A defamation lawsuit related to an NDP allegation in 2016 was dismissed after the former government and other parties involved settled the case..In July 2016, the Alberta NDP claimed the $2 billion in power purchase agreement (PPA) losses borne by Alberta electricity consumers was caused by an Enron “secret backroom deal” made in 2000 to alter an important clause in the PPAs..“My defamation case was about setting the record straight that I was not involved in a PPA secret backroom deal in 2000,” said Calgary lawyer, Robert Hemstock, who sued the former Alberta government..In June 2015, the NDP government amended Alberta’s Specified Gas Emitters Regulation to increase carbon taxes on large carbon emitting facilities, including coal-fired electricity generation..This decision was made without the NDP government undertaking the necessary due diligence to learn that increasing the carbon tax on the PPAs would allow the four companies that held PPAs (PPA Buyers) to terminate their now money-losing PPAs..All four PPA Buyers seized upon the opportunity and terminated their PPAs. The PPAs reverted to the Balancing Pool (Alberta electricity consumers), along with roughly $2 billion in future PPA losses..On July 25, 2016 the Attorney General of Alberta sued the PPA Buyers to try and overturn their PPA terminations and thus avoid the Balancing Pool having to incur the $2 billion loss. On the same day, the NDP government embarked on a media campaign that included government paid advertisements, to deflect public attention away from the costly PPA carbon tax decision..In its media campaign, the NDP government alleged the PPA terminations were the product of a “secret backroom deal”, made in 2000 between Enron and the former PC Government to amend the PPA Change in Law clause..“Our government believes regular Albertans shouldn’t be on the hook for secret backroom deals,” said NDP MLA Sarah Hoffman on July 25 2016, who noted companies have made an estimated $10 billion in profits from the PPAs..Two weeks into the media campaign, they identified Hemstock, a lawyer for Enron Canada in 2000, as having a role in the “secret backroom deal.".The province took legal action against utilities benefiting from a regulation they’ve dubbed the “Enron Clause.”.In March 2018, the attorney-general discontinued her lawsuit against the PPA Buyers without any of the PPA terminations being overturned. With this, the $2 billion loss to the Balancing Pool was now assured..The end of the Attorney General’s lawsuit didn’t resolve the issue of the veracity of the NDP government’s “secret backroom deal” allegation..To address this, in July 2018 Hemstock sued the defendants (Hoffman, Cheryl Oates, and the Government of Alberta) for defamation relating to this allegation.."The story really isn't about me. It's about what happens when a government makes a mistake. And then they use their power as government like a David and Goliath circumstance," Hemstock said.."They use their power of government to communicate messages that are not true. And it's very unfortunate. It's very unfortunate and not what Albertans would expect.".In November 2022, Hemstock and the three defendants reached a settlement which was satisfactory to all parties..It is unclear how much money Hemstock was paid.."I'm not allowed to speak to you about the terms of the settlement other than to say that all departments are satisfied with the settlements," Hemstock said.
A defamation lawsuit related to an NDP allegation in 2016 was dismissed after the former government and other parties involved settled the case..In July 2016, the Alberta NDP claimed the $2 billion in power purchase agreement (PPA) losses borne by Alberta electricity consumers was caused by an Enron “secret backroom deal” made in 2000 to alter an important clause in the PPAs..“My defamation case was about setting the record straight that I was not involved in a PPA secret backroom deal in 2000,” said Calgary lawyer, Robert Hemstock, who sued the former Alberta government..In June 2015, the NDP government amended Alberta’s Specified Gas Emitters Regulation to increase carbon taxes on large carbon emitting facilities, including coal-fired electricity generation..This decision was made without the NDP government undertaking the necessary due diligence to learn that increasing the carbon tax on the PPAs would allow the four companies that held PPAs (PPA Buyers) to terminate their now money-losing PPAs..All four PPA Buyers seized upon the opportunity and terminated their PPAs. The PPAs reverted to the Balancing Pool (Alberta electricity consumers), along with roughly $2 billion in future PPA losses..On July 25, 2016 the Attorney General of Alberta sued the PPA Buyers to try and overturn their PPA terminations and thus avoid the Balancing Pool having to incur the $2 billion loss. On the same day, the NDP government embarked on a media campaign that included government paid advertisements, to deflect public attention away from the costly PPA carbon tax decision..In its media campaign, the NDP government alleged the PPA terminations were the product of a “secret backroom deal”, made in 2000 between Enron and the former PC Government to amend the PPA Change in Law clause..“Our government believes regular Albertans shouldn’t be on the hook for secret backroom deals,” said NDP MLA Sarah Hoffman on July 25 2016, who noted companies have made an estimated $10 billion in profits from the PPAs..Two weeks into the media campaign, they identified Hemstock, a lawyer for Enron Canada in 2000, as having a role in the “secret backroom deal.".The province took legal action against utilities benefiting from a regulation they’ve dubbed the “Enron Clause.”.In March 2018, the attorney-general discontinued her lawsuit against the PPA Buyers without any of the PPA terminations being overturned. With this, the $2 billion loss to the Balancing Pool was now assured..The end of the Attorney General’s lawsuit didn’t resolve the issue of the veracity of the NDP government’s “secret backroom deal” allegation..To address this, in July 2018 Hemstock sued the defendants (Hoffman, Cheryl Oates, and the Government of Alberta) for defamation relating to this allegation.."The story really isn't about me. It's about what happens when a government makes a mistake. And then they use their power as government like a David and Goliath circumstance," Hemstock said.."They use their power of government to communicate messages that are not true. And it's very unfortunate. It's very unfortunate and not what Albertans would expect.".In November 2022, Hemstock and the three defendants reached a settlement which was satisfactory to all parties..It is unclear how much money Hemstock was paid.."I'm not allowed to speak to you about the terms of the settlement other than to say that all departments are satisfied with the settlements," Hemstock said.
