John Curran
Northern News Services
Published Monday, August 27, 2007
YELLOWKNIFE - Reacting to recent reports condemning the lack of teeth in a deal the territorial government signed with the Mackenzie Gas Project proponents, Imperial Oil contends it was never intended to be enforceable.
"We're very pleased with the agreement," said Imperial Oil spokesperson Pius Rolheiser. "Both sides are happy."
The Socio-Economic Agreement regarding the $16.2 billion Mackenzie Valley pipeline - reached early this year between Imperial, its pipeline project partners ConocoPhillips, Shell Canada and Exxon Mobil as well as the Government of the NWT (GNWT) - has come under attack from the Yellowknife-based social justice coalition Alternatives North.
The group commissioned two independent reviews of the deal and both came back highly critical of the document.
"The agreement is effectively unenforceable and may also be largely incapable of implementation," said Dr. Ciaran O'Faircheallaigh, a professor at Australia's Griffith University who wrote one of the reports for Alternatives North.
The project proponents maintain the deal is just fine and it's not meant to be a firm contract.
"The agreement was never designed to be that," said Rolheiser. "This agreement was not intended to be a document focused on enforceability and hard targets."
This position left Alternatives North member Shelagh Montgomery flabbergasted.
"What's the point of negotiating an agreement if it's not going to mean anything," she said. "This agreement is not going to ensure benefits or jobs for Northerners."
The other report's author, University of Calgary law professor Nigel Bankes, complained First Nations were not involved in negotiating the 60-page agreement.
Rolheiser said the territorial deal is intended to complement the confidential access and benefits agreements - which Imperial has been negotiating with the various First Nations along the proposed pipeline route.
"Those do include ... employment, training program and contracting opportunity hard targets," he said, adding they are enforceable.
He declined to make the specifics of those agreements public, even though they may help eliminate the fears of groups like Alternatives North.
"It's not that we're trying to hide anything," said Rolheiser.
One of the communities yet to sign an access and benefits agreement is Fort Good Hope, where residents rejected the latest proposal in 2006.
"There were several things that needed to be cleared up or strengthened," said Arthur Tobac, the Yamoga Land Corp. vice-president and co-ordinator of lands and resources.
Having briefly scanned the deal signed by the territorial government, he thought Montgomery and the professors had a point.
"Some of the wording looks rather weak," he said.
Singling out the term "reasonable commercial efforts," which is used in the deal, he added, "I'm not sure what that means."
For its part, the territorial government has no plans to revisit the agreement, which took approximately two years to negotiate.
"The GNWT is very satisfied," said Industry, Tourism and Investment Minister Brendan Bell.
Bell also questioned whether professors O'Faircheallaigh and Bankes had the understanding needed to pass judgment on matters concerning the NWT.
"Typically governments tax business, receive royalties and reinvest that to benefit residents," he said, adding distant academics likely aren't familiar with how the territories operate fiscally.
