Environmental groups say Stephen Harper’s “world class” tanker safety plan changes nothing

    1 of 1 2 of 1

      Environmental groups were quick to condemn new safety measures for oil tankers proposed by the federal government in Vancouver yesterday (March 18).

      “Prime Minister Harper can make all the safety announcements he wants but it doesn't change the fact that the people of B.C. are moving in the opposite direction he is,” reads an op-ed by Ben West, a campaign director with Forest Ethics Advocacy. “We are saying less tar sands oil not more, thank you very much. The truth is the safest thing we can do is say no to the Enbridge and Kinder Morgan pipelines.”

      A similar message was posted on the website of the Wilderness Committee.

      “People in BC are very worried about the massive increase in risk that we’d be exposed to if these two pipelines go ahead,” said committee member Eoin Madden. “To say that a few extra flights and some inspections of older vessels will increase tanker safety is an insult to British Columbians who care about protecting our coast.”

      Native groups have also voiced their disapproval of the new safety proposals.

      “Ultimately the best way to safeguard Canada's seas and skies is to say no to new pipelines,” reads a statement by Carleen Thomas, elected councillor for the Tsleil-Waututh Nation. “It's time for the Harper government to stop talking about pipelines to the West Coast like they are inevitable and start listening to what the people of B.C. are saying. British Columbians do not want new pipelines and increased tanker traffic on our coast.”

      Canada’s Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver and Transport Minister Denis Lebel flew to British Columbia to announce the new measures at the Port Metro Vancouver office, where they advertised the plan for “world class tanker safety.”

      A Transport Canada media release lists eight points the government maintains will “strengthen Canada’s tanker safety system.” Quoting that document:

      • Tanker inspections: The number of inspections will increase to ensure that all foreign tankers are inspected on their first visit to Canada, and annually thereafter, to ensure they comply with rules and regulations, especially with respect to double hulls.
      • Systematic surveillance and monitoring of ships: The government will expand the National Aerial Surveillance Program.
      • Incident Command System: The government will establish a Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) Incident Command System, which will allow it to respond more effectively to an incident and integrate its operations with key partners.
      • Pilotage programs: We will review existing pilotage and tug escort requirements to see what more will be needed in the future.
      • Public port designations: More ports will be designated for traffic control measures, starting with Kitimat.
      • Scientific research: The government will conduct scientific research on non-conventional petroleum products, such as diluted bitumen, to enhance understanding of these substances and how they behave when spilled in the marine environment.
      • New and modified aids to navigation: The CCG will ensure that a system of aids to navigation comprised of buoys, lights and other devices to warn of obstructions and to mark the location of preferred shipping routes is installed and maintained.
      • Modern navigation system: The CCG will develop options for enhancing Canada's current navigation system (e.g. aids to navigation, hydrographic charts, etc) by fall 2013 for government consideration.

      The Conservative government said it is also tabling a motion in Parliament that would amend the Canada Shipping Act of 2001. The Safeguarding Canada's Seas and Skies Act would:

      • Strengthen the current requirements for pollution prevention and response at oil handling facilities;
      • Increase Transport Canada's oversight and enforcement capacity by equipping marine safety inspectors with the tools to enforce compliance;
      • Introduce new offences for contraventions of the Act and extend penalties relating to pollution; and
      • Enhance response to oil spill incidents by removing legal barriers that could otherwise block agents of Canadian response organizations from participating in clean-up operations.

      A significant portion of British Columbians are opposed to oil pipeline expansion projects in the province and don’t want increased oil tanker traffic in coastal waters.

      B.C. Environment Minister Terry Lake was reportedly pleased by the federal government’s announcement.

      “It looks to me like they're making a great effort,” he told CBC News, “and they understand from British Columbians that you can't simply increase the transport of hazardous goods through B.C. without also increasing the environmental safeguards and protection mechanisms that are in place.”

      You can follow Travis Lupick on Twitter at twitter.com/tlupick.

      Comments

      5 Comments

      DavidH

      Mar 19, 2013 at 2:59pm

      I don't tend to accept conspiracy theories, but this really seems like Part 2 of a communications strategy crafted by the three conservative goverments involved (Ottawa Conservatives, Alberta Conservatives and BC Liberals ... aka Conservatives).

      Christy pretends to throw up 5 key demands, the feds pretend to knock them down, and Alberta says, "See? The Dilbit World is great!"

      ACMESalesRep

      Mar 19, 2013 at 9:43pm

      You mean we're not already doing these things? But the feds and the industry said that there were already foolproof safeguards in place!

      (On a more serious note: This government has done more to curtail scientific research, and to censor results that don't support its political agenda, than any in recent memory. Promises to conduct research while gagging federal scientists ring somewhat hollow.)

      ACMESalesRep

      Mar 19, 2013 at 9:44pm

      DavidH: I think you give the governments involved far too much credit. The federal Conservatives might be able to keep up their part of such a charade, but the BC Liberals in particular would surely have found a way to go off-script and expose the entire deal by now. They couldn't even keep their election strategy quiet, remember?

      PJ

      Mar 20, 2013 at 6:33am

      Enviromental groups wont be happy about anything untill all transport of oil(exept to USA)is shut down,so they can name theire price and dictate who gets some and when.
      If the oil sands were in the USA,there would be no uprisings and demonstrations,by US paid demonstrators.
      They dont want us to sell OUR oil to China as it would make us and China better of then them.We have oil to sell wheras they have to import.Funny how jelousy works.
      Enviromental groups are US funded as is Suzuki getting hanouts.
      Going green means curb Canadas growth ,as the US is in big doodoo.

      Scott_G

      Mar 20, 2013 at 2:54pm

      BC seems to be all for Oil, everywhere I look they are driving cars, flying in Jets, and buying food that has come from around the world on Jets all fueled with OIL products. It appears they are drinking the stuff, but God forbid that someone admits it or sells it to someone else so there is a benefit to Alberta. If I was the Oil companies, I would turn off the tap, and side with BC to not have any oil products on BC land. And watch everything screeeech to a halt. Then there would be some kissing of the ring to get the pipeline in as fast as possible. And a premium !