First Nations Oppose Enbridge Pipeline Project

[admin]

Protest rally in Kitimat,BC
VIDEO http://www.youtube.com/v/ox3IyiR97-4
(Various First Nations groups speak out against Enbridge during the protest rally on August 31, 2010 in Kitimat, BC.)

- - -

First Nations Say They Will Not Allow Pipelines and Oil Tankers Carrying Alberta’s Tar Sands Oil
in British Columbia

“This is where Enbridge hits a wall”

VANCOUVER (March 23, 2010) –First Nations stood as a unified block today – on the 21st anniversary of the
Exxon Valdez oil spill – to announce their opposition to a proposed Tar Sands pipeline that would bring expanded
amounts of Tar Sands oil from Alberta to British Columbia, where the oil would be shipped by oil tankers to
overseas markets, notably China.

“We will protect ourselves and the interests of future generations with everything we have because one major oil
spill on the coast of British Columbia would wipe us out,” said Gerald Amos, Director, Coastal First Nations, an
alliance of nine First Nations. “This bountiful and globally significant coastline cannot bear an oil spill. This is
where Enbridge hits a wall.”

Coastal First Nations from Vancouver Island to the BC/Alaska border are unanimous in their opposition and are
joined by the vast majority of First Nations affected along the pipeline route from Kitimaat to Alberta. These First
Nations – whose territories are all directly impacted by the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline – stood in
unity today to voice their opposition. The Coastal First Nations issued a declaration from their First Nations
governments:
…in upholding our ancestral laws, rights and responsibilities, we declare that oil tankers
carrying crude oil from the Alberta Tar Sands will not be allowed to transit our lands and
waters.

The Athabasca Chipewyan Cree First Nation located near Alberta’s Tar Sands also offered their support with Chief Allan
Adam saying, “From experience I know that any industrial development and potential pollution within traditional territories
of the First Nations not only jeopardizes the land, the people and wildlife today, but for generations to come… I do not
support doing business with Enbridge now and in the future.”

To date no First Nation in Canada – and no municipality – has publicly supported Enbridge’s proposed pipeline,
which would increase Tar Sands oil production by 30 per cent. Tar Sands oil produces three times more greenhouse
gas emissions than conventional oil.

“Nothing threatens our way of life more than contaminated water and destruction of wildlife. Today, we invite First
Nations around the world to join us in solidarity in our fight against this pipeline development and to a put a stop to
oil tanker traffic,” said Terry Tegee, Vice President, Carrier Sekani Tribal Council.

Also today, an unprecedented grouping of 150 First Nations groups, businesses, environmental organizations, and
prominent Canadians – including Dr. David Suzuki, Margaret Atwood and Neve Campbell – ran a full-page ad in
today’s Globe and Mail with the headline ‘This was Exxon’s gift to Alaska. B.C. Can Expect the same from
Enbridge.’

MORE . . .
http://pipeupagainstenbridge.ca/
- - -

"BC First Nations will not put their territories and waters at risk caused by the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline and crude oil tanker traffic"
UBCIC Resolution no. 2010-11


(Coast Salish Territory/Vancouver, B.C. - March 23, 2010)

The UBCIC Chiefs Council met last week in Vancouver, B.C. and one item of discussion was the proposed Enbridge Pipeline Project. UBCIC Resolution 2010-11, Enbridge Pipeline Project, was presented, discussed and ratified.

Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, President of the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs stated “The UBCIC is opposed to the Enbridge Pipeline Project and stands with the many First Nations who are standing as a unified block in their opposition to this proposed Tar Sands pipeline.”

This morning, the Coastal First Nations, who are an alliance of First Nations on B.C.’s North and Central Coast and Haida Gwaii, announced that they will not allow pipelines and oil tankers carrying Alberta’s Tar Sands Oil in British Columbia.

This week, Grand Chief Phillip is in Williams Lake supporting the Tsilhqot’in’s defense of Teztan Biny at the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency public hearings into the proposed Taseko Mines Ltd.’s plans to build a gold-copper mine on the territory of the Tsilhqot’in Nation.
“Water is the issue. Indigenous Peoples are defending their territory and the health of their communities throughout British Columbia. The short-term economic gain promised by government and industry proponents of mega-projects like the Enbridge Pipeline, Taseko Mines’ Prosperity Mine and Kemess North are being opposed by First Nations who are thinking of the long-term impact on their territories and on their communities,” said Grand Chief Phillip.

Grand Chief Phillip concluded “It is abundantly clear, B.C. First Nations will not put their territories and waters at risk caused by the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline and crude oil tanker traffic. As Indigenous Peoples, we know first-hand when third party interests are granted access to the resources of our territories, government and the courts protect those industry interests at great cost to our Aboriginal Title and Rights and of the environmental values that many British Columbians share with First Nations.”

– 30 –

Media inquires:
Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, Union of BC Indian Chiefs
Phone: (250) 490-5314

=====================

UNION OF B.C. INDIAN CHIEFS
CHIEFS COUNCIL
MARCH 17TH - 18TH, 2010
VANCOUVER, B.C.

Resolution no. 2010-11

RE: Enbridge Pipeline Project

WHEREAS Enbridge proposes to build two parallel 1,170 kilometre pipelines through Alberta and British Columbia to export crude oil and other oil products;

WHEREAS these pipelines would involve over 1000 stream and river crossings and result in 525,000 barrels of crude oil/day, 193,000 barrels of condensate/day, and 225 tankers a year travelling through the territories of nations along the pipeline and tanker routes;

WHEREAS the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline Project will ship oil products by tankers in our coastal waters;

WHEREAS First Nations have practiced uncontested, supreme and absolute jurisdiction over our territories, our resources and our lives with the right to manage our territories including our lands and waters;

WHEREAS First Nations laws and customs define our responsibilities to protect our lands and waters;

WHEREAS BC First Nations will not put their territories and waters at risk caused by the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline and crude oil tanker traffic;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the UBCIC Chiefs Council oppose the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline Project.

Moved: Chief Donna Gallinger, Nicomen Indian Band
Seconded: Chief Wayne Christian, Splats’in First Nation
Disposition: Carried
Abstention: Chief Fabian Alexis, Okanagan Indian Band
Date: March 18th, 2010

[admin]

"First Nations have said no to the project definitively today. . ."

News and Comment
by Tehaliwaskenhas - Bob Kennedy
Copyright
Turtle Island Native Network
http://www.turtleisland.org/resources/resources-environment.htm

March 24th, 2010 - A wall of opposition to the Proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline.

"We will protect ourselves and the interests of future generations with everything we have because one major oil spill on the coast of British Columbia would wipe us out," said Gerald Amos, Director, Coastal First Nations, an alliance of nine First Nations. "This bountiful and globally significant coastline cannot bear an oil spill. This is where Enbridge hits a wall."

Coastal First Nations, who are an alliance of First Nations on B.C.'s North and Central Coast and Haida Gwaii, announced that they will not allow pipelines and oil tankers carrying Alberta's Tar Sands Oil in British Columbia.
DETAILS: http://www.turtleisland.org/discussion/viewtopic.php?p=11166#p11166

A recent UBCIC Resolution states, "BC First Nations will not put their territories and waters at risk caused by the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline and crude oil tanker traffic".

Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, President of the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs stated "The UBCIC is opposed to the Enbridge Pipeline Project and stands with the many First Nations who are standing as a unified block in their opposition to this proposed Tar Sands pipeline."

