Tag Archives: Oil and gas

Former Bank of Canada Governor Dodge: Look East with New Pipelines, Not West with Enbridge

May 4, 2012Canada, Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, Tar SandsAlberta Tar Sands, BC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Oil and gas, PoliticsCommon Sense Canadian

Read this article on former Bank of Canada Governor David Dodge’s recent speech at Edmonton’s McEwan University, in which he questioned the fundamentals and viability of the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline – suggesting instead that Tar Sands producers look to supply oil-importing Eastern Canadian provinces with Alberta bitumen. (May 1, 2012)

EDMONTON – The former Governor of the Bank of Canada says it may make more sense to ship Alberta’s bitumen to Eastern Canada, in view of the vocal opposition to two proposed pipeline projects to the West Coast.

“I think it’s going to be difficult, right. You’ve got all the loony tunes in Vancouver who don’t want to see Kinder Morgan’s pipeline expanded,” said David Dodge, in an interview with the Journal.

Dodge, who was in Edmonton Tuesday to deliver a speech on the global economic outlook at MacEwan University, said Enbridge’s proposed Northern Gateway pipeline to Kitimat looks like even more of a long shot.

“I think the project to Kitimat looks, objectively, more risky. So why hasn’t much greater effort gone into looking at Prince Rupert and taking (bitumen) out that way? My guess is, the easiest place to get B.C. to buy into the project would be to go to Rupert.”

Dodge’s views echo those of former Alberta Premier Peter Lougheed, who also favours looking at an alternate pipeline route to Prince Rupert, where ocean-going supertankers can navigate more easily.

But given the level of opposition to any oilsands pipelines in B.C., where Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson has been among the harshest critics of the Kinder Morgan project, Dodge said it may be more feasible to simply ship bitumen east.

“You’ve got to get the stuff out of here somehow, and not necessarily send it all south (to the U.S.). And maybe it’s going to be difficult for other reasons to send it west. So I’m intrigued with the option of getting it to tidewater going east,” he said.

Rafe Mair, Robyn Allan Draw Over 4,000 Listeners to Telephone Townhall on Exporting Alberta Bitumen Through BC

May 4, 2012Canada, Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, Tar Sands, Western CanadaAlberta Tar Sands, BC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Enbridge, KinderMorgan, Oil and gas, Politics, rafe mairCommon Sense Canadian

Read this story from the Chilliwack Times on a recent telephone townhall meeting held throughout the riding of Chilliwack-Hope to discuss proposed oil pipelines and tankers in BC in advance of the recent provincial byelection there. (May 1, 2012)

Thousands of residents in the provincial Chilliwack-Hope riding took part in a telephone townhall meeting on the topic of Kinder Morgan’s oil pipeline expansion before Thursday’s byelection.

The call was organized by Victoria-based Dogwood Initiative and went out to everyone listed in the phone book, approximately 14,000 homes.

Dogwood campaigns director Eric Swanson said 4,572 people opted in to the discussion, although most did not stay on the entire time.

“At any given moment we were talking to just under 400 people,” Swanson said.

The call involved a number of poll questions about oil tankers and pipelines. On the line for a discussion were three panelists: former Socred MLA and current political commentator Rafe Mair; economist and former ICBC CEO Robyn Allan; and Abbotsford resident John Vissers, an outspoken critic of the pipeline.

The three main Chilliwack-Hope byelection candidates were asked to provide their positions on the issue, but only New Democrat Gwen O’Mahony responded.

When asked if those on the line supported or opposed projects like Kinder Morgan’s, or the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline, 39 per cent supported, 44 per cent opposed and 17 per cent said they didn’t know.

Sixty-eight per cent of respondents said the issue of pipelines and tankers would be a voting issue in the byelection, as opposed to 32 per cent who said it wouldn’t be.

Fraser Institue Took Half Million in Foreign “Charitable” Funding from US Oil Billionaire Koch Brothers

May 4, 2012Canada, Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Politics, Tar Sands, Western CanadaAlberta Tar Sands, Oil and gas, PoliticsCommon Sense Canadian

Read this story from the Vancouver Observer, revealing that the Texas oil billionaire Koch Brothers have given some $500,000 in charitable funding to the BC-based ultra-right wing Fraser Institute – which has been a supporter of the oil industry and climate change denial campaign. (April 25, 2012)

As the Conservative assault continues against Canadian environmental charities, the Vancouver Observer has learned that since 2007, foreign oil billionaires the Koch brothers have donated over half a million dollars to the “charitable” right-wing Fraser Institute.

