Hard to say who will win political games over pipeline battle

The showdown between Alberta and B.C. over the TransMountain pipeline is not only pitting the two westernmost provinces against each other.

The battle has larger implications not only for the New Democratic Party — which counts two premiers in the fight — but also for the federal government and the panorama of Canadian voters and economic interests.

As fun as it might be for some Albertans to watch two NDP leaders duke it out, it’s hardly a road to victory for any other major party.

The pipeline expansion — which is as key to the energy sector in Alberta and provincial finances as it is to Premier Rachel Notley’s re-election hopes — is the focus of a stall campaign by B.C. government, led by NDP Premier John Horgan.

Horgan’s party won the most seats in last year’s election and holds power thanks to support from the Green Party, which similarly opposed the line on the campaign trail.

A majority of B.C. voters supported those parties, it is important to note.

The federal Liberals own this issue at the federal level, and pro-pipeline Conservatives philosophically support localized decision making over heavy-handed edicts from Ottawa.

Both would love, and possibly need, to win B.C. in the next federal election to form government.

What can Ottawa do to settle this in the short term isn’t clear.

As for the right-of-centre assertion that the NDP’s plan to gain “social licence” for pipelines with other carbon reductions hasn’t worked, it’s hard to believe a stern lecture would be more successful.

Can we really imagine sending in troops to get this line built?

It was required in North Dakota, where opponents of the Dakota Access line set up encampments. Is anyone willing to risk another Oka standoff? On the ground today Notley is coming off a resounding victory in a recent trade skirmish with Saskatchewan.

Now, Conservatives have tread carefully to not appear too enthusiastic about their sworn enemy cutting off contracts to buy B.C. wine in Alberta liquor stores.

Some may argue the move will hurt the wine-drinking public, but that will send most shoulders in the Alberta oil patch into a full-on shrug. It’s the sort of move Joe Sixpack would seem to love. Yet, the situation for Notley must be nothing short of infuriating.

Her government’s accelerated phase-out of the coalpowered electricity production may do more than any other measure to this point in reducing carbon dioxide production in Canada.

And she’s done it without much congratulations from environmental interests, who see the oilpatch as a bigger fish to fry, or from members of her own party.

Shortly after Notley’s stunning 2015 election, the federal convention held in Edmonton saw pragmatic leader Tom Mulcair turfed and new support for the ‘Leap Manifesto’, a document calling for a radical restructuring of the economy.

Mind you, the party has debated for 60 years whether it should be pragmatic to gain power or be unwavering, so-called conscience of parliament in the backbenches.

In B.C., they see a bigger game in opposing oilsands development, but risk losing huge gains made on the environmental file, namely those Notley’s made in the most conservative jurisdiction in the country.

The west coast game plan is reminiscent of the great folly of Hillary Clinton’s campaign for president in 2016.

Her downfall was not proposing to move America toward a “21st century economy” but not providing a roadmap or mentioning what would happen in the meantime.

Traditional industries, as threatened, antiquated or backward as they may appear to be are the major employers of today.

The oilpatch is still the heart of the Alberta economy that includes four million Canadians who deserve stability oil exports to the west coast would bring.

(Collin Gallant is a News reporter. To comment on this and other editorials, go to www.medicinehatnews.com/opinions.)