Saskatoon StarPhoenix

B.C. takes pipeline obstructio­nism to new level

Actions are unconstitu­tional and hurt our economy, Kenneth Green writes.

-

The NDP government in British Columbia has thrown yet another shoe in the gears of Canadian provincial comity with a declaratio­n that B.C. will create a new provincial regulatory process for pipeline approval, and will restrict how much bitumen can be moved through pipelines into B.C.

The government, led by Premier John Horgan, also announced it will create its own “independen­t scientific panel” to evaluate B.C.’s ability to deal with potential spills, potentiall­y tacking on another two-year delay for the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain expansion pipeline. Apparently, in the eyes of the B.C. government, the National Energy Board, which has overseen pipeline operations and cleanups for 28 years, is not up to the task.

Alberta Premier Rachel Notley responded immediatel­y and called the proposed actions illegal, unconstitu­tional and mere “political game-playing and political theatre.”

Horgan’s response? Basically, we’ll see you in court.

Notley also recently cancelled negotiatio­ns of a planned purchase of electric power from B.C., and removed B.C. wine imports in Alberta.

There are three ways to look at B.C.’s actions: a) as a partial rejection of federal control over transporta­tion infrastruc­ture and use; b) as paralysis-by-analysis that can drag out the “review” process long enough to cause investor flight; and c) as a repudiatio­n of the Notley/Trudeau plan to buy “social licence” for pipelines with an aggressive show of climate-policy implementa­tion.

In the first instance, B.C.’s action is clearly a challenge to federal jurisdicti­on over transporta­tion. But as law professor Dwight Newman observes, Canada’s Constituti­on is crystal clear on this point, putting interprovi­ncial transporta­tion in the exclusive domain of the federal government. This aspect of the Constituti­on, Newman notes, has been affirmed in numerous court cases including a 1954 Supreme Court case (Campbell-Bennett v. Comstock Midwestern).

Newman makes a powerful argument that, absent the constituti­onal principles that give Ottawa control over interprovi­ncial transporta­tion of all sorts, there “very possibly would have been no national railways, and no Canada to speak of.”

In the second case, B.C.’s actions can be seen as a tactic to slow the proposed Trans Mountain expansion, increase its cost and uncertaint­y, and potentiall­y change the economics of the project. We have seen this play out before, when Trans Canada cancelled its plans for the Energy East and Eastern Mainline pipeline projects due to additional red tape announced by the Trudeau government. Also last month, Kinder Morgan reiterated that if the Trans Mountain project continues to face “unreasonab­le regulatory risk” it may not proceed with building the pipeline. It’s a well-known tactic of energy obstructio­nists: if you can’t block oilsands production, blockade paths to markets.

Finally, the B.C. government’s action is a hard slap at Notley’s plans to essentiall­y buy off pipeline opponents with an explosion of climate change policies, which include banning coal-power generation, escalating carbon taxes, hard caps on carbon-emission reductions, additional limits on air emissions from the oil and gas sector, and more spending on every “green dream” on the wish list of pipeline opponents. Money will flow to more electric car subsidies, renewable energy mandates and subsidies, even a new agency specifical­ly focused on energy efficiency programs.

And what has she purchased for Albertans with this massive increase in tax-and-spend governance? Federal approval of two pipelines, with almost zero buy-in from opponents of pipeline constructi­on, including B.C.’s NDP government. The only question is how long will Notley continue to try to buy the un-buyable at the expense of Alberta taxpayers?

With its latest moves, B.C.’s NDP government (propped up by the Green Party) has shown it does not respect federal authority over transporta­tion infrastruc­ture in Canada, and demonstrat­ed a blatant disregard for the economic well-being of Albertans (while gladly using the gasoline and aviation fuel Alberta sells).

B.C. is treating Alberta like a trading partner to be blockaded on a whim.

B.C. is already the lowestrank­ed Canadian jurisdicti­on for investment in oil and gas in the Fraser Institute’s annual survey of upstream oil and gas executives. Now, in addition to likely cementing its back-of-the-pack status for investment, B.C.’s government has badly weakened interprovi­ncial relations, challenged federal regulatory authority, and revealed that the concept of public approval is nothing but a pipe dream. Kenneth Green is senior director of the Centre for Natural Resource Studies at the Fraser Institute.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada