Alberta premier says Northern Gateway critical to Canadian economy

Updated below with transcript of Alison Redford’s speech.

 Bill Graveland of Canadian Press reports in  Alberta premier says Northern Gateway pipeline critical for Canadian economic development.

In an address to the Calgary Chamber of Commerce, which CP says was her first major address in Calgary since becoming premier, Alison Redford said that the Northern Gateway pipeline project is of national importance and is critical to Canada’s future economic strength.

“We need to be able to talk about why the success of this pipeline becomes critical to our economic success in the next two years. But we are going to have to separate the wheat from the chaff because we know there are going to be a number of interveners who have very particular political agendas,” said Redford in a question and answer session following a lunch-hour address to the Calgary Chamber of Commerce.

Redford was referring to the large number of people who have registered either as intervenors or to give comments at the Joint Review hearings. She added:

The agenda that I think matters to most Canadians is the agenda for economic growth at a time when the rest of the world is in very uncertain circumstances and we just don’t have to be.”

CP says Redford called on other Canadians to lobby on behalf of the Keystone and Northern Gateway pipelines.

“I don’t think it’s appropriate or even necessary for only Alberta or only Alberta interests to be out lobbying with respect to this pipeline. We’re trying to ensure it succeeds. This is an issue that takes on national importance and my expectation with people in Ottawa including the prime minister is they understand that,” she said.

Update one

A few hours later, columnist Don Braid writing in the Calgary Herald in It’s sinking in that Redford is different notes how the powerful of the Alberta oil patch were eager to hear the premier’s speech, as compared to former premier Ed Stelmach.

Braid notes that:

It’s just beginning to sink in that Redford is radical in the Alberta context, a national diplomat of an entirely new order.

She does not say, like the old Reform party, that the West Wants In. She assumes that Alberta already is in, and offers to lead without the resentment born of grievances from the old National Energy Program to current attacks on the oilsands.

Although Braid’s column goes over Alberta’s old grievances with the federal government, and how perhaps the premier is diplomatically working to overcome them,  he closes with an ominous threat to British Columbia:

Redford might someday have to show a brass knuckle inside her velvet glove.

She might even suggest, along with former minister Lloyd Snelgrove, that B.C. has a lot of nerve rejecting Alberta oil, when B.C.’s natural gas is routinely shipped through Alberta pipelines to the United States.

Snelgrove isn’t recommending a ban, oh no, but he says: “Maybe people need to think about that when they say they won’t take our oil.”

Maybe they do; or maybe Alison Redford’s olive branch will bring peace and prosperity to the land.

There is widespread support for the LNG projects in Kitimat and across the northwest and the KM LNG partners project has much better relations with First Nations than Enbridge.

However, last week’s blockade by members of Wet’suwet’en First Nation clans of a Pacific Trails Pipeline survey crew at Gosnell River, over fears that the PTP project could open the gates, so to speak, for the Northern Gateway pipeline, means that nothing is certain.

Perhaps Don Braid and Lloyd Snelgrove should be careful what they wish for.


Update 2 Transcript of Premier Redford’s speech.

Premier Redford does not mention Northern Gateway in the actual speech ( the news reports are from a question and answer session).

She does say, however:

“The world will need fossil fuels for a long time to come. The oil sands, as one of the few energy-rich areas outside the unstable Middle East poised for growth, will be essential, as the International Energy Agency publicly recognized this month. The second is that there is no Canadian Energy Strategy without our partners.
The infrastructure we need to get our oil and gas to market must cross other provinces’ lands. And the federal and provincial regulations that will inevitably shape how Canada’s environment is protected, how our energy is extracted and how it is transported will require input from everybody to have the greatest net positive effect.

We must rise together. There is no other way.

Alberta’s success depends on partnership with the province.”

Thank you for that introduction, Nancy (Southern). Ladies and gentlemen, distinguished guests, it is a pleasure to be here with you. Thanks to the Calgary Chamber of Commerce for asking me to be here today.

I am pleased to have the chance to speak to you today about the province’s economy and our place in uncertain times.

