The Keltic hearings

Day one, Guysborough

Keltic hearings open to supportive, emotional crowd

“Do I support the project? Yes, 100 per cent. Do I feel the environment will be protected? Yes. Does the area need these kinds of projects? Yes.”
– District Seven councillor Bradley MacLeod

GUYSBOROUGH – It was the day Keltic Petrochemicals president Kevin Dunn had surely dreamed about.

The long-awaited Environmental Assessment Board (EAB) public hearings into the proposed $4-billion dollar Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) and petrochemical complex in Goldboro began in Guysborough on Monday.

And from where Dunn was sitting, the news was almost exclusively good. “Oh yes, definitely, definitely,” Dunn replied when The Journal asked him if he was happy with the day’s events. “All the comments from the people of Guysborough County were excellent.”

And while it wasn’t all smooth sailing – a presentation by the Ecology Action Centre highlighted “major inconsistencies” with projected employment and land use statistics that Keltic presented in its Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report – Dunn and others who want the project to proceed received overwhelming support from local residents and municipal politicians.

Monday’s hearings, at the Guysborough branch of the Royal Canadian Legion, were broken into two sessions. The first session, held in the afternoon, featured a presentation by the Municipality of the District of Guysborough.

The evening session entertained a presentation from the Ecology Action Centre. Four Guysborough County residents – all of who support Keltic – then offered their insights into the project.

The day’s proceedings began with a brief overview of the proposed project by Shawn Duncan of AMEC Engineering, a company hired to help Keltic on its EIA report. Throughout Monday’s sessions, Duncan was the primary speaker for all companies that would be involved in the project.

During his 30-minute overview, Duncan said the EIA report concluded that the project would have “relatively few” significant “residual effects.” He then highlighted two examples – the “significant positive benefits” expected in the local and regional economy, and the visual change to the landscape. His overview, however, said that “balanced with the relatively small number of receptors (residents), the planned industrial zoning of this area, and the advantages of the project, the overall significance of this effect (landscape changes) can be considered medium.”

Duncan also admitted that the project would result in “a small loss of habitat for terrestrial birds and animals” and then added that it was “unavoidable.” He added that there would be “significant additional demands on local and regional roadways.”

Ecology Action Centre spokeswoman Chantal Gagnon, however, called the accuracy of Keltic’s EIA report into question and said it contained “a lack of clarity and consistency.” Gagnon gave a power-point presentation that showed that Keltic’s EIA report contained a host of wildly varying employment projections. At one point, she said, the EIA report stated that “up to 3000” jobs would be created by the project. At another point, she said, the employment projection jumped to 4700 jobs.

Gagnon also said Keltic’s report contained inconsistencies about how much land might be affected by the project. She said figures in the EIA report showed the affected area to be “300 hectares at one point, and 400 hectares at another.” Gagnon asked that the statistics be redone and recommended that Keltic err on the side of caution when projecting the potential negative and positive impacts of the project.

She also questioned how it was possible to make an accurate estimation on potential impacts on traffic levels, health concerns and other aspects of the EIA report when the figures were fluctuating so wildly.

“The estimates of the impacts and benefits…are not clearly explained. The report creates an unclear picture and it looks like it was done in a rush,” Gagnon said.

Local support

However Gagnon’s presentation was the exception in a day dominated by Keltic supporters, all from Guysborough County.

Guysborough warden Lloyd Hines began the municipality’s five-person presentation, offering the EAB and Keltic a short Guysborough County history lesson.

He was followed by District Seven councillor Bradley MacLeod, who left no-one in doubt about his views on the project.

“Welcome to Guysborough, the natural gas capital of Atlantic Canada,” MacLeod said. “Do I support the project? Yes, 100 per cent. Do I feel the environment will be protected? Yes.

“Does the area need these kinds of projects? Yes.”

MacLeod then said that projects like Keltic could provide “badly needed jobs” and prevent the out-migration of county residents.

It quickly became a familiar theme.

The other presenters for the municipality – chief administrative officer Dan MacDougall, councillor Sheila Pelly and director of solid waste management Gary Cleary (believed to have been a last-minute addition to the municipality’s team and who spoke at length to reassure residents that the second-generation landfill near Lincolnville wouldn’t accept any hazardous materials from the project) – all made references to the county’s high unemployment rate, small business closures and aging, sparsely located population.

After the other municipal speakers had concluded their part of the presentation, Hines returned to the podium and told the EAB that Keltic would provide the Municipality of Guysborough’s residents with many benefits already enjoyed by other Canadians.

Hines said it was time for residents to stop worrying about whether their region had a future.

“Population figures? I wake up in middle of the night, scared at what we’re going to see when the new census comes out in March,” Hines said.

Evening session

Hines’ comments resonated into the evening session. After Gagnon’s presentation, Isaac’s Harbour resident and truck driver Frank Fougere also threw his support behind the project.

Fougere, who has lived in Isaac’s Harbour for 10 years, detailed several declining local industries and spoke about the many small businesses that had closed throughout the region in the last 30-40 years.

“Since I came to Isaac’s Harbour, there have been 24 deaths and two births – now tell me this community is not dying,” he said. “

Fougere wrapped up his presentation by handing EAB chair Tony Blouin a petition signed by 363 District Seven residents who support the project.

Guysborough’s Stewart MacIntosh, “a local 244 member” with the United Association of Plumbers, Pipefitters and Welders (union), then gave a brief presentation that also supported the project.

MacIntosh said that Fougere had “said pretty much everything I wanted to say” but added he felt obligated to make a presentation because some of his friends – displaced Nova Scotians working in Western Canada – had called him and asked him to make sure that “someone was here to say, ‘Hey (Keltic), you’ve got our support.’”

Roman Valley resident Ernie Kelly, the co-chair of the Antigonish-Guysborough Road Committee, made the evening’s final formal presentation. The group is lobbying the province to upgrade Antigonish-Guysborough Road from the Roman Valley turn-off and make it part of the upgraded transportation system that will be required if the Keltic project proceeds.

Kelly asked the EAB to recommend to Environment Minister Mark Parent – who will decide whether the province will approve the project in January – that the province choose his group’s proposed route.

Kelly’s presentation led to one audience member asking the EAB whether it should even be entertaining submissions about transportation given that that aspect of the Keltic project was withdrawn from the EIA report earlier this year at the province’s behest.

Blouin said that while potential routes weren’t officially part of this week’s hearings, the EAB could make recommendations to Parent about it.

That comment led MacLeod to also step forward and formally oppose the Antigonish-Guysborough Road Committee’s proposal. MacLeod said he still favoured the original route proposed by Keltic.

After Kelly’s presentation, several Guysborough-area residents made statements to the board – all supporting the project. The partisan crowd had earlier applauded the presentations made by Fougere, MacIntosh and Kelly and continued to do so as each speech was made.

The most thunderous applause, however, was reserved for Hines, who told the board that he was getting “a little resentful of people not from Guysborough County…telling us what’s good for us.”