Report - Agence canadienne d'évaluation environnementale

Opinions of participants
One participant among many stated that he had been reassured by the proponent and
the quality of the analyses provided (Mr. Jacques Bouillé, DM467, p. 3). The Société
de développement économique de Lévis stated that good corporate citizens such as
Rabaska are needed to contribute to the many social and community-based projects
of the community (Mr. Pierre Lapointe, DT15, p. 71). Other participants were of the
opinion that the proponent had demonstrated his capacity and intention to involve
himself with the community (Mr. Michel Roberge, DM88, p. 2; Chambre de commerce
de Lévis, DM611, p. 12).
In order to measure the quality of reception for the project in the community, surveys
were conducted by various groups and the proponent. To demonstrate the
community’s favourable reception, the Mouvement populaire À bon port upheld that
“survey after survey, it has been clearly established that a majority of the population is
in favour of Rabaska” (DM547, p. 9). This group is also of the opinion that the results
of the last municipal election in 2005 reflected the population’s support (ibid.).
Conversely, the members of the Coalition Rabat-joie estimated that, based on their
own survey, the project does not have the population’s support. According to this
group, this survey “establishes that a strong majority of people residing within a radius
of 2.5 km and less from the future implementation site disapproved the project”
(DM606, p. 40). Moreover, some questioned the validity and representativeness of
these surveys, while others considered them to be a reflection of the general opinion
on the project: “we must be careful with opinion surveys done with the population and
businesses. We must be aware of the fact that we gather less information and are
less sensitized about issues that don’t concern us directly” (Mr. Benoît Bouffard,
DM31, p. 4 and 5). Another participant added that:
[…] the popular support upon which he [the proponent] claims he is basing survey
results from all across Lévis, i.e. with citizens living as far as 40 km from the site
targeted by the proponent. Because they are far from the site, it is normal that
these citizens do not feel the same concerns for their safety as those who would
have to live within a stone’s throw of the Rabaska facilities.
(Mr. Louis Duclos, DM458, p. 12)
For some participants, “various reliable measures, among which are included three
municipal elections and one referendum […] established that most citizens who are
directly concerned were opposed to the Rabaska project (Association pour la
protection de l’environnement de Lévis, DM459, p. 22). As for île d’Orléans residents,
“this project does not meet with the approval of the population of Sainte-Pétronille, as
demonstrated by the petition sponsored by the Association de l’île d’Orléans contre le
port méthanier” (Municipality of the village of Sainte-Pétronille, DM7, p. 2). In this
respect, the Association de l’île d’Orléans contre le port méthanier tabled, during the
14 Rabaska Project – Implementation of an LNG Terminal and Related Infrastructure