APE - Against Port Expansion in Delta, BC
Say NO to Roberts Bank Terminal 2
Watch Video To See Why!
APE - Against Port Expansion in Delta, BC
Say NO to Roberts Bank Terminal 2
Watch Video To See Why!
Latest News

Against Port Expansion in the Fraser Estuary BC

APE (Against Port Expansion in the Fraser Estuary BC) is a group of concerned citizens who recognize that plans for container terminal expansion on Roberts Bank (RBT2) will see the loss of globally-significant wetlands and habitat (classified as a Globally Significant Important Bird and Biodiversity Area - IBA) for migratory birds, shorebirds, waterfowl, salmon, herring, crabs and orca whales; degradation of the quality of life for thousands of Lower Mainland residents; and the industrialization of prime agricultural land. 

we_will_starve.png

HERE IS THE CURRENT RBT2 STATUS:

MAY 2022 STILL NO DECISION - AFTER EIGHT YEARS !!

  • MAR. 27 2020 THE FEDERALLY-APPOINTED REVIEW PANEL PUBLISHED ITS REPORT IDENTIFIYING SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS IN MANY AREAS SHOULD RBT2 BE BUILT.
  • AUG. 24 2020 THE FEDERAL ENVIRONMENT MINISTER PAUSED THE DECiSiON PROCESS AND ASKED THE PORT FOR MORE INFORMATION. 
  • AUG. 28 2020 THE PORT SAYS IT WILL HAVE COMPLETED GATHERING THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PRIOR TO YEAR END
  • NOV. 5 2020 THE PORT SAYS IT WILL NOT PROVIDE THE INFORMATION UNTIL SUMMER 2021.
  • SEP 24 2021 PORT PROVIDED ITS RESPONSE
  • DEC 15 GOVERNMENT PROVIDED A DRAFT OF POTENTIAL CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL AND OPENED FINAL ROUND OF PUBLIC COMMENT
  • MAR 15 2022 PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD CLOSED WITH THOUSANDS OF OPPOSING SUBMISSIONS
  • APR 22 2022 PORT RESPONDED TO SOME OF THE OPPOSING SUBMISSIONS, BUT NOT ON THE KEY ISSUE, BIOFILM
  • JUNE 10 2022 PORT RESPONDED ON THE BIOFILM ISSUE. SAME OLD FLAWED SCIENCE, PROMOTING BIOFILM REPLACEMENT WHEN INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED SCIENCE SAYS THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE ON THE SCALE NECESSARY TO REPLACE WHAT WILL BE LOST
  • SEPTEMBER 2022 - A WALL OF SILENCE REMAINS OVER OTTAWA ON RBT2

SO MANY QUESTIONS:

  • WHAT  IS THE PORT AFRAID OF AND WHAT IS IT TRYING TO HIDE? 
  • WHY DID THE PORT HIRE AN ENGINEER TO MANAGE INFRASTRUCTURE DELIVERY AND GET CONTRACTS SIGNED FOR A T2 OPERATOR? 

SO MANY QUESTIONS, NO ANSWERS FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

WE NEED YOUR HELP. NOW IS THE IDEAL TIME TO URGE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO REJECT ROBERTS BANK TERMINAL 2.

The govenrment  has the science, facts and evidence. Its own scientists say RBT2 will result in significant adverse environmental effects that cannot be mitigated. How much more does the government need to reject this project?

And so the saga continues, eight years and counting, wasting more taxpayer funds.

KEEP THE PRESSURE ON THE FEDERAL GOVENRMENT

TELL THEM YOU WILL NOT ACCEPT RBT2 BEING APPROVED.

WRITE TO MINISTER GUILBEAULT. SELECT COPY & PRINT THIS

Attention Minister Steven Guilbeault: 

SAVE_WESAS.png

Roberts Bank Terminal 2 (RBT2) is environmentally unsustainable. Environment and Climate Change Canada scientists have consistently characterized the negative environmental impacts of the RBT2 project as permanent, irreversible and continuous, disrupting and eliminating quality fatty acid production from diatoms in biofilm across Roberts Bank by dampening and reducing salinity. These particular fatty acids are absolutely required by Western Sandpipers and disrupting their production may also have negative implications for salmon and crab production, as well as eulachon a major part of Indigenous heritage. Many international scientists agree, as do Birds Canada, Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network, BC Nature, Nature Canada and others. 

I am opposed to RBT2 and petition you to deny approval for this project. 

