It’s time to tell the whole truth about the NEB and the pipeline expansion

OTTAWA — “The National Energy Board’s process and report on the Trans Mountain pipeline project have been so flawed that the only sensible thing to do is to re-open the hearing process and get the facts right,” said Elizabeth May (MP, Saanich-Gulf Islands).
“There is too much at stake and too much contention over the issue which has bred resentment among the provinces, First Nations, industry and Canadians. It’s the worst crisis in Canadian federalism since Quebec’s 1995 referendum.”
Ms. May said that Natural Resources Minister Sohi must have the courage to stand up to Cabinet and explain that without a thorough re-examination of the process the government cannot consider going ahead with this project in good conscience. As it stands the government is at risk, once again, of establishing a process too flawed to be capable of surviving a court challenge. It’s time to tell the whole truth about the NEB and the pipeline expansion.
The Federal Court of Appeal decision explains how there are “unacceptable deficiencies in the National Energy Board’s report and recommendations” and that the “Government in Council could not rely on the board’s report and recommendations when assessing the project’s environmental effects and the overall public interest.”
“The Federal Court of Appeal has affirmed what numerous scientists and economists have been saying for over a year: the NEB’s review was flawed. If you comb through the NEB’s report carefully, you’ll find that the report is rife with errors, omissions and incorrect claims. Canadians deserve better.”
“It says, for example, that ‘the capital cost of the project is expected to be $5.5 billion…’ How can this be when Kinder Morgan announced in October, 2015 that the capital cost would be $6.8 billion?  Not to mention how in August, 2018 the company’s estimated price tag ballooned to $9.3-billion.”
“With respect to tanker traffic at the Westridge Marine Terminal, the report claims it ‘typically loads five tankers per month.’  That’s inaccurate. It’s half that number!” I invite you to review economist Robyn Allen’s recent letter to the NEB where in 10 pages she details 5 significant material errors that should be cause of concern.”
“The federal government insisted the NEB review climate impacts of the private sector Energy East pipeline. It is untenable for them to exclude climate impacts of a government-owned pipeline. They must include climate impacts as well as tankers in this re-opened review.”
“Natural Resources Minister Amarjeet Sohi has been given a thankless task. But if he acts judicially, he has been given the opportunity restore the integrity of the NEB’, concluded Ms. May.