Carrier Sekani Tribal Council

The Carrier Sekani Tribal Council brings together seven member nations to unify our voices and strengthen our inherent indigenous rights, title, and interests in our territories.

News

Groups affirm boycott of discriminatory Missing Women Commission

Fifteen organizations issued letters directed to Commissioner Wally Oppal confirming that they will not be participating in the “second phase” of the Missing Women Commission of Inquiry, citing concerns about discrimination and the conduct of the Commission to date.

The attached letters from an informal coalition of advocacy and service providing groups, the Native Women’s Association of Canada and the Assembly of First Nations are written in response to an invitation letter sent by Commissioner Wally Oppal, asking organizations to return to the Inquiry.

For more information, please contact:

  • Aboriginal Front Door Society, Mona Woodward, Executive Director, (604) 697-5662
  • Amnesty International Canada, Craig Benjamin, (613) 744 -7667 ext 235
  • Atira Women’s Resource Society, Janice Abbott, Executive Director, (604) 331-1420
  • B.C. Civil Liberties Association, David Eby, Executive Director, (778) 865-7997
  • Battered Women’s Support Services, Angela Marie MacDougall, Executive Director, (604) 808-0507
  • Carrier-Sekani Tribal Council, Terry Teegee, Vice Tribal Chief, (250) 640-3256
  • Downtown Eastside Sex Workers United Against Violence Society, Katrina Pacey, (604) 729-7849
  • Ending Violence Association British Columbia, Tracy Porteous, Executive Director, (604) 633-2506, x11
  • February 14th Women’s Memorial March Committee, Lisa Yellow-Quill, L.YellowQuill@gmail.com
  • First Nations Summit, Colin Braker, Communications Director, (604) 926-9903
  • Native Women’s Association of Canada, Claudette Dumont-Smith, Exec. Director, (613) 722-3033 x223
  • PACE: Providing Alternatives Counselling & Education Society, Karen Mirsky, (778) 838-2972
  • Pivot Legal Society, Doug King, Lawyer, (778) 898-6349
  • Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs, Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, (250) 490-5314
  • Union Gospel Mission, Genesa Greening, Director, Community Strategies, (604) 506-0845
  • West Coast LEAF, Executive Director, Kasari Govinder, (604) 684-8772, x212
  • WISH Drop-in Centre Society, Kate Gibson, Executive Director, (604)669-9474

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

Open Letter: Non-participation in the Policy Forums/Study Commission
Missing Women Commission of Inquiry                                
Attn: Commissioner Wally Oppal, QC
#1402 – 808 Nelson Street
Vancouver, BC
V6Z 2H2

April 10, 2012

Dear Commissioner Oppal,

We write to advise the Commission that we, the undersigned groups, will not be participating in the Policy Forums or Study Commission aspects of the Missing Women Commission of Inquiry (the “Inquiry”). We are not prepared to lend the credibility of our respective organizations’ names and expertise to this Inquiry, which can only be described as a deeply flawed and illegitimate process. The Commission has lost all credibility among Aboriginal, sex work, human rights and women’s organizations that work with and are comprised of the very women most affected by the issues this Inquiry is charged with investigating.

Many of the organizations listed below have for years been demanding an inquiry into the disappearances of so many marginalized women from Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside and across the province. When this Inquiry was finally called, we fully expected it to be a meaningful and inclusive process that would respect and honour the expertise of women, Aboriginal people, sex workers and other community members with important insight and knowledge to share. However, it has become painfully clear over the course of the Inquiry’s proceedings that this Inquiry is not a meaningful and inclusive process. Instead, it has served to repeat the same discrimination and exclusion that we had hoped it was going to uncover.

Women have been going missing from Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside, and across the province, for decades. Women, especially Aboriginal women, sex workers, and women living in poverty, continue to face extreme violence in their lives, and experience profound barriers to reporting their victimization to police. Police and government failures to take women’s safety seriously and to commit resources to improving the social and economic conditions in which women live are issues of long-standing concern to all of the undersigned groups. It is disturbing to note that this Inquiry into the disappearances and murders of sex workers from Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside is taking place while government funding for sex worker support groups like PACE (Providing Alternatives Counselling and Education Society) and PEERS (Prostitutes Empowerment Education Resource Society) has been drastically reduced to the point that these two essential organizations may soon be forced to close their doors. Women’s organizations across the province are feeling a similar squeeze.

We feel that it is important to state our profound disappointment in how this Inquiry has unfolded. Based on our experiences of exclusion from the Inquiry process, as well as our assessment of events occurring throughout the course of the proceedings, we have no confidence that our participation in the Policy Forums or Study Commission will contribute to the truth, reconciliation and accountability that we fully expected when this Inquiry was initiated. Instead, we will continue to seek alternative ways to support the families of the missing women and the vulnerable communities who continue to deal with ongoing violence, and we will advise you of this work. 

When the provincial government denied funding to the community group participants who had been calling for this public inquiry for over a decade (the “Community Group Participants”), the Inquiry became the subject of intense and well-deserved criticism.  We are extremely disappointed that multiple appeals to the Province to remedy this injustice were unsuccessful, and that Community Group Participants were unable to exercise the standing rights granted to them by the Commissioner.

The failure to ensure equal access to the Inquiry process for the Community Group Participants granted standing made it clear to us, as it was to the broader public, that there would be deep inequities in terms of what evidence would be tendered and what interests would be represented. The value of the Inquiry was called into question and, at that point, so much more could have been done by the Commission to fight for the integrity of the process. The lack of commitment to fighting for the appropriate, meaningful, and adequately funded involvement of Community Group Participants was extremely disappointing. Additionally, former Attorney General Barry Penner, current Attorney General Shirley Bond, and Premier Clark themselves bear responsibility for refusing to adequately fund Community Group Participants, marginalizing their essential contributions and undermining the legitimacy of the Inquiry process.  The families, who have appropriately been provided counsel, are unable to offer the same contributions that would have been made by the many other groups who were shut out. These groups have decades of relevant policy expertise, have been supporting women who have experienced the most extreme levels of violence imaginable, have been tracking deaths of women for many years, and have been analyzing the serious problems with policing in British Columbia, as well as other systems such as child protection, income assistance, housing, healthcare, and transportation. These groups could have made a positive difference to the proceeding and outcomes for women and families in our Province.

We would like to take this opportunity to set out a number of other concerns we have had as this Inquiry has progressed.

Limitations of the terms of reference: In unilaterally setting the terms of reference for the Inquiry without consulting any of the affected parties, the provincial government unnecessarily restricted the Commission to examining the criminal justice system and its handling of the Pickton investigation, without providing for a fulsome examination of the various systemic issues leading to marginalized women’s particular vulnerability to violence, the lack of protections available, or the epidemic of missing and murdered women in British Columbia. 

No lawyers for organizations and community members who represent crucial perspectives: 25 publicly funded lawyers have represented police and government interests and yet no lawyers were funded to represent the Community Group Participants who originally demanded an inquiry in the first place. The Community Group Participants represent essential perspectives and experiences that have not been, and cannot be, adequately represented by Commission counsel, the amici or the two very dedicated but overburdened lawyers who represent the families of the missing women. 

Lack of Witness Protection: The Inquiry has recreated many of the barriers that women face when requiring police protection. One key example of this was the failure to grant adequate protection for the identities of vulnerable witnesses who agreed to come forward to tell their stories. Instead, the Commissioner granted significant protections for people convicted of assaulting the exact women that the Commission was hoping to hear from.

Delayed, incomplete disclosure: The failure to order the disclosure of the book written by Lori Shenher, a lead VPD investigator on the Pickton file, for months, the order requiring the book to be redacted, and then the failure to mark it as an exhibit so that the public may have access to it, is just one example of the inadequate and delayed disclosure that has become commonplace throughout this Inquiry.

Impossible Timelines: The provincial government has set a deadline of June 30, 2012, for the production of the Commissioner’s report. Hearings will end by April 30. This arbitrary timeline cannot and will not provide for an appropriately diligent examination of all relevant issues. The Commissioner’s request for an extension was refused, and all indications are that similar demands made recently by the families of Pickton’s victims will also be rejected.

Conflict of interest: The Commission hired a former Vancouver Police Department officer to conduct witness interviews and to “help” write an “independent” report on the Vancouver Police Department and RCMP investigations that was intended to be authored by the Peel Regional Police. The Peel Regional Police had numerous officers under investigation by the RCMP while they were writing their portion of the report about the RCMP investigations into Pickton. We also understand this former VPD officer is writing questions for Commission counsel and has no training to be doing this type of work.

Allegations of sexism and marginalization of witnesses: Former staff from the Commission have alleged sexist conduct, and conduct inconsistent with the intent for which the Inquiry was established, namely, to facilitate hearing the evidence of marginalized women. The Commission appears woefully out of touch with how it may be replicating the exact exclusion and discrimination that led to this Inquiry being called in the first place.

Limited Witnesses: The arbitrary and unworkable timeframe has meant that the Commission has not and will not hear evidence from many important witnesses. Key witnesses requested by counsel for the families have not been added to the witness list more than four months after the request was made. The Commission has refused to hear evidence about possible connections between the Pickton brothers and Hell’s Angels, or to look into allegations of corruption and connections with organized crime. The purpose of the Inquiry is to get to the bottom of why police failed to stop the killings of vulnerable women. The question of whether women were prevented from coming forward to police with information about Pickton because they were intimidated by organized crime connections is highly relevant to this purpose and should be fully explored. Instead, this line of inquiry has been explicitly shut down by the Commissioner.

Further to these concerns, the recent resignation of Robyn Gervais, the lawyer hired to represent “Aboriginal interests” at the Inquiry, has further reinforced our concerns. Ms. Gervais resigned her position citing the Commission’s unwillingness to give enough time and weight to evidence from Aboriginal witnesses. “Aboriginal interests have not, and will not, be adequately represented in these hearings,” she said. “Given that these hearings were about missing Aboriginal women, I didn’t think I would need to fight to have their voices heard.” From the outset, we did not support the appointment of amici to represent community interests. Ms. Gervais’ resignation confirms our belief that this was a tokenistic appointment that could never have been expected to effectively represent the broad and essential perspectives of First Nations people.  We are extremely troubled by the recent announcement regarding the hasty appointment, one month before the end of the hearings, of two new Independent Counsel to present issues related to Aboriginal interests.  We emphasize that this will still not allow for the inclusion of critical Aboriginal voices – those voices required their own legal counsel in order to participate. 