"As Indigenous Peoples, we know first-hand when third party interests are granted access to the resources of our territories, government and the courts protect those industry interests at great cost to our Aboriginal Title and Rights and of the environmental values that many British Columbians share with First Nations." Grand Chief Stewart Phillip.

Enbridge proposes to build two parallel 1,170 kilometre pipelines through Alberta and British Columbia to export crude oil and other oil products; these pipelines would involve over 1000 stream and river crossings and result in 525,000 barrels of crude oil/day, 193,000 barrels of condensate/day, and 225 tankers a year travelling through the territories of nations along the pipeline and tanker routes; the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline Project will ship oil products by tankers in coastal waters.

New Democrat environment critic Rob Fleming expressed his concerns, "The minister should know that Enbridge and First Nations in British Columbia have talked and talked for six years, and First Nations have said no to the project definitively today. The Enbridge pipeline would make an oil spill on B.C.'s pristine north coast outside the Great Bear rain forest an accident waiting to happen. That's been predicted time and time again. That's the conclusion of a recent study by 12 scientists that took five years that studied 14,000 kilometres of our coast. When a significant oil spill occurs, it could eradicate killer whales. It could exterminate 150 species of marine mammals and birds in our coast." (Yesterday was the 21st anniversary of the Exxon Valdez spill off the Alaskan coast)

In the BC Legislature, Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation George Abbott said, "There are extensive discussions underway already around the proposed Enbridge pipeline project. It is far from even proceeding to the intensive environmental assessment stage. So we will certainly watch with interest the concerns of First Nations, but there is much to be played out in terms of process around this issue."

The Premier added, "Enbridge has a proposal . . .which is going through a process. That process will include consultation with First Nations. It will include consultation with all those First Nations individually. It will include the most rigorous environmental regime there is anywhere in North America, and it potentially could include billions of dollars of investment, thousands of jobs for people across the north, particularly for First Nations, build the capacity for First Nations that they've been asking us to build for a number of years now. All of that will be done within an environmental framework that is secure for the long-term future of British Columbia, First Nations and non-First Nations alike. The way that you actually move to a successful conclusion of these is to include First Nations, talk to them directly, talk about the benefits that they may have, talk about their concerns and see if there is an answer. If there's an answer, it will proceed. If there is not an answer, it will not proceed."


. . .excerpts from the BC Legislature Tuesday March 23rd, 2010

FIRST NATIONS CONSULTATION ON ENBRIDGE OIL PIPELINE PROPOSAL

G. Coons: Today was a historic moment for First Nations in British Columbia and, indeed, across the province as dozens of nations and tribal councils from across the province joined together to oppose the Enbridge tar sands pipeline. My question is to the Premier. Will he show respect for First Nations by standing up today and saying no to the Enbridge pipeline?

Hon. G. Abbott: I appreciate the member raising this important issue. There are extensive discussions underway already around the proposed Enbridge pipeline project. It is far

Hon. G. Abbott: I appreciate the member raising this important issue. There are extensive discussions underway already around the proposed Enbridge pipeline project. It is far from even proceeding to the intensive environmental assessment stage. So we will certainly watch with interest the concerns of First Nations, but there is much to be played out in terms of process around this issue.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

G. Coons: That's a concern, as this minister sits here watching with interest. There's a major concern with this pipeline, and he needs to act on it.

The message from First Nations is clear. They say: "In upholding our ancestral laws, rights, and responsibilities, we declare that oil tankers carrying crude oil from the Alberta tar sands will not be allowed to transit our lands and waters."

The Premier talks endlessly of his commitment to a new relationship with First Nations, and to date, no First Nation in Canada and no municipality has publicly supported Enbridge's proposed pipeline. Statistics show that it's not a question of if an oil spill happens but when. It's time for this government to show they can walk the walk, not just talk the talk.

Again to the Premier: will he rise today and say no to the Enbridge tar sands pipeline?

Hon. G. Abbott: It's always interesting to listen to the opposition and some of the positions that they take. We heard the other day in the Legislature that the outcome of every environmental assessment process should be consent by all parties before any economic activity could proceed on the land base in British Columbia. Now I am hearing this member say that Enbridge should not even talk to First Nations. They shouldn't have an opportunity to explain their project. They shouldn't have an opportunity to explore the possibilities of that project with First Nations in the province.

I find this an extraordinary example of a kind of destructive paternalism on the part of the opposition — that they won't even have industry talk to First Nations. Apparently, these members are prepared to submit their judgment on this important project for important consideration by First Nations. That is an astonishing assertion and an unfortunate one, indeed, from a First Nations perspective.

R. Fleming: The minister should know that Enbridge and First Nations in British Columbia have talked and talked for six years, and First Nations have said no to the project definitively today.

The Enbridge pipeline would make an oil spill on B.C.'s pristine north coast outside the Great Bear rain forest an accident waiting to happen. That's been predicted time and time again. That's the conclusion of a recent study by 12 scientists that took five years that studied 14,000 kilometres of our coast. When a significant oil spill occurs, it could eradicate killer whales. It could exterminate 150 species of marine mammals and birds in our coast.

My question is to the Premier. It's the 21st anniversary of the Exxon Valdez spill off the Alaskan coast today. Will he stand up and reject the oil sands pipeline today?

Hon. G. Campbell: Enbridge has a proposal…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. G. Campbell: …which is going through a process. That process will include consultation with First Nations. It will include consultation with all those First Nations individually. It will include the most rigorous environmental regime there is anywhere in North America, and it potentially could include billions of dollars of investment, thousands of jobs for people across the north, particularly for First Nations, build the capacity for First Nations that they've been asking us to build for a number of years now. All of that will be done within an environmental framework that is secure for the long-term future of British Columbia, First Nations and non–First Nations alike.

The way that you actually move to a successful conclusion of these is to include First Nations, talk to them directly, talk about the benefits that they may have, talk about their concerns and see if there is an answer. If there's an answer, it will proceed. If there is not an answer, it will not proceed.

talk about their concerns, and see if there is an answer. If there's an answer, it will proceed. If there is not an answer, it will not proceed.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

R. Fleming: Well, I think we've heard from the Premier of what comes ahead of First Nations and the environment, and it's Enbridge. In October a freighter ran aground in the same channel that is proposed for supertankers. The Queen of the North sank in these very waters four years ago, and Enbridge now proposes to move 525,000 barrels a day of tar sands oil — oil with three times the greenhouse gas emissions of conventional crude.

Maybe the Premier would like to hear the science on this. Environment Canada lists the Douglas Channel and the north coast interior passages as the fourth most dangerous in the world. The risk of human error, the harsh weather — those things can't ever be taken care of by the Premier's assurances that we've just heard.

Again to the Premier: will he reject this unacceptable risk to B.C.'s environment and say no to the Enbridge pipeline?

Hon. G. Campbell: Well, let me tell you this, hon. Speaker: I accept jobs for First Nations people across this province that will build the capacity they've been calling for, for generation after generation. I accept a rigorous environmental assessment process, which every major project in British Columbia and Canada must go through.

Evidently, that is unlike the opposition, who reject environmental assessment, who yesterday rejected wind power, who have rejected the benefits of reducing carbon across the province, across the environment. This is a time to reach out to First Nations to talk about opportunities and how we actually create economic opportunity within the framework of a sound environmental and scientific policy. That's what we intend to do, and that's how we'll build the future for First Nations in British Columbia and for all British Columbians.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

D. Donaldson: Well, the fact is there are absolutely no long-lasting jobs associated with the Enbridge pipeline, and that's why the First Nations of the north are unanimously opposed to this project. Experts in the shipping and pipeline sector say, "You move oil; you'll spill oil," and this Enbridge project will spill oil.

