“The railway, which will carry the wheat from the west, will start a trade around Hudson Bay resulting in industries not yet dreamed of. Great cities will spring up, lands now a barren waste will be cultivated and productive, and new fields of silver, gold, and other valuable minerals will be developed to add wealth to the nation.”That’s what Canadian Magazine wrote in 1913. It’s more or less what boosters of the Churchill port expansion are saying today. But beware: “Only politicians and public servants are pushing Churchill,” says Heather Exner-Pirot of the MacDonald-Laurier Institute. “The private sector is not lining up to develop our minerals and energy in the Arctic.” Says Canpotex: “Canada’s largest and fastest-growing potash markets are in Asia and South America.”.OLDCORN: The public square is for everyone — not just the ‘tolerant’ Left.Understandably, Canadians want major projects, including pipelines, to move forward. A recent Nanos poll showed 60% support for oil and gas shipments in the Arctic — even if there are “environmental concerns.”But this is not the time for reckless mistakes. While no pipeline project made the first cut on the federal major projects list, Premier Danielle Smith remains hopeful. To try to attract private investment, she has put $14 million of Alberta taxpayers’ money on the table. That pales in comparison to the $1.3 billion that former Premier Kenney committed to restart Keystone XL — before President Biden nixed it by executive order. .BC energy minister Adrian Dix has said the final major projects list should include only those projects backed by strong investors, concrete plans, and solid timelines: “Now is not the time for fantasy projects.” Prime Minister Carney is apparently insisting that any pipeline project must have private backing. So why not hold the Churchill port expansion — expected on the next major projects list — to the same standard? Formerly under private-public ownership, it’s now operated by 41 First Nations. Over the summer, Manitoba and the federal government announced a preliminary $80 million for port development and the The-Pas-to-port railway, which is bogged down in muskeg and prone to severe flooding. While some call the expansion a “game changer,” others call it a distraction. They cite exponential capital, transport, and storage costs, as well as permafrost, silting, and dredging. Hudson Bay is frozen up to eight months of the year. Churchill itself is inaccessible by road. .EDITORIAL: Barber and Lich sentences are politicized 'justice' gone mad.Further complicating infrastructure development is that Churchill — close to Wapusk National Park and a polar bear maternity-denning area — is increasingly geared to eco-tourism. Environmental groups are alarmed about the effects of Arctic shipping. The Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs says expanding the port tramples on treaty rights. And then there’s the cost of ice breakers — over $3 billion each. Anything close to year-round shipping would require an entire fleet of them. Port proponents say salt water is “slushier” than “structural ice” and point to the fact that the Russians already successfully operate Arctic ports. However, these are also iced in most of the year, and Russian fleets are navigated by accident-prone, nuclear-powered ice breakers. Russia’s lack of warm water ports is a major geopolitical issue..Some, including Premier Wab Kinew and certain federal scientists, believe that climate change will magically unfreeze and unlock Hudson Bay. But in reality, the ice remains as thick as ever and consistent with historic Coast Guard mapping data.Premiers Kinew, Smith, Moe, and Ford have all engaged in wishful thinking on Hudson Bay. Ford has promoted James Bay, on the southern tip, as a “deep sea port.” It is no such thing — certainly not deep enough for huge cargo ships or oil tankers. Their desire for made-in-Canada solutions is understandable. However, without privately-backed projects, governments will play the dangerous game of picking winners and losers. The lost opportunity of private pipeline projects, advanced-then-cancelled during the Trudeau years, is a great cautionary tale. Energy East, Northern Gateway, Keystone XL, and the initially-private Trans Mountain expansion were backed by roughly $40 billion in private capital..OLDCORN: No, we don’t ‘honour martyrs'.“We have tried to build nation-building pipelines,” Enbridge CEO Greg Ebel told a Toronto crowd last week. “And we have the scars to prove it. About 500 million scars.” Ebel urged Ottawa to streamline federal regulation, speed up project reviews, and repeal the oil and gas cap and industrial carbon price. How many more times does someone have to say it?It’s time to rekindle the real nation-building projects that make economic sense and are based on the best bang for the fewest bucks. Quebec might not be officially in favour of an Energy East redux. BC might not like oil. Carney might want unanimous provincial and indigenous support. But that cannot mean unviable, make-work “fantasy” alternatives — including the Port of Churchill expansion — are pursued at taxpayers’ expense. Bronwyn Eyre is Saskatchewan’s former Energy minister of Energy, now a senior fellow with MEI and the Aristotle Foundation.This article appeared in a modified form in the Winnipeg Sun.
