Alberta suspends ban on B.C. wine
Notley eases off after Horgan says courts will decide on jurisdiction
Premier John Horgan stepped back from the brink of an all-out trade war with Alberta on Thursday, promising to let the courts settle jurisdictional questions about a proposal to ban expanded bitumen shipments through the province.
Horgan said the measure wasn’t about backing down, but about trying to take politics out of the process on an issue that drew an explosive reaction from Alberta Premier Rachel Notley, with her boycott on B.C. wine and the threat of escalating sanctions if the province didn’t drop the proposal.
“This is intended to have cooler heads prevail,” Horgan said. “We believe the rule of law is important in this country. We believe the rule of law is paramount to the people of British Columbia.”
B.C.’s proposed regulations were viewed by Alberta as a threat to Kinder Morgan’s $7.4-billion Trans Mountain expansion, which would cost the province thousands of jobs and $1.5 billion per year in revenue to its treasury alone.
Notley decided Horgan’s move was enough to suspend Alberta’s boycott of B.C. wine and resume talks on interprovincial electricity trade.
“In shelving (the proposed bitumen ban) and asking the courts to give it a right that it does not have, B.C. is stepping back from the brink and abiding by the law,” Notley said during a news conference in Edmonton.
Horgan said B.C. will proceed with the other four points of its plan to consult the public on additional environmental regulations around oil-spill response and compensation for spill damage.
On the fifth point — barring additional diluted bitumen shipments through B.C. until further scientific studies on how to clean up a spill — Horgan said B.C. will take a reference case to court for guidance on jurisdictional questions.
“The outcome of this reference will also be used to inform any next steps used to defend our coast,” Horgan said.
However, as much as Horgan’s move and Notley’s response appeared to be a truce, neither premier toned down their rhetoric on their positions on the Trans Mountain expansion project.
Horgan characterized Notley’s wine ban as a “disproportionate and unlawful reaction” to B.C. taking measures to protect the province’s coast — measures he maintains the court will uphold.
“We believe it is our right to take appropriate measures to protect our environment, economy and our coast from the drastic consequence of a diluted bitumen spill,” Horgan said. “And we are prepared to confirm that right in the courts.”
Notley said she was also unconcerned about the court outcome, believing a decision will confirm B.C. never had the right to restrict bitumen shipments. She called the matter “an unprovoked and unconstitutional attack on Alberta’s economy.”
“We think (the reference case) is ultimately the most important decision that is going to occur (for) the pipeline’s future,” Notley said.
“We’re reasonably confident in the success of that,” she said, adding that she now sees a path forward for the Trans Mountain expansion’s future.
Both premiers also face opposition pressure.
In Alberta, Opposition leader Jason Kenney said B.C. is still injecting uncertainty to a “critically important” project in urging Notley not to back down from a fight.
“It’s clear that the B.C. NDP has not changed its hostility to the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline expansion,” said Kenney, leader of Alberta’s United Conservative Party.
In Victoria, MLA Jas Johal, the B.C. Liberal critic for jobs, trade and technology, said Horgan’s step back didn’t reduce the risk of trade retaliation and introduced the possibility of a lengthy court case that would add to the tarnish on B.C.’s investment reputation.
B.C. environmentalists, however, welcomed Horgan’s decision on a reference case.
“Today’s announcement adds another legal barrier that could affect Kinder Morgan,” said Eugene Kung, a staff lawyer with West Coast Environmental Law.
Kung said WCEL’s position has long been that Canada’s co-operative federalism recognizes that jurisdictions overlap and B.C. does have the right to set regulations around bitumen.
“The reference case should provide clarity on exactly how far provincial regulation can go to protect B.C. from the threats of diluted bitumen,” Kung said.