My question to the Premier. Ecotourism, hunting and fishing are major economic drivers in my region. That is why 45 businesses, most of them located….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Continue, Member.

D. Donaldson: Ecotourism, hunting and fishing are major economic drivers in my region. That is why 45 businesses, most of them located in the northwest, have signed on to a declaration opposing the Enbridge pipeline.

My question is to the Premier. Will he show his commitment to sustainable local development by standing in the House today and saying no to the Enbridge tar sands pipeline?

Hon. G. Campbell: There is no question the opposition will say no to anything — any opportunity for investment, any

Hon. G. Campbell: There is no question the opposition will say no to anything — any opportunity for investment, any opportunity for jobs, any opportunity for economic development. That opposition has said no year in and year out for almost a decade and a half.

Here's what we have said quite clearly. We believe in economic and environmental assessments. We believe in wind power. We believe in new independent power projects. To that member opposite, his constituents call our offices and come to us every single day and say: "Please provide us with jobs, encourage investment and do it with first nations." We will work with first nations.

Unlike the opposition, I can guarantee the member opposite this: we will work with first nations, we will work with community leaders, and we will generate investment in jobs that meet our environmental objectives in British Columbia.

[admin]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

MARCH 24, 2010

OTTAWA MUST ACT NOW TO PREVENT AN ANOTHER VALDEZ

21 years since Valdez spill Harper is moving to have Tankers off BC

OTTAWA - On March 24, 1989 at 12:04am the Exxon Valdez oil tanker ran
aground on Bligh Reef causing one of the most devastating environmental
disasters in North American history. Now, 21 years later, the
Conservative government is pushing to start having oil tankers off the
sensitive coast of British Columbia.

That is why today on the anniversary on the accident, Fin Donnelly,
New Democrat Fisheries and Oceans Critic and MP for New
Westminster-Coquitlam and Port Moody, commemorated this tragic event by
announcing the introduction of a bill seeking to outlaw all oil tankers
in the Dixon Entrance, Hecate Strait and Queen Charlotte Sound.

"My bill would make the moratorium on oil tanker traffic in this region
legally binding," said Donnelly. "The moratorium on oil tanker traffic
has been in place for over 35 years - it was necessary to protect our
coastline then - it's still necessary now".

Yesterday, First Nations groups and community activists from all over
British Columbia came together to denounce the proposed Enbridge
Pipeline which would bring 225 oil tankers a year through the Hecate
Strait and the Queen Charlotte Sound to move oil to markets in Asia and
the US.

"People from across northern British Columbia are becoming united
against this pipeline and the oil tanker traffic it will create," said
Nathan Cullen, New Democrat Natural Resources Critic and MP for the
northern BC riding of Skeena-Bulkley Valley. "The decisions are being
made in Ottawa, but the First Nations and the local grassroots are
saying that their future isn't in the temporary jobs this would create.
They are looking for real investments in new green energy."

New Democrat Environmental Critic Linda Duncan (Edmonton-Strathcona)
says one need only consider the record of the federal government in
preventing and responding to spills to understand the opposition to
this project.

"I experienced firsthand the devastation of the bunker C spill at Lake
Wabamun and the failure by federal departments to respond including to
address impacts to First Nation lands.," said Duncan. "The concerns
raised about risks posed by this project are well founded."

- 30 -

For more information or to schedule an interview, please contact:
Shelley Browne
Constituency Assistant

Nathan Cullen, MP Skeena-Bulkley Valley NDP Critic for Natural
Resources & Energy
250-877-4142;
cullen1@parl.gc.ca

[admin]

March 2010

"Enbridge, a pipeline company, has proposed to build an 1,170km pipeline from the Alberta Tar Sands out to the coast of British Columbia. If this pipeline is built, it will flow more than half a million barrels of dirty oil a day from the tar sands out to the pristine Great Bear Rainforest. Once there, it will be loaded onto oil supertankers and navigate the treacherous coastal waters. The future of the Great Bear Rainforest and the livelihood of First Nations’ traditional territories are in danger from an inevitable oil spill unless we get a ban on oil tankers and stop this project."
http://blogs.greenpeace.ca/?p=2573


First Nations solidarity . . .
http://www.turtleisland.org/discussion/viewtopic.php?p=11166#p11166
- - -

Northern Gateway Pipeline Project - Funding Awarded for Participation in the Environmental Review
OTTAWA, March 25, 2010

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency has awarded a total of $435,780 to nine applicants to support their participation in the environmental assessment process for the Northern Gateway Pipeline Project in Alberta and British Columbia.

Funding recipients are ForestEthics Canada Project, Living Oceans Society, Raincoast Conservation Foundation, Kitimat Valley Naturalist Club, B.C. Wildlife Federation, United Fishermen and Allied Workers' Union, Nature Canada, Dogwood Initiative, and Friends of Michel Society.

This funding will help successful applicants to review and comment on the application to be submitted by the proponent, Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines. The application will include the environmental impact statement. Funding may also be used to prepare for and participate in the public hearings that will be announced by the Joint Review Panel. The information pertaining to these public participation opportunities will be communicated at a later date.

An independent funding review committee reviewed the requests and provided recommendations on funding allocations. The committee's report, along with further information on the project, is available on the Agency Web site at http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca. Information on the proposed project is also available on the Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry on the Agency Web site, under reference number 06-05-21799.

Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines proposes to construct and operate two pipelines, 1,170 km in length, between an inland terminal at Bruderheim, Alberta and a marine terminal near Kitimat, British Columbia. About 500 km of pipeline will be in Alberta and 670 km in British Columbia. One of the pipelines will carry crude oil west to Kitimat and the other line will carry condensate east to Bruderheim. The project also includes the construction and operation of an integrated marine infrastructure at tidewater to accommodate loading and unloading of oil and condensate tankers and marine transportation of oil and condensate.

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency administers the federal environmental assessment process, which identifies the environmental effects of proposed projects and measures to address those effects, in support of sustainable development.

[admin]

Enbridge Blocking First Nation's Comments on Sufficiency of Pipeline Application

KITAMAAT VILLAGE, BRITISH COLUMBIA

June 28, 2010

The Haisla First Nation is firing back after Enbridge urged the federal government to ignore First Nations input on the sufficiency of the company's recent Northern Gateway Pipeline application.

The Haisla have written to the National Energy Board (NEB) and Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) expressing concern that Enbridge wants government to overlook its constitutional obligation to consult First Nations.

"We are deeply concerned at the disrespect Enbridge has shown for our rights," said Haisla Councillor Gerald Amos. "Enbridge is acting in bad faith by interfering in our Nation's government-to-government relationship with the Crown."

Enbridge submitted its application for the Northern Gateway Pipeline in May to the Joint Review Panel (JRP) process headed by the NEB and CEAA. The panel must determine whether Enbridge's application is sufficiently complete to initiate the review process.

In a June 17 letter, Enbridge's legal counsel urged the JRP determine the sufficiency of Enbridge's application without considering information from the Haisla.

"The Haisla have a right to be consulted at every phase of the assessment process and that includes commenting on the sufficiency of Enbridge's application," said Haisla Chief Councillor Dolores Pollard.

