The pipeline is the centrepiece of a MOU between Alberta and Ottawa, which have both faced criticism for not bringing First Nations into the planning much sooner in the process.JONATHAN HAYWARD/The Canadian Press
Staunch opposition by some First Nations is threatening Alberta Premier Danielle Smith’s hopes for an oil pipeline to British Columbia’s northwest coast, weeks before her government plans to file an application for a project.
Alberta has floated a series of route options for the one-million-barrel-a-day proposal to ship crude to the West Coast, according to draft maps. Some Indigenous nations have already voiced opposition to them, saying they would not agree to an oil conduit crossing their territories or any move to weaken a ban on tanker loadings off the northern coast.
The pipeline is the centrepiece of a memorandum of understanding between Alberta and the federal government. Both governments have faced criticism for not bringing First Nations into the planning much sooner in the process, as has become the accepted procedure for developing major projects.
Negotiations have not formally started, though Alberta’s Energy Ministry was reported to have held meetings in Prince Rupert in May.
The Nisga’a Lisims Government, whose territory includes the Nass River region northeast of Prince Rupert, said it has not been consulted by Alberta or Ottawa officials and remains opposed to an oil pipeline. It issued a statement on Tuesday responding to reports of earlier discussions.
“All Nisga’a citizens can rest assured that despite this ill-conceived process being advanced by the Alberta government, nothing can happen on our lands without our consent, our treaty guarantees it,” it said. “At the same time, anybody can draw lines on a map and speculate about all kinds of projects.”
Carney cautions B.C. not to drag out pipeline debate
The Globe and Mail obtained draft maps drawn up by the Alberta government that feature three potential routes for a pipeline ending at various coastal ports that could be limited by a federal ban on tankers loading heavy oil.
One would extend west from Fort McMurray, Alta., to Observatory Inlet near the border with Alaska. Another would roughly follow the ill-fated Northern Gateway pipeline route from Edmonton to Kitimat or Prince Rupert along the Skeena River in B.C., and a third would run from Edmonton to Nasoga Gulf along the Nass River. None is in its final form, and the routes may have changed since they were issued, a source said.
The Globe is not naming the source, as they are not authorized to speak on behalf of the Alberta government. The CBC first reported on the maps showing the proposed routes.
Trans Mountain pipeline will run at full capacity in June, CEO says
Alberta officials declined to comment on the route proposals. “Alberta’s government is still finalizing our proposal for a one million barrel per day pipeline to Canada’s west coast for submission to the Major Projects Office by July 1,” Sam Blackett, spokesman for Ms. Smith, said in an e-mail.
As an alternative, Ottawa and industry players are also considering routing a new pipeline roughly adjacent to the recently expanded Trans Mountain line to Burnaby, B.C., with various proposals for the end point. However, Ms. Smith said she prefers a northern route that would afford tankers a faster journey to Asian markets.
The eight members of the Coastal First Nations, whose territories are affected by industrial development in the region, have been unmoved in their opposition. After Ottawa and Alberta signed their implementation agreement for the MOU last month, the group said it would not change its view that a bitumen pipeline would bring unnecessary environmental risks.
“No offer of equity or ownership will change our position, and no proponent is acceptable to us. Governments and would-be proponents should be aware of our absolute determination to protect our economy and our coast, which contributes more than $3-billion annually to our region and employs 30 per cent of the workforce,” the group said on May 15.
By not engaging with the communities at the outset of the planning process last year, the governments have made gaining the trust of First Nations much more difficult, said J.P. Gladu, an Indigenous business leader and corporate director. The danger lies in presupposing the future before everyone is at the table, he said.
“Putting lines on a map is the best way to upset First Nations,” Mr. Gladu said at a Calgary Climate Week executive forum on Tuesday.
“I’m hoping, as they begin to clarify what the potential routes are and the ports are, that they bring together the communities.”
Canada, U.S. must do more to remove political risks around pipeline permits, South Bow CEO says
Legally, consultations with Indigenous peoples begin before the project is listed under the Building Canada Act, and that happens when it is submitted to the Major Projects Office, Charlotte Power, spokesperson for federal Natural Resources Minister Tim Hodgson, said in a statement. That submission hasn’t happened yet.
As a result, formal talks with the Crown have not begun, though the minister has met with several Indigenous leaders in B.C. and Alberta to discuss various topics, including potential pipelines, she said. Meanwhile, the Alberta government has not chosen a route yet, so it is unable to identify Indigenous rights holders, she added.
Still, B.C. Premier David Eby is dead set against lifting the ban on loading oil on tankers at ports on the northern coast, and reiterated on Tuesday that he has not been party to any of the discussions about the proposed pipeline. He pointed out that the project still lacks a private-sector proponent or defined route.
“And now I hear that there are leaks of potential routes that I don’t know who drew them, whether Premier Smith drew them. I don’t know what they take into account,” Mr. Eby said at an unrelated event in Burnaby. “Here’s what I know: There is no world in which there will be a pipeline that goes through the north of British Columbia, bringing diluted bitumen, if it requires the oil tanker ban to be lifted.”
Editor’s note: This article has been corrected to state that, legally, consultations with Indigenous peoples begin before the project is listed under the Building Canada Act, not when it is listed.