According to U.S. tax documents, the Fraser Institute received $150,000 from the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation in 2008, $175,500 in 2009, and another $150,000 in 2010. The grants were purportedly for “research support” and “educational programs”.

Prior to 2008, the Institute received another $25,000 in funding from the Claude R. Lambe Foundation, which is under the umbrella of Koch Family Foundations.

It has long been known that the ultra-conservative Koch Brothers have been donors for the conservative policy think-tank—though this information is not listed the Institute’s Annual Reports—however, the extent of their funding in the past few years demonstrates the foundation’s more recent influence in Canadian politics.

Read article: http://www.vancouverobserver.com/politics/2012/04/25/%E2%80%9Ccharitable%E2%80%9D-fraser-institute-accepted-500k-foreign-funding-oil-billionaires

Open Letter to Christy Clark on Enbridge, BC’s Sovereignty

April 24, 2012Canada, Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, Tar Sands, Western CanadaAlberta Tar Sands, BC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Christy Clark, Enbridge, Oil and gas, Politics, Stephen HarperDamien Gillis

The following letter was originally published on economist and former President and CEO of the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia Robyn Allan’s blog, robynallan.com.

April 19, 2012

Dear Premier Clark,

Your government has not spoken out for or against the Northern Gateway pipeline proposed by Enbridge Inc., rather preferring to wait until the National Energy Review Board process is complete. I am writing to you today to explain that, unfortunately the current Northern Gateway environmental and public interest process is flawed and as a result the public interest of BC is not protected.

The Federal government, as I am sure you are aware, has publicly endorsed the project, stated it is in the national interest of Canada, and has systematically demonized individuals and groups who oppose the project. This behaviour has made a travesty of the necessary arms length relationship between government and an independent regulatory body.

As long as there was some sense that the Joint Review Panel (JRP) was independent and had the authority to reject the proposal regardless of the political pressure imposed by the Prime Minister’s Office, a semblance of due process was maintained. That necessary condition was violated when Federal Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver unveiled proposed legislation on April 17, 2012.

The Federal Government now intends to further weaken environmental protection and favour large oil companies operating, primarily, in Alberta. This has betrayed any remaining trust in federal energy decisions as they relate to the province of British Columbia.

With the overhaul of the environmental assessment rules and process, and making final decision on oil pipelines—such as the Enbridge Northern Gateway and proposed Kinder Morgan projects—a Federal cabinet prerogative, there is no confidence that the Government of Canada will make decisions that will be in the best public interest of the residents of this province.

A major change in policy in the midst of nation breaking events such as Northern Gateway or Kinder Morgan requires deliberate action on the part of your Office to protect the public interest trust and rights of BC residents and First Nations.

Certainly when the NEB process for Northern Gateway commenced in June 2010, the BC government thought the JRP would be objective and have the power to recommend a binding decision which would reflect the public interest of British Columbians and Canadians. I can imagine that the safety and efficiency inherent in one independent review body—which the NEB was believed to be at the time—and the belief that our public interest would be protected were reasons why the Liberal government of BC under the leadership of Gordon Campbell, felt it acceptable to sign away our right to conduct an environmental assessment under B.C.’s Environmental Assessment Act.

During my review of the Enbridge economic documents as part of their Application to the NEB, I wondered why there was no real or meaningful review of their case by various ministries of the BC government. The deliberate intent in the Enbridge documents to increase the price of oil for Canadian consumers and businesses, and the lack of concern over the impact our petro-currency has on forestry, agriculture, tourism and manufacturing, appeared to be glaring examples of an economic case intent on presenting only the benefits to the oil industry without due consideration to the economic costs for the rest of us. The development of a strategy to export raw crude to Asia at the cost of value added jobs and control over environmental standards also seemed worthy of provincial comment.

I felt surely, there should be professional economists, paid by taxpayers, that would stand up and present a fair picture of the macroeconomic impact rapid resource expansion and export has on the economy of British Columbia, not to mention the threat to the environment and First Nations rights. That is when I discovered that BC had signed away the right to actively assess the project. I then understood that not only have you, as Premier, elected to remain silent on the issue, but our provincial departments have effectively been muzzled as well.