The Haisla intend to submit a letter in the coming months commenting on the specific deficiencies of Enbridge's application.

The proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline would carry tar sands oil from Alberta to an oil tanker port near Kitimat, in Haisla traditional territory.

Download the Haisla letter at: http://www.haisla.ca/files/haisla_06222010.pdf

Download the Enbridge letter at: http://www.haisla.ca/files/NGP_06172010.pdf

For more information, please contact
Haisla First Nation
Gerald Amos
(250) 632-1521
or
Haisla First Nation
Dolores Pollard
(250) 639-1595 (cell) or (250) 639-9361 ext 110

[admin]

Turtle Island Native Network notes the concerns being raised by a major Canadian sustainable energy 'think tank'
regarding the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline
which could open British Columbia's coast to crude oil tankers
and will have "monumental impacts on the environment and society for decades to come".

Jun 29, 2010

The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline project proposes to transport oil sands petroleum and condensate
between Alberta’s oil sands and the B.C. coast, by building twin pipelines connecting a terminal near Edmonton
to a marine terminal near Kitimat to transfer petroleum products and condensate into and out of large crude oil tankers.

First Nations have already raised major concerns, and now there is more proof that those concerns are valid . . .

The proposed environmental assessment of the Enbridge Gateway oilsands pipeline falls short, according to an analysis released today by the Pembina Institute.

We can't count on environmental assessment process for a fair decision on Enbridge Gateway oil sands pipeline

Karen Campbell

Pembina Institute
http://www.oilsandswatch.org/blog/73

As the Enbridge Gateway oil sands pipeline proposal lurches toward the environmental assessment process, B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell is on record saying: "Enbridge has a proposal which is going through a process . . . It will include the most rigorous environmental regime there is anywhere in North America."

While it sounds nice, the reality is that the increasingly controversial [http://www.vancouversun.com/opinion/Ignatieff+promises+tanker/3185242/story.html] pipeline will be reviewed by a Joint Review Panel established by the National Energy Board and Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. And if the Mackenzie Gas Project is any indication, there are some very real problems with how the federal government is making decisions about major energy projects.

There's good reason opponents of the Enbridge project are wary of trusting the environmental assessment process. To illustrate why, let's look at the Joint Review Panel tasked with reviewing the Mackenzie Gas Project, a 1,300-kilometre natural gas pipeline in the Northwest Territories.

The panel consisted of seven diverse members, including four from the Northwest Territories, who spent six years conducting research and hearings before issuing 176 recommendations to mitigate harmful environmental and socio-economic effects. But guess what? Of the 115 of those recommendations directed at the federal and territorial governments, only 10 have been fully accepted [http://www.cbc.ca/canada/north/story/2010/05/17/mgp-jrp-nwt-fed-response.html?ref=rss#ixzz0oG1n15WC].

In other words, even after a comprehensive hearing process, it appears the federal government is going to disregard the advice of its panel. And given that the panel developed these recommendations after considering the input of Aboriginal peoples, local citizens and more, this disrespect extends to them, too.

*If approved, the Enbridge Gateway oil sands pipeline will open B.C.'s North Coast to crude oil tankers.In the case of the Enbridge Gateway oil sands pipeline, however, the situation is much worse to start off with. The Joint Review Panel only consists of three people — none of whom are from B.C. Two are from Calgary; the third is a First Nations person from northern Ontario.

So, let's get this straight: a 1,300-km natural gas pipeline project gets reviewed by a diverse seven-member panel, some of whom have a first-hand understanding of northern issues, but a twin 1,170-km oil sands pipeline (2,340 km in total), which opens B.C.'s North Coast to crude oil tankers only gets reviewed by a panel of three people with no first-hand knowledge of the region [http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/article/819541--gorrie-the-big-spill-coming-to-a-coast-near-you]?

This is starting to sound like a bad political satire. Unfortunately, it's real life — and the consequences of rubber-stamping the Enbridge pipeline are tremendous [http://www.oilsandswatch.org/blog/70].

While Enbridge may claim the chance of a major oil tanker spill due to this project is "minimal," keep in mind that BP also said the chance of a spill in the Gulf was "unlikely." To top it off, Enbridge ultimately bears no responsibility beyond the tanker port anyway. It's easy to make promises you don't have to keep.

Unlike BP's Deepwater Horizion rig, which was exempted from a formal environmental impact analysis, at least the Enbridge Gateway oil sands pipeline will undergo an environmental assessment, but the credibility of this assessment is starting out on shaky ground, and the panel hasn't even started its hearings yet.

Download our full comparison [http://www.pembina.org/pub/2044] of the review process for the Mackenzie Gas Project and the Enbridge oil sands pipeline.
- - -

Also related to this issue . . .

Haida Gwaii Municipalities Unanimous in Opposition to Tankers
Port Clements adds voice to growing call for ban on coastal tanker traffic

Today Port Clements will join all other Haida Gwaii municipalities and sign a declaration calling for a ban on coastal tanker traffic.The decision by Port Clements’ council to add its voice to growing calls for a ban means that all of Haida Gwaii--including the Haida Nation as well as the municipalities of Masset, Old Masset, Skidegate, Sandspit, and Queen Charlotte – is united in opposition to coastal tanker traffic.

Victoria, BC Jun 24, 2010

Today Port Clements will join all other Haida Gwaii municipalities and sign a declaration calling for a ban on coastal tanker traffic.

The decision by Port Clements’ council to add its voice to growing calls for a ban means that all of Haida Gwaii--including the Haida Nation as well as the municipalities of Masset, Old Masset, Skidegate, Sandspit, and Queen Charlotte -- is united in opposition to coastal tanker traffic.

“Everyone has their eye on what is happening in the Gulf of Mexico, and nobody in B.C. wants to risk an accident like this happening along our fragile and treacherous coast,” said Sierra Club BC Executive Director George Heyman. “The communities that stand to be most impacted are uniting in unwavering opposition to the threat of oil spills.”

Sierra Haida Gwaii and other organizations have been working together as the Enbridge Awareness Group to draw attention to the proposed 1,170 km ‘Northern Gateway’ pipeline that will flow more than half a million barrels of crude oil a day from Alberta’s tar sands to the Great Bear Rainforest area. From Kitimat, super-tankers would transport the oil out to sea through the same rough and narrow passages where the much smaller Queen of the North ferry sank in 2006.

“In communities where so many livelihoods depend on shellfish aquaculture, fishing and tourism, protecting our coast is a priority on everybody’s mind,” said Sierra Haida Gwaii chair Jacques Morin. “It has been heartening to see community after community join together in solidarity to protect our coast and livelihoods.”

“The solidarity on Haida Gwaii reinforces the Coastal First Nations’ declaration last March to keep oil tankers out of their ancestral territories,” said Caitlyn Vernon, Sierra Club BC Coastal Programs Campaigner. “The momentum is growing. First Nations and non-Aboriginal communities are standing together in opposition to tankers and in support of sustainable livelihoods that depend on healthy coastal ecosystems.”

Sierra Club BC is concerned about the serious threats tanker traffic would pose to the adjacent Great Bear Rainforest. Though it has been a model for land conservation, the rainforest is heavily dependent on the health of the water that surrounds and runs through it.

“An oil spill in the coastal waters off the Great Bear Rainforest would have a devastating and potentially irreparable impact on this globally-significant ecosystem,” said Heyman.