The global population is growing, and its needs and wants are expanding too. We have 7 billion people on this planet, and many of them aspire to a higher standard of living.

And those who already enjoy it want to do so more responsibly. They want to mitigate the impact of their consumption, and they expect producers to respond.

The world needs food and energy, in greater quantities with fewer consequences for the environment.

Alberta is uniquely placed to meet this demand and excel, despite the short-term negative impact of our neighbours’ woes on our finances.

We can become preferred suppliers on a global scale.

The mechanisms we need to achieve this are already in place.

Our agricultural sector maintains a sterling reputation. And our energy industry is at the leading edge in production, innovation, technology and compliance, all areas this government is working to improve even further.

In both areas, we have a skilled workforce capable of expanding production in an environmentally and socially responsible, and economically sustainably manner. Our resources are therefore not just profitable, but strategic.

Simply put, Alberta is opportunity. And so long as we begin laying the foundations now to establish this province as an international hub for commodities and expertise, this will remain true for a long time come.

But we can’t forget why we are doing this.

Our search for new markets can never overshadow our highest priority: improving the quality of life for all Albertans.

It is our responsibility to ensure that every Albertan shares in the benefits our capabilities afford us.

The wider we spread prosperity, the more we gain.

You understand this as well as I do, which is why I have been saying “we” all along.

Quality of life is not purely a matter for government. In a place as independent-minded as Alberta, the private sector plays a major role.

Many of the individuals in this room have achievements that go far beyond the professional sphere. You sit on the boards of non-profits, generously provide them with financial support and tap your personal networks to find still more.

You devote a significant part of your lives to giving back, strengthening the bonds that hold Calgary together by reaching out to the less fortunate in love and compassion, in the hope of making a positive change in their lives. You make a difference in this city every single day.

Government must support your efforts by making things easier for you, so you can do the same for others, and complement the public sector’s work.

There is one way to go about this: growing Alberta’s economy.

Expanding industry, investing in innovation and tuning our tax structures to support business ? these are the methods we use to fund our public services and deliver community supports.

These are also the tools we need to build Alberta’s wealth and create opportunities, for philanthropy, for personal fulfillment and for nurturing the community relationships that make Calgary a city worth living in.

Despite the tenuous world economy, we can still protect and preserve these aspirations.

Alberta has incredible natural advantages that allow us to accomplish things that no other province can hope to achieve. We can use them to build even as others struggle to stay afloat and that’s exactly what this government will do.

We have the ability and the will to sow the seeds of a brighter future, the one Albertans have told us they want.

During our recent public roundtables on the budget, Albertans overwhelmingly indicated that health and education remain their highest priorities.

They expect high-quality public services, a comfortable standard of living and fiscal responsibility, without deep cuts.

We can deliver, without soaring expenditures and long-term debt.

Alberta has the distinction of being the most economically free jurisdiction in North America.

We have low unemployment, strong job growth and a reliable economic engine, positioning us to lead Canada.

Our tax regime is one of the most competitive in the developed world.

Even as other economies flounder, we are attracting investment and skilled workers.

Our small businesses are second to none, accounting for almost a third of provincial GDP and over three-quarters of all enterprises with employees.

And our large businesses continue to thrive and invest in innovation.

Of course, not everything is coming up roses. We have a tough budget ahead of us.

The costs of core services like health care and education continue to grow.

And our largest trading partners are weighed down with unsustainable debt loads, anaemic growth and high unemployment. Alberta can’t help being affected to some degree.

In the current fiscal year, provincial revenues will be $1.2 billion more than predicted, thanks mostly to increased land lease sales. However, our forecasted deficit will be $3.1 billion, $1.8 billion higher than first quarter projections.

This is largely due to international factors beyond our control. The US, our main customer, remains weak. American debt now exceeds $15 trillion and cross-party efforts to find mutually acceptable spending cuts have led only to more acrimony. Unemployment remains stubbornly high and growth stubbornly low, while a solution seems farther away than ever.

I was in Washington last week and let me tell you, the despair was palpable.

