BC Native Leader Critical of Enbridge Tactics
Saturday, June 9, 2012 @ 5:13 AM
Prince George, B.C. – The head of the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs says Enbridge is trying to deceive the people of British Columbia with its claims about native communities signing equity agreements for a stake in the Northern Gateway Pipeline project.
Enbridge claims “nearly 60% of the aboriginal groups along the proposed route of the Northern Gateway Pipeline Project through B.C. and Alberta have signed on to share in the ownership and profits of the project. The communities each agreed to take a share of a 10 per cent equity stake in the $5.5 billion project, meaning they will also get to share in the profits generated by the pipeline.” The Enbridge release said the company couldn’t name the native communities “for contractual reasons.”
UBCIC Grand Chief Stewart Phillip says the Enbridge claim is “definitely not the case. If there were any agreements reached certainly it would be public knowledge. There has been no reported agreement. We believe this to be part of Enbridge’s accelerated propaganda campaign where they’re attempting to mislead the general public as well as first nations people. In my view it’s a very sleazy campaign of misinformation to confuse the issue, and it’s not going to work quite frankly.”
Chief Phillip notes the agreement that was signed off by the Gitxsan First Nation executive but was then publicly renounced by the Gitxsan Treaty Society following a months-long protest by members of the Gitxsan community who are vehemently opposed to the project.
Chief Phillip says “there’s a lot of confusing messages coming out of Enbridge. I think these are acts of desperation. They know full well the opposition to both the Enbridge pipeline proposal and the newer Kinder Morgan pipeline proposal are generating greater opposition on a daily basis.” He also says the Enbridge claim that it can’t identify the native communities that have signed on “is completely bogus. They felt they had achieved an agreement with the Gitxsan people. They were quick to announce and proclaim this so-called agreement that at the end of the day turned out to be a non-agreement, so I don’t think Enbridge has much credibility in terms of the public realm.”
Chief Phillip also says “there’s a policy of cronyism on the part of the Harper regime in Ottawa. They are certainly very much in the camp and the pocket of big business and bid oil, and have attacked and vilified all of the voices that oppose the Enbridge pipeline proposal and have declared this in the national interest and have made some pretty outrageous statements that represent an attack on democracy itself.” He says Bill C-38, the 450-page omnibus legislation, contains 130-odd pages that are designed to gut the Canadian Environmental Assessment processes and the Fisheries Act “to remove all notions of habitat protection for fish, which is absolutely outrageous.” Chief Phillip says “I think the Harper government has declared war on the environment in the interests of bid oil and big business.”
The Grand Chief believes the Enbridge proposal “will end up before several courts at many different levels, and that doesn’t bode well for investor confidence, not to mention who on earth is going to insure this project? It’s so rife with uncertainty and risk and is definitely becoming the defining fault line between the Harper government and Canadians.”
Comments
I think Cheif Phillip has a very good understanding of the true ons of PM Harper and Enbridge. Nothing about this project benefits the people BC. Not when consideration is given to the irreversible and negative environmental impact the eventual spill will have on our Province.
The Grand Chief is correct that no one would insure this project for its estimated $20 billion dollar spill containment cost. That is why this project (should it get approval) will not be insured for the full cost of its disaster, because then it would not make it economical for it to go ahead.
For Enbridge to rope in a few native bands… they get them on the hook as ‘equity holders’ and all the shared liability that comes with that.
So if you’re going to accuse Enbridge of lying, shouldn’t you have some proof?
There is no proof, is there? As a result, one can come with an opposite statement refuting the claim.
We have a standoff. One party says one thing, the other says another. Neither is showing the basis of their claim in the detail required by any reasonable person to determine for him or herself that the claim is verified.
Until such time, I prefer to stay with the word “claim” rather than lying. “Lying” is your term, JohnnyBelt.
It’s a pretty fine hair you’re trying to split gus, but point taken.
Enbridge Not Positioned to Pay for Gateway Oil Spill: Report
http://m.thetyee.ca/News/2012/06/05/Gateway-Oil-Spill-Insurance/
Where’s Enbridegs’ proof? Thier say so? Thier word? We know how good that word is in places like Michigan. Funny how convenient the contract calls for non disclosure. Ya, we should just take them at thier word…..not me.
I do no want the pipeline for many reasons. Environmental spills along the pipeline is the least of my concern.
That being said, I try to take an objective view as often as I can.
Therefore, to be objective, neithet party has provided any details as to which bands have signed on, the location of those bands with repect to “a corridor of impact”, both postitive and negative, of the actual pipeline and exactly what it is they have signed on to.
The bands did not want their names to be released, so Enbridge has very little options when it comes to them verifying their claim. At least, that is the way I see it.
So, shiould they have come out with the statement at all, in that case. THAT is where the “tactic” comes in, and where Enbridge has made a PR mistake. They knowingly came out with a claim which at this time cannot be verified. Eventually it will have to be. So they simply came out too early thinking that it would be seen to be to their benefit.
I have not been following the presses on this one so I do not know how well it has been received by the media beyond this site.
As for the bands, if they wish to counter the claim, they, likewise, will have to come out with some particulars …. otherwise it continues to be a matter of “he said she said”.