I draw to your attention the Environmental Assessment Equivalency Agreement signed between the NEB and BC’s Environmental Assessment Office (EAO) on June 21^st, 2010. I have attached a link to the agreement for your ease of recall.

Essentially the agreement states that the EAO will accept the NEB’s environmental assessment for four proposed projects, including the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project, which would otherwise have to be reviewed under BC’s Environmental Assessment Act. The NEB’s review would be treated as an equivalent assessment.

If the province of BC had not signed away its right to the NEB, under the terms of the legislation the EAO would have had to undertake a review. According to the EAO, it is a “neutral agency that manages the review of proposed major projects in British Columbia, as required by the Environmental Assessment Act. The environmental assessment process provides for the thorough, timely and integrated assessment of the potential environmental, economic, social, heritage, and health effects that may occur during the lifecycle of these projects, and provides for meaningful participation by First Nations, proponents, the public, local governments, and provincial agencies.”

We have the power within BC to undertake meaningful environmental assessment within provincial jurisdiction, but signed it away. However, not all is lost. Clause 6 of the Environmental Assessment Equivalency Agreement states: ”Either Party may terminate this Agreement upon giving 30 days written notice to terminate the other Party”.

May I recommend that the Government of British Columbia inform the Government of Canada that the province is now exercising its right with 30 days notice in order that it may undertake a proper environmental assessment under the terms of the provincial Environmental Assessment Act, for the Enbridge project, and it will not entertain signing such an agreement for the proposed Kinder Morgan pipeline.

This action will ensure that the public interest of the people of BC will be protected and will not be severely curtailed by the actions of the Government of Canada favouring primarily Alberta’s oil producers.

Sincerely,

Original Signed by Robyn Allan

Robyn Allan

cc. Dr. Terry Lake, Minister of the Environment

Mr. Adrian Dix, Leader of the Opposition

Mr. Rob Fleming, Environment Critic

Mr. John Cummins, Conservative Leader

Mr. John van Dongen, Conservative MLA

Mr. Bob Simpson, Independent MLA

Ms. Vicki Huntington, Independent MLA

Stephen Hume: Campbell/Clark Government May Have Surrendered BC’s Sovereignty on Enbridge Pipeline Proposal

April 22, 2012Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and SupertankersBC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Enbridge, Oil and gas, policeCommon Sense Canadian

Read this column from the Vancouver Sun’s Stephen Hume on a respected analyst’s Robyn Allan’s warning that BC has surrendered its provincial sovereignty with regards to the review process on the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline. (April 20, 2012)

Hearings assessing the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline project and legislative changes planned in Ottawa compromise the province’s sovereignty and threaten its authority to defend British Columbians’ interests, warns a letter from Robyn Allan, the former president of ICBC, to Premier Christy Clark and other leading provincial politicians.

The planned pipeline would carry 190 million barrels of diluted bitumen from Alberta’s oilsands to Kitimat each year. Tankers the size of three football fields would then move the bitumen through the Inside Passage to upgraders in China. Another proposed pipeline expansion by Kinder Morgan would more than triple capacity to move oil from Alberta to a tanker terminal in Burnaby from 100 million to more than 300 million barrels per year.

Potential environmental risks, first nations issues and municipal government objections have been a major source of controversy in both the public and political discussion of the Northern Gateway project. Clark has said the province won’t take a position until the environmental assessment and economic review process are complete. The mayors of Burnaby and Vancouver have both vowed opposition to the Kinder Morgan proposal.

Allan, an economist who has been analyzing the Enbridge proposal, says that an agreement quietly signed by the provincial government under former premier Gordon Campbell on June 21, 2010, relinquished the province’s right to its own environmental assessment process for major resource projects and instead accepted the federal NEB’s findings as an equivalent.

The assessment now underway combines the NEB review and the federal ministry of environment’s review under what’s known as the Joint Review Panel.

Allan says the B.C. government made its equivalency agreement in the belief that the NEB review would provide a neutral, objective, arm’s length assessment.

But since then, she says, the process has been compromised, the federal government has unilaterally moved to change the rules and B.C.’s sovereignty is now threatened with subordination to the interests of Alberta and Ottawa while input from provincial departments has effectively been muzzled.