Europe’s troubles add to the mix. Despite the international bailout package the European Union has put together, there is still a strong expectation that Greece will default on its debts. Other EU members such as Italy and Portugal are struggling to avoid the same situation.

And from a provincial perspective, government has seen increased outlays due to disaster relief, especially from the wildfires around Slave Lake, and our renewed commitment to primary education.

We are not living in the best of times, but neither are we mired in the worst. And however grim are partners’ economic struggles, they do not define our destiny.

The Alberta Advantage will ensure we stay in an enviable position of strength.

We will make the most of the province’s unique characteristics to deliver what Albertans want.

We will keep taxes low while maintaining strong public service and a wealth of opportunity.

Our plans for stable, multi-year budgets for these services will bring unprecedented discipline to public spending. Other governments have talked about doing it. We will make it happen.

Hard decisions on the part of past governments have allowed Alberta to eliminate its long-term debt and build up a savings account, the Sustainability Fund, to see us through rough patches.

We will conduct regular budgetary reviews to search for savings wherever we can, managing our finances to protect future Albertans from debt.

And we remain committed to balancing the budget by 2013-14, without the sharp cuts Albertans fear.

This government will never lose sight of Albertans’ needs, or back away from providing supports to our most vulnerable, and services for all, no matter what the outside world throws our way.

We will keep working for Alberta families.

Their hopes and dreams demand no less.

I know this government can surpass them.

Even if the fog of another recession descends, we have a clear path back.

Diversifying our customer base to focus on hungry developing nations is the key to our long-term success.

We must pursue opportunity wherever we find it, searching for new partners in new markets and promoting Alberta on the global stage.

Even as the western world falters, other economies are thriving.

Asia’s star is rising and Asian nations are poised to dominate the 21st century. Best of all, they are eager for our resources and our know-how, particularly in energy.

We can deliver, in a safe, secure and environmentally friendly fashion. But we can’t go it alone.

The rest of the provinces can join our efforts and escape the trap of low growth and high debt, into which so many others have fallen.

Canada is an energy-rich nation, blessed with an incredibly array of resources, from the oil sands to hydro, natural gas, nuclear and renewables.

No single source is better than any other or can stand on its own.

Innovation is the key to developing our capacity to produce them all at competitive rates. Collaboration is the key to developing the infrastructure necessary to get our energy to market. The more the provinces work together to harness and transport their respective resources, the greater our shared prosperity will be. We need a Canadian Energy Strategy.

The provinces must begin a dialogue to develop shared outcomes that their energy systems can serve. Collectively, they should use energy to foster national economic growth and competitiveness, seeking out new markets.

Canadians all face similar challenges notwithstanding the different forms of energy under development such as international market uncertainty, fiscal issues, public opinion, environmental protection and regulatory concerns.

Untangling the web of self-interest that divides this great nation will not be easy, but if the provinces are willing to work together, they can transform Canada into a global energy leader, drawing sustainably on multiple sources in a way that benefits the world and our citizens, without compromising anyone’s quality of life. We can become models for countries dealing with similar issues.

It is time to leave old antagonisms behind.

The oil sands have come in for particularly sharp criticism from the rest of Canada. We must be willing to forgive and forget, to work together for our mutual benefit.

We must ally with the other provinces to attain the greatest possible prosperity, but we can’t dictate terms. This must be a genuinely cooperative endeavour, from which everybody gains.

At the end of the day, we must recall two things:

One is that there is no Canadian Energy Strategy without us.

The world will need fossil fuels for a long time to come. The oil sands, as one of the few energy-rich areas outside the unstable Middle East poised for growth, will be essential, as the International Energy Agency publicly recognized this month.

The second is that there is no Canadian Energy Strategy without our partners.

The infrastructure we need to get our oil and gas to market must cross other provinces’ lands. And the federal and provincial regulations that will inevitably shape how Canada’s environment is protected, how our energy is extracted and how it is transported will require input from everybody to have the greatest net positive effect.

We must rise together. There is no other way.

Alberta’s success depends on partnership with the provinces.

And the health of each and every province is inextricably linked to the strength of the global economy.

On every level, we are stronger together than apart, because far more unites us than separates us.

