After asking questions about Northern Gateway's public engagement activities for parts of three days at environmental review hearings, Fort St. James resident Brenda Gouglas believes the company behind the pipeline plan has been doing more talking than listening.
"They are here to sell the pipeline. They're not hearing what it is that we are saying," Gouglas after wrapping up questioning of Northern Gateway witnesses as part of National Energy Board (NEB) hearings in Prince Rupert. "I do not believe, personally, that their public consultation is effective. I don't believe it's a success like they seem to think it is."
Gouglas and Kandace Kerr represented the Fort St. James Sustainability Group and quizzed Northern Gateway representatives on how they've conducted public engagement activities during the planning phases of the pipeline. The NEB hearings are designed to find out if the proposed $6.5 billion pipeline from northern Alberta to Kitimat is in the public interest and can be done in a safe manner.
Kerr said she was frustrated by the way Northern Gateway approached public engagement in her community.
"Unless you're on board with them, you are somehow the opposition," she said.
During the hearings, Northern Gateway witnesses described a number of ways the company has conducted its public engagement, from holding formal meetings to informal coffee chats. They also set up community advisory boards in different regions along the proposed route and conducted advertising campaigns.
"We're really wanting people to understand our story so that they can make the informed decision going forward," Enbridge vice-president for western access Janet Holder said.
Holder also pointed to internal Northern Gateway polling data which she said showed increasing support for the project. Northern Gateway president John Carruthers added that their data shows that if Northern Gateway commits to meeting the conditions set out by the province of B.C. around environmental, First Nations and economic concerns, the pipeline becomes more popular.
"We've heard a lot of nos in the process that have changed to be yeses," Holder said.
Gouglas challenged Northern Gateway's polling data, which hasn't been made public.
"We have no idea what questions they asked and that's what polls are, it depends on how you phrase the questions," she said.
All recently published public opinion polls have showed more opposition to the project than support for it.
Holder acknowledged that there's still work to be done to improve the company's image in communities in northern B.C., but she said things are getting better.
"We want to be in those communities with great pride and we want to be able to wear the Gateway hat and the sweater," she said. "Right now, it's not always that easy. We're finding, interestingly enough, that most of us are more comfortable and so the swag is actually moving out of our offices faster than it had been maybe a year ago."
Kerr wanted to know from the witnesses if they felt Northern Gateway had the social license to operate in B.C. Carruthers said it's important the company achieve it, but said it was tough to define exactly what it was.
From her perspective, Kerr said the company has yet to achieve legitimacy, credibility and trust in her community and pointed to the District of Fort St. James' official opposition to the plan.
What the Fort St. James group and Northern Gateway do agree upon is that more community engagement sessions are needed.
Northern Gateway spokesman Ivan Giesbrecht said the company has tried to tailor its meetings and presentations in Fort St. James with community concerns and plans on having further discussions.
Kerr is open to the idea as well.
"I think they should be here talking to us, talking to landowners, talking to the district," she said. "We're going to have to deal with them."