“The federal government, as I am sure you are aware, has publicly endorsed the project, stated it is in the national interest of Canada, and has systematically demonized individuals and groups who oppose the project,” Allan writes. “This behaviour has made a travesty of the necessary arm’s length relationship between government and an independent regulatory body.

Disgraced Gitxsan Treaty Negotiator Rewarded with Appointment to Prince Rupert Port Authority

April 22, 2012Canada, Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, PoliticsBC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Enbridge, Gitxsan, Oil and gas, PoliticsDamien Gillis

Read this story from the Vancouver Sun on the controversial paid appointment by the Harper Government of Elmer Derrick – the former Gitxsan treaty negotiator who was fired for cutting an unauthorized deal with Enbridge behind his nation’s back – to the board of the Prince Rupert Port Authority. (April 20, 2012)

The northern B.C. first nation chief who signed a controversial deal to support Enbridge’s $5.5-billion oil pipe-line has been appointed by the federal government to the Prince Rupert Port Authority.

As a director of the board, Gitxsan hereditary chief Elmer Derrick will receive payment, although it is not clear exactly how much.

“It’s a strange appointment. It raises the possibility it’s a quid pro quo for supporting the pipeline,” said NDP Skeena-Bulkley Valley MP Nathan Cullen, whose riding includes a large stretch of the Northern Gateway pipeline route.

Cullen noted that Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government is a supporter of the pipeline, meant to open up new markets in Asia for crude from the Alberta oilsands.

When Derrick, who is the chief negotiator with the Gitxsan Treaty Office, announced he had signed a pipe-line ownership deal with Enbridge that would provide $7 million over a 30-year period, it sparked an immediate battle with other leaders in the community who said they don’t sup-port the project.

In the face of the opposition to the deal from dozens of Gitxsan hereditary chiefs, Enbridge pulled out of the ownership agreement.

NDP Byelection Wins Bad News for Both Liberals and Conservatives; Good for NDP, Environment

April 22, 2012Canada, Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, Western CanadaAdrian Dix, BC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Christy Clark, Enbridge, KinderMorgan, Oil and gas, Politics, rafe mairRafe Mair

The two by-elections are very bad news for the Liberals, not much better for the Tories and excellent news for the NDP.

Let’s start with the last first.

The loyal opposition is now in the position where a couple of Liberals crossing the floor can bring the government down. I don’t believe that will happen but it’s a worry for the Liberals. Mostly this confirmed Adrian Dix’s leadership. Any time you have a contested election, the losers and their supporters have a death wish for the winner – more about that in a moment. Dix is firmly in control. The NDP made a brilliant move in saying that while they oppose Enbridge and coastal tanker traffic they promise a local referendum for Kinder Morgan. One of the moves of the Campbell/Clark government was to extinguish the right of local governments to pass judgment on environmentally sensitive projects and the NDP understand that the late US Speaker, Tip O’Neill, was right when he said “all politics is local”.

For the John Cummins Conservatives this by-election was a bitter blow, for if the Tories can’t win a by-election – governments usually have trouble with them – in a staunchly “conservative” riding, what chance do they have in a general election. This hardly enhances the opportunity for a new party along the Socred lines since Cummins brings nothing to the table.

For the Liberals, these votes can’t be put down to the usual anti-government pissed off voters. Premier Clark’s leadership was on the line and the Liberals know it.

Going into the by-elections all but one caucus and cabinet minister wanted someone else. She has stumbled from one gaffe to another since she took office. She must go and soon; if she stays, it will be the best news the NDP could get. She’s like Bill Vander Zalm was in 1991 – a loser brought to his knees as much by cabinet and caucus disloyalty as personal stupidity.

When a premier is in trouble he/she must be able to rally the troops – this Ms. Clark is utterly unable to do. She must go, with a temporary leader in place pending a leadership convention, for which time is very short.

Never mind the weeping that a split vote cost them Chilliwack and a turncoat won in Port Coquitlam – the fact is that the government lost two elections which were referenda on the Liberals and their leadership.

There was another winner – big time: the environment. In Chilliwack, the Kinder-Morgan pipeline was a big issue – to my memory, the first time the Environment was a large issue there.