Although Canada can’t entirely escape the downward pull of its long-suffering trading partners, this doesn’t mean the rest of the country is doomed to suffer, any more than Alberta is.

We have a way out, and it’s time we used it. It’s time to stand up and show others how Alberta and Canada can lead globally on all fronts, from the economy to the environment to energy.

Our shared future Canada’s future is worth infinitely more than our quarrels. Together, we can shine.

To ensure Canadians’ prosperity, the provinces must translate this realization into action. I pledge to you: Alberta’s government will.

Thank you.

Editorial: Any one who believes the Northern Gateway can be fast tracked is out of touch with reality

Editorial

In the past few days there has been a lot of  comment from politicians, pundits, columnists and business analysts about “fast tracking” the Northern Gateway pipeline project now that the United States has postponed  approval of the Keystone XL pipeline.

If anyone wanted proof that these people are completely out of touch with reality, the past three days has proven it beyond any reasonable doubt–and it has absolutely nothing to do with politics.

For the purposes of this editorial, let’s assume, just for the sake of argument, that there was no opposition, but one hundred per cent support for Enbridge’s  project to build the pipeline from the Alberta bitumen sands to the port of Kitimat. Let’s assume that the Minister of Natural Resources, Joe Oliver,  was successful, as he is quoted today, in expediting the approval process by the Northern Gateway Joint Review Process. 

After all that, could the Northern Gateway be “fast tracked?”

No.

Let’s ignore, for this argument, any of the objections that the environmental movement has raised against the pipeline.

Let’s instead take one argument that Enbridge has used to promote the pipeline project, that the Northern Gateway is another  “national dream,” the equivalent of building the Canadian transcontinental railway more than a century ago.

The problem with the majority of economists, as always,  is that they think that they are dealing with  a spreadsheet not the real world. Just move everything from the Keystone column to the Northern Gateway column.  The bitumen goes to China instead of Texas, and the money rolls in.

The problem with cabinet ministers like Joe Oliver and Jim Flaherty,  proponents of fast tracking the pipeline, is that either they are not getting the proper briefing notes or they are ignoring those briefing notes.  (That is scary when it comes to Flaherty since he is supposed to be guiding the Canadian economy).

As noted earlier, the business columnists and analysts don’t even bother to read the technical studies posted by Enbridge on the Northern Gateway Joint Review site.

The bitumen pipeline is planned to cross 1,172 kilometres of challenging terrain from the bitumen sands to Kitimat. The parallel condensate pipeline is planned to cover 1,172 kilometres from Kitimat to the bitumen sands
.
Why does Enbridge call the  pipelines the equivalent of the great railway construction of the nineteenth century?

The pipelines will have to cross some of the most rugged territory on this planet;  mountain ranges, including the Rocky Mountains, The Bulkley Ranges, the Coast Ranges.

 Even the valleys and plateaus the pipeline must cross are considered geologically unstable.

The weather is often terrible.  Rain.  Snow.  More rain.  Wind storms. Lots and lots of rain.  The pipeline will come to close to Lakelse Lake, just east of Kitimat, that has a Canadian record for a one day snowfall, 118 centimetres.

Just ask DriveBC how difficult it is to maintain the highways in this region, highways that have been around for at least 60 years and where the engineering has improved over those decades from the tracks my family drove when I was a kid.  Washouts happen, even in “mild” years.

Then there’s the possibility of earthquakes. As Enbridge, correctly, points out, the tectonic plates where the major quakes can be triggered are far off shore and at least according to the maps, the pipeline is not in  a quake zone. Yet Kitimat was badly shaken by the  magnitude 9.2 1964 Good Friday  earthquake in Anchorage, thousands of kilometres away. 

So terrain, weather (summer or winter) and even earthquakes could hold up construction.  

The building of the Canadian Pacific Railway was held up, not just by the challenging terrain but by the Northwest Rebellion,  financial mismanagement by the CPR, (they ran out of money) and political scandal. That was in the nineteenth century when health and safety regulations were non existent and no environmental precautions were required. 