On May 1, 2012, the Inquiry will shift into its Study Commission function and begin holding Policy Forums in which interested individuals and organizations can make submissions to the Commission on issues within the advisory and policy aspects of its mandate. Given the record of the Inquiry thus far, our organizations have no confidence that the insight or expertise we could now offer would make any difference to the Inquiry’s outcome or the strength of its recommendations. The government’s failure to commit the necessary resources to this Commission does not bode well for its commitment to implementing any of the Commission’s recommendations, and the Commission’s continued exclusion and marginalization of community voices undermines the credibility of the entire process. We see little value in spending our organizations’ extremely limited time and resources contributing to a process that is fundamentally flawed and irredeemably defective.

Canada has been criticized by the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women and, just weeks ago, by the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination because of the inadequacies in its law and practice respecting the prevention, investigation, prosecution and punishment of violence against women, particularly Aboriginal women. The high levels of violence experienced by Aboriginal women, as well as the hundreds of missing and murdered Aboriginal women across the country, are evidence of Canada’s failure to meet its international legal obligations to respect, protect and fulfill the fundamental human rights of women. To date, Canada has not made an effective response to these serious and significant findings by expert human rights bodies.

The UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women has initiated its inquiry procedure under the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women  in response to information it has received regarding disappearances and murders of Aboriginal women and girls. Given the failures of the British Columbia and Canadian governments to address effectively the human rights crisis of missing and murdered Aboriginal women and girls, including the social and economic conditions that make Aboriginal women and girls more vulnerable to violence in the first place, our organizations will dedicate what limited resources we can offer to working with the United Nations to facilitate their investigations and fact-finding processes, in order to ensure that Canada is held internationally accountable for these ongoing human rights violations. We have no confidence that the Commission of Inquiry can provide such accountability.

In closing, we reiterate our disappointment in the Missing Women Commission of Inquiry, which continues to lose relevance and credibility.  Ensuring that the Commission proceeds with the maximum amount of evidence and input available is literally a matter of life and death for the marginalized women who continue to experience extremely dangerous situations on a daily basis in the Downtown Eastside and throughout the province, and we are extremely upset that the Commission has not chosen to implement measures to allow for this.  We are angry that millions of dollars continue to be spent on the Inquiry, and yet the Province and Commissioner were not able to provide adequate funding for Community Group Participants to participate in an appropriate manner.  Our organizations will continue to support the families of the missing women and will work together going forward to ensure that real change happens for the vulnerable women of the Downtown Eastside.

Yours truly,

  • Aboriginal Front Door Society
  • Amnesty International Canada
  • Atira Women’s Resource Society
  • B.C. Civil Liberties Association
  • Battered Women’s Support Services
  • Carrier Sekani Tribal Council
  • Downtown Eastside Sex Workers United Against Violence Society
  • Ending Violence Association of British Columbia
  • Feb. 14th Women’s Memorial March Committee
  • First Nations Summit
  • PACE: Providing Alternatives Counselling & Education Society
  • Pivot Legal Society
  • Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs
  • Union Gospel Mission
  • West Coast LEAF
  • WISH Drop-in Centre Society

PDF Version

Carrier Sekani Concerned about Federal Budget

Dakelh Territory, Prince George, British Columbia.  Canada. Today the federal government released its much anticipated budget, and as predicted it falls short on several items.  The Carrier Sekani Tribal Council (CSTC) is particularly concerned that the ‘One Project, One Review’ streamlining of the environmental assessment will only create further uncertainty.  Other items of concern are the lack of commitments towards long term, substantive investments in First Nations education.

Vice Tribal Chief said, “We will be monitoring very, very closely how the federal bureaucracy gets reorganized, especially at the Major Projects Office.  First Nation title and rights are cornerstone impacts for our people, for large and small projects.”  The environmental assessment process is already inadequate for ensuring that First Nations rights and interests are protected.  “Canadians, especially in BC, should be very concerned about what the Harper government is proposing as this so called streamlining of environmental assessments is directly related to approving the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline project and associated tanker traffic.”  The CSTC is calling for full disclosure and transparency from the federal and provincial governments related to how projects will be assessed under the new proposed changes.
  
“Our children and youth are the fastest growing population in Canada.  We’re concerned that the new budget does not provide enough substantive, long term resources for education, skills training and support for First Nations business innovation, particularly in the technology and science sectors”, stated Tribal Chief David Luggi.  He noted, “It seems that the federal government is all about selling our resources from under us.  ‘Responsible resource development’ to us means not taking more than you need, and ensuring that the land can sustain future generations.  It doesn’t mean sell it all for money.”  The budget is intensely focused on the Asia-Pacific markets that are hungry for natural resources.

“The CSTC territory makes up 7.8 million hectares in north central BC.  Our people will no longer allow projects that do not supply secure, equitable and appropriate benefits for this and seven generations to come”, said Vice Tribal Chief Teegee.  He also noted, “It’s time that Prime Minister Harper and the full Cabinet visit our lands to meet with our people.  Only then can partnerships be built that ensure mutually beneficial projects.”