Signed________________________Email____________________________________

 Name_____________________________________Postal Code__________________

AND MAIL TO

Minister Steven Guilbeault               POST FREE
    House of Commons

     Ottawa, Ontario, K1A0A6

Click Here to Sign the Petition

See what others are doing to stop RBT2:

1. Fraser Delta in the International spotlight. Birdlife Interantional has joined the fight to stop RBT2.
https://www.birdlife.org/worldwide/news/waterfowl-winter-refuge-fraser-river-delta-risks-being-lost-forever?utm_source=BirdLife+International+News+Notifications&utm_campaign=a1bb67f58b-Summary_news_notification&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_4122f13b8a-a1bb67f58b-131704081&mc_cid=a1bb67f58b&mc_eid=0757e28fcf 

2. In May 2022 The Garden City Conservation Society published a comprehenisive analysis of all that is wrong with the RBT2 project, under the title Stop RBT2 - To Enable Success, and sent it to the federal Environment Minister and the Cabinet

stoprbt2_enablesuccess_gccs_0.pdf

3. A video by Ranincoast Conservation
https://youtu.be/HkKLY3P2_ys

4. Natural Legacies versus Waste

https://gardencitylands.wordpress.com/2020/04/04/fraser-voices-urges-federal-government-to-reject-roberts-bank-port-expansion/

5. Fraser Voices

https://www.facebook.com/FraserVoices/posts/2525873930958632?__cft__[0]=AZUdM4gLQGuLAuiIVb_6PxF5BNrdBoz4KiElrrlqVoUBShwuJp6UHSY5mWAGz0etwKLQsE10_Ss-qK7aGDQemFBPCb8nyQsjtbRBGMWEMaqncH-9Dc-WYdwptkuZASF4OsN487dcEmp0wBKuk9JfpC8C0GMYxI1uj79xp-tiD_FXKA&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R

6. Georgia Strait Alliance 

https://georgiastrait.org/work/species-at-risk/proposed-terminal-2-deltaport-expansion-2/

RBT2 Casualties - Science, Facts, Evidence

Science Facts and Evidence Ignored in the Quest for RBT2
By Roger Emsley Executive Director Against Port Expansion August 31, 2022

Science facts and evidence are the casualties from the years long quest by the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority (VFPA) to build a second container terminal in the Fraser Estuary on Roberts Bank (RBT2):

A. Science:

  • Roberts Bank – one of the most important stops on the Pacific Flyway for migratory birds – recognized as one of the top Important Bird Areas in Canada and home to critical wintering grounds for the highest number of waterfowl and shorebirds found anywhere in Canada. 
  • The reason – the rich source of polyunsaturated acids in biofilm on Roberts Bank, which RBT2 will denigrate, is essential for millions of migratory and other shorebirds, as well as other wildlife, that rely on that biofilm. 
  • Compelling science – developed over many years by Canadian and international scientists, expert in wetlands ecology which VFPA ignores.
  • That science proves the salinity trigger causes the richness of the diatoms in biofilm, where pulses of fresh water from the river oscillate with the tidal salt water to shock the diatoms into producing nutrients essential for the birds and other wildlife. RBT2 changes tidal flows and water temparature disrupting that salinity trigger; reducing the richness of the biofilm, thereby no longer providing the essential food source for millions of birds.
  • That science does not fit with the VFPA quest for RBT2, so they ignored the science and developed their own flawed version to fit with their desired solution.

B. Facts

Misleading statements and information by VFPA, claiming:

  • Lack of terminal capacity as early as 2025.  In fact there is over one million spare container capacity as of 2022. Forecasts indicate there is sufficient capacity into the 2030s by which time expansions in Vancouver and Prince Rupert will increase west coast terminal capacities to 10-11 million containers without ever building RBT2.
  • RBT2 required because of forecasted container volume increases. VFPA consistently underperforms against its forecasts.
  • Supply chain issues are caused by lack of terminal capacity.  These are not caused by terminal capacities but rather lack of warehouse space and shortage of industrial land in the lower mainland
  • RBT2 will cost $3.5 billion. VFPA consistently underestimates costs to build RBT2. With an expected construction start of 2024 or later costs will balloon to over $4 billion not the $3.5 billion figure VFPA claims.