Some of the first locomotives and rolling stock were not built for crossing some of the biggest mountain ranges on Earth.

Yes the CPR was built. It didn’t come in on time and on budget. The CPR certainly wasn’t “fast tracked.”

In the end one has to wonder if any of the politicians, pundits, columnists and analysts  who are so certain they can  fast track the Northern Gateway pipeline have attempted a home renovation.   Perhaps they should try to finish their basements before pronouncing on building a pipeline fast tracked across the west.
   

   

Harper says oil to Asia “important priority,” Oliver wants to expedite Gateway Joint Review process

Energy Politics

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has told reporters at the APEC summit in Hawaii that pushing Canadian energy products to Asia are an “important priority” for his government given the postponement of the Keystone XL pipeline project.

Reuters reports from Honolulu:

“This does underscore the necessity of Canada making sure
that we are able to access Asia markets for our energy
products,” Harper told reporters on the sidelines of the
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum.


“That will be an important priority of our government going
forward and I indicated that yesterday to the president of
China.”

A couple of hours earlier, the industry newsletter Platts quoted Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver as saying he wanted the Northern Gateway pipeline approval process expedited and limited to just one year.



Platts quoting a CBC interview (the quote, at this point is not on the CBC website story about Oliver) says:

Canadian Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver said November 13 he wants a regulatory decision by early 2013, a year ahead of the current schedule, on Enbridge’s Northern Gateway project to expedite the shipment of Alberta oil sands crude to Asia….

“The Chinese are ready to buy,” he told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. “The issue is building the infrastructure to get our resources to China.”

To that end, Oliver said he now expects Northern Gateway’s hearings to be completed within a year of starting in January 2012.

While insisting that he will not interfere in the Northern Gateway process, Oliver said it is a “fundamental strategic objective” of the Canadian government to diversify its customer base for oil beyond the United States.

Oliver apparently made his statement before Stephen Harper was scheduled to meet with US President Barack Obama.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Keystone XL decision – more questions than answers: Blog

A blog by Edmonton based, University of Alberta business professor Andrew Leach, Keystone XL decision – more questions than answers, analyzes the Keystone postponement through the rose coloured glasses we see often from Alberta (referring, of course, to the provincial flower, not the political party) and is more intelligent than what we’ve seen from the business press across Canada.

Interestingly Leach says:

It took exactly 3 minutes after I first heard the news for me to hear
someone say, “if they don’t want our oil, we’ll send it to China!”
Surprisingly, it took another 3 hours for me to hear someone make
reference to letting Americans freeze in the dark

And later, Leach goes on to advise Albertans:

If Alberta wants to grow oilsands production beyond about 3 million barrels per day, we are going to need others to accept infrastructure in their backyards to get it to market. In the past, landowners along 1000s of miles of pipeline would have no easy way to come together and oppose the project – that has all changed and if you don’t believe me, ask the 4000 people who have signed up to intervene at the Northern Gateway Joint Review Panel hearings, or the 10000+ people who converged on the White House to oppose Keystone XL.

Editor’s Note: Leach was part of a wide ranging Twitter debate after the Keystone XL was postponed. A key article that sparked the debate was a piece in the New York Times by Michael Levi, that talked about NIMBYism in the Keystone case, A Shortsighted Victory in Delaying the Keystone Pipeline.  That three minute record seems typical of the attitude on Twitter from many Albertans, who assume that the Northern Gateway pipeline  will go ahead.

‘Keystone Cops’ crippling U.S. economy: National Post

Energy Politics

Diane Francis, writing in the National Post, in Keystone Cops’ crippling U.S. economy,  a wide ranging piece attacking the decision to postpone the Keystone XL pipeline, makes her contempt for all the people of northern British Columbia pretty clear in her push to get the Northern Gateway pipeline going

The other priority is to fast-track the proposed pipeline through British Columbia to the West coast to ship oil to Asian markets. The aboriginal claims must be settled financially and generously as quickly as possible before the trans-national non-state players in the environmental movement organize them and stop the pipeline.