-30-

For more information please contact:

Tribal Chief David Luggi: Office (250) 562-6279 ext.222. Cell: (250) 640-6622
Vice Tribal Chief Terry Teegee:  Office (250) 562-6279 ext.223.  Cell: (250) 640-3256

Carrier Sekani Warns that the CEAA Report Will Lead to Decreased First Nations Consultation

Dakelh Territory, Prince George, British Columbia.  Canada. The Carrier Sekani Tribal Council (CSTC) has reviewed the House of Commons Standing Committee Report on the future of the Canadian Environmental Assessment (CEAA) Act and warns investors and the Federal government that the recommendations contained in the document are not acceptable.   The Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development undertook the statutory review of the CEAA Act and released the report on Tuesday this week.

Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Tribal Chief David Luggi states, “We expected an improvement to the CEAA process, not a death nail in a coffin, for an activity that is supposed to ensure environmental accountability.  We’ve been concerned about the environmental assessment process for years.  This latest report proves the current environmental assessment process is failing First Nations and the general public now and in the future if the Harper government is allowed to ‘rubber stamp’ projects.”

The CSTC finds the report is indicative of the federal government’s push to expand the tar sands at any costs.  The Harper government has already expressed its interest in seeing the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline built to move the tar sands to new markets in Asia and Southern United States.

CSTC Vice Tribal Chief Terry Teegee referenced the recent internal CEAA warnings that were leaked to the media last week and stated, “CEAA staff are warning top federal officials that adverse legal consequences are imminent if the federal government does not adequately consult First Nations.   The CEAA Committee Report that includes an accelerated environmental assessment process with fewer resources for First Nations to engage will undoubtedly lead to the opposite result.”

The Carrier Sekani Tribal Council urges the Prime Minister Harper to reject the report and work with the CSTC and other First Nations organizations on a joint solution.

-30-

For more information please contact:

Tribal Chief David Luggi: Office (250) 562-6279 e.222. Cell: (250) 640-6622
Vice Tribal Chief Terry Teegee:  Office (250) 562-6279 e.223.  Cell: (250) 640-3256

PDF Version

Opposition to Enbridge Grows

Dakelh Territory, Prince George, British Columbia.  Canada.  The CSTC is acknowledging the growing opposition to the Enbridge pipeline project from northern communities.  Both the City of Terrace and the Skeena Queen Charlotte Regional District (SQCRD) passed resolutions opposing the building of tar sands pipelines and the related tanker traffic.  The Northern Gateway Pipeline project is doomed to fail as such formal opposition is growing throughout BC.

Tribal Chief David Luggi said, “First Nations are not alone in their steadfast opposition to the Enbridge project.  People throughout the north are saying that the risks are too great to allow this project to proceed.  Enbridge should save tax payers money and focus on other projects.”

“We did our risk assessment of the proposed project and we’ve found that it is not worth the risks to our rivers, forests and wildlife.  We want investments in our territory to reflect truly sustainable initiatives like value added manufacturing, education and cultural tourism”, said Vice Tribal Chief Terry Teegee.  The CSTC territory is rich with natural resources and human capital that is undervalued.  In addition the CSTC territories offer unaccounted for ecosystem functions for clean air and water.  Projects like the Enbridge pipeline create unacceptable risks from an eventual rupture or tanker spill. Vice Chief Teegee note, “These risks are long-term; these types of project persist in our environment for decades, beyond my lifetime, beyond the lifetime of Enbridge executives.  It is our grandchildren that will pay the price when there is a spill.  We find this unacceptable.”

Tribal Chief Luggi concluded, “The municipal governments have demonstrated wise leadership through their opposition.  In addition to the opposition from the Union of BC Municipalities, there are over 100 First Nations in BC, Alberta and the Northwest Territories that are in opposition to the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline Project.  Even if the project is approved by the Harper government, it’ll be delayed in the courts and on the ground.”  The CSTC expects that the Enbridge project will take longer than the Mackenzie Valley pipeline project because First Nations have not offered their free, prior and informed consent.

-30-

For more information please contact:
Tribal Chief David Luggi: Office (250) 562-6279 e.222. Cell: (250) 640-6622
Vice Tribal Chief Terry Teegee:  Office (250) 562-6279 e.223.  Cell: (250) 640-3256

PDF Version

NEB Joint Review Panel Is Flawed

Dakelh Territory, Prince George, British Columbia.  Canada. Today the National Energy Board (NEB) will be in Prince George for day 5 of the Joint Review Panel (Panel) hearings regarding the doomed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline project.  The CSTC will not be participating in this flawed process. 

“The whole Panel review process is flawed for First Nations”, said Vice Tribal Chief Terry Teegee. He noted, “They don’t have any mandate or direction to examine the impacts to our Aboriginal rights and title, which have not been extinguished by any government.”  In addition the review is limited in scope and will only examine the actual pipeline route and not consider regional and global cumulative impacts from the actual extraction, shipping and use of the dirtiest oil in Canada.

Tribal Chief David Luggi said, “Our people have examined this project in 2006 and found that it was not worth the risk.”  He continued, “We are prepared to protect our inherent and legal rights to protect our lands and resources.  Enbridge should save its investors money and the Canadian taxpayers from further burdens by dropping this doomed project.”  Carrier Sekani First Nations are not opposed to development within their territories so long as there is free, prior and informed consent.

