KEYSTONE CONFUSION?

After reading the following—see link  http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Pipeline+decision+time/7800039/story.html  I became confused .
(The Keystone XL oil pipeline is part of a 2700 km  system stretching from Alberta to Texas).
The article tells me-- ‘According to a new study...TransCanada found an alternative route that avoids Nebraska’s .. crucial aquifer..and numerous ecologically sensitive areas in the state....
The article states that “the company (TransCanada)..addressed most every concern raised..agreeing to dozens of special conditions...during the construction,operation and maintenance phases....Finally,TransCanada has committed itself to taking responsibility,technical and financial,for any spills.”
We hear little about Enbridge or Kinder Morgan  and the ‘profiting’ project participants’(oil producers and shippers) agreeing to ‘take financial responsibility for ANY spills.’!  Occasional mumbling is heard by these folks---but no firm commitment to pay for ALL spills! Conveniently,for them, the project participants profit as a group—regardless—but for A DISASTROUS SPILL ,in Burrard Inlet or Douglas Channel, or some remote ‘Kalamazoo like’ swamp land along the pipeline right of way, we’ll likely see a lot of finger pointing happening—leaving BC citizens  to pay for clean up.
That’s what confuses me ..no clarity about a commitment to pay...AND little apparent interest in reducing the probability and consequences of a spill(and unbelievably still ,sticking to Douglas Channel and Burrard Inlet routing).
Unless we hear soon  how  these  wannabe BC pipe liners will protect us from the inevitable screw up—maybe we should look at inviting new proposals? The oil will keep in the ground while we find the right proponent.
We’re happy to assist our cousin provinces to transport their resources to market—so please, cousins,  support us by telling  the pipeline proponents to come up with some sensible schemes—that do not encumber BC residents unfairly.
Seems fair.