Topic
Tories rewriting safety regs with no input from their own expert panel, says member.
Spreading Gulf spill: Experts here on a leash.
Environmental assessment rules weakened, advisory group blindsided, say critics.
Jobs beckon, but Alaskan brings message of caution.
Many British Columbians watching the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico are wondering what safeguards are in place to ensure such a disaster does not happen here. What they don't know is that the federal government recently made sweeping changes to the primary advisory panel put in place to ensure that a major oil spill does not occur on the B.C. coast.
Those changes have weakened the panel's power to prevent a disaster, according to one current member, as well as other sources interviewed by The Tyee.
The Pacific Regional Advisory Council on Oil Spill Response (Pacific RAC) is one of six such bodies nation-wide that was brought in after the Exxon Valdez spill in 1989. These are independent panels are composed of local experts and mandated under the Canada Shipping Act to advise the federal minister of transport on:
"-- an adequate level of oil spill preparedness and response in each region; and
"-- to promote public awareness and understanding of issues and measures with respect to preparedness."
The need for such oversight would seem a given, as the B.C. government led by Premier Gordon Campbell has supported opening the coast to offshore oil drilling as well as new pipelines connecting the tar sands in Alberta with B.C ports, any of which would result in more tankers traveling up and down this province's coastline.
Yet by the time television pictures of an oil-slicked Gulf of Mexico reached British Columbians, the very advisory board mandated to watchdog marine oil safety and communicate with the public had seen many of its veteran experts dismissed, and its resources and responsibilities clipped.
Sudden shuffle, limited meetings
Late last year, Transport Canada unexpectedly replaced five of the seven members, and required incoming members to sign a "Letter of Expectation" (available below) that limited their meetings to only two per year "unless pre-approved by the Regional Transport Canada Office."
In previous years, the group met numerous times annually and reportedly had difficulty keeping up with their growing workload.
This leash-shortening, sources say, wasn't the only action by the Harper government that many of the past and present Pacific RAC members found troubling.
The members also wondered why, given their mandate and expertise, they had been denied access to drafts of changes to marine oil safety regulations they've known are in the works in Ottawa.
And this volunteer panel of experts were flummoxed when denied even a modest travel budget to engage communities about increased tanker traffic on the B.C. coast.
'Burr in the saddle for Transport Canada'
Stafford Reid is a current member of the Pacific RAC with 20 years of experience in marine vessel risk assessment and spill response preparedness. He served for 17 years as an emergency planning specialist for the B.C. government and attended many of the RAC meetings prior to himself being appointed last year.
While Reid stresses that he does not speak on behalf of the group, he feels personally that the considerable expertise of the committee is not being fully used or appreciated by Ottawa.
"There's no question that there's talent on the RAC. That's one the big reasons that I'm there... Here you've got this talented group who's using up their professional time and passionate about protecting the coast and making sure that it's win-win for industry as well as the environment. Yet you've got only two meetings a year and no budget?"
Why does he think that Ottawa is now reining in this formerly independent body and turfing long-time members?
"It appears to be a burr in the saddle for Transport Canada," said Reid, who believes that Ottawa made the move in reaction to the committee becoming more insistent on engaging the public as per their mandate. "It's quite clear that they're not going to give it a budget, they're not going to allow you to have more meetings, and they didn't want to hear anybody howling so they got rid of most of the members."
Reid believes that other jurisdictions have recognized that vigilance around tanker traffic requires public engagement and transparency, something that is not happening here.
"You've got to have industry, citizens and government working together," Reid told The Tyee, "and they're not."
Alaska's panel more powerful
Analogous advisory groups to the RAC in Alaska enjoy vastly more resources and seemingly less outside meddling. The Prince William Sound Regional Citizens' Advisory Council (PWSRCAC) has an annual budget of $2.8 million that is provided by the oil industry through an arm's length legal contract.
Their 20 board members represent virtually all stakeholder groups, including from commercial fishermen, First Nations, environmental groups, local communities, tourism, industry and business. They are elected by the community they represent, not appointed (and fired) by Ottawa.
Unlike the Pacific RAC in B.C. that is limited to two half-day meetings per year by the federal department they are ostensibly overseeing, PWSRCAC holds six full day meetings annually with a support staff of 16.
