B.C.'s Failure to Consult First Nations Sets Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline Back to Square One

authordefault
on

The provincial government did not fulfill its legal obligation to consult with First Nations on the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline, the B.C. Supreme Court ruled Wednesday.

The case, brought forward by the Gitgaโ€™at and other coastal First Nations, argued the province erred when it handed over decision-making authority for the project to the federal government under a provincial-federal Joint Review Process managed by the federal National Energyย Board.

B.C. granted Ottawa authority over the projectโ€™s environmental review in a 2010 equivalency agreement. That agreement, however, did not release the province from the legal duty to consult First Nations, the B.C. Supreme Courtย found.

โ€œItโ€™s a very significant ruling,โ€ Elin Sigurdson, lawyer with JFK Law, said. โ€œThe coastal First Nations and Gitaโ€™at were very successful in the application to quash the equivalency agreement which means the province now has to consult with First Nations that will be affected by matters in the provincial jurisdiction and has to conduct a new environmental assessment for theย project.โ€

In December 2013 a Joint Review Panel recommended the federal government approve the pipeline, slated to carry 525,000 barrels of oilsands crude to the B.C coast each day, subject to 209 conditions, one of which was โ€œconsultation with aboriginal communities.โ€ Federal cabinet approved the pipeline in Juneย 2014.

Greg Rickford, former Natural Resources Minister under the Harper government, suggested at the time that the duty to consult with First Nations resided withย Enbridge.

โ€œThe proponent clearly has more work to do in order to fulfilย the public commitment it has made to engage with aboriginal groups and local communities along the route,โ€ Rickford said in a government pressย release.

โ€œThe duty to consult as a constitutional obligation does not lie with Enbridge,โ€ Sigurdson said. โ€œThe Crown always has to ensure that the duty to consult was discharged in a meaningfulย way.โ€

Heiltsuk Chief Marilyn Slett said the ruling is a โ€œgreatย victory.โ€

โ€œWeโ€™re feeling really good about it,โ€ she said. โ€œWeโ€™re just so committed to our community and protecting ourย coast.โ€

โ€œItโ€™s affirming to know that thereโ€™s a responsibility to come back and talk to the people these kinds of projects willย affect.โ€

Slett said the government acknowledged the need to address First Nations concerns in Premier Christy Clarkโ€™s five conditions for oilย pipelines.

โ€œIn terms of the government saying they are doing what they are supposed to be doing, well today shows [Christy Clark] has to be held accountable, to consult withย us.โ€

โ€œWe stand our ground, around protecting who we are as people and our communities. This strengthens all of us,โ€ she said. โ€œWeโ€™re in itย together.โ€

Susan Smitten, executive director of RAVEN Trust, said the ruling will mean major delays for a project that is already mired inย uncertainty.

โ€œAll the coastal nations that will be affected by components within B.C. jurisdiction will have to be consulted, which will take time,โ€ she said. โ€œAn environmental assessment would also takeย time.โ€

She added her organization is delighted with todayโ€™s win. โ€œThis is what we live for: to see Indigenous Peoples successfully see their issues through theย courts.โ€

In September the B.C. Environmental Appeal Board ruled B.C. handed out scientifically flawed long-term water withdrawal permits to Nexen, a company with fracking operations in northern B.C.

The board found B.C. failed to properly consult with the Fort Nelson First Nation when issuing the water licence and ordered its cancellation, effectively immediately. The board also ruled B.C. failed to operate in good faith with the Fort Nelson First Nation and that the provinceโ€™s consultation process was โ€œseriously flawed.โ€

According to Sigurdson, the province may need to change its approach toย consultation.

The province should have ensured the equivalency agreement met the needs of First Nations that stood to be affected by the Northern Gateway pipeline, sheย said.

โ€œThey were supposed to have consulted and it was not honourable for them to not doย that.โ€

Consultation โ€œhas to mean something,โ€ Sigurdson said.ย โ€œItโ€™s an obligation grounded in a solemn constitutional promise to preserve and protect the aboriginal rights of First Nations inย Canada.โ€

โ€œIt canโ€™t just be window dressing,โ€ sheย said.

โ€œIt has to be real and meaningful dialogue. You canโ€™t just have pretend consultation stand in the place of performing the actual obligation of giving information, hearing concerns and responding to them โ€” actually engaging the concerns.ย โ€œ

โ€œIf youโ€™re not doing that, youโ€™re not doing the consultationย required.โ€

Image: Mandy Nahanee, member of the Squamish First Nation at a rally, June 2014. Photo: Zack Embree.

Related Posts

Analysis
on

The celebrity investor pitched โ€˜Wonder Valleyโ€™ with no committed investors, no Indigenous partnership, and about 27 megatonnes of projected annual emissions.

The celebrity investor pitched โ€˜Wonder Valleyโ€™ with no committed investors, no Indigenous partnership, and about 27 megatonnes of projected annual emissions.
on

City Council OKs private equity firmโ€™s purchase of Entergy gas utility, undermining climate goals and jacking up prices for the cityโ€™s poorest.

City Council OKs private equity firmโ€™s purchase of Entergy gas utility, undermining climate goals and jacking up prices for the cityโ€™s poorest.
on

With LNG export terminals already authorized to ship nearly half of U.S. natural gas abroad, DOE warns build-out would inflate utility bills nationwide.

With LNG export terminals already authorized to ship nearly half of U.S. natural gas abroad, DOE warns build-out would inflate utility bills nationwide.
Analysis
on

We reflect on a year of agenda-setting stories that charted the political influence of fossil fuel interests in the UK and beyond.

We reflect on a year of agenda-setting stories that charted the political influence of fossil fuel interests in the UK and beyond.