-30-

Contact:

George Heyman, Executive Director, Sierra Club BC: (604) 312-6595

Caitlyn Vernon, Coastal Programs Campaigner, Sierra Club BC: (250) 896-3500

Jacques Morin, chair, Sierra Haida Gwaii: (250) 559-8798
- - -

Previously reported on this topic . . .
http://www.turtleisland.org/discussion/viewtopic.php?p=11166#p11166

[admin]

NEWS RELEASE

For Immediate Release

July 27, 2010

Latest Enbridge Oil Spill Another Bleak Reminder of Dangers of Northern Gateway Pipeline

While Enbridge continues to gush about the safety of its proposed
pipeline in British Columbia one of its subsidiaries has spilled more
than 3 million litres of crude oil in Michigan.

"The latest Enbridge pipeline spill only reinforces our concerns about
Enbridge's proposed Gateway project in British Columbia," says Art
Sterritt. "Despite its claims to making Northern Gateway a model of
world class safety and environmental standards oil spills like the one
in Michigan confirm our belief that it would only be a question of time
before a catastrophic spill occurs in our land or our waters if the
project is approved."

Enbridge proposes to bring crude oil from Alberta to the northern BC
coast, where it would be loaded onto large crude carriers for transport
to Asian refiners through the pristine waters within our territories

The Enbridge Energy Partners spill near Marshall, Michigan has made its
way into a tributary of the Kalamazoo River. "Despite any clean up
effort the spill will cause damage to the environment and local
economy."

Sterritt, who recently visited Louisiana to hear first hand from Native
Americans and others about the impact of the BP oil spill, said we were
told that the best way to avoid a similar disaster was not to allow the
pipeline or tanker traffic in our territories. "A Cajun man told me that
if humans can make it, humans can break it. Companies like Enbridge
continue to prove him right."

The Coastal First Nations will continue to oppose the Enbridge project,
said Gerald Amos.

Amos, the president of the Coastal First Nations, said an oil spill on
the coast would wipe out the marine resources we depend on so heavily.
"The memories of seeing the black plume from the BP oil spill and
hearing the devastating stories the spill has had on the Native
Americans and all the people on the coast will be a constant reminder to
us that we must stop the Enbridge project. Our coastline simply cannot
bear an oil spill."

-30-

Contact:

Art Sterritt, Executive Director, Coastal First Nations: 604-868-9110 or
604-696-9889
Gerald Amos, President, Coastal First Nations: 250-632-1521

[admin]

In the wake of the latest oil spill,
the Canadian Union of Public Employees in British Columbia has written a letter to the Premier,
warning that BC and Canada are on a collision course with First Nations and others concerned about the dangers
of the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway project . . .
http://www.scribd.com/doc/35168696/CUPE-warns-of-oil-spill-dangers


BURNABY, BRITISH COLUMBIA

July 29, 2010

Citing this week’s Enbridge oil spill that has threatened a Michigan river and the earlier disaster by British Petroleum that devastated the U.S. Gulf Coast, the B.C. division of the Canadian Union of Public Employees today joined First Nations and environmental groups in voicing opposition to the Enbridge Northern Gateway project.

The project would involve super tankers carrying bitumen from the Alberta tar sands and navigating the coast of British Columbia, including the fragile Great Bear Rainforest.

CUPE BC says that any potential benefits of the Enbridge plan are outweighed by the high risk of another disaster like the BP oil spill. Enbridge itself has lost credibility in recent days with a pipeline leak that resulted in more than 3 million litres of oil flowing into the Kalamazoo River in southern Michigan, coating birds and fish.

“As we’ve seen in Michigan and the Gulf coast, any kind of oil spill on our coast would have a tremendous impact on the natural environment and would impact wildlife, including salmon and the Kermode bear which is unique to the Great Bear Rainforest,” says CUPE BC diversity vice-president (aboriginal workers) Leanne Louie. “With the BP oil spill, the damage is irreversible. We can’t let that happen here.”

Penetration of the B.C. coastline by oil tankers is only part of a massive plan to build a 1,150-kilometre underground pipeline that will result in the transportation of 525,000 barrels of oil each day across Alberta and B.C. The federal government and its joint review panel are currently reviewing Enbridge’s application for the project despite the B.C. government’s 2006 promise to protect the Great Bear Rainforest.

“Enbridge claims there is minimal risk of an oil spill. In reality, it’s not if but when an oil spill will occur,” says Sheryl Burns, co-chair of the CUPE BC environment committee. “The Campbell government says it wants to fight climate change. But by supporting the Enbridge application it’s doing precisely the opposite, since the pipeline will be a major incentive for increased production of climate-damaging oil from the tar sands. We should be creating green jobs instead that will employ British Columbians while also protecting our environment.”

(Read the CUPE letter to the Premier http://www.cupe.bc.ca/sites/default/files/ltr%20to%20premier.pdf )

[admin]

Inevitable oil spill, a threat to Coastal First Nations in British Columbia . . .

September 1, 2010

The proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline project threatens the existence of First Nations on the North and Central Coast and Haida Gwaii. It's inevitable that an oil spill will occur said Art Sterritt, executive director of the Great Bear Initiative, who spoke Tuesday in Kitimat at a hearing of the Enbridge Northern Gateway Joint Review Panel. "The consequences of an oil spill on the coast would not only be catastrophic to the pristine waters within our Traditional Territories but also to our people and our culture." It is for those reasons that the ban on oil tankers on the BC coast remain, Sterritt said.

"We have commissioned scientific reports and consulted with our communities over the past five years. The message we have received is clear - the ban on oil tankers must stay in place." An oil spill would cause irreparable damage to the marine ecosystem and resources, he said. "Marine resources, whether for food, social or
commercial use, are culturally and economically important to First Nations. We've spent the last decade creating a conservation-based economy that includes a very promising shellfish aquaculture industry. An oil spill would destroy that sustainable industry."

The recent BP oil spill in Louisiana and the Enbridge spill in Michigan occurred in relatively friendly marine environments, Sterritt said. "Yet they proved to be difficult to contain and clean up. The conditions on our coast are much harsher and that coupled with the existing archaic cleanup technology means an oil spill would destroy the marine ecosystem and the resources we depend so heavily on." The Great Bear Initiative is not opposed to all resource developments on the coast. "But they must be properly planned and safe. They must contribute to sustainable economic development while protecting the environment and supporting coastal communities.

The proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline does not meet those criteria."

The Coastal First Nations is an alliance of First Nations on British Columbia's North and Central Coast and Haida Gwaii whose goal is to create an ecologically and economically sustainable coast. Members of the Coastal First Nations include Wuikinuxv Nation, Heiltsuk, Kitasoo/Xaixais , Nuxalk, Gitga'at, Haisla, Metlakatla, Old Massett, Skidegate, and Council of the Haida Nation. Source: Art Sterritt
- - -

PROTEST RALLY
Read more about First Nations speaking out against the Enbridge project . . .
http://www.turtleisland.org/discussion/viewtopic.php?t=7302

[admin]

Today, more than 500 people marched through downtown Prince George, BC,
in support of First Nations and northern BC residents opposing a tar sands pipeline and tanker port
proposed by Enbridge Pipelines Inc. . .

September 9, 2010

The proposed pipeline would move up to 525,000 barrels of oil a day from the tar sands in northern Alberta to tanker port in Kitimat, BC.