Editor’s note: Why do the business columnists across the Canadian media continue to believe that the people of northern British Columbia, aboriginal and non-aboriginal, are so stupid and helpless that they are under the thumb of the so-called “trans-national non-state players in the environmental movement” rather than local residents concerned about the environment where the live, work and play?? (Sounds like an editorial, which will be forthcoming)

Flaherty talks tough with U.S. in wake of Keystone pipeline delay : reports

Energy Politics

Finance minister Jim Flaherty is “talking tough” according to the Globe and Mail’s Steven Chase  and threatening the Americans with the Northern Gateway pipeline in the wake of the postponement of the Keystone XL project.

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty [is] warning the postponement could kill the project and accelerate this country’s efforts to ship oil to Asia instead.

“The decision to delay it that long is actually quite a crucial decision. I’m not sure this project would survive that kind of delay,” Mr. Flaherty told Bloomberg News. “It may mean that we may have to move quickly to ensure that we can export our oil to Asia through British Columbia.”

The original Bloomberg article also reports:

Flaherty, 61, will travel later this week to Beijing, where he will discuss increasing energy exports to China and facilitating investment in Canadian natural-resource assets. Enbridge Inc. (ENB) has proposed building a pipeline, called Northern Gateway, that would transport crude from Alberta’s oil sands to Canada’s Pacific coast, while Kinder Morgan Inc. plans to expand its Trans Mountain route to do the same.

Keystone “too important not to proceed” TransCanada CEO says

Energy Environment Politics

622-tc_logo-thumb-110x27-621.jpgThe CEO of TransCanada,  Russ Girling, reacting to news that the US State Dept. has delayed approval of the Keystone XL pipeline said Thursday, Nov. 10, 2011, “This project is too important to the U.S. economy, the Canadian economy and the national interest of the United States for it not to proceed.”

While Girling also said, “”We remain confident Keystone XL will ultimately be approved,” but the news release from TransCanada also acknowledged:

… while Keystone XL remains the best option for American and Canadian producers to get their oil to the U.S. Gulf Coast, today’s announcement by the DOS could have potential negative ramifications, especially where shippers and U.S. refiners are concerned.

“Supplies of heavy crude from Venezuela and Mexico to U.S. refineries will soon end,” said Girling. “If Keystone XL is continually delayed, these refiners may have to look for other ways of getting the oil they need. Oil sands producers face the same dilemma – how to get their crude oil to the Gulf Coast.”

In the release, TransCanada says the company will be discussing its next steps with the U.S. Department of State after it said further analysis of route options for the Keystone XL pipeline need to be investigated, with a specific focus on the Sandhills in Nebraska.

TransCanada said the company has already studied 14 different routes for Keystone XL, eight in Nebraska. The earlier studies included one potential alternative route in Nebraska that would have avoided the entire Sandhills region and Ogallala aquifer and six alternatives that would have reduced pipeline mileage crossing the Sandhills or the aquifer. TransCanada said the company hopes this work will serve as a starting point for the additional review and help expedite the review process.

“If Keystone XL dies, Americans will still wake up the next morning and continue to import 10 million barrels of oil from repressive nations, without the benefit of thousands of jobs and long term energy security,” concluded Girling. “That would be a tragedy.”

TransCanada said it has held more than 100 open houses and public meetings in six states since 2008, The company said thousands of pages of supplemental information and responses to questions were submitted to state and federal agencies. The State Department received over 300,000 comments on the project.

Koch owned Flint Hills Resources is intervenor in Northern Gateway Joint Review

Energy Politics

Flint Hills Resources Canada LP, the energy and resources company owned by the controversial American brothers, David and Charles Koch, is one of the intervenors in the Northern Gateway Joint Review process, a check of the JR website shows.


Flint Hills Resources LP Canada registration at NGJR

The two men own Koch Industries, the second largest privately held company in the United States. According to a Forbes article quoted by Wikipedia, Koch Industries has a world wide annual revenue estimated at  $98 billion.

Koch Industries website

Northwest Coast Energy News checked the JRP website after an article published online today by Columbia Journalism Review outlined the Koch brothers and their company’s involvement in the Keystone XL pipeline and their extensive holdings in Canada through Flint Hills Resources.

