SUPPORTNG STATEMENT: Enbridge states that it “is committed
to the principles of good governance, and the company
employs a variety of policies, programs and practices to
manage corporate governance and ensure compliance1.” This
commitment includes ensuring compliance with the
company’s Statement on Business Conduct which includes a
specific commitment to “Ensuring any presentations or
proposals are truthful and do not contain inaccurate or
misleading information2.”
Yet Enbridge acts repeatedly in ways that contradict this
commitment (sic)
With respect to its gas distribution business in Canada, the
Competition bureau is investigating Enbridge’s (sic) for
telling potential customers that gas is the most costeffective way to heat their homes and suggesting that it is
“clean energy” and “low carbon.”3 None of these claims are
true. Enbridge’s misleading claims run contrary to Ontario
government’s research4 that shows heat pumps are cheaper
in areas being considered for expanded gas infrastructure.
Enbridge states that Line 5 is a safe and reliable pipeline. Yet
evidence shows serious safety and structural issues with the
70-year-old pipeline5. The financial and reputational risks
from any Line 5 pipeline failure are huge considering the size
of financial damages that could occur with a pipeline that
runs through the Great Lakes watershed, a source of
drinking water for more than 40 million people, and home to
80 per cent of North America’s surface freshwater.
Enbridge applied to the Ontario Energy Board (OEB) for a
rate increase that would primarily pay for an expansion of
Enbridge’s gas infrastructure. To justify this application at a
time when natural gas has become uncompetitive for heating
new homes, Enbridge was found to have relied on a faulty
report that overestimated the cost benefits of natural gas vs.
electrified heating by $140 billion6. The OEB in its final ruling
found that the energy transition puts Enbridge’s expanded
gas infrastructure at risk of being stranded7. Yet Enbridge
argues that there is less risk to natural gas infrastructure
because, it argues, there will be a change of government in
the next Canadian election that will result in the repeal of the
carbon tax charge on natural gas heating8. Enbridge is
essentially relying on polling and campaign promises to
justify rate increases and investment decisions.
Our request for a review is reasonable and proportionate as
Enbridge has shown a pattern of misrepresentation that is
failing to meet its own Statement on Business Conduct while
creating financial and reputational risk. We urge shareholders
to vote in favour of this proposal to protect Enbridge’s
reputation and economic interests