These by-elections did more than alter the make-up of the Legislature; they altered politics in BC – Big Time.

The Canada-New Zealand Fracking Connection

April 20, 2012Energy and Resources, Fracking, Oil&Gas, Water and Hydrocarbonsfracking, Oil and gasDamien Gillis

I’m down in New Zealand at the moment, filming for a feature documentary involving the unconventional gas industry – particularly the increasingly controversial practice of hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking” – which I’ve been working on for the past year with a fellow Canadian filmmaker.

Why New Zealand?

We came here to follow the main subject of our film, a young First Nations man from the heart of the Canadian (and one could argue global) fracking industry. Caleb Behn worked for a number of years as a lands manager for several First Nations, addressing both of the major shale gas plays in Northeast BC, where the two sides of his family come from – the Horn River Basin near Fort Nelson and the Montney Shale formation, which extends beneath communities like Hudson’s Hope, Dawson Creek and several hundred kilometres East across the Alberta border.

After years of frustration attempting to respond to the deluge of paperwork inundating his offices over proposed seismic testing, well sites, water extraction and disposal, toxic flaring, access roads, security gates and fences and myriad other incursions onto his traditional territory and way of life, Caleb decided to lawyer up. He felt a legal background could help him more effectively represent his people in dealing with industry, so he has been studying at UVic Law for the past several years.

For his final term he decided to venture down to another Victoria University – this one in Wellington, New Zealand – to learn from Maori people facing similar challenges from the oil and gas industry down here.

Maori and concerned citizens in New Zealand have been dealing with the oil and gas industry for a long time; but Caleb’s timing couldn’t have been more appropriate, as it is just in the past several years – and particularly the past few months – that fracking operations have really been ramping up. And the parallels between the two countries, as we have been learning quickly, are positively striking.

Perhaps most interestingly, a Canadian company I’d never heard before this week – one TAG Oil, based Vancouver of all places – is on the cusp of a major expansion of fracking operations across the North Island of New Zealand, where Caleb is studying and we’re doing most of our filming.

Yesterday, Caleb was invited to speak about his people’s experiences with the Canadian unconventional gas industry at a packed community forum in the town of Napier, in the Hawkes Bay region on the West Coast of the North Island (watch the national news story on the event here). It was an eye-opener for us to hear from other speakers of the mounting concerns amongst New Zealanders about this Canadian company, which has been operating mostly in the Taranaki region on the other side of the North Island – both onshore and offshore. The company has formed joint ventures with Apache Canada, the Canadian subsidiary of Texas gas giant Apache Corp.

Just in the past several months, TAG Oil has been pursuing “aggressive” (their own words) expansion plans, with seismic testing and exploratory drilling in the Hawkes Bay region where the forum was being held. The community gathering heard from a farmer named Sarah Roberts – who has been referred to us by a number of people as the “Erin Brockovich of New Zealand” (a title she wears reluctantly), for her wealth of knowledge on the emerging industry and her principled stand against it. Sarah made the journey across the island from Taranaki, where her farm has been under siege from TAG Oil’s operations. She described to us how the company is flaring fumes over her and her neighbours’ dairy farms (milk is New Zealand’s biggest export and, along with tourism, the cornerstone of its economy). She also told us how some local farmers have been convinced to take “produced” (the industry’s term for contaminated) water from them and dispose of it on their fields a s “fertilizer”.

Both Sarah and Caleb’s words resonated as a warning to the people of Hawkes Bay of the dangers to come if TAG OIl and Apache Canada are able to expand their operations into that region as they are now planning. Following yesterday’s meeting I did some googling on TAG Oil – astonished that I’d never come across this company which is a key player in the emerging New Zealand unconventional gas industry. While its headquarters are located not a kilometre from my home in downtown Vancouver, – at 885 West Georgia St. – in its 10 year history it has focused almost exclusively on New Zealand. It appears as though the relatively small company secured its foothold by obtaining leases and permits here, then reaching out to the larger Apache Canada to provide the capital and industrial muscle to exploit these resources. TAG, Apache and other shale gas companies clearly have big designs on this small island state in the South Pacific.

