Why British Columbia Has a Tanker Ban — And Why Politicians Must Stop Ignoring It

🚢🌊 Why British Columbia Has a Tanker Ban — And Why Politicians Must Stop Ignoring It 🌊🚢

By Tina Winterlik / Zipolita — Winter 2025

For decades, people up and down the West Coast have understood something that too many politicians in Ottawa still refuse to grasp:

💥 British Columbia has a tanker ban for a reason.
💥 It exists to protect one of the most dangerous, turbulent, irreplaceable marine ecosystems on Earth.

And yet, here we are in late 2025, still watching MPs — many of whom have never set foot on these waters — argue as if this is some optional policy, some bargaining chip, some “economic opportunity.”

No.
This is about life and death of an ecosystem.
It’s about food security.
It’s about culture, salmon, orcas, Indigenous rights, and entire coastal communities.

🧭 The Real Reason for the Tanker Ban: Geography, Danger, and History

Elizabeth May recently reminded everyone of a crucial truth in her video:
🔹 The north coast of British Columbia is one of the most dangerous stretches of water in the world.
🔹 Twisting channels, fierce storms, unpredictable winds, and narrow inlets make it a deadly maze for massive crude oil tankers.

People forget this — or were never taught.

And here’s the part MPs continuously misunderstand:
🚫 Alaskan tankers DO NOT sail down our coastline.
They head west out into the open Pacific, far offshore, navigating huge ocean routes designed to keep them away from sensitive coastal ecosystems.

Why?
Because the risk of hugging the BC coastline is unacceptable.

We learned that the hard way.

🛢️ Remember the Exxon Valdez?

The 1989 Exxon Valdez spill was a global trauma — 11 million gallons of crude oil spilled into pristine waters.
Thousands of animals died, entire food webs collapsed, and communities are still dealing with long-term impacts.

BC said never again, not here.

But Exxon Valdez wasn’t the only one.
The West Coast has faced:

• Diesel spills that wiped out clam beds
• Bilge dumping
• Fuel leaks
• Marine disasters hidden by governments because they’re “inconvenient”

Indigenous Nations warned about this for generations.
Scientists warned.
Fishers warned.
Environmental groups warned.

And still, politicians argue as if this is a debate about “jobs.”

💔 Why Are MPs So Clueless? Why So Greedy?

It’s honestly heartbreaking — and infuriating — that people in Parliament still misunderstand basic environmental geography. Some have clearly never studied marine navigation. Some don’t listen to Indigenous stewards of the land and sea. Some don’t even know where the Great Bear Rainforest is.

And some are simply blinded by corporate interests and campaign donations.

This isn’t intelligence.
This isn’t leadership.
It’s greed mixed with ignorance, and coastal communities are always the ones who pay.

When politicians play with tanker bans, they are gambling with:
🐟 Salmon
🐚 Clam beds
🦅 Wildlife
🧡 Indigenous food sovereignty
⛵ Local economies
🎣 Fishing jobs
🌊 The entire Pacific coast

🌎 BC’s Tanker Ban Is Not Extreme — It’s Common Sense

The ban is not anti-development.
It is not anti-economy.
It is not “ideological.”

It is basic risk management.
Even one spill would destroy hundreds of kilometers of coastline and billions in natural capital.

BC isn’t being dramatic.
We’re being responsible — because Ottawa won’t.

---

🪞 Reflective Questions (for Readers and Politicians)

1. Why do MPs with no knowledge of West Coast waters feel entitled to override local voices?
2. Why are corporate profits always placed above Indigenous rights and environmental safety?
3. Why do politicians pretend tanker bans are “new,” when BC communities have fought for them for decades?
4. What does it say about our leadership when they cannot grasp basic marine geography?
5. If one spill could destroy ecosystems for generations, why do some MPs still treat this as an economic game?
6. What is the role of greed in political decision-making on environmental issues?
7. Would these same MPs support tankers in their own home riding’s most dangerous waters?
8. How can citizens better hold Parliament accountable for decisions that directly threaten coastal life?