Liberal's pipeline policies, inaction hurting the West
Cancellation of Keystone XL has consequences around world, Herb Pinder writes.
After more than a decade of pipeline political Ping-pong, TC Energy and the Government of Alberta have given up — Keystone XL is dead. The anti-pipeline, anti-energy and anti-market protagonists are celebrating a great victory while also saving the planet.
Maybe. While there are many consequences of this rejection, none will enhance Mother Earth.
This pipeline was conceived primarily to move heavy oil from Canada's oilsands to refineries on the Texas Gulf Coast configured to process such feedstock. Now denied the least costly and safest sourcing, the first consequence is more U.S. oil imports from countries with lower environmental standards and higher GHG emissions, hardly supportive of the articulated objectives of the activists, the Democratic Party and the White House.
A second long-term consequence is that Canada now fully understands that the U.S. is an unreliable trade partner, many times dishonouring both the spirit and the word of long-standing energy agreements and integrated pipeline system.
From the early stages of this full contact Pingpong, the Canadian industry and many political leaders have come to understand the need for Canadian access to the growing oil-and-gashungry nations of Pacific Asia. The construction progress of the Transmountain pipeline is tangible recognition of this need by the owner and developer, the Government of Canada.
Another consequence is economic loss for the U.S., now the world's largest producer of both oil and natural gas and the largest refiner.
In a few decades it has evolved from an importer of both commodities to an exporter.
Canada now fully understands that the U.S. is an unreliable trade partner.
Yet the significant geopolitical advantage of being an energy superpower is diminished by its green policy shift and the violation of energy trade agreements with its major supplier. Further, inconsistencies abound including cancelling Keystone XL while giving the green light to the completion of Nord Stream 2, a natural gas pipeline from Russia to Germany. The U.S. loses stature and Russia gains influence.
There is further policy confusion as President Joe Biden stands on the sidelines as his friend, the Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, attempts to abrogate a recent agreement approving the replacement of Line 5 serving Michigan and Canadian refineries, even after approval by her legislative colleagues.
In Canada, however, there should be no misunderstanding in the West about the real agenda of the federal Liberals. After withdrawing the approval of Northern Gateway, obstructing Energy East, lamely acquiescing to the XL rejection and passing anti-pipeline legislation, the Trudeau government is vehemently supporting Line 5.
Tankers off the Atlantic coast and up the
St. Lawrence River are fine; but are restricted off the Pacific coast. By way of Bill C-48, Northern Gateway approval was withdrawn. Energy East was obstructed by changing the regulatory rules midstream, and likewise then legitimized by Bill C-69.
Hypocrisy, incompetence and inconsistency you say? Hypocrisy — without any doubt. Incompetence — yes, as Energy East would strategically assure energy security for all Canadians including especially those from Ontario and Quebec. Inconsistency — no, only on the surface.
The deeper political imperative requires
Line 5 to protect the Liberals electoral base. More than half of all gasoline in Ontario and Quebec is dependent on Line 5 as well as jet fuel for Toronto's Pearson airport.
The Liberals also want to reduce much of the Conservative funding, that since the Stephen Harper days, has originated in Calgary.
The template was succinctly laid out by
Keith Davey, close adviser to the first Trudeau: “Screw the west, we'll take the rest.” All about politics and the lust for power — consistent as it repugnant.