C. Evidence

Never introduced and/or the Review Panel refused to hear:

  • Port truck traffic and the resulting congestion on highways
  • Rail delays and container transit times because of rail congestion through the Fraser Canyon
  • Alternatives to Vancouver - Prince Rupert - their Terminal capacities and their expansion plans. Prince Rupert is two sailing days closer to Asia, has few environmental effects and a much easier less congested rail route East.
  • Viewpoints and concerns from US indigenous groups that were never given proper consideration.
  • Failure to include ECCC scientists when engaging with First Nations, thereby providing those First Nations with invalid science regarding biofilm.

 

VFPA CEO Silvester says: “There is no other project anywhere near the finish line.… Terminal 2 is a project we developed in the public interest rather than in the interest of a single shareholder.” “By growing the necessary container terminal capacity and building Roberts Bank Terminal 2 at Canada’s largest port, we unlock greater opportunities for Canadians, connecting businesses — big and small — to the global economy”.

 Misleading:

1. If T2 gets approved it is likely a foreign entity will operate it. And Silvester thinks this is in Canada’s interest? Where is the justification?
2. It is NOT in the public interest to use taxpayer funds to build RBT2 when it is private investment that will expand existing terminals in Vancouver and Prince Rupert, providing all the volume necessary to meet Canada’s trading needs.
3. No other project near the finish line? Not true. DP World is already expanding its Vancouver and Prince Rupert container terminals. Global Container Terminals (GCT) is building out Deltaport and is set to expand its inner harbour terminal. DP World is readying plans to build a second terminal in Prince Rupert, all with private investment.
4. DP World and GCT expansions are nearer the finish line than RBT2, which if approved won’t start construction until at least 2024, taking 7 years or more to build, by which time it’s cost will have ballooned past $4 billion.
5. VFPA’s full container throughput declined 13% in the first half of 2022 versus the same period in 2021. 2022 volumes are flat compared to 2019. There is over a million spare container terminal capacity in West Coast Canada. At current rates of trade expansion this will serve Canada’s trading needs into the 2030s by which time the already announced expansions will be ready. West Coast Canada will have 11 million container terminal capacity without ever building the mega expensive T2. 

VFPA CEO Silvester says: “The project has gone through the highest level of environmental review in Canada: a federally designated review. It’s had a public hearing to hear all the perspectives, all the factual information that we put forward about environmental impacts and the ways we would mitigate all the concerns of stakeholders. The federal minister had some further questions, and we’ve responded in full. Everyone has had a chance to comment on those responses. Now, the project needs to go forward to government for a decision. We are very firmly of the view that this project can be delivered without adverse environmental effects.”

6. VFPA insisted the Panel terms of reference exclude impacts beyond the port footprint. Therefore the Panel refused to hear about negative impacts such as increased road and rail traffic causing congestion on highways, snd rail bottlenecks through the Fraser Canyon.
7. The federally appointed review panel identified a number of areas where RBT2 would result in significant adverse environmental effects and was uncertain whether mitigation will rectify the negative effects in a number of these. Precautionary principle: –if the risk is unknown, the outcome uncertain, then do not proceed.
8. Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) scientists have said consistently and repeatedly T2 will result in significant adverse environmental effects that cannot be mitigated. Major Canadian and international environment groups, including Birds Canada, WHSRN, Audubon, Birdlife International, BC Nature, Nature Canada all have the same concerns.
9. International scientists with expertise in wetlands ecology whose research has been published in peer-reviewed journals share the ECCC science concerns.  All oppose T2. The environmental review panel noted many areas of significant adverse environmental effects and could not conclude with certainty that all these could be addressed and effectively mitigated.
10. Silvester keeps pushing the VFPA science, which unlike the ECCC and international scientists has never been published in peer-reviewed science journals. International scientists expert in wetlands ecology criticized the VFPA science, identifying a number of critical flaws in the VFPA science.
11. VFPA is proposing mitigation measures, whereby they plan to replace the biofilm habitat lost as a result of RBT2, but ECCC science has proven that biofilm habitat cannot be replaced on the scale necessary.
12. VFPA has held workshops with First Nations on biofilm and biofilm replacement. VFPA invited DFO to these workshops but specifically excluded the federal regulators - ECCC scientists - the body with expertise in this field. VFPA has consistently ignored the ECCC science because it does not fit with the flawed science they are promoting.
13. VFPA are now involving First Nations in promoting alternative sites for biofilm recreation with no scientific underpinning nor validation from experts in wetlands and wildlife ecology independent of the VFPA. Why does VFPA continue to ignore and bypass ECCC scientists, who with their international colleagues have spent years understanding biofilm and what is and is not possible in terms of re-creating that which industrial projects have destroyed?