The project would cross unceded territories claimed by over 20 First Nations. It would also cross 785 watercourses, fragment wildlife habitat and impact fragile salmon fisheries. Enbridge has a long history of pipeline spills and other accidents, including a one million gallon spill of crude oil into the Kalamazoo River in Michigan in July-one of the largest spills in U.S. history. Today's multi-generational procession began at the Court House and concluded at a rally held outside the Prince George Civic Center where the federally appointed Joint Review Panel listened to issues and concerns about the project. The march follows a 250 strong rally at a similar hearing last week in Kitimat, BC.

Carrier Sekani Tribal Council (CSTC) communities want Federal regulators to conduct a community-led review process based on minimal international standards, such as those held in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which would address the full spectrum of impacts to aboriginal rights and the environment related to the proposed project.

"We invite all Indigenous peoples to join the fight against the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines project," said Tribal Chief David Luggi. "Those backing the Enbridge Gateway pipeline should know that as long as CSTC First Nations withhold consent, this project is not viable. We have the legal and moral power to decide what happens in our territories. We have not relinquished our powers to protect our lands for future generations." Environmental groups such as the Sea to Sands conservation alliance also have concerns regarding the Joint Review Panel lack of scope.

"How can the pipeline project be reviewed in isolation of the Tarsands and the oil tankers? If Enbridge is going to build a pipeline without any oil or condensate running through, we would not be in this position. It is the fact that Enbridge proposes to transmit dirty oil from the Tarsands across our beautiful Province to export to Asia and, all the risk that that entails, that we are vehemently opposed to this project" stated Hillary Crowley of the Sea to Sands Conservation Alliance.

Other groups such as the Rainforest Action Network (RAN) have been advocating for change within the finance community to stop the bank roll of unsustainable industries.

According to financial data compiled by RAN the Toronto Dominion Bank and Royal Bank of Canada have financed more than $11.8 billion for Enbridge since 2007.

Source: CSTC
- - -

FRASER LAKE, BC,
NEWS RELEASE

Sept. 9, 2010

The Carrier Sekani communities of Nadleh Whut'en, Nak'azdli Whut'en, Saik'uz, Takla Lake and Wet'suwet'en First Nations are standing united to proclaim that the federal government's review of the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines Project is flawed and has no authority.

These 5 First Nations see the Joint Review Panel as a waste of taxpayers' and investors money, and will do nothing to protect the environment or the rights of indigenous people. The deck is stacked by having the Panel members accountable to the existing government, which has been reluctant to lead in progressive climate change policy, including that of stopping energy developments in the Alberta Tar Sands - the most destructive project in the world (also considered by some to be the largest industrial project in human history) and largest contributor to green house gas emissions and other toxic chemicals into the atmosphere, land and water, which impact the quality of life of all Canadians.

"The Panel was appointed by a federal Minister. The indigenous people who will be most affected by the proposed pipeline were not included in establishing a fair and transparent process for reviewing this project." Stated Chief Larry Nooski of the Nadleh Whut'en First Nation. "This process is a contravention of our existing Section 35 Aboriginal Rights, and Article 18 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples:

Indigenous peoples have the right to participate in decision-making in matters which would affect their rights, through representatives chosen by themselves in accordance with their own procedures, as well as to maintain and develop their own indigenous decision-making institutions.

Chief Karen Ogen of the Wet'suwet'en First Nation said, "Our people and Elders have been discussing this proposed pipeline project since they first showed up 5 years ago. We told them then, and we're telling them now. Enbridge is not allowed to bring dirty oil through our communities, because when a spill happens it will destroy our water for generations." In addition, Chief Dolly Abraham stated, "Enbridge cannot even take care of its existing pipelines. The people around the Kalamazoo River in Michigan have had their homes destroyed by negligent regulators and an irresponsible company [Enbridge]. Strike three happened many, many years ago. Enbridge has a bad track record, and government regulators brush spills and leaks under the carpet." In July 2010 the Canadian House of Commons Environment Committee killed a report on the impacts to water from the Alberta Tar Sands because Conservative MPs wanted to hide testimony that government officials failed to protect the environment. It is the same Tar Sands oil that could be moved through the Enbridge pipeline from Bruderheim, Alberta to Kitimat, BC. It is the same Tar Sands oil that spilled into the Kalamazoo River.

Vice Tribal Chief of the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council noted, "First Nations are being supported by many, many Canadian citizens that are concerned that the cumulative impacts from the pipeline are simply not worth the risk. We've seen what the mountain pine beetle has done to our forests and local economy. We need to focus on moving into a low carbon economy and innovation through education and conservation."

Alternatives to oil are available and relevant policies and laws must be developed in concert with indigenous peoples in north central BC. "We are here to stay and defend our lands and resources from unsustainable practices." Voiced Chief Fred Sam of the Nak'azdli Whut'en. "We have strong prima facia cases for title to our territories, and industry and government better pay close attention to what free, prior and informed consent means, because if First Nations don't approve a project, it will not happen." The 5 First Nations are no strangers to development in their territories. They are not anti-development; it just must be appropriate and sustainable. The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines Project is neither.

"Our people have been here since time immemorial. That means that our ancestors did things to respect and give thanks to the creator for all the beauty of our lands and what it provided for our survival. In return, we took care of land, the fish, the plants and other creatures. People cannot eat money; money can't buy a healthy environment," said Chief Jackie Thomas of the Saik'uz First Nation. Enbridge jobs being offered to First Nations and northern residents have no long term value. They will not diversify local economies, nor build strong sustainable communities. The 5 First Nations are seeking investments in projects that truly benefit people, the environment and relationships. The Enbridge project is doomed to fail since it has already not listened to First Nations communities.

A separate First Nations review process is required of these mega projects like the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines proposal. Several First Nations have brought this proposal forward to government, but it has been ignored, in fear that power in Ottawa will be tarnished. First Nations and local communities deserve a fair, transparent and relevant process, and it is not found with the current Joint Review Panel.

For more information, please contact
Terry Teegee, Vice Tribal Chief
Primary Phone: 250-640-3256
E-mail: tteegee@cstc.bc.ca
- - -

Previously reported on this topic and BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
http://www.turtleisland.org/discussion/viewtopic.php?t=7302

[admin]

First Nations receive more support in their efforts to halt pipeline project in British Columbia . . .

The Coastal First Nations say the proposed Enbridge Pipeline project is dead in the water.

Art Sterritt, the executive director of the Coastal First Nations, said a little more than a year ago we met with Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline President John Carruthers and he told us that if the project isn't supported by all communities it would not go ahead.

"Today BC communities sent a clear and strong message to Enbridge that they don't support the proposed Enbridge project. We fully expect that the project will be shut down."

Sterritt added that he is grateful to the Union of BC Municipalities for its leadership and wisdom on this very important issue. "In particular we'd like to acknowledge the courage and leadership of the Queen Charlotte City council and its Mayor Carol Kulesha. We look forward to working with members of the UBCM to create a sustainable economy on BC’s coast."

The fact that members of the Union of BC Municipalities resoundingly opposed both oil tanker traffic and the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline demonstrates the breadth of opposition to the project, Sterritt said. "This is not just a First Nations issue.