The Koch brothers are active in conservative American politics and numerous media reports say they are chief financial backers of the Tea Party.

Wikipedia says David and Charles have funded and libertarian policy and advocacy groups in the United States.

Since the 1980s the Koch foundations have given more than $100 million to such organizations, among these think tanks like the Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute, as well as more recently Americans for Prosperity. Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks are Koch-linked organizations that have been linked to the Tea Party movement

On Nov. 7, 2011, The Guardian reported that the Koch brothers plan to launch a giant database listing all Americans with conservative leanings in an attempt to influence the 2012 elections, including the presidential race. See Koch brothers: secretive billionaires to launch vast database with 2012 in mind

An interactive from The Guardian lists all the Koch connections.

Koch replies to its critics on the KochFacts site.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Enbridge confident of avoiding Keystone XL woes: Globe and Mail

Energy Link

In Enbridge confident of avoiding Keystone XL woes, The Globe and Mail reports on Enbridge’s US bound pipelines. (So it is not really a story about Northern Gateway, although the Keystone and Gateway projects are similar)

Enbridge Inc. is expressing confidence that it won’t be harmed by the problems that have dogged its rival TransCanada Corp.’s Keystone XL line.

Enbridge has secured substantial support for two of its own new U.S. pipeline projects – one called Flanagan South, the other Wrangler. But because the Enbridge projects would run through existing pipeline corridors, chief executive Pat Daniel said he believes the company can avoid some of the loud environmental criticism that has caused delays – and the threat of serious new problems – for Keystone.

Joint Review media analysis Part two: Postmedia and The Great American Energy Conspiracy

In her column in The Calgary Herald, Nov 4, 2011 aimed at making the Northern Gateway Joint Review process quick, efficient  and excluding a lot of  people who want to make oral comments pro-pipeline columnist Deborah Yedlin raises once again what is a big deal for the mostly conservative  Postmedia  columnists.   (See Part One of this analysis:  Calgary Herald columnist advocates curbing free speech on Northern Gateway Hearings)

It could be called ” The Great American Energy Conspiracy,” which has apparently now gone international since a tiny minority of those wishing to  give oral comments to the Northern Gateway Joint Review panel are not only from the United States, but from the United Kingdom and even Germany. Yedlin doesn’t want non-Canadians (at least non-Canadian environmentalists, no mention of oil executives flying up from Houston) to give oral testimony at the Joint Review Panel.

So where does this conspiracy originate? It was uncovered from the research by blogger  Vivian Krause, who has detailed all the contributions made by US-based foundations to support environmental issues in Canada, especially on the bitumen sands, protecting the coastline and salmon farming.

Several  Postmedia columnists, including Yedlin,  go completely ballistic over this issue, quoting Krause as saying, in effect: How dare these foreigners interfere in a Canadian issue
(They don’t actually use the term foreigners)

Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Sea Change Foundation and San Francisco Oak Foundation. She will show you how these organizations have heavily funded the opposition to the oilsands in Canada.

To wit: a tax return filed for 2009 by Sea Change indicates $2 million was given to the Tides Foundation to be used for “promoting awareness and opposition to oilsands.”

(I should note here that Postmedia’s reporters continue with generally fair and accurate coverage of the pipeline issues, although the chain as a whole tends to tilt in favour of the energy  industry)

Yedlin goes on to say

the involvement, nay, interference, by U.S. foundations in the development of Canada’s natural resources constitutes a violation of the North American Free Trade Agreement or of Canadian economic sovereignty.

Were the shoe on the other foot, and Canadian organizations were sending money to U.S. environmental concerns opposing development of, say, shale gas reserves, it’s a good bet steps would be taken in short order to shut it down.

Really?

Has the United States taken any steps to stop the millions of dollars Canadian corporations are spreading along Washington’s lobbying central, K Street, not to mention throughout the six western mountain and southern states the Keystone XL pipeline will cross, to  promote that  proposed pipeline?

