Premiers' conference: Energy diplomacy
The chance of Canada’s premiers coming up with a national approach to energy development in Halifax is not off to a great start. But at least the first step should be clear to everyone. Some energy diplomacy is needed to get Alberta’s Alison Redford and British Columbia’s Christy Clark to call a truce in their fight over sharing benefits of the proposed $5.5-billion Northern Gateway pipeline.
The Alberta-B.C. problem is one most governments would love to have. Northern Gateway would add $270 billion to GDP and boost federal and provincial taxes by $81 billion over 30 years. By tapping Asian markets through the B.C. port of Kitimat, Alberta producers would earn an extra $72 billion by 2025.
There would be opportunities for B.C. industry to use the feedstock and for aboriginal communities to participate in the project. With proper safety measures, the pipeline can surely be made a huge win-win for both provinces.
But fear of spills has created opposition in coastal B.C. and the Opposition NDP says it wouldn’t allow the line to proceed. This has put pressure on Premier Clark to make her support conditional on “world-leading” spill-prevention and clean-up measures and on maximizing revenue. But her call for a higher share of government revenues is seen in Alberta as a raid on its oil royalties, something neither Ms. Redford nor the Alberta public will accept.
Premier Redford is right that it’s unacceptable for one province to be taxed by others for having its resources move across borders. This tollgating would be a huge burden on business and consumers and incompatible with a national economy. But Premier Clark hasn’t actually asked for a cut of royalties and there are other ways to give B.C. a greater economic stake in the project and its potential spin-offs.
What’s in neither province’s interest is to repeat the Quebec-Newfoundland impasse that stymied Lower Churchill hydro for decades.
It would also be a loss if Premier Redford’s efforts to promote a national energy strategy were derailed. In energy terms, Canada is a ridiculously chopped-up nation that has failed to create linkages to allow oil, gas and electricity to move efficiently throughout the country and to export opportunities. Fixing that is well worth more effort by the premiers to engage in a bit of energy diplomacy.
pipeline
Submitted by cabottrail on July 26, 2012 - 8:10am.
As with all these energy stories, no one is doing a good job to explain the financial story in terms of good numbers or any visual charts ,the average person can't unravel this by talking about the royalties without showing the input and out put formulas .
NDP Oppose
Submitted by Bobby33 on July 26, 2012 - 8:15am.
i am not surprised that the opposition NDP would oppose the pipeline. If they are consistent with Dexter's vision they would rather pour millions into very relevant paper mills as a source of economic development.
Nothing to see here. Move on.
Submitted by shawnino on July 26, 2012 - 8:41am.
Redford and Clark had their little catfight. Let's move on. No matter how grandiosely this group of premiers bills itself ("Council of the Federtion of Planets" or some such), they never actually accomplish anything. It takes a prime minister to accomplish anything. Always has, always will.
Prime Minister Harper?
Submitted by hav2b on July 27, 2012 - 7:09am.
His absence was due to arrogance to the point of ignorance.
Can you imagine, a first minister's meeting without the first minister? What does Harper think "Prime Minister" means?
...political grandstanding
Submitted by henry gondorf on July 26, 2012 - 9:39am.
..this is one great big dose of political grandstanding...this is a regulatory issue that will be decided by the National Energy Board....and that will be it... the board is responsible for setting the “toll rate.. for moving product through its pipelines..Enbridge will make that application...and lay out before the NEB that B.C. is demanding compensation for environmental risks...and aboriginal land crossing.. and in turn the NEB could bump up the price-per-barrel that oilsands developers pay to get their product to market.... the royalties that Alberta receives are not affected...they get a royalty for the oil....the oil developer has to get it to market and pays a toll rate...... Clark is playing the violin...Redford is right..
..oh ...and in addition
Submitted by henry gondorf on July 26, 2012 - 9:53am.
I wish that someone would revisit the Hamilton Falls ( Churchill Falls) issue from a historical basis...it can be described in the same vein as this issue...the historical equivalence is marked...Quebec had an energy corridor to the US...a system of delivery invented by a Quebec engineer that was a very major engineering discovery in the world at the time....Newfoundland had a power source..but no delivery system, and had no investors interested in building another delivery line to the same market...just as if Saskatchewan discovered oil and wished to deliver it to China...do you think that another pipeline investment would be popular for investors...nope...which makes me wonder why we are building a line through NS to New England. It doesn't make any sense....
More Political Posturing
Submitted by daveburris on July 26, 2012 - 11:31am.
This little tiff sure puts the lie to that oft-quoted common wisdom that we should have more women in politics. Not so much, no difference.
Clarke is acting pretty much like a spoiled child - “If Alberta doesn’t sit down and talk about it, the project can’t go ahead. It’s as simple as that" Nation building is not on her agenda.
As noted by the editor "tollgating(across borders is) incompatible with a national economy" Right, we have enough hindrances to development and job creation as things are.
If the Toronto Sun is correct Clarke doesn't have a leg to stand on "The constitution gives decision-making authority over pipelines, railways, interprovincial highways and other national transportation systems to the federal government. Above and beyond that, the B.C. government signed a deal over a year ago to abide by the outcome of the federal assessment being conducted by a National Energy Board (NEB) panel due to be completed in Dec. 2013" http://www.torontosun.com/2012/07/24/pipeline-posturing-just-political-t...
So just another politician, the male gender has no monopoly on political grandstanding.
Funny how it works
Submitted by Here on July 26, 2012 - 1:33pm.
People with no say in the matter get to demand tariffs and tolls?
We have Premier Clark acting as if BC is exempt from confederation and an independant state. We have obscure tribes claiming no labrador development unless they are bought off.
The Federal government is responsible for certain areas and the provincial governments are responsible for certain areas. Individual groups of citizens are not responsible for anything but dabble in whatever catches their interest. Premier Clark is not responsible for pipelines or ports and Innu do not own Labrador. In both cases Canada, the federal government acting for all Canadians, has the responsibility and right.
Too much weight and time in this country is spent listening to folks who have no idea what they are on about but want to claim eminent domain in a field.
Shed Colonial Legacy
Submitted by CapeHalifax on July 26, 2012 - 5:18pm.
Spot on comment: "Canada is a ridiculously chopped-up nation..."
We need to come into the third millennium as a unified economic and energy powerhouse or our failed legacy as colonial enclaves unable to leverage the true power of confederacy will repeat itself to our own collective disadvantage.
The Canadian Corporate identity has yet to be realized.
Until we succeed in talking to one another first, we will never speak to the world as a leading light merely, as China chastised us, a middle power muddling along annoying the real world leaders.
We have to shed our colonial baggage and start running this operation based on established principles of modern enterprises venturing public capital for the stakeholder's benefit.
same old story
Submitted by GRF on July 27, 2012 - 4:15am.
It’s just more of the same old story, give me the money and I’ll sell out the environment. That is true to a point but the pipe line must and will be built or we will continue to depend on the US market. That is unthinkable and if this country is to benefit from the sell of energy to Asia it has to start here. My real concern is all Canadians are not receiving a benefit from the countries oil and gas reserves. That could be accomplished by extending the existing pipe line east ward to NS and PEI which would allow the off shore oil and gas from the east to travel west and the west supply to travel east eliminating the need of foreign purchases of energy. Regulations on the industry should also include a stipulation that a certain percentage of profit from the industry as a whole be made available to assist in the development of a green industry in Canada along the lines of tidal and wind power with a special consideration to hydro development. We must without delay or hesitation develop a basket containing all possible advantages to our country.