The UBCM resolution supports the concerns First Nations and other groups have about the potential catastrophic damage a pipeline or oil tanker spill would cause." The proposed pipeline was to carry oil from Alberta to Kitimat. The plan was then to ship the oil on tankers through pristine BC waters.
- - -


October 1, 2010

Coast Salish Territory/North Vancouver BC — The First Nations Summit Chiefs’ Council met today in

North Vancouver and passed a resolution stating that the federal government must not proceed any

further with its review of the Enbridge Pipelines project and associated oil supertankers.


The proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines project would mean the construction of two 1170-km-long pipelines

from the tar sands in Alberta, across BC to the north Pacific coast at Kitimat, BC. Oil supertankers would carry the oil

through very dangerous waters to markets in Asia and elsewhere. The project would bring a high risk of pipeline and

marine oil spills, recently highlighted by Enbridge’s two major pipeline oil spills in the U.S. and the tragic Gulf oil spill.

First Nations from across BC joined together and agreed on a statement that the federal government should not proceed

further with its assessment of the Enbridge pipelines, unless it obtains the free, prior and informed consent of affected

First Nations – the international standard governing consultation with First Nations on the approval of proposals such as

the Enbridge pipelines and tankers.


The Carrier Sekani nations of Nadleh Whut’en, Nak’azdli, Takla Lake, Saik’uz and Whutsoowhut’en proposed the

resolution, as the pipelines will run through hundreds of kilometres of their territory. The pipeline and tanker routes will

pass through or near the territories of over 50 First Nations. No First Nation in BC supports the project.


“The pipelines and tankers, if they are approved, would have major environmental, social, cultural, legal and economic

impacts for First Nations all along the route, on the coast, and upstream and downstream of the pipeline,” said Chief Larry

Nooski of Nadleh Whut’en First Nation . “If this project is approved, it would risk an oil spill that would destroy our food

supply, our livelihoods and our cultures. Our laws tell us we can’t stand by and allow these pipelines and tankers into our

territories and waters. All the gathered chiefs of First Nations Summit have stated strongly that our peoples and our laws

will have the final say on this.”


Last year, the First Nations Summit called on the federal government to negotiate with affected First Nations to create a

decision-making process for the Enbridge project that would respect their constitutionally-protected rights and title. The

federal government ignored the demands of First Nations, and unilaterally designed and established its review process

and Aboriginal consultation process for the pipeline. The “joint review panel” process that the government selected is not

designed to respect First Nations’ rights or decision-making authority over their territories.


“First Nations’ have made it clear to the Crown over and over that this process is not adequate,” said Grand Chief Edward

John, member of the First Nations Summit Political Executive. “We’ve even made clear to Canada that First Nations want

to work with the Crown to create a process that will respect our rights. The Crown has not listened. The First Nations

Summit Chiefs gathered in assembly have made it clear with today’s resolution that this project must not proceed without

the consent of the affected First Nations. ”


If the project is built, it would allow a 30% expansion of tar sands output, and add 6.5 megatonnes of greenhouse gas

emissions annually. It would result in even worse effects on the land, water, air and health of communities living in the

area of the tar sands.


“This Enbridge project doesn’t just affect the nations who live near the pipeline and tanker routes,” added Geraldine

Thomas-Flurer, a member of Saik’uz First Nation. “It will contribute to climate change and that will harm people around

the world, leading to more poverty, more suffering, and more conflict. We all need to switch direction and stop building

projects tied to a dead end fossil fuel industry, and move towards different energy alternatives.”


For more information:
Geraldine Thomas-Flurer, Co-ordinator, Saik’uz First Nation: (250) 570-1482
Chief Larry Nooski: (250) 613-7102
Colin Braker, Communications Director, First Nations Summit (604) 926-9903

[admin]

Report: Enbridge's Northern Gateway project - A dead-end investment

VANCOUVER, Oct 5, 2010

Prior to Enbridge's Investor Days in Toronto and New York, ForestEthics released a report to analysts and bondholders highlighting the risks and opposition associated with the company's Northern Gateway Pipelines proposal.

The report -- Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines: Community Opposition and Investment Risk -- highlights First Nations legal risks, review process uncertainties and political risks associated with the controversial project.



"Enbridge has underestimated the risks and opposition associated with this project.

If the project isn't stopped by a First Nations legal case, it will be stopped by a federally legislated tanker ban.

If it's not stopped by the environmental review process, it will be delayed by lack of shipper agreements.

If all else fails, First Nations and community resistance will rise up and take action," said Nikki Skuce, ForestEthics Senior Energy Campaigner.

"Enbridge is essentially shoving money down a rat hole for a project that will never go ahead."

Link to report: http://www.forestethics.org/downloads/E ... _Final.pdf

Link to Executive Summary: http://www.forestethics.org/downloads/E ... _Final.pdf

For further information:

Claudia Li, Communications Officer, ForestEthics - 604-331-6201 ext. 224


Northern Gateway would cross at least 52 First Nations communities, many with
unceded Title and Rights. "This project would double the number of First Nations
communities that Enbridge’s pipelines would cross, although their experience with B.C.
First Nations without Treaty is new.

No First Nations have publicly supported this project.

Several First Nations (including the Haisla, Gitga’at, Gitxaala, Wet’suwet’en, Nadleh
Whut’en, Nak’azdli and Takla Lake) have publically stated (via the Joint Review Panel
or in the media) that neither the Crown nor the established assessment process for
Enbridge’s project have adequately met their duty to consult and accommodate, or
respected their Aboriginal Rights and Title.

"The consultation process set up by the Crown was developed unilaterally and fails to
fully assess the potential impacts on Aboriginal Title and Rights, leaving it vulnerable to
legal challenges.

"The Crown has delegated some of the responsibility for consultation to Enbridge, who
have been widely criticized for their inadequate consultation to date.

On October 1, 2010, the Chiefs of the First Nations Summit of BC, representing a
majority of First Nations and Tribal Councils in the province, passed a resolution calling
on the federal government to halt Northern Gateway until its received free, prior and informed consent by affected First Nations.

In March 2010, nine Coastal First Nations declared an oil tanker ban under their traditional laws.
- - -

Read more about First Nations opposition to the piepline project . . .
http://www.turtleisland.org/discussion/viewtopic.php?p=11991#p11991

[admin]

December 16, 2010

“Our lands and waters are not for sale, not at any price.”

Nadleh Whut’en, Dakelh territories (BC) – The Yinka Dene Alliance, a group of five First Nations with territories along and near the proposed route of the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline, have rejected Enbridge's offer of an equity stake in the project, and instead a legal Declaration is being delivered to Enbridge's headquarters in Calgary stating that the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines are not allowed through their territories, according to ancestral laws.

The Declaration was agreed to on December 2 by representatives of 61 First Nations, and because the document has legal status, it was delivered by a process server directly to Enbridge's CEO Pat Daniel and Enbridge's board of directors. The Declaration was previously left at the locked door of Enbridge's Vancouver offices when employees refused to let two representatives of the First Nations enter.

“Our lands and waters are not for sale, not at any price,” said Chief Larry Nooski of Nadleh Whut’en First Nation, speaking as a member of the Yinka Dene Alliance that includes Nadleh Whut’en, Nak’azdli, Takla Lake, Saik’uz and Wet’suwet’en First Nations. “We want no part of Enbridge’s project and their offers are worthless to us when compared to the importance of keeping our lands, rivers and the coast free of crude oil spills. What Enbridge is offering is the destruction of our lands to build their project, and the risk of oil spills for decades to come which could hurt everyone’s kids and grandkids.”