Is the United States objecting to Ambassador Gary Doer crisscrossing the United States until he will equal George Clooney’s character in Up in the Air, building up frequent flier points  lobbying in favour of the bitumen sands and cross continent pipelines?

Yedlin’s statement is the height of hypocrisy. For conservative columnists in Canada, it is unacceptable for American foundations to support the groups concerned environmental issues and opposing the bitumen sands.  Yet apparently there is nothing wrong for Canadian companies to spend millions of  dollars to lobby the United States on behalf of the Keystone XL pipeline:

The Globe and Mail reported on  Oct. 20, 2011 that

In the past two years, TransCanada Corp. which is seeking to build the $7-billion pipeline, has spent over $1.5-million on U.S. federal lobbyists, and even more in individual states like Nebraska, where opposition has been the most vocal. That’s in addition to the money it has poured into advertising campaigns, which include a current print, TV and online effort in Washington, D.C., aimed at persuading decision makers that the pipeline will help “real Americans.”

TransCanada has been joined by the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), which has marshalled the considerable connections of Gordon Giffin and David Wilkins, both former U.S. ambassadors to Canada, to press the case for the pipeline and the Alberta oil sands. The American Petroleum Institute has banded together with the Laborers International Union of North America to feed union workers and ferry them to public meetings, clothe them in orange shirts and ask them to make the case for the pipeline.
 

Now, of course, the United States is taking some action, with the Inspector General of the State Department investigating possible undue influence by TransCanada, as reported by the Globe and Mail.

The U.S. State Department’s Inspector-General on Monday launched a conflict-of-interest review of the pipeline’s permitting process to examine “the Department of State’s handling of the Environmental Impact Statement and National Interest Determination for TransCanada Corp.’s proposed Keystone XL permit process.”

The Inspector-General review comes after a request by several powerful U.S. senators, who questioned the impartiality of Cardno Entrix, the consultant hired to conduct the Keystone XL permitting process. Cardno Entrix has listed TransCanada as one of its major clients, raising conflict-of-interest concerns.

TransCanada denies any wrong doing and told the Globe

… spokesman James Millar welcomed the Inspector-General’s review “so that these latest claims by professional activists and lawmakers who are adamantly opposed to our pipeline project can be addressed.”

“At TransCanada, we conduct ourselves with integrity and in an open and transparent manner,” he wrote. “We are certain that the conclusion of this review will reflect that.”

Note that the Inspector General is not investigating the money that Canadian corporations and the Canadian government is showering on the United States, but the fact that a company that had worked for TransCanada was reviewing the company’s plans for the State Department.  Is it just “professional activists and lawmakers” who perceive that as a conflict of interest?

In her column Yedlin says one of the foundations Krause has “exposed” has lobbied against Keystone.

Sea Change was apparently a signatory to a letter signed by 251 environmental organizations and sent to the U.S. State Department asking Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to block approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline

Just what is going on here?  Sea Change is, as Krause and Yedlin point out,  an American foundation. Now these two object to an American foundation lobbying the US Secretary of State on the issue of a bitumen sands pipeline crossing United States territory. Huh?

Why? Apparently this is all a giant conspiracy to cripple the Canadian energy economy:

it’s hard not to wonder if some of what is going on vis-a-vis Northern Gateway in particular is a (not so) veiled attempt by the U.S. foundations to ensure there is a wide differential between the continental North American price of oil price and the world price.

After all, low oil prices are better for the U.S. economy than are higher prices and what better way to do this than by cloaking oneself in an environmental cape?

So  American environmental foundations, worried about the effects of a giant oil spill along our mutual coast, are secretly in the pocket of the American energy companies. Quick call Dan Brown and  hire a boat to look for a Da Vinci Code among the petroglyphs along the cliffs of the Inside Passage and rocks on the shores of Douglas Channel.

Then there’s the issue of Chinese investment in the bitumen sands and various pipeline projects. Some of those millions of yuan will surely make their way into the lobbying funds used by Canadian energy companies. Apparently there’s nothing wrong with China having its hand in Canada’s natural resources, as long as they’re sending money to energy companies and not to environmental groups.

No conspiracy, just more hypocrisy.