It has been suggested involving Indigenous Groups into “ biofilm restoration” is a VFPA ploy without the groups being appraised of ECCC science and so far VFPA is getting away with ignoring ECCC science. 

Conclusion:

Three cities Delta Richmond White Rock, major Canadian and international environment groups, expert scientists port operators, and thousands of citizen scientists and others all oppose this project. The science is overwhelming. The decision is clear. DENY APPROVAL FOR RBT2.

Maritme Magazine August 2022 - RBT2

Reprinted from Maritme Magazine

MARITIME MAGAZINE: A STRIKING TALE OF OPPOSING VIEWS

Roger Emsley and Robin Silvester will likely never be chums. Their respective passions run in opposite directions over the most controversial (and expensive) project ever proposed for Canada’s Pacific Gateway. Mr. Emsley is as ardently opposed to the Port of Vancouver’s proposed Roberts Bank Terminal 2 (RBT2) as Mr. Silvester is committed to its construction. 

Mr. Emsley, a transportation industry consultant with a lengthy career as systems analyst, has led a broad coalition of grass-roots organizations aligned under the banner ‘Against Port Expansion’ while meticulously following the details of a federal Environmental Assessment Panel’s process for the last nine years. Mr. Silvester, President and CEO of the Port of Vancouver, with a background in marine mergers and acquisitions, insists the $3.5 billion RBT2 project is the only viable alternative to meet Asian container trade volumes on Canada’s west coast by 2030. 

Both now anxiously await a decision from the federal Environment Minister who received the Panel’s Report in 2019. However, in a further delay, the federal government made a post-report request last year for more information from the Port, submitted in June this year, and over which Mr. Emsley has called foul. The primary issue is the scientific credibility of the Port’s claim it can recreate a critical substance called Biofilm on scale large enough to replace what the RBT2 project will destroy of the natural substance. 

Identifying science and facts 

Biofilm is the life-sustaining food source for the migratory birds feeding in the estuary waters where the massive RBT2 artificial island is to be built. While scientists from Environment and Climate Change Canada as well as other experts from around the world have disputed the claim, Mr. Emsley, through an access to information request, discovered the ECCC scientist’s position on the matter was excluded from the Assessment Panel’s final report. The affair now has the potential to taint the review process just as it finally reached its conclusion. Mr. Emsley recently told Maritime Magazine, “If government ignores science, facts and evidence, I will expose them. I know our group and others will take this to court. We can win, we will win.” 

Mr. Silvester has indicated he has little time for projects that compete with RBT2. In a speech to the Greater Vancouver Board of Trade last year, he made a jaw-dropping disclosure: “My organization has been spending $1million to $2-millon a month on this process. We’re employing experts in the field of all the areas we need to be providing to ensure this project is done properly. We are a very sophisticated proponent. We’re not just another operator in a port that thinks they can bring a project forward.” 

One of those operators is GCT Terminals, operator of the Port of Vancouver’s largest container terminal at Deltaport, on the Roberts Bank shore, a short distance away from proposed site of RBT2. When the Port would not approve GCT’s alternative to RBT2 – a fourth berth at its Deltaport facility – which it says is sufficient to meet the Port’s required capacity expansion, and without the environmental damage of RBT2, GCT announced two years ago it was taking legal action against the Port for its conflicted role as landlord and regulator, and now as well as a competitor with its RBT2 project.

In his many critiques of the RBT2 process, Mr. Emsley has also drawn attention to original vision of the Pacific Gateway concept, which saw the development of the Port of Prince Rupert as a priority over the already congested urban area around the Port of Vancouver. In February this year, Mr. Emsley was gratified when the Port of Prince of Rupert and container terminal operator DP world announced a feasibility study on adding capacity of 2-million TEU for Canada’s Asia-Pacific markets. 

However, the RBT2 Assessment Panel rejected considering Prince Rupert as a solution “because Prince Rupert is not within the Proponent’s [Port of Vancouver] jurisdiction.” While underscoring the Port of Vancouver’s dominance in the entire affair, it also raises a more fundamental question on Canada’s port governance structure.

Zoran Knezevic’s regional strategy approach

Zoran Knezevic, President and CEO of the Port of Alberni on the southern end of Vancouver Island, describes the Port of Vancouver, where he worked for 15 years, as “a lot of people pushing RBT2 while not considering the overall impacts of their project, which is going to create more congestion and not necessarily improve transportation as a whole.” He is critical of the Port of Vancouver for “not incorporating smaller ports into their plans to divert some of the congestion they have.” Mr. Knezevic said he proposed a plan to the federal government a few years ago for single administration for all the ports on the west coast. I think there is a lack of a regional strategy,” he said.