The proposed pipeline will cut through unceded lands and rivers and place communities, fish and wildlife at risk from oil spills.

“Enbridge talks about having the so-called “support of First Nations,” but I don’t know of a single First Nation that supports them. There are over 80 nations that have come out against their pipelines and tankers,” said Chief Jackie Thomas of Saik’uz First Nation. “In the last month, the number of First Nations publicly opposed to this pipeline has tripled. The money they are offering can be put to better use by restoring the land they have already harmed in Alberta, Michigan and elsewhere.”

Chief Art Adolph of Xaxli’p, a community of the St'át'imc Nation whose territories cover the middle and southern parts of the Fraser watershed, added: “Enbridge has pointed to 30 ‘protocol agreements’ signed with Indigenous Nations and claims support for their pipelines. In fact, Enbridge’s public documents show that these agreements do not indicate support but simply “establish the ground rules and points of contact for discussion on all aspects of the Northern Gateway project that might affect or involve First Nations and Métis communities.”

There is no First Nation that has publicly supported this project.

-30-
For more information:

Chief Larry Nooski, Nadleh Whut’en First Nation, 250-613-7102
Chief Jackie Thomas, Saik’uz First Nation, 250-570-7392
Chief Art Adolph, Xaxli’p – St'át'imc Nation, 250-256-4800

[admin]

Oil Sands: First Nations Reject Latest Enbridge Pipeline Equity Offer

Nations Reject Company's Latest Tar Sands Pipeline Financial Package, Citing the Risk of Oil Spills, and Taking Company to Task for Lack of Respect for Their Rights

PRINCE GEORGE, BRITISH COLUMBIA and LHEIDLI, BRITISH COLUMBIA

Feb. 16, 2011

Last night at a public meeting in Prince George, the five First Nations of the Yinka Dene Alliance told Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines President John Carruthers that they categorically reject the company's revenue-sharing offer.

Tuesday night's rejection responds to the more detailed financial and job offer Enbridge set out last week. The decision is especially significant because the five Nations' traditional territories cover approximately one quarter of the proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline route.

"Our Nations will not be turned. We won't trade the safety of our rivers, lands and fish that are our lifeblood," said Chief Jackie Thomas of Saik'uz. "Enbridge knows it can't guarantee there will be no oil spills into our rivers. Their promises and their money are no good to us."

In recent weeks Enbridge officials have attempted to minimize the importance of First Nations' opposition to their project, suggesting that these communities are in the minority. Earlier in February, at a public meeting in Terrace, BC, Enbridge officials refused to answer when asked directly whether the company would comply with the decision of First Nations to reject their pipeline project.

Chief Thomas told Enbridge's president: "Enbridge's recent statements suggest to us that you hope to ignore the will of our Nations. Our Nations are becoming more and more frustrated at the lack of respect that's shown for our laws, authority and rights. Because you claim to respect our legal rights, but push ahead despite our clearly saying no, you've made it more and more difficult for us to accept your word. It's simple – if Enbridge respects our protocols and our laws, then it must abide by our decision."

"Over 80 First Nations in BC have stated that they are totally opposed to Enbridge's proposed pipelines," said Chief Larry Nooski of Nadleh Whut'en. "People shouldn't be fooled by Enbridge's claim that we are in the minority. Nations along more than half of Enbridge's proposed pipeline and tanker route have made clear that their project is against our laws. It will hurt us and hurt First Nations who live near the nightmare of the tar sands. This project is not going to happen and we'll use all the means we have under our laws to fight it."

Enbridge has made numerous statements to national and regional media lately about its plans to have First Nations borrow money in order to purchase a small fraction of the pipeline.

"Enbridge is talking a lot about doing deals, saying Nations should be proud about taking their money," says Chief Thomas. "We've seen it before. History is full of bad deals – often made when Indigenous Nations felt they had no other choice. We have a choice and we won't sign away our future, and the safety of our waters and lands, to Enbridge. Taking cash to compromise our kids' futures is nothing to be proud of."

The Yinka Dene Alliance includes Nadleh Whut'en, Nak'azdli, Takla Lake, Saik'uz, and Wet'suwet'en First Nations, and is a leader in the Save the Fraser Declaration, uniting Nations in the Fraser River watershed from the headwaters to the coast in banning the transportation of oil sands crude through their territories.

For more information, please contact
Yinka Dene Alliance
Geraldine Thomas-Flurer
Coordinator
250-570-1482
or
Nadleh Whut'en
Chief Larry Nooski
250-690-7211
or
Saik'uz
Chief Jackie Thomas
250-567-8048

[admin]

Enbridge Pipeline: First Nations Urge BMO to Withhold Financing

Alliance of five First Nations attend BMO AGM to dissuade bank from backing project that would harm rivers

VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA

March 22, 2011

Coast Salish Territories (BC)

The five First Nations of the Yinka Dene Alliance are delivering a message to Bank of Montreal (BMO) and its shareholders today in Vancouver: Do not finance Enbridge or its Northern Gateway Pipeline Project, since Enbridge fails to respect the authority of First Nations along the proposed pipeline route.

"We're calling on BMO to live up to the highest human rights and environmental standards in making their financing decisions," said Geraldine Thomas-Flurer, spokesperson for the Yinka Dene Alliance. "The banks should not raise funds for companies operating within Indigenous territories against the will of Indigenous peoples."

Since 2007, Bank of Montreal has raised more than $286 million for Enbridge, Inc., the general partner in the Northern Gateway Pipelines which is building the project, and its related companies. The project would include the construction of twin pipelines that would transport crude oil from the Alberta oil sands to Kitimat, BC. Approximately one quarter of the proposed pipeline route passes through the traditional territories of the Yinka Dene Nations. If approved, Enbridge would likely look to Canadian banks including BMO to raise needed funds.

In a letter sent to BMO on March 2, 2011, the Yinka Dene Alliance called on the bank to make business decisions that are in line with its stated social and environmental commitments. The letter referred specifically to the Enbridge pipelines, stating: "We have spent several years considering the project, including the completion of detailed studies as to how the Enbridge pipelines would affect our land, waters, and peoples, and the exercise of our rights … the Enbridge pipeline project is in violation of our laws, and our obligations to all peoples to protect these lands and waters."

To date, Enbridge has failed to recognize the authority of First Nations over their territories, by indicating that they will proceed with the Northern Gateway project, with or without the consent of the affected First Nations. This violates the standards set out in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which Canada signed on to last year. The Declaration provides that First Nations must give free, prior, and informed consent to projects that will affect their land and resources.

Thomas-Flurer added: "Our Nations are opposed to the Enbridge oil pipelines and the inevitable oil spills that will result. We have to protect our rivers and our communities from this risk. BMO should respect our Indigenous Rights and not support the Enbridge pipeline project."

The request is not without precedent. In December 2010, RBC adopted a policy requiring bankers to document where client activities impact Indigenous communities, and to consider whether clients have "policies and processes consistent with the standard of Free, Prior and Informed Consent." TD bank adopted a similar policy in 2007?

The Yinka Dene Alliance includes Nadleh Whut'en, Nak'azdli, Takla Lake, Saik'uz, and Wet'suwet'en First Nations, and is a leader in the Save the Fraser Declaration, uniting Nations in the Fraser River watershed from the headwaters to the coast in banning the transportation of oil sands crude through their territories.

For more information, please contact
Yinka Dene Alliance
Geraldine Thomas-Flurer
Coordinator
250-570-1482