And what do they do with all these resources? PWSRCAC describes their mandate as "an anti-complacency organization. The farther we get from the date of the Exxon spill, the easier it will be for people to forget the impacts of that event. By monitoring, observing, researching, advising, and educating, PWSRCAC helps keep attention focused on safe oil transportation in [Prince William] sound."
In contrast, the expert members on Pacific RAC have seen budget requests of less than $15,000 turned down by Ottawa. Their mandate "to promote public awareness and understanding of issues and measures with respect to preparedness" is hobbled by having no resources to host meetings in communities outside Vancouver.
Transport Canada confirmed that funding for the group is limited to "expenses covered for [members to] travel to official RAC meetings twice a year, subject to Treasury Board Travel Directive."
They also deny that former members were pushed out. "Membership on the RAC is limited to a three-year term and as of last year, those three-year terms had expired," said Jillian Glover, regional communications advisor.
Industry given more input than expert watchdogs
The relative weakness of our oil spill safeguards is also seen in Canadian regulations. While the U.S. has strong laws governing the transport of oil by tanker, Canada is still relying on comparatively vague rules that are now 15 years old.
The requirements for environmental response are currently addressed by the Environmental Response Regulations made pursuant to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001 (CSA 2001) and two supporting Technical Publications: TP 12401 (1995) and TP 12402 (1995).
These documents guide Canada's private-sector Response Organizations on what level of spill response preparedness is required to be certified by the Canadian Coast Guard. The standards stipulate requirement levels for response equipment, training, planning, and exercises for a 10,000 tonne oil spill from a vessel or coastal oil handling facility.
When the Pacific RAC in 2009 asked in writing to review and provide input on draft changes to these important regulations, they were turned down by Minister Baird because they were considered "cabinet confidences." They later learned that an industry-dominated group called the Canadian Marine Advisory Council (CMAC) was instead invited to provide input.
"They wouldn't give them to the RAC until Canada's five Response Organization and CMAC reviews have been completed," recounted Reid. "They actually received a letter back from the minister saying that they were secret. These are absolutely profoundly important standards that will reflect how well prepared the oil industry has to be to prepare for an oil spill."
Reid is not impressed, either with the 1995 regulations still in place or the draft changes now in circulation behind closed doors. "I told them it was a skinny pig in 1995 and now it's just a skinny pig with lipstick. You'd think 15 years later there would be some lessons learned and those response standards deficiencies would be fixed. Instead this appears to be largely administrative repackaging rather than a process of continuous improvement."
Avoiding 'horrendous things'
Reid is concerned the current regulations are nowhere near adequate to prepare for a major oil spill on the B.C. coast, particularly in light of increased tanker traffic.
"The amount of planning that is required for a response organization in Canada is for a 10,000 tonne spill -- that's one quarter of the Exxon Valdez spill," Reid said. "There was a recent spill of about that volume in Korea -- the Hebie Spirit collision -- and 1.2 million volunteers showed up. With the current level of planning required here, I doubt we could handle a fraction of this number of convergent volunteers."
Reid also wonders how the government or industry can hope to have public buy-in on new oil spill regulations when the review process is not even open to the committee of experts who are charged under federal law with advising the minister, let alone coastal communities or First Nations.
"How can you build public confidence when you send out environmental protection regulations and standards that show up in a little gazetted ad in a newspaper that no one sees?"
The current head of the Pacific RAC, Captain John Lewis acknowledges that more work is needed to raise the profile of the group that is working with far fewer resources than their Alaskan counterparts. "Under the previous president we certainly made ourselves a lot more visible and it is my intent to continue to do that... Many people are not even aware of the RAC."
A common refrain among people close to the issue of tanker traffic is the need for constant vigilance, particularly in places like Canada that have never suffered the consequences of a serious oil spill. Lewis points out that the Exxon Valdez does not even rank in the top 50 oil spills in the world.
"There are some horrendous things that have happened in the world and we are very much determined that we not have anything like that happen here."
The commitment of Lewis and other members of the Pacific RAC is not in question.
What is puzzling is why, at the very moment that tanker traffic is poised to increase on the B.C. coast, Transport Canada has seemingly weakened Pacific RAC's ability to monitor the shaping of key regulations, advise decision makers all the way to the top, and communicate with a worried public haunted by images of the Gulf oil catastrophe. ![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
29
Login or register to post comments
Camero409
2 years ago
OIl Spill Perparedness?