His idea was identical to a Report solicited by The Honourable David Emerson, Minister of the Pacific Gateway in 2008 and still awaiting action under Mr. Emerson’s Port Modernization Review completed in 2016. One of the Report’s recommendations says: “It is of the utmost importance that our port authorities are aware they are not competing with one another, for there is no benefit to Canada of having its west coast ports in competition. We recommend that a single port authority be created.”

If that recommendation had been implemented, what a different story this might have been!

This article titled: A striking tale of opposing views written by Colin Laughlan was originally published in the Maritime Magazine’s Summer 2022 issue.

RBT2 Myths Exploded

Perpetuating the Myths Surrounding Roberts Bank Terminal 2 (RBT2)

The Vancouver Fraser Port Authority (VFPA) continues to perpetrate two myths concerning RBT2:

  • Project-induced salinity changes are unlikely to cause a significant adverse environmental effect on biofilm and western sandpipers, and any residual uncertainty can be addressed through conditions requiring follow-up and adaptive management
  • Vancouver is likely to run out of container terminal capacity as early as the mid 2020s and the supply chain congestion is caused by lack of terminal capacity. 

Neither is true. 

1. For Biofilm and Western Sandpipers:

On June 10 VFPA put in its latest submission on Biofilm and Western Sandpipers to Terence Hubbard, President Impact Assessment Agency of Canada. In it VFPA refutes the Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) science, evidence and facts. VFPA claims incorrectly that:

  • Any salinity changes caused by RBT2 are minor and well within the range of seasonal variation.
  • Adaptive management and follow up will effectively mitigate any minor adverse environmental effects.
  • Biofilm can be re-created on a massive scale sufficient to replace biofilm lost as a result of RBT2.

None of this is true. VFPA uses the same data they have used previously to support its claim that the project will not affect the salinity trigger. ECCC in a previous submission see: https://www.againstportexpansion.org/uploads/images/file_view/Highlighted_RBT2_ECCC_comments_on_final_IR_response_final.pdf
reviewed the proponent’s studies in 2016, 2017, and 2018 (Hemmera et al. 2019) and found the VFPA conclusions invalid. ECCC demonstrated that RBT2 would result in changes to salinity sufficient to significantly reduce biofilm quality and quantity, stating RBT2 will result in:

  • “the disruption of the salinity trigger responsible for shocking marine-type diatoms into high fatty acid production
  • changes in community composition of diatoms in biofilm from marine to freshwater types that will produce lower amounts of fatty acid
  • an unfavorable spatial shift in the centre of the distribution for biofilm towards sandier substrates where biofilm would be inaccessible for foraging Western Sandpipers due to tongue morphology
  • all causing a reduction in the biomass of available biofilm, resulting in lower abundance of food for shorebirds during the critical migration period.”

 ECCC then states:

“Therefore, the Proponent’s conclusion that salinity changes resulting from the project will not adversely affect biofilm and migratory shorebirds is inconsistent with the established ecology of biofilm and with the results of the Proponent’s own studies”.  

Regarding the large-scale re-creation of biofilm habitat capable of supporting shorebirds, based on ECCC’s review of studies undertaken by VFPA and their citation of restoration at other sites it is clear there is an absence of mitigation options for Roberts Bank. ECCC research has concluded there are no alternate sites for the construction of a large-scale mudflat and the re-creation of biofilm in the Fraser Estuary. All alternative sites have sandier substrates and/or different hydrological regimes.  

VFPA has repeatedly cited the restoration of biofilm at a site in Japan, yet the evidence shows the area where biofilm was re-created was small, much smaller than that attributed by VFPA. As ECCC has stated these do not provide evidence of the recreation of mudflats with equivalent functional values for Roberts Bank.

As for adaptive management ECCC states:

“Considering ECCC’s view that project effects on biofilm and Western Sandpipers would be immitigable, immediate, and irreversible, ECCC suggests that an adaptive management approach would not provide an appropriate solution to remediate what ECCC continues to anticipate would be the adverse impact of the project on biofilm and western sandpipers”. 

