Premier Danielle Smith has Alberta stepping up as a proponent of a pipeline to the West Coast. Such a pipeline to the West Coast would give Alberta oil access to world markets, where we could get a better price per barrel and expand markets. Presently, we get a discounted price, as most of our oil is sold to the US and we are otherwise landlocked (except for Trans Mountain Expansion, which will soon be at capacity).By contrast, Prime Minister Carney has reportedly lofted the notion of restarting Keystone XL south to the United States..MacBAIN: Parks Canada gets it wrong, again.While this would avoid disputes or confrontations between Premier Eby of British Columbia and BC indigenous land back activists, it would keep Alberta and Canada even more economically tied to the United States, the opposite of Carney’s “elbows up” plan for Canadian economic sovereignty.Robert Lyman, retired energy economist and former federal public servant and diplomat of many years, sees the Keystone XL ploy by Carney as deceptive. In a recent article, Lyman writes, “For ten years, the policy of the Liberal Party of Canada has been that the construction of new oil production and pipeline facilities in Canada should not proceed if they would compromise the attainment of the ‘Net-Zero by 2050’ greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions goal. Further, successive Liberal governments have provided hundreds of millions of dollars in subsidies to environmental and indigenous groups that oppose new pipeline infrastructure. They have implemented over 140 measures to reduce GHG emissions and spent over $150 billion of taxpayers’ funds in pursuit of ‘net-zero.’”.“Now, Canadians are to believe that, presumably as a way to get an agreement on trade with the United States, Mark Carney will turn his back on almost 16 years of actions that his party has taken.”“I may be forgiven for thinking that there is something fishy about this.”Regarding the Alberta proposal for a pipeline to the West Coast, Premier David Eby of British Columbia is opposed, despite such approval being in federal hands. However, both Carney and Energy Minister Tim Hodgson have publicly stated that they’d support such a pipeline if British Columbia and indigenous groups agree, side-stepping their own authority in law, and the recently approved Bill C-5, which allows the government to simply pick a winner and go forward with it..NEUMANN: Alberta’s democracy needs some sober second thought.In Canada, pipeline approvals are now all about politics, not evidence.Once upon a time in Canada, the National Energy Board (NEB) handled these detailed, evidence-based reviews for some 60 years. Most people had never even heard of the NEB until the enviro law charity, Ecojustice, began a point-and-click campaign against the NEB, demanding changes. Those demands turned into Bill C-69, the “no more pipelines” bill. Unfortunately, the NEB’s rigorous, evidence-based process no longer sets the bar for approvals. Now the Canada Energy Regulator and the Impact Assessment Act review major projects. Politics plays a key role..Lyman explained to me that the government has established a procedure in which a project is first "reviewed in principle" for consistency with the government's policies before it is assessed in terms of its specific merits, costs, and benefits. That injects a subjective judgment (e.g. could the project hinder Canada's ability to meet the Net-Zero objective?; is it consistent with the government's gender policies?) in place of a neutral assessment based on the facts. Thus, major project proponents are gun-shy of such a set-up. Remember that development costs in preparing engineering and technical documents for such projects often run in the order of $1 billion before any construction starts..BEST: Judges are remaking Constitutional law, not applying it, and Canadians’ property rights are part of the collateral damage.Robert Lyman has written a report titled, “Before Politics Governed Pipelines” to remind the public just how thorough the NEB’s assessment of Northern Gateway was. This is a fine educational tool to share with people to understand the scope of an evidence-based review.Lyman writes, “The NEB carried out an exhaustive review over four years. It held 35 public information sessions. Public hearings were held over 180 days; these heard the views of 206 intervenors, 12 government departments and agencies, and 1,179 oral arguments before the Panel. The entire record of the proceedings was published. The panel’s report [1] set out a lengthy summary of the evidence it heard and of the Panel’s views based on the evidence.” .Lyman closes by saying that, “The NEB’s review of Northern Gateway demonstrated on the evidence that an oil pipeline from Alberta to the northern British Columbia coast and the related port and marine shipping could be accomplished in a safe and environmentally responsible way and would yield large economic benefits to British Columbia, Alberta, and Canada as a whole.”This project was approved by the Harper government, and in 2015, Justin Trudeau made an election promise to cancel it. Once in office, Trudeau simply failed to conduct the consultations with indigenous groups that the Federal Court had ruled needed to be held to validate the permit that the NEB and the Harper Government had approved. He then "double-downed" by introducing legislation that banned tanker traffic off the northern BC coast. .FLETCHER: Trump lays the lumber on BC and Eby’s elbows are up.Tiff Macklem, Governor of the Bank of Canada, just informed Canadians to expect a decline in our standard of living. There is no reason why Canadians should expect that when we are rich in resources and commodities that are in demand worldwide. The only thing stopping Canada from surging ahead economically is our own government and its climate-addled world view.