Investors from around the world are encouraged to talk to Carrier Sekani First Nations before even submitting any permits to the BC or Canadian governments.  Without First Nations consent, projects will be mired in uncertainty and legal challenges particularly the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline proposal.

“We need a new and improved process for land use planning and shared decision-making,” concluded Vice Tribal Chief Terry Teegee.

-30-

For more information please contact:

Tribal Chief David Luggi: Office (250) 562-6279 e.222. Cell: (250) 640-6622
Vice Tribal Chief Terry Teegee:  Office (250) 562-6279 e.223.  Cell: (250) 640-3256

CSTC: http://www.carriersekani.ca/current-issues/auis-enbridge-pipeline
NEB JRP website: http://gatewaypanel.review-examen.gc.ca/clf-nsi/prtcptngprcss/hrng-eng.html

CSTC Calls Ethical Oil Hypocrisy

Dakelh Territory, Prince George, British Columbia.  Canada. During a debate on the CTV Question Period program yesterday CSTC Vice Tribal Chief Terry Teegee was part of a panel that included Eric Swanson (Dogwood Initiative), and Kathryn Marshal (Ethical Oil). The ‘Ethical Oil’ group claims to promote the interests in Canadian tars sands production and the benefit of the Enbridge Northern Gateway project as an ‘ethical’ choice because of the environmental, labour and human rights laws in Canada.  The CSTC calls ‘Ethical Oil’ hypocritical and a danger to First Nations and Canadians.

“It’s absurd and misleading that the Ethical Oil group is suggesting that the Enbridge Gateway project is good for First Nations and northern BC”, stated Vice Tribal Chief Terry Teegee. “Our First Nations communities see nothing ethical in the way Enbridge is financing this doomed project.” The argument is that tar sands oil is more ethical than so called ‘conflict oil’ from countries that have no respect for human or environmental rights.  Yet the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation are under constant threat of losing their way of life because of the tar sands.  Countless First Nations have already said that the project is not worth the risks to the environment from the pipeline and tanker traffic.  Approval of such a project will undermine local decision-making and the free, prior and informed consent required by First Nations.

Tribal Chief David Luggi said, “The Chinese have been heavily investing in the tar sands and the Northern Gateway pipeline proposal, which has been driving Canadian policy and decision-making for years.” This is in response to Kathryn Marshal’s fear-mongering that they work to support decisions in the national interest, and counter Prime Minister Harpers’ warning that the National Energy Board hearings will be ‘hijacked’ by foreign interests.  “They are spinning the facts and misrepresenting the issues.  These projects are already being influenced by foreign forces”, noted Luggi.

“Our First Nations are not against development.  But it must benefit more than foreign investors and brokers in Calgary and Toronto”, said Vice Tribal Chief Terry Teegee.  “We examined the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline project and our people said that it was not worth the risks. We cannot eat money. We cannot take care of the land and water if it is allowed to be destroyed by foreigners.  We have a responsibility to ensure our land is protected for future generations”, stated Teegee.  

-30-

For more information please contact:

Tribal Chief David Luggi: Office (250) 562-6279 e.222. Cell: (250) 640-6622
Vice Tribal Chief Terry Teegee:  Office (250) 562-6279 e.223.  Cell: (250) 640-3256

Link to CTV debate: http://watch.ctv.ca/news/ctvs-question-period/jan-8/#clip597087

Sea2Sands – Notice about JRP Hearings Enbridge Gateway Project

Dear Sea to Sands Conservation Alliance members,

The Joint Review Panel hearings will be starting soon, in a community near you! Due to the overwhelming number of people concerned about the Enbridge’s Northern Gateway Pipeline Project, the National Energy Board received a record-breaking (4300 and counting) registrations for oral presentations. Therefore, the first round of oral presentations will be made by Intervenors, followed by a second round of oral presentations by non-intervenors. Sea to Sands members have numerous ways to participate in the hearings and review process (see below for details). We would like to encourage you to do attend the hearings, make a written submission, or prepare an oral presentation, to ensure that the Joint Review Panel understands that northern British Columbians are opposed to this project.

Oral presentation by Intervenors: January 18th, 2012 @ the Ramada Hotel starting at 6:00 PM. The schedule for intervenors is available here , and you are encouraged to attend any of these sessions, if possible. Sea to Sands Conservation Alliance & Carrier Sekani Tribal Council are organizing a rally and indoor presence. We will provide more details soon.

Oral presentations by non-intervenors: March or April (TBD) S2S will be organizing a local workshop this winter to assist those who have registered to prepare their oral presentation. More details to follow.
Friends of Wild Salmon are offering webinars (online seminars) this week to help people get prepared for presenting at the upcoming Enbridge pipeline hearings.From the comfort of your own home you’ll be able to either phone in and/or follow a live Internet webinar. At the beginning of the webinar, FOWS will be providing a 30-minute overview presentation covering what you can expect and offering ways to maximize the impact of your oral statement. After that, we’ll have a question and answer period for participants.You can register now for the telephone/webinar session by selecting from the following dates/times (click on one of the dates provided):
Thu, Jan 5, 2012 7:00 PM – 8:00 PM PST
Sun, Jan 8, 2012 3:00 PM – 4:00 PM PST
Mon, Jan 9, 2012 7:00 PM – 8:00 PM PST

Once registered you will receive an email confirming your registration and providing the information you need to join the webinar. Be sure to read the computer system requirements.