2. For the potential to run out of container capacity by the mid 2020s:

 There is currently over a million TEUs spare terminal capacity on the BC West Coast.  Yet despite this the (VFPA) insists as recently as June 10:

“ With container trade growing faster than forecasted globally-based supply chain challenges that Canadians are experiencing today are a preview of made-in-Canada supply-chain problems ahead if, as a country, we don't deliver the capacity needed. Designed under our public interest mandate, Roberts Bank Terminal 2 will provide timely container capacity on Canada's West Coast, ensure greater supply chain competition, and protect Canada's trade sovereignty”. 

VFPA continues to live in its own dream world. Growth faster than forecasted?  Q1 2022 saw VFPA container volumes drop by over 10% compared to the 2019 pre-pandemic levels. For the first five months of 2022 full container volumes are down by almost 15 percent. Total containers (TEUs) handled for the same period are off by close to 10 percent and that includes 414,000 empty container moves.

Yet VFPA pushes the same old fairy tale that their $3.5 billon plus RBT2 project is needed now because Canada will soon run out of west coast container capacity. How can the public rely on government agencies when they continue to misrepresent the facts in this way?

Supply chain issues, to the extent they exist, are the result of lack of warehouse and logistics space in the Lower Mainland and that is because there is a shortage of industrial land. In the strange ways Vancouver Fraser Port Authority management think the solution to that is to sacrifice precious BC agricultural land for more port expansion, meaning BC would need to import food products from the likes of China. Yes, unbelievable as it is the Port CEO Silvester once said “the Agricultural Land Reserve is emotionally but not economically important to the region and more must be done to ensure land is available for industry.”

A second factor is the rail bottleneck going East - aka Fraser Canyon. Grain and other bulk shipments are often delayed by rail container traffic. The southern rail route is heavily congested and as the 2021 floods proved vulnerable.

25% of the total traffic is US container traffic that Canada handles - with no economic value to Canada – is discretionary and is of little economic value to Canada. 

The solution is of course obvious to all - but it is not one that VFPA management are interested in. 

It involves diversifying container trade by using the expanding Prince Rupert terminals. Its port operator, DP World, is investing $ millions in expanding the current Fairview Terminal and will soon start on a second terminal on South Kaien Island. Prince Rupert capacity will expand by over 2 million TEUs a year. Add that to current expansion in Vancouver and the west coast will have 10.5 - 11 million TEU capacity, sufficient to handle Canada’s trade for decades to come without ever building RBT2.

The Proof? 2021 west coast actual volumes in TEU = 4.74 million. At a growth rate of 3% to 2030 and 2% beyond west coast volumes by 2040 will be 8.2 million TEUs versus a planned capacity of 10.5 - 11.0 million TEUs, WITHOUT EVER BUILDING RBT2. Where do the percentage increases come from - THESE ARE VFPA’s NUMBERS. And if the US traffic were taken out then by 2040 west coast volumes would be about 6 million TEUs.

So why is the federal government still allowing VFPA to progress the project? 

Answer - vested interests. 

Stakeholders such as the Canadian and foreign entities that have invested in warehouse and logistics infrastructure and plan to build more want a return on their investment. Add to that the foreign port operators that see an opportunity to make a lot of money building and operating RBT2 at no risk to themselves.

VFPA has an extensive lobby in Ottawa and is prepared to do anything to get its project approved. They have supporters inside cabinet - the Transport Minister and the Trade Minister are two of several. Potentially add in the Prime Minister who incredulously wants to repair Canada/China relations and increase trade with them - evidenced by his creation of an Indo-Pacific Advisory Committee with the likes of China lovers such as Barton and Pettigrew as key advisors. This appears to be one of several reasons RBT2 is still in the frame.

Will the federal government buy into the VFPA fairy tales and sacrifice the Roberts Bank ecosystem, or will they finally deny RBT2 project approval? It is time for the federal government to say NO to RBT2. It is well past time.

Against Port Expansion in the Fraser Estuary Community Group

June 19, 2022.

Stop RBT2 - To Enable Success

 

SOS.jpeg.png

The Garden City Conservation Society has recently sent an excellent analysis of the Terminal 2 project to the federal Environment Minister and Cabinet. As a sequence of illustrated topics, it is clear and readable.

Read it here:
stoprbt2_enablesuccess_gccs.pdf

They suggest the project is “a train wreck on the verge of happening” and that it needs to be stopped to save the Roberts Bank ecosystem from further degradation.

The submission is organized into a number of topics and is the most comprehensive and fulsome analysis yet of the disastrous RBT2 project and why it must never be approved.