GIESBRECHT: 'Conscription if necessary but not necessarily conscription'

Mark Carney is being accused of giving Alberta and Quebec different answers on the east-west pipeline issue. Basically, the accusation is that he is telling Alberta “Yes, we will build the pipeline” while at the same time telling Quebec “No, we won’t, unless you change your mind and say Yes.”We should not be surprised. In fact, he is just taking a page out of the playbook of William Lyon Mackenzie King who, with a total of 21 years and 154 days in office, remains not only the longest-serving prime minister in Canadian history, but also the longest-serving Liberal leader. He held the position for exactly 29 years.It was King’s famous “Not necessarily conscription, but conscription if necessary” sleight of hand that kept his Liberals in power during a similar episode in history, when Quebec wanted one thing, and the rest of the country wanted exactly the opposite. Quebec was opposed to conscription, while the overwhelming majority of the rest of the country believed that conscription was necessary if Hitler was to be defeated..Bloc Quebecois leader, Yves Francois Blanchet, accused Carney during the April 16 federal leaders’ French language debate of lacking consistency on the pipeline issue, saying that he simultaneously claimed he would “push pipelines through Canada” and then asserted he would not.Carney told Radio-Canada last month that new pipelines would “not necessarily” be prioritized by his government. Thus, we have “Pipelines if necessary, but not necessarily pipelines.” Very clever.He went on to muddy the waters even further:“We have to choose a few projects, a few big projects, not necessarily pipelines, but maybe pipelines,” he said in French during the April 13 interview. “We’ll see.”When questioned during the May 13 interview about his evolving views on various environmental policies, particularly the consumer carbon tax that he removed as prime minister after initially endorsing it, Carney reiterated his support for a pipeline.“If you want a simple answer on ‘Will I support building a pipeline?’ Yes. That’s the simple answer. I’ve given that multiple times,” Carney said..That last bit seems like a clear “Yes” to pipeline construction. But when speaking to Quebecers in French Carney seems to assure them that no pipeline will be built across their province unless they give their agreement to such a proposal. This effectively means that Quebec would have a veto over any east-west pipeline construction.And as to any rethinking of Carney’s lifelong commitment to the Liberals’ climate change and net zero “holy grail,” former Environment Minister Steven Guibeault said during a May 14 press scrum that fighting climate change continues to be a cornerstone of the Liberal government’s agenda.“It was a central element of our platform, and we will make good on our commitments,” he said.That doesn’t sound good for folks hoping that the new Carney government will be much different from the Trudeau government..And Carney’s new Environment Minister doesn’t sound to be less radical than the old one. In fact, she might well be even worse.In the same scrum Guilbeault insisted that investors aren’t interested in the east-west pipeline idea anyway.Of course they are not, with all of the obstacles, and uncertainty that Guilbeault and Trudeau have very deliberately put in the way of the fossil fuel industry why would any sane investor put billions into a project that a zealot, like Guibeault, could scuttle with a few strokes of his — or her — pen?Alberta Premier Danielle Smith explains during a May 8 interview that the federal government has created “a chaotic investment environment” and said it is Ottawa’s job is to “create an environment where the private sector will come to the table.” .And other recent comments by Carney only reinforce the cold water Guilbeault is throwing on hopes that an east-west pipeline will be built.He has said the industrial carbon tax will not be repealed, despite requests for its removal by the energy industry.Carney is like Mackenzie King in many ways, and seems to be copying his clever tactics.Mackenzie King kept his “Yes conscription, No conscription” equivocation trick going until the crisis had passed. The trick worked, and helped make him Canada’s longest serving PM. Will Carney do the same with his “Yes pipelines, no pipelines” trick?The difference between the two situations, of course, is that when Mackenzie King used his “Yes conscription-No conscription” gambit it was basically a case of Quebec wanting one thing, and the rest of Canada wanting the opposite.Today it is more nuanced. For example, many climate change enthusiasts in Toronto or Vancouver would probably support the Quebec “no pipeline” consensus. However, it seems clear that if not for Quebec opposition, an east-west pipeline, as well as many other of Alberta’s requirements, would definitely become a federal government priority. 87% of Canada’s business leaders want the pipeline to happen. .Mackenzie King knew full well that the conscription issue could well have torn this country apart. It was his clever Liberal-style prevarication that enabled him to navigate Canada through troubled waters and prevent that from happening.Carney is now attempting a version of that — namely by stalling — on the thorny pipeline/fossil fuel issue. He might well believe that he is keeping the country together by doing so. Whether or not he will be as successful as King remains to be seen.But it comes down to a question of how long Smith and Moe will let Carney string them along, if Quebec continues to say “No”. Because Smith is telling Carney that Alberta needs pipelines, and needs an answer soon.Premier Smith explains Alberta’s demands in this recent interview with Western Standard’s Derek Fildebrandt. She is prepared to give Carney time to show his good intentions. In crude terms, she has basically given Carney six months to…..errr…relieve himself, or extricate himself from the commode.Brian Giesbrecht, a retired Manitoba judge, is a Senior Fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

GIESBRECHT: 'Conscription if necessary but not necessarily conscription'

Related Stories