I have been dragged here today by two emotions 鈥� love and fear. I am here because I am convinced that something I love passionately is in considerable danger. And that makes me afraid.
The 鈥渟omething鈥� I love passionately I do not think of as simply the province of British Columbia. It is people 鈥� family, friends and fellow citizens 鈥� and also all manner of wildlife as well as the land itself: steep forest slopes, narrow green valleys, creeks, ridges, booming rivers, bench land, bold mountains and chilly and rich coastal waters.
How can I explain the beauty and the fragility I feel so keenly when I speak of this province? Words seem so feeble when you stand beside the Skeena, river of mists, or climb into the wilderness of Manning or Wells Gray parks, when you touch the tissue leaves of a clematis or see a crimson spread of Indian paintbrush in an alpine meadow, when you watch a cautious wolf fish for salmon.
I think our wider home is at high risk, needlessly. The oilsands industry, through the Northern Gateway proposal, talks about measures to make pipelines and the related tanker traffic safe. Everything the pipeline company says is problematic. Maybe yes, maybe no. I am here because I believe in certainties: earthquakes, avalanches, volcanoes, tsunamis, mudslides and floods. Is there anyone here who does not believe that tectonic plates are squeezing each other at this moment, and that this certainty will produce occasional sporadic uncontrollable results?
The only questions associated with these certainties are where, when, how intense and how often. We all have to take our chances with these violent natural occurrences. What we do not have to do is take risks with them that are optional. The proposed pipeline and tanker traffic route across 1,100 kilometres of wilderness, then out to a sometimes violent ocean through narrow winding channels, threading past numerous islands and reefs, large and small 鈥� that proposal is optional. It puts at high risk our inland waterways that sustain forest and field, and our coastal waters, all the life forms dependent on unpolluted habitat.
For decades, my wife and I have travelled to almost every corner of this province. We have travelled the Inside Passage between Port Hardy and Prince Rupert five times, often enough to gather a distinct impression of the coast that this proposal would put at high risk.
I believe every generation has an obligation to serve in the role of steward, to look after the land and the waters around them. And this pipeline-tanker threat is coming on our watch. We simply must speak up.
The oilsands industry in Alberta has a valuable product, one with an assured market in Canada and the U.S. for all of its production. What could be better than that? Answer: two assured markets. If any industry has two eager markets, it can play one against the other, raise prices, increase profits. Enbridge鈥檚 pipeline proposal is a bid to secure that second market.
I have nothing against ethical capitalism; it has brought many of us a lifestyle we enjoy. I drive a car; it burns gasoline. But from time to time, big industries are astonishingly arrogant 鈥� brazen 鈥� in their thrust for greater profits.
Oil products are poisonous to animals, plants, birds and fish. That鈥檚 another certainty. We are talking about the proposed continuous mass transportation of poison right across our province, across more than 800 rivers, streams, creeks, across valleys, even through a mountain, and then boating this poison through the most treacherous of our coastal waters. And the volume of tanker traffic proposed, more than 200 sailings annually, virtually assures that a laden tanker will be in the wrong place at the wrong time when one of these violent certainties occurs.
This is a good time to note that all talk of oil spill cleanup is fundamentally nonsense. When this poison gets into water, be it lake or stream or ocean, the damage is done. The industry can lick up a fraction of it. On the ocean, the great currents and immutable tides will distribute the rest of it for scores of miles, painting the intertidal zones again and again, carrying it up and down the coast. Many spills testify to this. It is another certainty.
I have one final fear that I need to note. It鈥檚 this scenario: after you file your report, the federal cabinet ignores the massive opposition of British Columbians. It follows its own agenda, dealing the democratic process a mighty blow in the process, by granting federal political approval to this pipeline-tanker proposal.
That, I fear, would carry this province into a disruptive social confrontation. Politics trumping overwhelming popular opinion will lead to violence, people will be hurt. That would be the greatest tragedy. These hearings and your report are an important test for Canada鈥檚 democratic process. The stakes are high. I believe British Columbians and our many allies will protect this province from this rash scheme.
听
Don Vipond, 80, of Saanichton is a former Times 91原创 editorial-page editor. This is an edited version of his presentation to the Joint Review Panel Tuesday.
