Sudden shift on emissions sours visit to Ottawa

Do they actually have a section in the Prime Minister’s office called Annoy Alberta?

You’d think so, given the timing of the new Liberal environment minister’s statements that LNG exports may not count toward emissions targets.

Jonathan Wilkinson was just off to the Madrid climate summit when he said that to the Globe and Mail.

The Alberta Armada — the premier, eight ministers and various officials — was at that moment heading for Ottawa to plead Alberta’s case on a pack of contentious issues.

Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland was in the audience when Kenney spoke to the Ottawa Canadian Club Monday.

Kenney was gracious to her once again. But in the background, the Albertans were boiling mad.

After his speech, Kenney told reporters that former federal Natural Resources Minister Amarjeet Sohi had said LNG exports could be counted in meeting emission targets. He seemed confident about it.

Suddenly Wilkinson has a different view.

“I hope he isn’t surrendering Canada’s interests before we even get into the Madrid conference,” Kenney said. “The role of the government is to fight for our country’s economic and environmental interests.”

Kenney noted that Alberta and B.C. are in complete agreement over LNG exports. Export projects are also shaping up in Quebec and on the east coast.

And now, along comes a new federal minister with a new wet blanket.

Why do the Liberals keep doing this?

Just when the air seems to be clearing a bit, why do they say something else that tends to make investors wary and suppress the industry?

Because this has been Liberal strategy since 2015 — carefully tamp down signs of a longer term future for oil and gas.

The Liberals had appeared to show some postelection flexibility. Last week, they agreed that Alberta’s policy for heavy emitters meets national standards, so they will keep their noses out.

But they can’t have too much of that, oh no, without starting to annoy NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, and the Bloc Quebecois leader, Yves-francois Blanchet.

So, just as Kenney is telling his audience that Ottawa’s attitude “is like taking our family jewels to the pawnshop,” the environment minister’s clanger is already echoing.

Wilkinson, who’s from North Vancouver, doesn’t seem to be a clone of his predecessor Catherine

Mckenna, thank heavens.

He hasn’t actually declared the industry an enemy of the state that wants to gut environmental regulation.

But what he did say is arguably more damaging. He puts into doubt the future of LNG as a viable, abundant and long-term energy export.

For many Alberta gas producers, LNG is seen as salvation from a long period of low prices.

Ready access to ports could guarantee industry health for a generation, while actually reducing world emissions.

The assumption behind this is that Canada would get credits for replacing emission-heavy fuels abroad, especially coal.

But Wilkinson said, according to the Globe, “I think we have to be very careful about the LNG argument.”

He said LNG is a long way from fitting into any deal on Article 6, which in theory could award credits for LNG exports.

He hopes Canada would reach its emissions targets without Article 6, which presumably means there would be no mechanism for LNG to get credits.

Wilkinson also expressed concern about the “big, big emissions” produced domestically by the liquefaction process itself.

Every word like this from a federal cabinet minister discourages investment and suppresses signs of industry momentum.

And only a year ago, Trudeau was in Vancouver with B.C. Premier John Horgan, trumpeting the $40-billion LNG terminal project.

It seemed that the feds favoured at least one petroleum product (after having used Bill C-48 to block northern B.C. shipment of nearly everything else.)

They’re masters of ambiguity, these people. But a clear look down the hall of mirrors shows they haven’t changed.

As long as they’re able, they will manage oil and gas very carefully — downward, in the general direction of zero.