Report - Agence canadienne d'évaluation environnementale

Opinions of participants
participant specified that “the company will become the biggest taxpayer in the city,
and therefore support a large portion of the services that are offered to citizens, thus
probably improving our quality of life” (Ms. Christine Dubé, DM138, p. 3). Many were
of the opinion that the tax revenues for the City of Lévis and the two levels of
government represent sizeable sums which can be reinvested into the upkeep and
development of infrastructures and services 1 . Regarding this aspect, one participant
emphasized the importance of the economy when improving quality of life:
If we want to improve our community’s social component, our services and our
jobs for young people, we must unfortunately or fortunately think about the
economy. How will we be able to reach our collective goals without funds, without
development, without consolidating our local and provincial economy? Our
regional economy is stable and growing slowly. Now, with Rabaska, we have a
very important development opportunity.
(Mr. Steve Boutin, DM151, p. 1)
The Mouvement populaire À bon port stated that Rabaska would also contribute to the
community’s well-being by financing the Lévis mass transit network: “milestones were
set out by the proponent in this respect through his written approval for financial aid to
develop mass transit in the Lévis community. As such, this is very promising for the
future” (DM547, p. 8).
The impacts apprehended on tourism
On the regional level, some participants apprehended impacts on tourism after
building an LNG terminal on the St. Lawrence River’s banks. Some believed that
building such a terminal at Lévis “would diminish our cultural environment, and by the
same token, the internationally recognized tourism component of our destination”
(GIRAM, DM461, p. 51). Several believed that the cruise and tourism industry in
Vieux-Québec and on the île d’Orléans could experience a decrease in traffic.
According to the North American Tourism Research Institute Inc. (NATRI), “the
presence of an LNG port compromises not only a major part of our tourism appeal,
but also opens the door to portuary expansion, which would drastically confine our
tourism and historic richness to a lower class, something which is unacceptable for
the regional tourism industry” (DM297, p. 6).
1. Mr. Denis Galipeau, DM104, p. 4; Mr. Jean-François Desjardins, DM105, p. 1; Société de développement
économique de Lévis, DM545, p. 11; Mr. Claude Caron, DM33, p. 2; Poitras Service d’exposition, DM361, p. 1;
Mr. Mathieu Lafontaine, DM291, p. 2; Mr. Gilles Bégin, DM39; Mr. Eddey Charbonneau, DM82, p. 2; Mr. Sylvain
Martineau, DM101, p. 1; Mr. Jacques Breton, DM215, p. 2; Mr. Mario Rochette, DM327; Qualité Granit inc.,
DM335, p. 2; Mr. Jean-Yves Goineau, DM386; E. Hyland, DM403; Mr. Thomas Enright, DM527, p. 1; Mr. Yan
Vallé, DM658, p. 1; Ms. Nancy Grégoire, DM667, p. 1; Mr. Stéphane Damphousse, DM657, p. 2.
44 Rabaska Project – Implementation of an LNG Terminal and Related Infrastructure