It's no secret residents of Northeastern Alberta are treated to an abundance of open houses and information sessions at the expense of the oil and gas industry.
Companies operating in the region routinely set up shop in rural community halls, inviting the area's residents out to hear about the latest proposed project, a record-breaking earnings report or the next company-funded community program, and, of course, to fill up on a plate of the favourite local fare and other refreshments.
These warm plates of food and rosy company projections have become a staple for many residents looking to make it through the frigid Alberta winters.
But what happens to the open house/information session concept when the news emanating from industry is not so nice?
In the case of CNRL and the ongoing bitumen leaks at the company's Primrose site, they cease to occur.
Critics, including Greenpeace Canada, members of Cold Lake First Nations and Beaver Lake Cree Nation, as well as individual scientists and concerned citizens have voiced their discontent with not only CNRL's approach, but also the Alberta Energy Regulator's (AER) approach, to communicating with the public regarding CNRL's ongoing bitumen leaks, the causes behind the leaks, the possible solutions and the problems the contaminated sites now face.
Both CNRL and the AER do update their respective websites on a week-to-week basis. However, those same groups and individuals are also criticizing that information.
It could be that CNRL and the AER are in a lose-lose situation – as the company's actions are harming the environment and earning it a bad reputation, while the AER is questioned over its ability to enforce regulations and provide timely and accurate information. But limiting communication to a couple of websites and a media and dignitaries tour will only make things worse.
Certainly, it would be frightening to stand up as a company or regulator representative and have to explain to the public what has happened, what the effects are and what will be done – with no ostensible benefits to either the company or the regulator. But to not provide the public with in-person information appears cowardly and secretive, especially considering the company is extracting a public resource for profit and the regulator is entrusted as the public's watchdog. Both entities are accountable to the public.
Perhaps the best approach for both the company and regulator would be to gather up a few independent investigators from CNRL's Primrose site, order a bunch of hearty food and host a open-to-the-public information and question session, to clearly and openly update the public about what exactly is going on out there.
That would probably be the best for everyone involved.
