[Regorium]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I also don't think BC has asked for any additional compensation, have they? Clark hasn't been vocal supporter of the pipelines, but she's hardly been standing in the way either.

Condition #5 that they gave Enbridge was that BC does not get their fair share. The environmental risk is Canada's, not BC's. The export terminal would've been completely within BC jurisdiction, and they would have gotten every bit of economic benefit from that.

Of course she's echoing the concerns of her constituents - but the concerns are unfounded.

Has TC even submitted their EE proposal to the NEB for review yet? I don't know that setting a deadline is the politically prudent think to do. I'd also rather the studies be done accurately than quickly.

Yes, TC first submitted an application to the NEB in 2014. They submitted a revised application to the NEB in November after thousands of hours of public consultation, which resulted in hundreds of changes. Concerns about Beluga whales, for example, meant that the extra export terminal that TC planned in Quebec was removed from the design.

He's already said the cabinet will review it, and again it's for political capital. People don't trust the NEB process and he's committed to overhauling but has said that it's going to take time and that cabinet review is interim solution. Reversing course on that now would be an incredibly stupid move.

Why isn't the NEB process trusted? I've worked with the NEB. They're tough. They're thorough. NEB doesn't really tell you want to do, they want you to prove to them that you're doing the right thing - which is a much higher bar, especially when the NEB is filled to the brim with technical experts with decades of experience in pipelining.

I feel like the "issue" for the general public is that the NEB is collaborative. They impose conditions and action plans on companies. Once companies fulfill those conditions and action plans, the NEB gives them the go-ahead.

Environmental groups expect the NEB to just say "NO" with no recourse or any explanation. As an impartial government entity, they wouldn't do that. Even the US State Department didn't do that to TC for KXL - they issued a whole bunch of conditions, which were then complied with, in order to get the State Department's approval. Only a presidential veto stopped the entire process, which has literally never happened before in history (thus the lawsuit).

But Quebec is abiding by the same rules handed down by the BC Courts, so until that ruling us overturned, you can't say it's unconstitutional, and in fact it's likely that local aboriginal groups in Quebec would use that ruling to hold things up, so antagonizing Quebec on this front is again a poor move politically.

TC is already abiding by the Quebec injunction. BAPE hearings start next week. While I would prefer Notley to have said something, TC is saying and doing all the right things regardless of the constitutionality of the situation. Time will tell whether that matters one bit.