This federal government, it's dictator Harper and our own Dictator of BC, Gordo, would of course like industry to police itself. I wonder how much the government is paying industry police and how much per diem they receive? You can bet there will be new rules and regs that won't inconvenience industry to be more safe or committed to the environment. It's been said all along, and I'll parphrase here, that if you have a hen house full of chickens looked after by the roosters, you can bet that all the chickens are going to get screwed many times. Cluck Cluck!
RickW
2 years ago
It's the "Little Things" that Count
And our Prime Minister, as ever, has one eye on The Rapture. Being as he is though, in a minority government situation, he can only do so much at any given time, to "contribute" to the coming "end times".
demotto
2 years ago
Public Notice
To any and all present and/or future man or woman acting in any capacity as a Minister of the Province of British Columbia and/or Canada and including any man or woman acting as a public servant that allows for any new oil tanker traffic along the coast of the geographical area of British Columbia will be held privately responsible for any and all environmental damage caused by said traffic. Conduct yourselves accordingly. This Public Notice can and will be acted upon by any private man or woman to recover any and all damages.
By the wish of the sovereign private
man Rick: Witala
Fish-counter
2 years ago
Oil spills? What oil spills?
Anyone who knows the oil industry knows three things:
1. Oil spills never happen.
It is a big Greenpeace propaganda scare tactic.
2. Oil is actually good for the environment.
It sorts out the tough wildlife from the wussies.
3. They always happen somewhere else.
Never here, wherever "here" is.
Knowing these three things, a priori, one can see that BC doesn't need any legislation or preparation for oil spills. We can rest assured that the oil companies have our best interests at heart. Sure they do.
This thing in the Gulf of Mexico is an anomaly.
Mikemah
2 years ago
oil spill
The Conservatives led by Harper are the Republicans of Canada. Money is all that they are concerned with and getting it from anyone who opposes them and giving it to anyone who supports them . That's it !
Blue Camas
2 years ago
another world tour coming up?
Well, our Prime Minister has already travelled the world explaining how to regulate banks. (http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Believe+bail+banks/3091428/story.html)
Now I suppose that is only a matter of time till he hits the road to tell the world how to prevent oil spills.
myworld2
2 years ago
Experts
Of courrse the Cons would get rid of the experts. They hate science. Science gets in the way of everything they stand for.
Sherwin
2 years ago
A conservative recipe of entitlement and insecurity
Good reporting. Independent panels and science based policy and research continue to be a significant weakness for the Conservatives. It's as though they're anti-science. Everytime I see how Conservatives seem unable to grapple with independent inquiry, I get a renewed sense for their underlying insecurity. It's two parts entitlement and one part fear...
blueknitca
2 years ago
just what we needed
This is a timely article to wake us up. We remember the Valdez spill and the on going damage to the land, the sea and the wildlife.
Now when there is an oil well leak in the gulf with 24 hour news coverage we can see what it could do our environment up here. Louisiana is losing it's wetlands, it's wildlife, and when the hurricanes begin it will lose it's land too. Just imagine the inland passage covered with oil in all it's many forms all toxic to plants and animals.
Do Conservatives want to destroy the land and water..will it make their Rapture come faster? Or will they be faced with the accusation "Why were you not a good steward of the land and life that I gave you"
Let us start being loud and demanding that we do not want Oil wells in the Pacific in any form. The companies can not be trusted, the people we appoint are to protect our Country do not care but we the people do and we must be heard before a crisis occurs, afterward there will be nothing left to cherish.
kootenay
2 years ago
Profit Before Humanity
What's particularly scary about the BP blow out in the Gulf of Mexico is the inadequate response from both BP and Obama.
In my opinion, the government should be seizing the assets of the company and inviting industry experts to form a working group, at BP's expense to find a solution. Why is BP still in charge, they obviously don’t know what the hell they are doing, their next maneuver could make the situation even worse.
In addition, why hasn't there been demand to have immediate inspections of all off shore oil rigs to ensure they aren't all operating on the brink of disaster?
The Gulf of Mexico has been destroyed by these Neo Liberal Corporate Pigs, the real extent of damage is yet to be seen.
alive
2 years ago
no magic if you believe.
Some of the weirdo's that Harper brought into that coalition he now runs, believe the earth is flat and that nothing was here at all before christ, so how could oil happen?
Did their god create oil?
If so, just start praying harder and the flow will stop just the waters parted!
PWB
2 years ago
How do Canadian citizen's take back their government.
