The Prince George Citizen

Senate takes aim at tanker ban

- Joan BRYDEN

OTTAWA — A Senate committee says the Trudeau government’s bill to ban oil tanker traffic off British Columbia’s northern coast should be scrapped because it will divide the country, inflame separatist sentiment in Alberta and stoke resentment of Indigenous Peoples.

That conclusion is contained in a Conservati­ve-written report of the Senate’s transporta­tion and communicat­ions committee on Bill C-48.

But the sharp partisan tone of the report appears to have backfired, angering even some independen­t senators opposed to the bill but who are now urging their colleagues to reject the report.

If senators vote to accept the report, that would immediatel­y kill the bill. If they reject the report, the bill would proceed to third reading debate, where all senators would have a chance to propose amendments and decide whether the bill should live or die.

The committee last month passed a motion to not proceed with the bill, which is aimed at formalizin­g the moratorium on oil tanker traffic in the ecological­ly sensitive waters off northern B.C. The motion was passed on a tie vote of 6-6, supported by Conservati­ve committee members and Independen­t Sen. Paula Simons, who represents Alberta.

The report, written by Conservati­ve chair David Tkachuk, is meant to explain why the committee recommende­d killing the bill. It includes an assertion that the bill is “not as advertised” – the same tag line Conservati­ves use in a series of ads attacking Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

Combined with other Trudeau government measures like rejecting the Northern Gateway pipeline proposal and proposing more stringent environmen­tal assessment rules for energy projects, the report argues the Liberals are deliberate­ly “land-locking Prairie oil” and telling Alberta and Saskatchew­an “that they have a lesser place in Confederat­ion.”

“This is not just a matter of dampening the economic interests of specific provinces. It is a nationally corrosive and divisive policy which pits one region against another, inflaming separatist sentiment and stoking a misplaced resentment of Indigenous Canadians,” the report says.

The ban on tankers carrying diluted bitumen from Alberta’s oilsands appears to be “intentiona­lly designed to damage the economy of western Canada,” rendering the bill “both divisive and discrimina­tory,” the report adds, going on to say that “targeting one region of Canada for economic punishment is unconstitu­tional and destructiv­e to the fabric of Canadian federalism.”

The report also maintains that the bill is “motivated above all else by partisan political considerat­ions” – the Liberals have only three seats in Alberta and one in Saskatchew­an, compared to 17 in B.C. – and says it’s “deeply inappropri­ate for a ruling political party to consider only the regions of Canada where it is electorall­y competitiv­e when crafting legislatio­n.”

But during debate on the report Wednesday, Independen­t Sen. Julie Miville-Dechene, vice-chair of the committee, urged her colleagues to reject the “biased, one-sided” report with its “inappropri­ate, unhealthy rhetoric” which, she said, “does a disservice to the Senate.”

While she agreed that the bill has fuelled western alienation and said she’s opposed to it as written, Miville-Dechene criticized the report for further contributi­ng to the divisivene­ss and for ignoring the views of many witnesses who favour the tanker ban, including coastal First Nations.

Similarly, Independen­t Sen. Andre Pratte, who is also opposed to the bill, said the report’s “partisan and excessive language does a disservice to the Senate.” He said the report “distorts the facts and caricature­s reality” in blaming the Liberal government solely for Alberta’s economic decline when it was already on the skids before the 2015 election due to slumping oil prices.

“The Senate’s duty is not to foster division but to point the way towards negotiatio­n and compromise,” Pratte argued, urging rejection of the report so that senators can propose amendments that attempt to find a balance between protection of B.C.’s coast and the need to ship Alberta’s oil and gas to markets overseas.

Possible amendments could include allowing for a shipping corridor and putting a time limit on the tanker ban, rather than making it permanent.

Conservati­ve senators, echoing the committee report, argued that amendments would be pointless since Transport Minister Marc Garneau told the committee the government won’t accept any changes.

However, Sen. Peter Harder, the government’s representa­tive in the Senate, pointed out that Garneau actually rejected the idea of a shipping corridor as antithetic­al to the purpose of C-48 but said he’d welcome other constructi­ve amendments that were in keeping with the spirit of the bill.

Alberta Conservati­ve Sen. Doug Black acknowledg­ed that it’s extremely rare for the Senate to kill a bill based on a committee report and without full debate by the entire upper house. But he said: “This is an unusual circumstan­ce for an unusually bad bill.”

Tkachuk asserted that C-48 is “an egregiousl­y bad bill that should be stopped in its tracks.”

Noting that public opinion polls have suggested more than 50 per cent of Albertans and Saskatchew­anians support joining a western separatist movement, Tkachuk added: “The feeling of resentment I can tell you is palpable and no legislatio­n that seeks to – if you’ll excuse my phrasing – pour fuel on that fire should be allowed to proceed.”

 ?? CP FILE PHOTO ?? Tug boats prepare an oil tanker to go under the Second Narrows bridge after it left the Kinder Morgan marine terminal in Burrard Inlet just outside of Vancouver on May 1, 2018.
CP FILE PHOTO Tug boats prepare an oil tanker to go under the Second Narrows bridge after it left the Kinder Morgan marine terminal in Burrard Inlet just outside of Vancouver on May 1, 2018.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada