Clark, Horgan trade blows over potential Site C cost increases
B.C. Premier Christy Clark fired back Tuesday at the NDP over its request to suspend the removal of two homes in the Peace River valley, declaring it could result in a $600-million cost increase to the Site C hydroelectric project.
In a letter released publicly, NDP Leader John Horgan responded by calling her claims on the additional costs “unsupported.”
In another, earlier version of the letter, which the NDP said was sent to Clark in error, even stronger language was used.
In that letter, Horgan said: “Given your record of misstatements and errors, it is impossible to trust anything you say regarding the Site C project schedules and costs.”
In the final version, Horgan also said if Clark is concerned about the Site C timeline, she should immediately recall the legislature, where the NDP and Greens are expected to bring down the government and co-operate to form a one-seat majority over the B.C. Liberals.
B.C. Hydro declined to speak on Tuesday regarding the validity and substance of the $600-million cost increase, instead saying they would hold a technical briefing on the issue in Victoria, Wednesday.
Ben Chin, a spokesman in the premier’s office, had on Tuesday referred questions on justification for the $600-million figure to B.C. Hydro.
In a written response to Postmedia News, Chin said the information the Liberals were sharing with the NDP and Green leaders was from B.C. Hydro.
“We’re in caretaker mode, so we need to let others who could potentially form government know the implications of any decision. And we must avoid binding future governments with any decisions during this period,” he said.
Last week, Horgan asked B.C. Hydro president Jessica McDonald for a delay in removing the families of the two properties.
As part of a power-sharing deal, the NDP and Greens have agreed to send the $8.8-billion Site C project to a review by the B.C. Utilities Commission.
In his letter to Hydro, Horgan said it made sense to allow the residents to remain until the future of Site C is “firmly determined.” He wants a BCUC review complete in three months, with an interim report ready in six weeks.
Construction — there are 2,200 workers on the job now — would not stop during the review.
In separate letters to Horgan and Green Leader Andrew Weaver, Clark said a delay in removing the homes would have a domino effect that would put the larger construction schedule at risk.
Her letter said it could delay road and bridge building, in turn leading to a delay in the diversion of the Peace River — now scheduled for September 2019 — to September 2020.
Clark demanded that Horgan and Weaver — given the new information of $600 million in delay costs — indicate by Saturday whether they stand by their position.
In her letter, Clark also asserted the project would progress past the “point of no return” before a BCUC review could be reasonably concluded. As a result of her assertion, she also demanded Horgan and Weaver tell her whether the government should order a “tools down” request to B.C. Hydro.
In his letter to Hydro, Horgan also requested the Crown corporation not enter into any contracts that could incur penalties for cancellation, but did not indicate construction should be halted.
Weaver, who did not have input into Horgan’s original letter, responded to Clark that before he could comment on the $600 million in delay costs, he would need detailed supporting evidence, including signed contracts, a project schedule and alternative timelines, as well as briefing notes on the status of existing delays and compliance with environmental permits.
He said it was her government that chose to proceed with the costliest public works project in B.C. history without adequately analyzing its economic viability.
Unlike most historical large energy projects in B.C., the B.C. Liberal government exempted Site C from a BCUC review.
Former B.C. Hydro CEO Marc Eliesen said that given no such independent review of Site C by the BCUC was done, and given such projects are prone to large cost overruns, a short delay for a review makes sense.
While Hydro may already be liable for $1 billion to $1.5 billion in costs, the province may lose billions and billions more if the project goes ahead, and without knowing whether it is needed and whether residents would pay higher rates if it goes ahead or if it was to be halted, Eliesen said.
“It is a prudent decision to take a look and see where you are today,” said Eliesen, also a former CEO of Manitoba Hydro and Ontario Hydro and deputy minister of energy in Ontario.