Enbridge are corporate criminals..Gateway is dead, end of story.
http://powellriverpersuader.blogspot.ca/2012/06/silence-of-lambs.html
Don’t know if it was this fellow or not that I heard on a radio interview but one of the big chiefs had contacted all thirteen bands west of Prince George directly on the pipeline route and he said only two had any sort of aggreement with Enbridge. That doesn’t quite add up to 60%.
Criminalmind.
I think the following sentence which I got from your link says it all:
“..Yes British Columbia, you take the risk of a catastrophic coastal disaster so we can fill our boots with money.”
“..Yes British Columbia, you take the risk of a catastrophic coastal disaster so we can fill our boots with money.”
But everyone says there is no money in it?
Hmmmmm
Ps – I did not read the link, as soon as I see the site I just roll my eyes and make a tinfoil hat
The tyee and powell river persuader.
Hi Johnny, still fascinated with the pipe eh?
We do have treatment available, think about it…
Good Day
Johnny reminds me of a guy I know.
An American that specializes in pipeline work and currently working at Husky refinery here in PG. A guy that rode the oil pyramid to its apex making a six figure income. Can’t vote because he is not a citizen, so he is vocal about his support for anything oil and gas any chance he gets. Its not his country so the environmental impacts are minimized, and the argument we can all walk if we don’t like oil is as strategic as the thinking gets. Loyalty to country means little when one simply moves to where the action is. The typical big oil supporter… onus is on the locals to prove anything, while the oil companies get the benefit of the doubt.
For someone like the above the little details like none of Gateways oil being for Canada means little. Ride the oil ponzi and let the locals worry about the spills and the energy inflation.
Its short sighted thinking. Encouraging the export of our oil for sake of production and jobs like his is one thing. But once that oil leaves Canada it also leaves behind the environmental regulations that protect our water and air quality. In addition to that Chinese workers are lucky to make in a month what a refinery worker here in Canada makes in a day. This Gateway project is about moving refining infrastructure to cheep labor markets with no regulation… and eventually with skilled foreign workers that will bring pressure to the quality of employment here in Canada as well as the USA. A race to the bottom enabled by projects like Gateway.
What I would like to see is something done about our gas prices here in PG. The Husky refinery is foreign owned and foreign controlled and all its generous profits are invested in Chinese exploration and developments in East Asia.
Councilman Skakun claims a 1-2 cent road tax on our gas in PG would bring in the $3.5 million need to maintain our roads. So if we continually pay 20 cents more than Kamloops, and I would argue more as you can almost always find a gas station in Kamloops around a $1.05… so even if we go with the general average of 20 cents then clearly Husky Oil and their cohorts in price fixing are raking in a cool $35+ million in hidden gas taxes from PG alone.
$35 million each and every year leaving PG to pay for oil infrastructure in Asia rather than pothole filled roads in PG.
When we had the Esso trans-load terminal on River Road before the ice jam we had access to other refineries by rail and the difference in price wasn’t nearly as great. Unfortunately we live in the era of monopoly capitalism and our politicians feel efficiency for the monopoly capitalists is of primary concern, and not policies that enable free enterprise competition.
If a new trans-load terminal for PG would lower our price to the range of Kamloops, then I would be more than happy to see government involvement in making that happen. A terminal where we could bring in by rail cheep gas from the BP refinery in Washington State or other locations in Alberta. A terminal that would allow small service providers to purchase their gas from a variety of suppliers and therefore enable real competition at the pumps here in PG. If it cost the city $50 million to build, then I would support this as a top priority for the city as surely it could pay for itself over the long run.
A question I have is about the new fuel terminal at the airport. They talked about using a variety of suppliers all bringing in their own fuel by rail for essentially the same reasons why the city should. The airlines would never entertain PG as an option if Husky was our sole source supplier even if Husky could make the quality fuels they require.
So with the new airport trans-load fuel terminal for bringing in fuel by rail from decent refineries elsewhere… can they also bring in gas for semi independents like Racetrack Gas, MrG, Superstore, Canadian Tire, or others? IMO that would be the biggest economic boost for PG in a long long time if we could share infrastructure.
Time Will Tell
Give More@The chief you are thinking of is Art Sterritt of Coastal First Nations. Here is their press release: http://www.coastalfirstnations.ca/news-release/june-6-2012-244am
75% of the BC citizens, are supporting the F.N. People, to keep the atrocities of the Enbridge pipeline and the dirty tar tankers, out of BC. That is a direct threat on the F.N. food sources. Not one of the greed bunch, have said one word, about the F.N. needs, to feed their people.
It’s bad enough, Harper and Campbell permitted dirty diseased fish farms, that are killing off the wild Salmon. Salmon is a staple for F.N. to feed their family’s. Bears, eagles, wolves and many wildlife species, rely on the Salmon for food.
There is a gag order on the media. Christy has outlawed media to report on, the massive die off of the, in river Salmon.
After the Red Deer river spill, we are more resolved than ever, to save our beautiful province from Harper’s greed.
We should be investing in renewable energy, before it’s too late and we pass the tipping point.
It’s as they say, man is the most destructive animal on earth, and the most stupid one at that.
Comments for this article are closed.