in Canada. We are only here to pick up the scraps left at the feet of the corporations don’t you know.
It’s all part of the new world order. Keep the rich, rich. Make the rich, richer and keep the minions under control.
Again, most of you are trying to debate decisions that have already been made. Q4 of this year will see the first of many new oilsands producers coming online. That oil WILL go somewhere. It must. Western Canada is over-supplied with refined products. We don’t need more oil yet the decision has already been made to build these plants and now the plants are nearly complete. You have to understand that. And bitumen IS a finished product. It is critical that people understand the oil business before commenting on it.
>>>Western Canada is over-supplied with refined products. We don’t need more oil yet the decision has already been made to build these plants and now the plants are nearly complete.
If we are over supplied why is it we pay so much for gas here in BC? Instead of going great guns and seeing how fast it can be taken out of the ground they should be going in the opposite direction and slowing the production. Back in the 70s and 80s lougheed capped oil development in alberta and thier royalties were 30/40% higher for the province then they are today and the province was making more money. Since then subsequent administations have scrapped that cap and opened their doors to unlimited exploration and development, at the cost of the alberta govt and people, thier royalties are a fraction of what they were per barrel. This was done to make it look good for alberta and how it is booming, but is having the effect of costing the province billions in revenue so corporate political contributors can make billions and billions at the expense of not only albertans, but Canada as well. Time for a new direction.
Nobody asked me. But hey, what do I know?
Comments for this article are closed.