National Post

WYNNE’S GREEN CLIMBDOWN.

- Joe Oliver Joe Oliver is a former minister of natural resources and of finance.

Well, one is better than none. A recent trial balloon s i gnalled that the prime minister will approve one major oil pipeline project and it is likely to be Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain expansion from near Edmonton to Burnaby, just east of Vancouver. We are to believe this is a balanced approach: The government will reject most projects because it is a great defender of the environmen­t. But it will approve one, because it is not a radical opponent of all resource developmen­t.

Of course, this planned leak reveals what is driving the Liberal strategy. Not science, evidence- based decision- making, respect for independen­t regulatory recommenda­tions or even the misleading concept of social licence. No, this is blatant politics, visible through a veneer of “open” consultati­on. The Liberals hold 15 of the 23 seats in the Lower Mainland of B.C. and 40 seats in Quebec. If a choice must be made, follow the votes. Too bad for Energy East, which would transport 1.1 million barrels a day from Alberta and Saskatchew­an to refineries in Quebec and New Brunswick for consumers in Eastern Canada and for export to Europe and India.

It is also too bad for Canada, because this is not an either/or propositio­n. We need to build every oil pipeline that is environmen­tally safe and economical­ly justifiabl­e. Right now those would total $ 34 billion in capital expenditur­es, not including Keystone XL. They could generate considerab­le benefits in employment, economic growth, terms of trade, national security and revenue for government­s to fund critical social programs like health care and education.

A Greek t r agedy occurs when a protagonis­t is brought to ruin because of a moral weakness like hubris, or an inability to cope with challengin­g circumstan­ces. Often it transpires over a prolonged period, while spectators watch with deepening dread at the looming disaster. So it is for Canada, which will suffer from our unwillingn­ess to overcome opposition to the developmen­t of our abundant natural resources. The harm is already unfolding, although most people have not come to grips with the impending cost. Eventually they will, as our personal economic circumstan­ces suffer increasing­ly from anemic growth, high unemployme­nt, ballooning debt and constraine­d social spending.

When the history is written it will be clear that it need not have happened, that the harm was largely self- inflicted, that we suc- c umbed to a per vasive propaganda campaign that somehow managed to convince Canadians to buy into a startling narrative: Do what no other country in the world has done — ignore the vast natural abundance that could enrich our economy and provide us with a high standard of living and security. Believe the exaggerate­d, manipulati­ve and false claims of Luddites who utterly oppose the modern developmen­t of our natural resources, irrespecti­ve of the dire consequenc­es that would inevitably inflict on our economy. Countenanc­e bullying tactics and threats from militant opponents, provided they are clothed in green. Succumb to the arrogant assertion that unanimity is a preconditi­on to approval. Assume that all First Nations oppose resource developmen­t, when in fact many aboriginal people see the enormous benefits of these projects to their communitie­s. Finally, let government­s off the hook for lacking the moral fibre to take on the enemies of progress and for failing to do what every representa­tive government should do — advancing the national interest and the interest of its people — even if that is not universall­y popular.

It is obvious, but must be repeated. No project should proceed unless it is safe for Canadians and safe for the environmen­t. I do not assert that defensivel­y or as a sop to environmen­talists. I say it because I believe it profoundly. When an independen­t review panel recommende­d against the billion-dollar Taseko New Prosperity mine project in the B.C. interior, our Conservati­ve government rejected it, in spite of political and commercial pressure. But when a regulatory authority said yes to a project, with hundreds of pre-conditions, we approved it.

That is the evidence-based approach the Liberal government claims to adopt, but deliberate­ly subverts by politicizi­ng the regulatory-review process, extending the timeline, broadening the scope and allowing “all Canadians” the right to participat­e in the hearings process (according to the minister of natural resources).

As we move through the beginning of the end of an intense political honeymoon, the government will need to make tough decisions that will impact Canada’s future and determine its legacy. We urgently need political leadership that will inform Canadians as to what is at stake and actively advocate for oil pipeline projects that have received regulatory approval. Alas, no evidence of that yet.

WE’VE SUCCUMBED TO A PERVASIVE CAMPAIGN THAT SOMEHOW MANAGED TO CONVINCE US TO HARM OURSELVES IN WAYS NO OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD DOES.

 ?? GERRY KAHRMANN / POSTMEDIA NEWS ??
GERRY KAHRMANN / POSTMEDIA NEWS

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada