Perhaps you’ve never heard of Line 9B. A lot of very rich, mostly foreign or internationally owned interests prefer it that way.

It’s a pipeline. Enbridge’s Line 9B currently transports crude oil originating from the North Sea and elsewhere in an east-to-west direction. Enbridge has applied to reverse the pipeline’s flow west-to-east to ship heavy crude oil and bitumen from the tarsands in Alberta to eastern Canadian markets and beyond. Enbridge is also asking to increase the capacity of Line 9 to 300,000 barrels per day from 240,000 because current infrastructure is operating near capacity.

Large-capacity pipelines are the primary enablers of tarsands growth. The oilsands produce about 1.8 million barrels of oil per day, but the federal and Alberta governments have approved a production increase up to 5.2 million barrels per day. Shouldn’t all Canadians have a voice in whether or under what conditions some of those barrels will be flowing through Toronto and southern Ontario?

The Harper government says no.

The National Energy Board is required to hold public hearings before recommending a pipeline project to Stephen Harper’s cabinet. The NEB hearings are important proceedings with far-reaching consequences. Pipeline or train spills like Lac-Mégantic often occur in rural areas or small towns. Can you imagine the effect of a pipeline spill in a city of almost three million? Yet the Harper Conservatives have quietly implemented a new regime under the National Energy Board Act, cutting off public participation and violating Canadians’ Charter rights to free expression.

Until recently, any interested group or individual could comment on the merits of a pipeline project or any other project seeking approval from the NEB. But in 2012, the Harper government snuck in amendments to the National Energy Board Act through omnibus Bill C-38. They wiped out much of the legal protections for Canadian fish and fisheries. They turned the NEB from an independent decision-making body into one that merely advises the cabinet. Even that wasn’t enough. Harper wanted to silence critics, too.

These amendments to the National Energy Board Act gave the NEB the power to screen out members of the public and scientific community likely to bring up “irrelevant” issues like skyrocketing cancer rates in downstream communities, the poisoning of watersheds and the negative impact of the tarsands. Prospective applicants are actually told not to bother if they intend to make submissions about tarsands development.

Today, anyone who wishes to be heard must fill out a nine-page Application to Participate Form just to submit a letter of comment. The obvious goal is to reduce the number of people putting their concerns on the record. Requiring that people submit a nine-page application form just for the right to submit even a one-paragraph written comment creates a tremendous disincentive for participation. Successful completion of the form does not guarantee the right to participate. That right remains at the NEB’s sole discretion.

And it works! Before these changes designed to keep the critics silent were enacted, the NEB heard 1,544 oral or written submissions at the Northern Gateway hearings. Now, they will hear only 175.

A group of Canadians is taking a stand against these violations of our Charter-protected rights to free speech. ForestEthics Advocacy, which I chair, is suing the Harper government to strike down the rule changes — specifically, section 55.2 of the National Energy Board Act — as an unconstitutional violation of free expression rights. We are also asking for the Application to Participate Form to be quashed as an unreasonable limit on citizen expression.

In addition, we are seeking a court order that the NEB accept all letters of comment from groups and individuals who want to participate. Finally, we’re requesting an injunction to prevent the NEB from deciding on Line 9B until the court has decided on this case.

We live in a country where oil industry representatives can buy unlimited ads and orchestrate media campaigns to shout up the economic upsides for their shareholders, and shut down those who want these dangerous pipelines examined. Yet concerned Canadians can’t talk to their own government decision-makers about risks to the environment and human health from the tarsands. It’s not just unconstitutional; it’s wrong.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

We may disagree on the answers — or even the right questions to ask — but as Canadians we’ve all got a stake in this. You, your family and your community have a constitutional — and moral — right to be heard. We’re just asking the government to listen to the people.