As a business owner I am not naive. Giving business a free rein when it comes to our natural resources and our environment is a recipe for disaster. The fat bottom line in business often comes from taking risks and shortcuts and then pulling the pin when it becomes evident that the cleanup costs after the operation would exceed any profits previously made.
The current day corporate-government alliance is actively rewriting and gutting old legislation removing any obstacles to doing what they damn well please to our country. My biggest concern is that to try and correct the situation we may need a bloody revolution and I'm not sure that's a long term solution for anyone? What a dilemma!
Birch
2 years ago
Enbridge Gateway
On the weekend, I attended at Kitimaat Village a large gathering of First Nations and others opposed to the proposed Enbridge Gateway pipeline, a project that will, if approved, require over 200 tanker trips a year loaded with thinned bitumen from the tar sands, down the Douglas Channel, through a number of tortuous turns around islands at the exit of the channel (including Gil Island, site of the sinking of Queen of the North), through Hecate Strait, and off to Asia
Needless to say, the First Nations delegations in attendance (including the Haida, the Gitga'at, and the Haisla) are unanimously opposed to the project.
It should be noted that China has bought equity stakes in more than one tar sands company. They're going to want their oil to keep their economy ramping up. At ten percent a year, their economy doubles every ten years. So will their energy demand.
The approval of Gateway would virtually guarantee a spill of some serious magnitude over the life of the project, either along the coast, or from the pipeline itself into one of the hundreds of rivers and streams it is projected to cross.
At a projected throughput of 525,000 bbls. per day, the pipeline would be carrying about $2 million per hour worth of oil (at $100 per bbl--prices are likely to be much higher in future, with the approach of peak oil).
Enbridge and China have on side Stephen Harper, bought and paid for by the oil industry, as well as the eager-to-become-addicted city councils and chambers of commerce along the route (not even bothering to mention Campbell and his rapacious coven in Victoria).
If I were a betting man, I would bet that Enbridge will be approved. Then things could become really ugly.
RickW
2 years ago
kootenay
Oil rules!
samuidave (not verified)
2 years ago
Obviously we are very short-sighted
How bad must things get before the herd sees it is heading over the cliff? Three successive mandates for Fuhrer Campbell, and a couple for King Stephen I.
It is simply mind-numbing that we the people are so agreeably and easily lead by such an inadequate few.
Being Canadian under these regimes is an embarrassment, and an affront to our more humanitarian and socialist approach to life. Are we seriously incapable of seeing that, as a nation, we are heading in the completely wrong direction?
ov
2 years ago
Big Oil, Big Money, Big Attitude
Screw the Environment: BP and the Audacity of Corporate Greed May 23rd
Above is the BP attitude when it comes to drilling in the Arctic. BP has paid $1.8 billion for drilling rights in Canada’s sector of the Beaufort Sea, and I think they see regulations as "unfair." I can't see the West coast being any more sacred.
If regulations are making it too expensive to drill then how does BP international explain doubling their profits last quarter to $5.65 billion. I don't think it would be unreasonable to expect BP to spend up to 3 or 4 years worth of profit to clean up their mess, but current regulations in US limit their liability to $75 million, and I think Canada would be even more generous.
I don't think BP is any different than any other big oil company.
DNA
2 years ago
Good investigative story!
I hope the major media pick this up!
A story recently in Salon pointed out that, bad as it is, many oil spills have been larger than what is likely to be the case in the Gulf of Mexico. It's just that the spill there directly affects Americans, not "foreigners."
See http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/feature/2010/05/28/gulf_oil_spill_comparison_open_2010
lindo
2 years ago
Let's stop potential oil spills right here, in BC!
An oil spill could happen here now! Come to a public meeting about oil tankers carrying Alberta's crude oil through Vancouver Harbour, the Gulf Islands and the Juan de Fuca straight! It's at 7:00 PM on Tuesday, June 8, 2010 @ the Wise Hall (1882 Adanac Street), Vancouver. From notanks.org: "No Tanks! is a coalition of fishermen, business people, environmentalists, and citizens of Vancouver who are working to keep our waters free from an oil spill. Two oil tankers per week are now shipping Alberta crude oil through Vancouver Harbour. A spill in our harbour or in Georgia Strait would devastate our marine environment, damage our fishing and tourist industries, and destroy our beautiful beaches, harbours, and inlets. We have a plan to end this practice. We’re staging a flotilla to support the fishermen when the fleet returns
from the summer fishing season. Join the Flotilla: October 17, 2010." HOW COOL IS THAT!!? Hope to see you there, lindo
RickW
2 years ago
ov
The same reasoning behind their increased profits lies behind the ordinary Joe buying lotto tickets - both want a lot of cash NOW. If the shareholders of BP were in it for the long run, money would be spent on for the long run.
