MPs call for Northern B.C. oil-tanker ban

Fear of spills could shut down shipping and drilling in 'voluntary exclusion zone'

SCOTT SUTHERLAND
Globe and Mail
June 25, 2007

VICTORIA -- Growing interest in routing new oil and gas pipelines to British Columbia's northern coast has some decades-old fears about oil spills bubbling to the surface again.

Natural Resources Minister Gary Lunn is fuelling those fears with comments that there is no moratorium on oil-tanker traffic on the West Coast because nothing was ever written down in the 1970s.

The minister said that doesn't mean an increase in such traffic would be allowed without oversight.

However, federal and provincial politicians want Ottawa to institute a full, formal ban on oil tankers in B.C. coastal waters, a move that is being backed by environmentalists and some first nations.

"There actually is no moratorium for [oil tanker] traffic coming into the West Coast," Mr. Lunn said.

There is what he called "a voluntary exclusion zone" that historically has applied to U.S. tankers carrying Alaska oil to terminals in Washington State through the Strait of Juan de Fuca

The strait separates the United States and the southern tip of Vancouver Island.

"This is something that was brought in quite a long time ago and is being respected."

But while denying there is any tanker moratorium, the Vancouver Island Tory MP said there is a ban on offshore oil and gas development "that's absolutely clear."

That was not good enough for Denise Savoie, the New Democrat MP for Victoria.

She presented a motion in the House of Commons calling on Parliament to reaffirm the moratorium on coastal drilling and to affirm a formal moratorium on international tanker traffic.

Ms. Savoie's motion seeks to ban international tanker traffic in the northern B.C. waters of Dixon Entrance, Hecate Strait and Queen Charlotte Sound.

Ms. Savoie said she wants parliamentary hearings with public participation on the issue when MPs return to Ottawa in the fall.

Such a ban would not affect the current shipping of oil and gasoline, mostly by barge and small tankers, to Vancouver Island and other parts of the coast.

"British Columbians feel the same way about it today as they did in the 1970s," said provincial New Democrat Rob Fleming. "They are opposed."

Mr. Fleming said a ban on both tankers and offshore development has survived eight prime ministers and nine B.C. premiers.

"What's changed in 30 years? Has the risk to our coastal waters been reduced?" he asked. "No, the science has not changed. The risk has not been reduced."

The issue has gained prominence mainly because of several proposals to construct pipelines linking Alberta with the coast at Prince Rupert or Kitimat. Crude oil from the oil sands would be pumped west for export, while "condensate" used to thin the thick crude in the pipeline would be removed and sent back eastward along a parallel pipe.

There is also a proposal that could see a liquefied natural-gas terminal built in Kitimat to accept cheap gas from Asia for distribution to North American markets.

"There's lots of talk and people trying to raise an issue, but there is nothing on the table at this point in time," said Mr. Lunn, reiterating that the Canadian government has not even been asked to consider any project so far.

If a proposal should come forward, he said, it would have to involve a comprehensive environmental evaluation, an assessment by Transport Canada and public consultation.

Environmentalists and first nations say any one of these schemes would inevitably lead to a high volume of tanker traffic through extremely sensitive coastal waters, including the channel where B.C. Ferries' Queen of the North sank.

Mr. Lunn's denial of the existence of a tanker moratorium exasperates long time anti-tanker crusader and former federal environment minister David Anderson.

"It doesn't make logical sense to say we did not commit to keeping tankers off the coast," said Mr. Anderson, the retired Victoria Liberal MP. "That is basically wrong. We did!"

The United States went to great lengths, and great expense, to route tankers bound from Alaska well away from Canadian waters, he said.

"Why would they have done all that to protect the Canadian shore unless Canadians were willing to do the same to protect their own coast? I mean, it just doesn't make sense."

He warned that if Canada were to permit tankers to enter B.C.'s northern waters, there would be an immediate call to increase oil exports though Vancouver.

Mr. Anderson, who fought the tanker issue in U.S. federal court in the 70s and won, is worried about the message Mr. Lunn and the Harper government would be sending to the Americans if Canada does anything that deviates from a policy that for decades has kept tanker traffic to a minimum.

"I don't think it's good news to give Americans cause to say Canada acts in bad faith," he warned. "If you are dealing with Americans, you should be pretty straight forward and honour your agreements."

Ironically, Mr. Anderson said, it was the tanker ban that was the catalyst for the companion moratorium on offshore oil development that is still being acknowledged by the federal Conservatives.

"If they succeed in allowing oil tankers along the coast, it brings us much closer to lifting the moratorium on oil and gas exploration and drilling once the means of transporting oil is established," said Ken Wu of the Western Canada Wilderness Committee, a group that has campaigned to keep the ban in place since the B.C. Liberals came to power.