[5] The proposal was also opposed by numerous non-governmental organizations, which cite previous spills,[6] concerns over oil sands expansion, and associated risks in transportation.
[2] Upon taking office in 2015, Prime Minister of Canada Justin Trudeau banned oil tanker traffic on the north coast of British Columbia, effectively killing the project.
In January 2025, following threats of economic sanctions by the United States under President Trump, the project was raised by former supporters and detractors as a way to diversify Canadian energy export customers.
[12] On 19 January 2011, the JRP requested that Enbridge provide additional information on the design and risk assessment of the pipelines due to the difficult access and unique geographic location of the proposed project.
[14] On 6 May 2016, Enbridge filed a request with the National Energy Board to extend the sunset clause for the Northern Gateway Project.
[20] Kinder Morgan Energy Partners operates the 1,150-kilometre-long (710 mi) Trans Mountain Pipeline System from Edmonton, Alberta, to terminals and refineries in central British Columbia, the Vancouver area and the Puget Sound region in Washington.
[22] According to Kinder Morgan, expanding the existing pipeline would have been cheaper than Northern Gateway and avoided opposition as experienced by the Enbridge's project.
[23] As an alternative, some indigenous groups proposed Eagle Spirit Pipeline from northern Alberta to the Prince Rupert area on the BC coasts.
However, project proponent TC Energy cancelled the pipeline[25] in the face of political objections and concerns over economic viability.
out of the federal review process if he was elected in the spring of 2013 (which he was not), while also hiring prominent constitutional lawyer Murray Rankin to consider a legal challenge on who had jurisdiction over pipelines.
Rankin argued that British Columbia should withdraw from the federal government's pipelines review process and set up a made-in-B.C.
[29] In response Dix said "Within a week of taking office, we will serve the federal government with 30 days' notice to terminate the 2010 deal in which the Liberals signed away B.C.
[31] Several coalitions and alliances produced formal declarations unequivocally rejecting the intrusion of an oil pipeline on aboriginal lands.
[39][40] The Joint Review Panel travelled to the Heiltsuk Nation in April 2012 for hearings into the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline proposal.
"[35] Facing non-violent protest as part of the greeting at the airport, the JRP members suspended the hearings for a day and a half.
[35] "As the young people of the community explained when they finally got the chance, their health and identity were inextricably bound up in their ability to follow in the footsteps of their forebears - fishing and paddling in the same waters, collecting kelp in the same tidal zones in the outer coastal islands, hunting in the same forests, and collecting medicines in the same meadows.
"[41] The Dogwood Initiative, ForestEthics, the International League of Conservation Photographers, and Greenpeace Canada were some organizations that actively campaigned against the Enbridge pipeline proposal.
First Nations bands in British Columbia, including many along the proposed pipeline route, signed the Save-the-Fraser Declaration in opposition to the project.
[46] In 2013 Enbridge offered a 10% equity stake in the $5.5 billion proposed project, over the following 30 years, to participating aboriginal groups.
As well, Enbridge said it would put one per cent of Northern Gateway's pre-tax earnings into a trust, which was expected to generate $100 million over 30 years for non-Aboriginal as well as Aboriginal groups.
[49][50][51][52][53] Several First Nations (including the Haisla, Gitga'at, Haida, Gitxaala, Wet'suwet'en, Nadleh Whut'en, Nak'azdli, and Takla Lake) publicly stated (via the Joint Review Panel or in the media) that neither the Crown nor the established assessment process for Enbridge's project had adequately met their duty to consult and accommodate, or respect their Aboriginal rights and title.
While the benefits of greater flexibility, adaptability and opportunity for the Canadian petroleum sector, through market expansion and diversification, have not been quantified, they are also real and important.
"[55] A report put forth by economist and former Insurance Corporation of BC CEO, Robyn Allan, in early 2012, took assumptions of Wright Mansell Research Ltd's analysis into question – stating that this proposed pipeline could have actually hurt non-oil based sectors of the Canadian economy.
"[56][57] There has been an informal moratorium on large tanker traffic in Dixon Entrance, Hecate Strait, and the Queen Charlotte Sound since 1972.
[61] In December 2010, the federal House of Commons passed a non-binding motion to ban bulk oil tanker traffic in the Dixon Entrance, Hecate Strait and Queen Charlotte Sound.
An Abacus Data survey released in January 2012 for Sun Media found that 38% of Canadians were in support of building the pipeline, while 29% were opposed.
residents opposed to Enbridge's proposal to transport oil through British Columbia's inside coastal waters, including 50% who registered strong disapproval.
In an 8 March speech to a "conservative family reunion" hosted by Preston Manning in Ottawa, BC Premier Christy Clark stated that "we support pipelines in British Columbia" (referring to liquid natural gas) but that she was not yet convinced of the benefits of the Northern Gateway scheme.
[93] Following the Kalamazoo River oil spill on Enbridge Pipeline 6B in Michigan, the BC government stated five requirements to be addressed prior to supporting any heavy oil pipeline proposal:[94] BC premier Christy Clark in 2012 boycotted a national energy strategy among the Canadian premiers[95] stating "until we see some progress in the discussions between British Columbia, Alberta and the federal government with respect to the Gateway pipeline through British Columbia, we will not be participating in the discussion of a national energy strategy."