And yet, there’s clearly a movement afoot to turn the tide on the industry’s expansion. A Maori leader from the Taranaki region Caleb spoke to the other day evinced with tears that it may be too late to save her territory from the impacts of oil and gas development, but that she hoped in sharing her people’s experiences with other New Zealanders, she could help protect them from the same fate. The people of Hawkes Bay took careful note of Caleb and Sarah’s words for the same reason.

The audience also heard from a young, ambitious Green Party MP and Energy Critic, Gareth Hughes, who has been travelling the country of late, drumming up support for a moratorium on fracking while the government conducts a parliamentary review of the industry.

Already the city of Christchurch has recently passed a local moratorium and other communities are considering following suit. We will be traveling to the South Island in a few days to speak to the people who were instrumental in that strong stand against the industry’s planned expansion into their region.

Nova Scotia Joins Growing List of Regions with a Moratorium on Fracking

April 19, 2012Canada, Energy and Resources, Fracking, Oil&Gas, Politics, Water and Hydrocarbonsfracking, Oil and gas, PoliticsCommon Sense Canadian

Read this article from the Calgary Herald on the decision by the Nova Scotia Provincial Government to put a two year moratorium on natural gas hydraulic fracturing while it gathers more science on the controversial practice. (April 19, 2012)

CALGARY – Companies searching for oil and gas in the Maritimes received conflicting messages this week around the use of hydraulic fracturing to develop the resources.

New Brunswick granted a five-year licence to Calgary-based Windsor Energy to explore and drill for natural gas on Tuesday while Nova Scotia banned fracking until the summer of 2014 to have more time to review the contentious technology.

Energy Minister Charlie Parker said the provincial government wanted to study reviews being drafted by the U.S. Environment Protection Agency and Environment Canada on the effects of fracking.

Parker cited other jurisdictions have been reviewing how fracking could affect water re-sources and earthquakes.

“We think it’s important to get the best possible information that’s out there and make an informed decision after we’ve learned all that,” Parker said.

Critics of the NDP administration suggest the government is freezing discussion about hydraulic fracturing until after the next election.

Public concern has in-creased in the past year about the technology, which pumps massive amounts of waters and chemicals down well bores to crack open reservoirs of so-called tight oil and gas. Protests against frack-ing escalated in areas such as the Maritimes, where little onshore oil-and-gas development has occurred.

Monday’s announcement was a setback for companies such as Elmworth Energy, a subsidiary of Triangle Petroleum Corp., which holds a 10-year lease representing the province’s first shale-gas development project.

Harper, Oliver Take Control of Pipeline Approval Over Environmental Regulators

April 19, 2012Canada, Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, PoliticsBC Oil Pipelines and Supertankers, Enbridge, Oil and gas, Politics, Stephen HarperCommon Sense Canadian

Read this story from the Globe and Mail on the Harper Government’s assertion of ultimate control over the approval of the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline and other major industrial projects. (April 17, 2012)

The federal government is asserting its control over pipelines – including the proposed Northern Gateway oil-sands project – taking from regulators the final word on approvals and limiting the ability of opponents to intervene in environmental assessments.

In proposed legislation unveiled by Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver on Tuesday, the Harper government will clear away regulatory hurdles to the rapid development of Canada’s natural resource bounty.

Ottawa is aiming to reduce the number of projects that undergo federal environmental assessment by exempting smaller developments completely and by handing over many large ones to the provinces. It will also bring in new measures to prevent project opponents from delaying the assessment process by flooding hearings with individuals who face no direct impacts but want to speak against the development.

At a Toronto press conference, Mr. Oliver said the proposed changes are aimed at providing quicker reviews in order to reduce regulatory uncertainty and thereby create more jobs and investment in Canada’s booming resource sector.

“We are at a critical juncture because the global economy is now presenting Canada with an historic opportunity to take full advantage of our immense resources,” he said. “But we must seize the moment. These opportunities won’t last forever.”

Resource-rich western provinces greeted the proposed changes warmly, saying they are eager to take over environmental assessments. Mr. Oliver said Ottawa will only transfer authority for project reviews to provinces that have similar standards as the federal government.

Provinces in central and Atlantic Canada were more cautious, wanting to know more details before drawing conclusions.

Environmental groups and some aboriginal leaders said the government is sacrificing environmental protection for development, and is intent on railroading all opposition to its vision of rapid development of oil sands and other resources.

The Common Sense Canadian

Critical discussion of key issues shaping our economy and environment.