STEPHENSON: B.C. premier channels Williams
Canada’s premiers attempted to scramble their way back to relatively safe and familiar territory on Friday by complaining about health-care funding and taking a few kicks at the federal government for ignoring the provinces.
British Columbia Premier Christy Clark, though, was having none of it.
She came to the premiers’ annual Council of the Federation meetings, hosted this week in Halifax by Nova Scotia Premier Darrell Dexter, as a rebel with her own agenda. The Danny Williams of the West, you might say.
She left in the same costume, no doubt scoring big political points back home, where she will be in the fight of her political life in an election expected next year.
Not only has she refused to play ball on developing a national energy strategy, one that all the other premiers signed on to and declared a major initiative of the federation, she is standing firm in her demands that B.C. receive a bigger slice of the revenue from a controversial pipeline project.
“There is only one person at this table whose job it is to stand up for the interests of British Columbians and that’s me,” she said.
The $5.5-billion Enbridge pipeline project, which has not received federal approval, will run from northern Alberta to the B.C. coastline at Kitimat, where heavy oil would be loaded into tankers bound for Asian markets.
There was a bit of Danny Williams’ drama in the whole production. The former Newfoundland and Labrador premier may not have been beloved across Canada for his firebrand positions on offshore revenues, power deals with Quebec and a whole host of other issues, but he consistently scored the highest approval ratings among premiers in terms of his support among the voters at home.
Clark catered to the home crowd in defence of her position, which she says is about acting in the interests of British Columbia taxpayers.
But she didn’t seem to grasp her own contradiction in standing up for her province in what she termed “difficult discussions” and her decision to withdraw B.C.’s involvement in the federation’s development of a national energy strategy.
“Just because it’s difficult, doesn’t mean you can step away and decide you’re not going to stand up for your province,” she said of the conflict over the pipeline project.
It was interesting to note, though, that the woman who stepped into Williams’ shoes after he left politics expressed little patience for Clark’s suggestion that working in the interests of one’s home province meant stepping aside from group discussions as premiers of the federation.
Kathy Dunderdale noted that premiers in the past have faced challenges among themselves over energy issues, but suggested the conflict between British Columbia and Alberta over the pipeline should be resolved elsewhere.
“There are difficult conversations, there are challenges, but we don’t get to walk away from them,” said Dunderdale.
“We’re looking forward to a time when British Columbia is comfortable enough with this process that they’ll be part of it. We’re not going to negotiate at the (federation) table an agreement between two provinces.”
The rebel-with-a-cause routine didn’t sit too well with the other premiers, particularly Alberta’s Alison Redford, who was too smart to take the bait on questions at the closing news conference about the lack of universal backing among premiers for the energy strategy initiative.
Redford has been a driving force in moving the federation toward a national strategy, and suggested the current disagreement with British Columbia is “an illustration as to why we need to have a Canadian energy strategy.”
The premiers made significant progress in a number of areas, producing reports on national health clinical treatment guidelines and a blueprint on how Ottawa’s plan to alter health transfers in future years will shift a significant burden of costs to the provinces.
There is no indication whether Prime Minister Stephen Harper will accept an invitation to come to Halifax to meet with the premiers at a first ministers meeting in November. It’s been over three years since he attended such a conference.
The premiers were wise to throw the ball back into the federal court and force Harper to provide an answer.
Marilla’s column returns Aug. 22.
Williams???
Submitted by mact on July 28, 2012 - 7:54am.
While she is steadfast on this one, I've yet to be convinced that she has Danny Williams' brains, or tenacity, for that matter.
Well it looks like two of Harper's strongholds have now been pitted against one another. Now all we need is for Southern Ontario, namely the area within 100 mi. of Bay Street, to join the ruckus.
Williams?
Submitted by murphyj87 on July 28, 2012 - 8:25am.
Christie Clark is not a stupid, "buy American", American health insurance industry bribed, traitor to Canada, empty suit as Danny Williams was.
At least someone is willing to stand up to the Harper Government's™ environment threatening pipelines. Maybe now the Harper Government™ will pay some attention to the desire of the people to derail Harper's pipeline agenda.
Marilla"s Own Contradiction
Submitted by dennis.cato on July 28, 2012 - 10:02am.
(1) "But she didn't seem to grasp her own contradiction in standing up for her own province in what she termed 'difficult discussions' and her decision to withdraw B.C.'s involvement in the federation's development of a national energy strategy." Marilla Stephenson
(2) "'Just because it's difficult, does not mean you can step away and decide you're not going to stand up for your province,' she said of the conflict over the pipeline project." Marilla DStephenson
Marilla appears to be very confused this morning on a two issues, the logical and the substantive. First, how is Christy Clark being self-contradictory in "standing up for her own province" on the one hand and her decision "to withdraw B.C.'s involvement in the federation's development of a national energy strategy" on the other? How is this being self-contradictory? It seems perfectly logical to me. Marilla may not agree with Clark's decision but that does not affect the logic of her (Clark's) reasoning.
Secondly, there is the substantive point. What is Marilla talking about? Is she talking about the national energy strategy or is she talking about the pipeline project or, for that matter, are the two separate issues at all? In (1) above, it appears that the "difficult discussions" refer to the national energy project but in (2) they appear to relate to the pipeline project. So, what is Marilla talking about?
P.S. Re: mact (7:54AM)
Really mact, is it true that you're "not convinced that she (Clark) has Danny William's brains, or tenacity for that matter?" Is that so, mact? I don't suppose you would have any reasons to support that claim, would you mact? No, I didn't suppose you would.
You are very generous in your assessment
Submitted by Here on July 28, 2012 - 10:14am.
Premier Clark's main argument in the discussions is to leave the meeting and not discuss a matter that has an effect on the entire nation. Essentially her stance of standing up for BC is to impose a tariff on those goods transiting her area of provincial responsibility. When you stop for a moment you realize that isn't a condoned practice in business or the world.
Comparing her to Mr. Williams is a bit off I think. She is blocking access to markets for another's product and that seems more like a Hydro Quebec logic.
Quebec says no to NL
Submitted by more equal than you on July 28, 2012 - 10:18am.
Quebec says no to NL transmitting power from Labrador through PQ to NS,NB,etc....end of story.
BC tries same deal and everyone and the PM is upset.
Am I missing something?
@dennis.cato
Submitted by mact on July 28, 2012 - 10:29am.
Don't fret. Those remarks aren't partisan or gender motivated, but due to the simple fact that she hasn't been in that position for long. We'll see how she gets along on this one which is far from over yet. Could be just political posturing.
Wait it out
Submitted by High Tide on July 28, 2012 - 11:35am.
They might as well wait until after the BC election before they settle this one. Let Clark run her mouth off and posture away until the ballots are counted. If she wins (or loses), the inevitable will happen - more money will get tossed at BC and the pipeline will go through. There are lots of other things to do until then. If they settle this now and the Liberals lose the election they will just have to redo all that work.