On June 18, the West Coast Environmental Law Association hosted a telephone town hall on what the rolling back of Canada's environmental laws means for oil tankers and the health and security of BC's coast.
Hundreds of people heard from panelists Robyn Allan, former President and CEO of ICBC, intervenor in the Northern Gateway Pipeline Project environmental assessment, and former intervenor in the environmental assessment of Kinder Morgan's proposed pipeline and tankers expansion project; marine ecologist Craig Orr; and environmental lawyer Anna Johnston. Callers were also invited to ask questions and provide feedback through polls. You can listen to this recording of the town hall, or read a summary of it below.
Background
In 2012 the federal government passed omnibus “budget” bills C-38 and C-45, erasing or weakening many of Canada’s oldest and most important environmental laws. As town hall moderator Eric Swanson noted, the rollbacks have hurt Canadians directly by restricting their right to have a say over risky projects and limiting the quality and quantity of information that gets considered when deciding whether to approve those projects. In the town hall, the panelists focused on the effect of the changes on the National Energy Board’s environmental assessment of Kinder Morgan’s oil tankers and pipeline proposal, which would see hundreds of new oil tankers carrying bitumen through BC’s waters each year.
Since Bills C-28 and C-45 were enacted, West Coast Environmental Law staff counsel Anna Johnston has reached out to British Columbians, explaining what the changes mean for coastal communities and the environment. Hundreds of people have attended talks and events in communities throughout the province. West Coast Environmental Law hosted the telephone town hall to spread the message further and allow people across Canada to learn what the rollbacks mean for the safety of the environment and the public’s right to have a say.
As Anna described in the town hall, the omnibus bills:
- Gutted the Fisheries Act, weakening protection of fish habitat and removing protection altogether from species that do not either belong to or support a fishery.
- Changed the Navigable Waters Protection Act to the Navigation Protection Act, removing legal protection from over 99% of Canada’s lakes and rivers. Now, there isn’t a single body of water on Vancouver Island that’s listed on the schedule of protected waters under that act.
- Replaced the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act with the much weaker CEAA 2012, handing the National Energy Board responsibility for environmental reviews of major energy projects like Kinder Morgan’s proposed pipeline and tankers expansion project.
- Restrict who gets to participate in environmental assessments and what gets considered in those reviews. For example, with the Kinder Morgan review, people had to fill out lengthy forms explaining how they are “directly affected” by the project or have special expert information to convey. Many people were deemed to not meet that test and so were denied intervenor status in the hearings.
- Impose mandatory timelines on assessments, making it extremely difficult for participants, including government bodies like environment and fisheries ministries, to properly analyse proponents’ information and provide their own expert reports.
Kinder Morgan and the need for an envrionmental safety net
Environmental assessments are considered the “look before you leap” of environmental decision-making. Public participation is a cornerstone of effective environmental assessments, but the public’s right to participate in assessments of projects like Kinder Morgan’s oil pipeline and tankers plan was greatly restricted by the 2012 federal omnibus bills.
Panelist Robyn Allan remarked on how the changes have greatly eroded public confidence in environmental assessment processes and outcomes:
I think the biggest loss is the loss of an environmental review process we can trust. The legislative changes have made it easier for the National Energy Board to limit its scope of issues, limit participation by the public, and limit the time available for proper review and analysis. The legislative changes also allow the Board to ignore obvious and significant risk.
For example, the NEB and federal government can now dismiss the threat of Kinder Morgan’s expansion on species at risk, including the impact increased tanker traffic will have on our Southern Resident Killer Whales, the orcas. British Columbians are concerned about the threat to the orcas; increased oil tanker traffic has major implications for their survival. Increased tanker traffic adversely impacts their sensory perception, and they need their sensory perception in order to find food. Kinder Morgan even admits in its application that its project would have a significant adverse effect on the orcas.
Panelist Craig Orr echoed Robyn Allan’s belief that the changes have eroded public trust in the government’s desire to protect the environment, and especially BC’s wild salmon:
….It’s easy to point to the weakening of the Fisheries Act, as well, as you know, posing a huge risk and increasing that risk to the health of wild salmon. Once upon a time, we relied on very capable Fisheries and Oceans Canada biologists to go out and assess impacts and potential impacts to fisheries habitat, but that doesn’t happen anymore. Now, they wait around until a proponent calls them and says, “We might have some impacts and we just wanted to check this.” So it’s now this kind of honour system with very few checks and balances on whether we’re creating damage to fisheries habitat.
I think one of the most egregious examples that I’ve seen and that stuck out for a lot of people was the fact that the checking of environmental damage around pipelines, which was under the purview of Fisheries and Oceans again, has now been transferred to the National Energy Board so that the NEB is managing the pipeline situation and also suggesting whether there’s impacts from those pipelines. I don’t know if people have much confidence that that’s going to work.
In general, what I’m seeing in weakening of environmental assessment and Fisheries Act and things like Navigable Waters Protection Act, which was the trigger for salmon farming EAs, is the complete and utter downplaying of risk to wild salmon on this coast by the federal government, and is accompanied by a lot of really underhanded things as well, [which] I would say is not too strong a term, including the muzzling of scientists who would stand up and protect the environment.
Three-quarters of the town hall participants who took a poll had heard of the environmental law rollbacks, and 88% said that the need to rebuild Canada’s environmental laws would influence their vote. A number of audience members had questions for the panelists, including about the Kinder Morgan review, the need for a better process for assessing risks to the environment and health, and what the public can do to join the call for stronger environmental laws and an oil-free coast.
You can listen to the full town hall here, and learn more about the changes and what you can do to help ensure the government rebuilds Canada’s environmental safety net at envirolawsmatter.ca.
By Anna Johnston, Staff Counsel