The Star’s view: Liberals’ attempts to build consensus fall short,

Justin Trudeau’s announcement on Tuesday that his government has approved two oil pipelines and rejected a third is the latest indication that, when it comes to energy and the environment, the prime minister is searching for a middle way.

The appeal of moderation is clear. For governments, particularly ones that want to appear centrist, deciding on energy projects has never before been so complex or fraught. Today, more than in previous decades, governments must negotiate between short-term economic aims and more enduring goals; they must secure social licence from a divided citizenry; and they must fulfil their legal and moral obligations to account for the diverse views of diverse First Nations.

The Trudeau government’s pipeline package, which also includes a ban on crude oil tanker shipping on British Columbia’s northern coast, is clearly aimed at striking a good balance among these competing interests.

Ottawa, for instance, has killed the highly controversial Northern Gateway pipeline. Approved by the Harper government, the line would have run from Bruderheim, Alta., to Kitimat, B.C., endangering some of Canada’s most pristine wilderness. Critics worried for good reason about a supertanker foundering in the treacherous coastal waters and fouling the coastline, or a calamitous pipeline rupture in the Great Bear rainforest. Trudeau vowed to nix the project if elected and he has rightly done just that.

The Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline, which the government approved on Tuesday, would seem to be a safer means of achieving the same objectives. While the line is not without real environmental risks, many experts agree its route, which is already established, is less problematic. Moreover, the government estimates that Trans Mountain will triple Canada’s capacity to get oil to international markets beyond the United States and create thousands of jobs in the process, particularly in struggling Alberta.

Where Trudeau has fallen short, however, is in building the social licence he has said again and again is crucial to giving these projects legitimacy. While consensus is no doubt a quixotic goal, the government ought to have done more.

The Trans Mountain pipeline, in particular, is profoundly unpopular in B.C., where many environmentalists and First Nations are not satisfied that the benefits outweigh the risks. B.C. Premier Christy Clark and Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson, among others, have vowed to continue the fight against the pipeline. Several First Nations have already launched court proceedings. There is a long distance between approval and pipeline.

On Tuesday, Trudeau offered this assurance to detractors in that province: “If I thought this project was unsafe to the B.C. coast, I would reject it. The decision was based on rigorous debate, on science and on evidence.”

That’s not much of a consolation given that the very science and evidence on which the decision seems to have been based were deemed insufficient by Trudeau during last year’s election campaign.

In opposition, the Liberals promised to rejig the approval process for energy projects to better build social licence, respect indigenous rights and ensure new development is consistent with Canada’s climate goals. Though the National Energy Board had already okayed Trans Mountain under Harper’s watch, Trudeau said he would submit the proposal to his new process before signing off on it. Yet a year into his government’s mandate, the process remains unchanged and the pipeline has been approved. Indigenous peoples, too, have reason to be dissatisfied. While Ottawa appears to have widely consulted with First Nations, the impending litigation and widespread discontent suggests there’s still much work to be done, especially given the oft-touted promise of reconciliation.

Finally, Ottawa has not done enough to make clear how these projects fit with its Paris Accord commitments. Environmentalists are understandably skeptical. The newly approved pipelines will significantly increase greenhouse gas emissions, neutralizing some of the gains promised by Ottawa’s plan for carbon pricing and its move away from coal.

Trudeau said on Tuesday that these approvals are consistent with the government’s climate goals. But Ottawa has released no comprehensive plan on how it intends to meet its targets. If Trudeau is serious about his Paris commitments, he ought to explain how it’s possible to meet them without a fundamental shift in Ottawa’s approach to resource development, especially since the experts say it’s not.

Every one of these decisions will be a source of division and rancour. Trudeau’s pipeline package tries to address the tensions at play, but much more must be done to convince concerned Canadians that the middle way is indeed golden, not simply a political calculation.

Ottawa has not made clear how these projects fit with its Paris commitments