Nathan Cullen Chastised At Enbridge Hearing

First Posted: 02/17/2012 8:38 pm Updated: 02/19/2012 8:27 pm

Nathan Cullen
Skeena-Bulkley Valley NDP MP Nathan Cullen was asked repeatedly by the hearing panel to stop his oral testimony Friday morning.


Two days of hearings for Enbridge's Northern Gateway Project got off to a rocky start Friday in Prince Rupert, B.C., amid more opposition by First Nations and a prominent local politician.


Skeena-Bulkley Valley NDP MP Nathan Cullen was asked repeatedly by the hearing panel to stop his oral testimony Friday morning.


Community consultations on the Northern Gateway Project have been making their way through Western Canadasince January.


The consultations are to evaluate a $5.5-billion plan that would see bitumen piped from the Alberta oilsands across northern B.C. to oil tankers on the west coast, for international export.


Cullen sought to discredit Enbridge's approach to community consultation, but the panel felt Cullen's evidence didn't abide by hearing rules that require presenters to speak from personal experience.


"The way a company conducts itself with a community in advance of a project is also indicative of maybe how they will conduct themselves with the community after the project is in the ground, if you follow my line of reasoning," said Cullen, who is also a candidate for the leadership of the federal New Democrats.


"Again I would remind you we are not here to hear argument," interjected panellist Sheila Leggett. "We're not here to hear the case from that perspective."


Metlakatla First Nation member banned from hearing


Members of the Metlakatla First Nation expressed frustration at what they said was an attempt by Enbridge lawyers to limit Cullen's testimony.


In a news release Friday afternoon, the Metlakatla said a member dressed in traditional drumming regalia left the hearing room in frustration, after Cullen was told he should not speak for First Nations.


The band said security and RCMP then told Lara Peterson she was not allowed back inside the hearing room and said she would be arrested and charged with trespassing if she tried.


"They can arrest me if they want. I'm not going to shut up," said Peterson.


"I have a 10-year-old and a 14-month-old and they love their fish. I want them to continue to eat fish. They eat fish three or four times a week. We don't feed our babies Pablum. They eat fish. As soon as they start showing teeth the first thing they taste is herring eggs — roe — on kelp."


The news release said three men intervened on Peterson's behalf and convinced RCMP to allow her to return to the hearings.


Nisga'a oppose pipeline project


Meanwhile, the Nisga'a Nation — one of northern B.C.'s largest First Nations — has taken a stand against the controversial pipeline project.


More than 60 First Nations have already spoken out against Enbridge's plans, but Nisga'a President Mitchell Stevens says it took his people a bit longer to decide.


"We did not make a statement on Enbridge right at the outset because our technical data wasn't in. We won't just oppose anything for the sake of opposing it. We have to have scientific and technical data that will back up our position," said Stevens.


"But at the end of the day, we understand that everything is driven by the economic stake, and it will be a federal government decision."


Stevens said their opposition to the pipeline project is based in a historic treaty, signed in 1998, that gave the Nisga'a control of the Nass Valley.


"The proposed pipeline won't run through our territory but [the] Nisga'a nation is concerned that the threat of oil tanker spill, what that would pose to fish — which Nisga'a citizens depend on — that's a constitutionally protected right in our treaty," said Stevens.


FOLLOW HUFFPOST CANADA POLITICS

Two days of hearings for Enbridge's Northern Gateway Project got off to a rocky start Friday in Prince Rupert, B.C., amid more opposition by First Nations and a prominent local politician...
Two days of hearings for Enbridge's Northern Gateway Project got off to a rocky start Friday in Prince Rupert, B.C., amid more opposition by First Nations and a prominent local politician...
Filed by Jacqueline Delange  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 20
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
njdanie
old retired nerd
11:42 AM on 02/19/2012
I wonder what's in it for BC and the 'Nations' to take all the environmental risk of a pipeline through their 'territory'. After all, sooner or later, the pipeline will leak somewhere. Is Alberta planning on sharing any of their oil revenue with BC and the 'Nations'? How convenient for Alberta that Harper gets elected there.
And, being from Ontario, what benefit is this to me? The value of the Canadian dollar is already high enough.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
thegirlnextdoor
09:21 AM on 02/19/2012
As an elected representative of the people he should be allowed to speak more generally.
But then, that narrow definition of only "personal experience" is handy for Enbridge. Since we have all seen the movies of their pipe lines leaking here there and everyone. They ruined the Kalamazoo river, where I was born. What are we supposed to do? Fly in people who helped clean up that river to speak from personal experience?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:31 AM on 02/19/2012
"Again I would remind you we are not here to hear argument".

T. Colin Campbell PhD, in his book "The China Study", quotes a line from an American author. It is in regard to how some scientists restrict the realm in which their study will take place. Thereby eliminating possible affects on the outcome.

"If you can control the questions, you don't have to worry about the answers".
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Skookum1
truth can't be bought, but lies sure can be sold..
08:35 AM on 02/19/2012
This is how our current Governor-General got that job....he wrote the terms of reference of the Mulroney-Schreiber affair so as to limit questioning such that other Tories (including Stevie) would not be touched by the inquiry (though they were by the facts....)

Similar limitations will be placed on the Prosperity Mine hearings, and I've seen this before in BC re pesticide and herbicide spraying in the Squamish-Whistler-Pemberton-Lillooet corridor back in '84 (which included all the people mobilizaing against the spraying being followed, some harrassed, by two guys in white shirts and black ties and a white ghost car....). Days of presentation were swept aside by the govt-appointed panel, with some terse denials from BC Rail and BC Hydro accepted with "well, that's all we needed to hear" and the sprayings got their stamp of approval pronto, after ten minutes deposition and no real evidence other than the aforesaid denials.

The atmosphere of farce that such hearings are conducted in is one of the reasons the population at large has no faith in our system of government. Panels appointed by nepotism, commissioned to find, or deny, what they are told to.
10:38 PM on 02/18/2012
I'm with Nathan on this. NO pipeline. Period. You cannot manage this risk to have no environmental damage. When it spills, it will be catastrophic.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
north of 60
Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
11:11 PM on 02/18/2012
How do we pay for all the benefits everyone believes they're entitled to?
photo
Spanky McFarlane
ILLEGITIMUS NON CARBORUNDUM.
04:45 PM on 02/19/2012
Don'tall costs get past on to the Consumer? The fact is this is 'Plan B' now that Obama looked @ Keystone XL & saw what Big oil was up to. That pipeline wasn't about bringing oil to the US, it was about exporting Cdn oil via Gulf State Refineries that just happen to be in 'Free Trade Zones' & therefore exempt from US Governm,ent Tax. Big Oil could then charge the World Price & pocket what they would normally pay in US Gov't Tax.

Obama was born @ night, but not 'last night' & when/if this pipeline goes thru we will all be paying Global price for NA oil which means a 20% increase from what it sells for now & a more rapid depletion of a vital resource.

Welcome to Harperland.
02:49 AM on 02/20/2012
Ummm..stop giving tax breaks to rich corporations that don't need them. Your standard reply is laughable buddy and it seems to always be rolled out when the 1% are wanting to screw the 99%.

The biggest entitlements are taken by corporate welfare in the form of resource giveaways and environmental degradation. Harper and his puppets are all responsible for the declining Canadian landscape and economy.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
north of 60
Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
12:00 AM on 02/19/2012
Yeah, no answer.. It's obvious you haven't thought this through.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
opprobrious
More speech. Less Flagging.
02:11 PM on 02/19/2012
How on earth did you reach the erroneous conclusion that the NGP had anything to do with government programs? You are the one who hasn't thought things through.
BritishColumbian
American/Canadian liberal
03:30 PM on 02/19/2012
So north of 60, seeing as you seem to think you are an expert, explain what a spill in the very difficult to navigate Hecate Strait due to currents and weather Hecate Strait would do to BC's fishing and tourism industry.

The fact that Alberta and the federal gov't is attempting some sort of "cost share" (ie bribe) to the BC gov't indicates the level of opposition among BC citizens to this pipeline. There is no upside to BC and too many risks. Period!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
north of 60
Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
05:59 PM on 02/18/2012
There are good reasons to build the pipeline if it's done responsibly. The people who are opposing the pipeline seem to forget that all the 'free' benefits they get from government programs that enable their cushy Canadian lifestyle are funded by petroleum revenue.

The problem isn't the pipeline, the problem is where they want to put it. Kitimat is the wrong port for any hydrocarbo­n product. Spend some time with Google maps and look at how sensible it would be to follow the existing highway and railway right-of-w­ay to Prince Rupert and totally avoid the treacherou­sly navigable and environmen­tally sensitive fjord from Kitimat to the coast.
Kitimat is wrong-head­ed for everyone but Alcoa.

The pipeline must be built in the existing rail-highway corridor to minimize environmental impact. No cutting across the wilderness.

The pipeline must be operated responsibly with spill mitigation policies and procedures in place.

As Canadians we should expect nothing less.
09:02 PM on 02/18/2012
Once again you have posted a comment that makes sense, another choice so to speak without the usual griping about the government!
photo
Spanky McFarlane
ILLEGITIMUS NON CARBORUNDUM.
10:37 PM on 02/18/2012
Just be aware that the pipeline will likely mean higher price at the pump for both Canadians & Americans to the benefit of Trans Global owners of the resource & there ever increasing Tax breaks.
The price right now is about 20% under Global pricing, with a pipeline & the chance of export we will have to compeate for that resource with our pocket books alone, not just the fact of good supply & less market as it is now.

Be careful for what you wish for because when it's gone, it's gone for ever.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
north of 60
Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
11:18 PM on 02/18/2012
Global price is what the retailers use to set the pump price. Western Canadian refineries are owned by the same companies that own the wells and the oilsands, the price those refineries pay for crude feedstock has always been substantially less than 'world oil price'. If world oil price goes up for any reason the pump price will go up. It has nothing to do with what the Canadian refineries pay for crude. American refineries pay the same as Canadian refineries for Canadian crude oil that's the way NAFTA works. Only a portion of the oil that America imports is valued at 'world oil price'.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
okgranny
Egalitarian by birth
05:29 PM on 02/18/2012
Nothing is written in stone. I have little faith in politicians, but I have great faith in the Canadian people to stop Alberta from thrusting their dirty pipeline right through BC's pristine waterways and virgin forests.
photo
Poster999
A promise made is a debt unpaid.
03:56 PM on 02/18/2012
They may very well get their pipeline in the end but It's going to be an uphill battle. Also the Americans are probably just going to wait till after the election to approve the XL Pipeline so does that mean we could possibly have two pipelines?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ansdlmol
07:15 PM on 02/18/2012
Hopefully not. We should keep our oil to ourselves and using Prince Rupert as a port makes good sense.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Skookum1
truth can't be bought, but lies sure can be sold..
12:59 PM on 02/19/2012
?? Non sequitur - Prince Rupert is already a port, and a busy one. And as far as bitumen/condensate shipping, no, Prince Rupert's not any more interested than Kitimat/Kitamaat is.....