Canada cautions Michigan over Line 5 shutdown
Michigan governor's actions a threat to regional energy supply, minister says
Ottawa mounted its strongest defence yet of Enbridge Inc.'s Line 5 pipeline on the eve of its possible closure, even as Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer threatened to seize the company's profits if it defied her order to shutdown the Alberta-to- Ontario conduit.
In a legal filing on Tuesday, the federal government said shutting down Line 5 would “harm” the relationship between Canada and the United States, cause fuel price spikes and layoffs, in addition to contravening a 1977 treaty. The amicus — or “friend of the court” — brief, filed a day before a deadline imposed by Whitmer to close the pipeline, argued that the treaty prevents a state-level government from shutting down a pipeline running between the two countries.
“It is essential to the continued success of the relationship (between Canada and the U.S.) that both countries can trust that their reciprocal legal commitments will be fully honoured and implemented notwithstanding initiatives at the state, provincial or local government level,” Gordon Giffin, the lawyer arguing the federal government's position, wrote in the filing to a U.S. district court in Michigan.
“The proposed shutdown would cause a massive and potentially permanent disruption to Canada's economy and energy security,” according to the brief.
The document argues for the continued mediation between Enbridge and Michigan, noting that the U.S. federal court is the appropriate jurisdiction to hear the case.
Natural Resources Minister Seamus O'Regan said in a release that Ottawa worked on the filing with the governments of Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario and Quebec.
“Line 5 does not just affect one province or one region — it supports our entire country,” O'Regan said, adding that jobs in Canada and the U.S. are supported by the pipeline.
“Line 5 is a vital piece of infrastructure for Canada and the United States and has safely operated at the Straits of Mackinac for 68 years,” O'Regan said. “It remains the safest, most efficient way to transport fuel to refineries and markets and is a reliable source of energy for Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Ontario and Quebec. The pipeline is as important to Canada as it is to the U.S.”
Canada is not invoking the 1977 treaty but bringing it to the attention of the U.S. district court in an attempt to argue that Line 5's operation is a U.S. federal jurisdiction rather than Michigan state-level jurisdiction, said Ian Cameron, spokesperson for O'Regan.
As a result, Canada still has the option to officially invoke the treaty in the future if it chooses.
On Tuesday, Whitmer promised to seize Enbridge's profits from the pipeline if it continues to operate the project after the May 12 deadline. Enbridge, for its part, has said it will continue operating the line despite the shutdown order, unless a judge determines the line should close.
The Michigan order needs a confirmatory ruling from a judge to enforce it, and Enbridge and Michigan are disputing whether the issue should be heard in state or U.S. federal court. The sides are in court-ordered mediation, with the next session scheduled for May 18.
“Governor Whitmer's decision to hold Enbridge accountable for refusing to shut down Line 5 is the right decision to safeguard the Great Lakes and protect the health and livelihoods of the millions of people and wildlife who depend upon them,” Collin O'Mara, president and CEO of the National Wildlife Federation, said in a release, adding that seizing the profits from the line would tally up to US$1.4 million per day.
Enbridge appreciates the support of the Canadian government and its brief “underscores that this is more than a Michigan issue,” company spokesperson Jesse Semko said in an emailed statement, reiterating that the company intended to operate the pipeline despite the shutdown order.
“A shutdown of Line 5 has serious, broad ramifications and raises substantial federal and international questions relating to interstate and international commerce,” Semko said.
U.S. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm, herself a former Michigan governor, refused to take a position on the dispute, citing the fact it remains before the courts, Canadian Press reported.
“We don't wade in on that,” Granholm said. “It will be decided in court.”
Alberta Energy Minister Sonya Savage credited Ottawa for working with the provinces to “defend Canada's energy security, economic prosperity and Canadian jobs.”
“What is most concerning to us in Alberta — as it should be for everyone — is the dangerous precedent that a shutdown of a safely operating pipeline would set for future oil and gas infrastructure projects,” Savage said.
The legal filing argues that shutting down Line 5 would affect jet fuel supplies at Toronto Pearson International Airport as well as 66 per cent of Quebec's crude oil needs. “A Line 5 shutdown would severely disrupt the supply and increase the price consumers pay for fuel across Quebec and Ontario.”
In addition, Ottawa argues closing the pipeline would “cause massive revenue losses and potentially significant job losses” in the western Canadian energy sector “just as it is struggling to recover from the impacts of COVID-19.”
A shutdown of Line 5 has serious, broad ramifications and raises substantial federal and international questions …