Letter of Comment: Please follow this link to provide the Joint Review Panel with a written submission by March 13, 2012.

Letter to the Editor: Send a letter to the editor of the PG Citizen, the PG Free Press or the Northern Sentinel

Also, please check out Ethical Oil’s new Ad that will be appearing in newspapers around the north!

Wishing you a wonderful 2012,
The Sea to Sands Conservation Alliance

The Joint Review Panel hearings will be starting soon, in a community near you! Due to the overwhelming number of people concerned about the Enbridge’s Northern Gateway Pipeline Project, the National Energy Board received a record-breaking (4300 and counting) registrations for oral presentations.

B.C. should reject Northern Gateway pipeline, ban oiler tanker traffic: report

MARK HUME
Vancouver— Globe and Mail Update
Published Tuesday, Nov. 29, 2011 6:03PM EST
Last updated Tuesday, Nov. 29, 2011 6:05PM EST
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/bc-politics/bc-should-reject-northern-gateway-pipeline-ban-oiler-tanker-traffic-report/article2254072/

Opposition to the proposed $5.5 billion Northern Gateway pipeline project has stiffened with the release of a report by three environmental groups which argue bitumen from Alberta’s oil sands can’t safely be transported across British Columbia.

In releasing the report, Tuesday, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Pembina Institute and the Living Oceans Society, jointly called on federal and provincial governments to reject the proposed pipeline and to permanently ban oil tanker traffic on B.C.’s north coast.

But Enbridge Inc. was quick to respond, saying the report offers no new information and amounts to fear mongering about a project that is of national importance, and which has acceptable risks.
At a press conference representatives of the environmental groups, and Gerald Amos a Haisla band member who has been rallying native opposition to the project, said possible pipeline leaks, or ruptures caused by landslides, and the risk of oil tanker spills on the rugged B.C. coastline, all make the proposal unacceptable.

Several of the participants were critical of Alberta’s oil sands, leaving little doubt that the opposition is as much about the source of the oil, as it is about the pipeline itself.

“Basically we’re dealing with two different issues. One is that we really don’t need expansion of tar sands. But most important for the purposes of this discussion today [is that] there really is no safe and risk free way to get tar sands oil and pipelines and super tankers across British Columbia’s ecosystem,” said Susan Casey-Lefkowitz, of the Natural Resources Defense Council, a U.S.-based, international environmental group.

“British Columbia has some of the most amazing natural resources and the communities that live in those regions really depend on those natural resources. It simply doesn’t seem worth the risk. . . when you look at who would be benefiting,” she said. “The benefit really stays with the oil industry. . .and all the risk is being borne by the communities and the ecosystems in British Columbia.”

Nathan Lemphers of the Pembina Institute, a national non-profit, advocacy group, said the Northern Gateway project had not planned for all eventualities, such as the impact on the pipeline of possible catastrophic events such as earthquakes or landslides.

“Right now Enbridge hasn’t made a sufficiently strong enough case that they are prepared for the worst case scenario, which faces British Columbians with an unacceptable level of risk,” said Mr. Lemphers.
But Paul Stanway, communications manager for Northern Gateway, accused the groups of raising unreasonable fears and setting “zero risk” targets that no pipeline project could ever reach.

“You would hope that the standard is going to be reasonable and achievable. To set a target that cannot be achieved is not really any target at all. You know, it supports their position that this pipeline should not be built under any circumstance,” he said.

“We’re not going to tell you that there are no risks involved with building pipelines. We deal with those risks every day,” said Mr. Stanway. “What we aim to do is minimize them to a reasonable level. And I think the suggestion here is to exaggerate the risk that’s involved and I think that’s unfair.”

The report suggests that bitumen – the raw, tar sands crude that would be shipped through the Northern Gateway pipeline to a port on the B.C. coast – is more dangerous to transport than other oils because it is corrosive.
But Mr. Stanway flatly rejected that assertion.

“The bottom line is, nobody has been able to identify any additional risk or hazard involved with transporting oil sands crude,” he said.

Mr. Stanway said it is clear the environmental groups are trying to sway public opinion, but Enbridge remains hopeful that the project will get federal approved and win public support.

“We knew right from the beginning that this was going to be a controversial project. It’s the largest private infrastructure project in British Columbia’s history. It comes at a time when there is heightened awareness of issues surrounding both the transportation and the use of oil. So we understood that there were going to be a lot of questions and you know we think we have the answers that people have, but they have to be prepared to listen and not be frightened by the sort of fear-mongering that we sometimes see,” he said.
Following release of the report, B.C. New Democrat environment critic Rob Fleming called on the provincial government to reject the pipeline.

“The opportunities for disaster are many, and the B.C. Liberals should re-assure British Columbians that it will not go through,” he said in a statement.

Opposition to the proposed $5.5 billion Northern Gateway pipeline project has stiffened with the release of a report by three environmental groups which argue bitumen from Alberta’s oil sands can’t safely be transported across British Columbia.

In releasing the report, Tuesday, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Pembina Institute and the Living Oceans Society, jointly called on federal and provincial governments to reject the proposed pipeline and to permanently ban oil tanker traffic on B.C.’s north coast.

New Report Highlights Dangers Associated with Tar Sands Pipeline to British Columbia

Report warns that corrosive oil, dangerous pathway and treacherous seas make Northern Gateway project an unnecessary threat

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Press contacts: Josh Mogerman, NRDC, 312-651-7909
Julia Kilpatrick, Pembina Institute, 613-265-5579
Geoff Gilliard, Living Oceans Society, 604-999-6273

VANCOUVER, BC (November 29, 2011) – A new report released today shines a light on the dangers associated with transporting tar sands oil by Enbridge’s proposed Northern Gateway project, both along the pipeline pathway and on B.C.’s sensitive coast, which massive oil tankers would be navigating for the first time. The report by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), the Pembina Institute and Living Oceans Society, has also been endorsed by nine British Columbia organizations.

“While the considerable environmental impacts of bitumen production are well documented, the increased risk and potential harm from transporting bitumen is less known,” said Nathan Lemphers, senior policy analyst, the Pembina Institute. “This report shows why the Northern Gateway pipeline is not worth the risk for the communities, rivers and Pacific coastline of British Columbia.”

The release of “Pipeline and Tanker Trouble: The Impacts to British Columbia’s Communities, Rivers, and Pacific Coastline from Tar Sands Oil Transport” comes as the battle over the controversial Northern Gateway pipeline project heats up in Canada and internationally. The report documents the risks that transporting tar sands oil poses to communities along the pipeline and tanker paths, to salmon-bearing rivers and to coastal ecosystems, including habitat of the Spirit Bear.

The proposed Northern Gateway pipeline would carry highly acidic and corrosive diluted bitumen from Alberta’s tar sands through nearly 1,200 kilometers (750 miles) of rugged and unstable landscapes to Kitimat on British Columbia’s northern coast. The pipeline would be serviced by over 220 supertankers each year sailing through B.C.’s North Coast waterways, which have been off-limits to the giant vessels due to concerns that an oil spill would ruin precious coastal natural resources. 

“There is fierce opposition in B.C. to allowing oil supertankers into our coastal waters and rightly so,” said Katie Terhune, Energy Campaign Manager, Living Oceans Society. “History has shown that oil tankers come with oil spills.  It is not a question of if, but when, a spill will happen.”

First Nations’ communities have made it clear that they will not allow the Northern Gateway project to proceed using their own laws to ban oil pipelines and tankers through British Columbia. The report also stresses their concerns while highlighting sensitive and beloved landscapes threatened by the pipeline and supertanker traffic.

“Our communities have taken a stand against the Northern Gateway pipeline because we would lose everything,” said Gerald Amos, member of the Haisla First Nation and Director of the Headwaters Initiative. “This pipeline is where we draw the line. Big oil pipelines and the accompanying oil super tankers mean that life as we know it will be over.”

“Pipeline and Tanker Trouble” also makes recommendations for provincial and federal policies associated with this project, asking for rejection of the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline and a ban on large oil tanker traffic off of British Columbia’s coast.

“In their growing desperation to get dirty bitumen to international markets, Alberta’s tar sands oil industry expects British Columbia to bear a very high cost,” said Natural Resources Defense Council International Program director, Susan Casey-Lefkowitz. “We have cleaner solutions that will not devastate British Columbia’s great angling rivers, the globally important Great Bear Rainforest and our climate.”

NRDC has recently added its voice to growing Northern Gateway opposition, with members and activists sending almost 100,000 letters in the last month to the B.C. government and Enbridge asking that the pipeline not be built.

The report is available at http://www.nrdc.org/international/pipelinetrouble

Additional Resources:

###

The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) is an international nonprofit environmental organization with more than 1.3 million members and online activists. Since 1970, our lawyers, scientists, and other environmental specialists have worked to protect the world’s natural resources, public health, and the environment. NRDC has offices in New York City, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Livingston, Montana, and Beijing. Visit us at www.nrdc.org

The Pembina Institute is a national non-profit think tank that advances sustainable energy solutions through research, education, consulting and advocacy and provides policy research leadership on climate change, energy issues, green economics, energy efficiency and conservation, renewable energy, and environmental governance. Visit us at www.pembina.org

Based in British Columbia, Living Oceans Society is the largest organization in Canada focusing exclusively on marine conservation. It advocates for oceans that are managed for the common good, according to science-based policies that consider ecosystems in their entirety. Visit us at www.livingoceans.org

You can find the report here: http://www.nrdc.org/international/pipelinetrouble.asp

The press release is attached.

And I blogged about the report today here: http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/sclefkowitz/pipeline_and_tanker_trouble_ne.html

Our take action page: https://secure.nrdconline.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=2505

Carrier Sekani Supports New Report: Pipeline and Tanker Trouble

Dakelh Territory, Prince George, British Columbia.  Canada. The Carrier Sekani Tribal Council is in full support of the report released today by several non-governmental organizations titled: Pipeline and Tanker Trouble – The Impact to British Columbia’s Communities, Rivers and Pacific Coastline from Tar Sands Oil Transport.   This report adds to the growing evidence that the Enbridge pipeline is not worth the risk.  Prepared by the Natural Resource Defence Council, Living Oceans Society, and the Pembina Institute, this latest report is also endorsed by several organizations including the Headwaters Initiative, ForestEthics, West Coast Environmental Law, Sierra Club BC, Raincoast Conservation Foundation, Pacific Wild, Friends of Wild Salmon, Dogwood Initiative and Douglas Channel Watch. 

Tribal Chief Luggi said, “This latest report does more than just outline evidence showing that the Enbridge pipeline should be rejected.  It offers several recommendations for government and pipeline safety regulators.” Chief Luggi noted, “We’ll be discussing these with our First Nations leaders and members.  Our people have said from day one that the Enbridge Gateway project is not worth the risk and will not be allowed to cross our unceded territories.”

Vice Tribal Chief Terry Teegee stated, “First Nations view the proposed Enbridge Gateway project with our eyes, mind and hearts wide open.  We see that the source of this project is based on the perceived global demand of crude oil.  It involves the largest industrial project in human history through the extraction of oil from the tar sands.  The proposed Enbridge pipeline could cross over 700 waterways on 1,000 km+ of mostly unceded First Nations lands.  The resulting super tanker traffic will threaten pristine waterways and the livelihoods of all beings.”  All of these activities are contributing to global climate change and global leaders, especially Canada, are waffling in their commitments to curb their emissions.  Leaders are in South Africa this week discussing the latest climate change protocol at the UN Conference of the Parties 17 (COP 17) on climate change.  Canadians should be concerned that the federal government is considering walking away from the table in Durban and not live up to the Kyoto Protocol.  “All of this is connected back to the Alberta tar sands, which is the source of most of Canada’s emissions increasing global climate change,” noted Vice Tribal Chief Teegee.  The UN also noted today that the past decade has been the hottest on record.

“It’s a shame on Canadians, and a violation of human rights if the Enbridge project is allowed to proceed,” said Tribal Chief Luggi.  He also stated, “First Nations are always the first to be impacted and tend to feel the impacts for generations as we attempt to live and survive through these types of projects.”  Vice Tribal Chief Teegee said, “We’ve witnessed what has happened when companies like Enbridge do business with First Nations.  The Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN) have filed suit against Shell Canada over unmet agreements to their lands and resources from Shell’s tar sands projects.  We stand united with ACFN and other First Nations that are saying ‘enough is enough’.”

LINK TO REPORT

-30-

For more information please contact:

Tribal Chief David Luggi: Office (250) 562-6279 e.222. Cell: (250) 640-6622
Vice Tribal Chief Terry Teegee:  Office (250) 562-6279 e.223.  Cell: (250) 640-3256

News Release (PDF Version)

Carrier Sekani Unaware of Mining Act Changes

Dakelh Territory, Prince George, British Columbia. Canada. The Carrier Sekani Tribal Council is astounded that the BC government is proposing unilateral changes to the Mining Act without any consultation and accommodation of First Nations title and rights.   It appears that the Clark Liberal government has done away with any relationship with First Nations.  Now the only way to become informed about legislation that will impact our territories is to read it in the media. 

CSTC Vice Tribal Chief Terry Teegee stated, “The ghost of the old colonial relationship is re-emerging causing unrest among our people.   Mining investors should be advised that the land question in British Columbia is unresolved and that only First Nations can bring the certainty needed for projects to proceed.”    Investors should look around and see the conflicts with the proposed Prosperity Mine, Mt. Klappan, Gething Coal, Enbridge Gateway, etc. and see that projects cannot proceed without the free, prior and informed consent of First Nations.   

Tribal Chief David Luggi noted, “The combined territories of our member First Nations accounts for 7.8 million hectares, about 8.3% of BC and twice the size of Vancouver Island, most of which is seeing an increase in mining exploration.”  The CSTC has several active, proposed and abandoned mines including Endako (molybdenum/active), Pinche Lake (mercury/closed), Kemess South and North (gold, active/proposed), Mt. Milligan (gold/copper-active/proposed) and Bralorne (gold/abandoned). 

“The CSTC First Nations are actively working with resource extraction projects that demonstrate sustainable and equitable benefits, without compromising our rights and those of our future generations”, stated Tribal Chief Luggi. “Companies need to talk with us before they submit any applications to the BC and federal government.  The Crown needs to talk with us about how we can share the wealth from our territories, otherwise no one will benefit.”

The recent BC Jobs Plan: Canada Starts Here announced by the Premier in September calls for 8 new mines and 9 expansions by 2015.   The way the BC government is going about by announcing projects without working in partnership with the impacted First Nations will result in litigation and further conflict.   Tribal Chief Luggi further stated, “We are calling upon the Premier to convene a First Nations government to government table to discuss the development agenda on our homelands.   Without such engagement most of the proposed mines will be mired in legal conflict for many years.”

-30-

For more information please contact:

Tribal Chief David Luggi: Office (250) 562-6279 e.222. Cell: (250) 640-6622
Vice Tribal Chief Terry Teegee:  Office (250) 562-6279 e.223.  Cell: (250) 640-3256