Northern Gateway decision to be based on science, not politics – unless there is no science

Opponents of the massive Northern Gateway pipeline might be asking themselves today whether the game is rigged.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper insists a decision on whether to proceed with the Calgary-based Enbridge Inc.'s $6-billion proposal to pipe oil sands bitumen from Alberta to a new export terminal at Kitimat on the northern B.C. coast will be based on independent scientific evaluation.

But The Canadian Press is reporting budget cuts have made it unlikely that scientific evidence will be available by Harper's decision deadline at the end of next year.

More ominously, a memo by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO), suggests it's mainly looking at how to minimize the risk of a bitumen spill in the sensitive coastal waters and along the pipeline route, and deal with it through "appropriate mitigation and compensation measures."

Documents filed with the National Energy Board suggest DFO seems to have resigned itself to the National Energy Board approving the project, a key part of the Conservative government's policy of diversifying markets for Canadian energy.

"As DFO has not conducted a complete review of all proposed crossings, we are unable to submit a comprehensive list as requested; however, this work will continue and, should the project be approved, our review will continue into the regulatory permitting phase," DFO wrote in a five-page letter dated June 6, 2012.

The letter was in response to a request by the National Energy Board panel reviewing the pipeline route for risk assessments for the the almost 1,000 B.C. streams and rivers the proposed pipeline crosses.

[ Related: NDP leader considers Northern Gateway pipeline dead ]

The letter also says there may be "differences of opinion" between DFO and Enbridge over the risk posed at some crossings but the department said it will continue to work with the company to determine the risk and level of mitigation required.

"DFO is of the view that the risk posed by the project to fish and fish habitat can be managed through appropriate mitigation and compensation measures," DFO said in its letter.

"Under the current regulatory regime, DFO will ensure that prior to any regulatory approvals, the appropriate mitigation measures to protect fish and fish habitat will be based on the final risk assessment rating that will be determined by DFO."

But critics say that promise, and Harper's pledge to base Ottawa's decision on the project on objective scientific evaluation ring hollow.

The government recently sent letters to 92 DFO habitat staffers in B.C. to tell them their jobs were disappearing, with 32 to be laid off, The Canadian Press reported.

The cuts, part of DFO's $79-million budget reduction, include the closure of all but five B.C. fisheries offices, including those in Prince George and Smithers that would have spearheaded monitoring of the pipeline's effects.

Retired DFO scientist Otto Langer said the department has disbanded the marine contaminant group that would normally respond to a spill and has gutted federal fisheries and environmental legislation.

"He (Harper) says the science will make the decision. Well he's basically disembowelled the science," Langer told the Globe. "It's a cruel hoax that they're pulling over on the public."

There's also disturbing evidence the battle over Northern Gateway is turning into a culture war.

Writing in the Huffington Post, journalist Robin Rowland points to a recent column by University of Calgary political scientist Barry Cooper deriding B.C. opponents of the project as "sybaritic scatterbrains."

[ Related: Most British Columbians on the fence over pipeline, poll suggests ]

"The province is no longer a productive resource centre, but a backwater playground," Cooper wrote in the Calgary Herald.

"Vancouver is less a big Canadian city than a 'world-class' vacation village with lots of multimillion-dollar condos and absentee owners. Of course, they still mine stuff and cut a few trees there, but most people see themselves as soft consumers and rent collectors, drinking lattes in the rain. Many believe in spirit bears and water sprites and require grief counselling when trees blow down in Stanley Park. They are what Nietzsche called 'last men.' "

"Canada has a new Two Solitudes in the 21st century," Rowland wrote Monday, referring to the famous metaphor about French and English Canada. "The dividing line is not the Ottawa River but the Rockies."

Rowland also calls out resident CBC curmudgeon Rex Murphy for similar cheap shots in the National Post in a critique of Premier Christy Clark's demands for a "fair share" of pipeline revenues.

"From this side of the great Rocky Mountains, the moves in the new 'great game' — as it has been played from the prematurely blossoming lawns of Victoria, to the ritzy enclaves opposite the prideful trees of Stanley Park — are, to outsiders and bedazzled amateurs alike, opaque and byzantine," Murphy wrote in an Aug. 11 opinion piece.

It was piling on, Rowland said.

"Long experience in Canadian journalism leaves me wondering. Much milder sarcasm about Newfoundland, Murphy's beloved 'Rock,' would have triggered outrage across that province, sparking calls to editors and ombudsmen, full-scale rants on talk radio, hundreds of comments on news web pages and likely a column from Murphy himself."

Stay tuned, folks. This is just going to get uglier.