Karen D.
2 years ago
The government has done a
The government has done a really bad job of regulating the industry so far.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHmhxpQEGPo
myworld2
2 years ago
Profit before humanity
Yes, there needs to be inspections of all off shore drills, but further, they all need to be required to wind down operations. A tough call, but until they know how to mitigate the damage when accidents occur simply reducing the likelihood of an accident is not good enough.
samuidave (not verified)
2 years ago
Rachel Madow had a good piece recently
about how history is repeating itself with Oil pumping into the Gulf and our inability to stop it. In short, all technological advances have gone toward drilling deeper while zero has benefited the techniques used to contain the mess.
This is totally worth the 8 minutes to watch, imo.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHmhxpQEGPo
Dukeboy
2 years ago
Prov.RAC
Is this simply another example of infiltration of Harper's "Rapture" people into the organization to destroy it from within as was done with Rights and Democracy? It seems to be a familiar story with this extreme right wing gov't. Whoever replaces this gov't will have a big job in rooting out all these appointed incompetents in Canada's institutions.
morechatter
2 years ago
Watchdogs are more like Scradie Cats
As oil industry is left to its own demise or ours I'm certain as oil and water just don't mix as toxic spillage in unknown quanities hits home as Chevron talks of the long and difficult process of cleaning up the mess that industry is uncertain how big of mess that needs to be cleaned up in the Burrad Inlet. See no reason to be afraid of a spill as we have our own right here in BC.
mariner
2 years ago
Canada's 243,042 km coastline uprotected against oil spills
The governemt (provincial and federal) fail to mention that there are 243,042 km of coastile in Canada - less than 1% can be quickly reached to deal with an oil spill - large or small.
Where most of the exploration drilling is done is in out of the way, hard to reach places - that are suseptable to weather extremes (winds, storms) and temperatures (anything down to -60C or colder). A major oil spill on the Canadian coast, of the sort currently being witnessed in the Gulf of Mexico, would fare even worse. There would be literally no help locally - certainly not enough to deploy the equipement (booms, skimmers, personnel) needed to deal with such emergencies.Any cleanup/response time frame would be months if at all - and there would be doubts it would ever be completed.
Canada is deficient in all aspects - since the population is around 34,000,000 as apposed to 340,000,000 and is lacking in everything needed to do the job properly.
I guess the comment that sums it all up nicely is "how stupid must stupid be" ??? To get the right approach from the government would mean having to kick out the right wing elements and replace with a party that does care about what happens in the environment and the pollution so created from the present gulf disaster. We all know that won't happen overnight, so in the meantime we cross our fingers and hope for the best.
Thank you
morechatter
2 years ago
Government is afraid of leaks
And not oil leaks or gas spills and such as Conservatives put a zip on it as Conservatives Aids need to keep a lip on it. The Prime Minister from Alberta is backed by big Oil Companies so Canadians are wasting their time trying to get Harper to put the country first and its people when its just not what he is about. And it little wonder Harper is considered about leakage especially after Basi and Virk finally make it to trail.
jharrison
2 years ago
Oil Tankers in Vancouver
Anyone interested in this issue should check out the only group working to get rid of Vancouver's Oil Tankers
www.notanks.org
MkumbaJoe
2 years ago
Yahoos
What do you expect from a bunch of yahoos.
On another note, we urgently need to fund research into alternative forms of energy production, clean forms that don't despoil the environment like the river run projects.
lfktravelguru
2 years ago
Oil Spill
Get it together Canada! Don't follow your neighbors south of your border; its getting nasty down here. There has been so much suffering already; form the lives that were initially lost to the livelihoods that are being destroyed today. Believe me, you don't want this. That being said, I do hope people will have a heart and support the local businesses of the Gulf Coast region who didn't ask for this, and had no responsibility for this. I'm sure there are going to be some very solid discounts on travel going this summer, and astute travelers would be wise to take advantage: http://www.lowfareking.com/hotels/discount-hotels/