Dear Editor:
The system is flawed and needs fixing! Upon completion of the National Energy Board's public hearings for the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project application, we anticipated a recommendation, based on clear public debate of complex issues. We received an NEB recommendation based primarily on the proponents' "expert" material - the public's "expert" input was not apparent. Further, many very controversial public issues were not decided. Instead we were left 209 conditions - for later resolution?
What to do? A publicly funded advocate system must be created which would allow the public to offer their "expert" prepared material for NEB evaluation. As it stands now we see primarily the proponents' "expert" material.The public offer their concerns, but with little or no expertly prepared supporting evidence, which leaves the NEB in an awkward position.
Significant public funds are required to hold hearings - for the benefit of the proponents basically.
The politicians tell us that the NEB exists to protect the public interest? The public deserves better!
Carl Shalansky
North Vancouver
