Showing posts with label Gateway Pipeline. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gateway Pipeline. Show all posts

Friday, June 27, 2014

Stephen Harper's National Energy Program May Do More Damage Than OPEC

" I witnessed first-hand the movement of an economy from historic boom to deep recession in a matter of months. A radical, interventionist blueprint of economic nationalism, the NEP caused the oil industry to flee, businesses to close and the real estate market to crash. The lives of honest, hard-working Albertans were upended and I came to know many of those who lost their jobs and homes." (Looking Back at Trudeau, Stephen Harper, National Post, October 5, 2000)

By 2000, Harper had left the Reform Party, and was running the National Citizens Coalition, a right-wing, anti-liberal non-profit; created initially to end public healthcare; but grew to include a fight against unions and a fight for the ability of corporations to fund politicians and political parties.

I don't know if Stephen Harper really believed that the National Energy Program caused the devastation he describes, or he was simply reviving an old wedge issue, while attempting to rewrite history.

Admittedly, the NEP was not popular in Alberta, but its cancellation by Mulroney, was the cause of most of their woes.
Oscar Wilde wrote that there are only two tragedies: one is not getting what one wants; the other is getting it. In the fall of 1985, the latter tragedy befell Alberta's oil industry. The OPEC cartel failed to agree upon a world oil price. The result was a global free-for-all among producing nations. Canada's oil and gas producers were caught in the middle. Having recently gained freedom from the NEP, Canada's oil and gas industry was not protected as the price of oil dropped from US $27 per barrel ... to $8 per barrel by August 1986. ... Forty-five thousand oil workers lost their jobs." (Of Passionate Intensity: Right-Wing Populism and the Reform Party of Canada, By Trevor Harrison, University of Toronto Press, 1995, ISBN: 0-8020-7204-6 3, p. 97)
In fact, most in the industry liked Trudeau's program because it allowed further exploration on public land. What they opposed was the proposed closing of tax loopholes by then Liberal finance minister, Allan MacEachen.

However, they couldn't campaign against that to attack the Trudeau government, so instead sold it as Ottawa aggression toward the West, and Ted Byfield, an early Reform Party organizer, kept the campaign alive. Wrote Harrison: "In the months and years that followed, Byfield's Alberta Report continued to mythologize the intent and the impact of the NEP", giving the Reformers their battle cry, "The West wants in".

Harper's National Energy Program

Since coming to power in 2006, the new and improved Reform Party, now calling themselves the Conservative Party of Canada, has done everything they could to deny that Climate Change exists, or that the Alberta Oilsands has anything to do with it, if it does.

That stance has made Canada a symbol around the world, of what Climate Change denial looks like, though it has increased Harper's creds with the diminishing Denial crew.

In the CPC's latest campaign, they suggest that the toxic bitumen coming out of the Oilsands is actually good for us. No more harmful than cooking a steak on a barbecue. Heck maybe we could bottle it and sell it as a sauce.

Economically, we've been turned into a Petro State with our fortunes dependant on how well the industry is doing.

Yet, according to the International Monetary Fund for every dollar in growth from oil, 82 cents goes to Alberta, with Ontario seeing just 4 cents. Yet the entire country has subsidized the Oilsands to the tune of 34 billion dollars.

Harper has also increased Alberta's federal transfer, while decreasing Ontario's and is moving the National Energy Board to Calgary, creating jobs in a province already apparently experiencing a labour shortage.

Will All of This Largesse Really Help Alberta?

The Harper government recently tried to bury a report, warning of the economic and health risks of the Alberta tarsands. Just another attempt at denying Climate Change exists, that has included muzzling scientists and ending tax breaks for environmental groups.

In the debate over the pipelines, we are told that without them Canada’s economic recovery would suffer serious damage. Says Russ Blinch in the Huffington Post: Prime Minister Harper says he won't lift a finger to help the environment because he's working too hard to protect jobs. In fact he is imperiling our future by blocking innovation in order to support a fading industry: fossil fuels.

The World Bank says that tackling climate change would grow economies, not hinder growth or recovery.

And while John Baird is putting pressure on the U.S. To approve the XL pipeline, a former Canadian ambassador claims that there is a very good chance that they won't be needed. Obama is now allowing American crude to be exported, which might also bring the price of oil down.

The Northern Gateway that would send the tar to China for refinery, is also not looking too promising. China is moving away from oil and switching to natural gas, which they are getting from Russia. Looks like Putin is laying claim to the Asian market with his own pipelines. So much for sanctions, as he's also moving away from the U.S. dollar.

So will Harper's National Energy Program cause the oil industry to flee, businesses to close and the real estate market to crash? Will it upend the lives of honest, hard-working Albertans, many of whom will lose their jobs and homes?

Jeffrey Rubin Former Chief Economist with CIBC World Markets asks Are Harper's dreams of Canada as energy superpower going up in smoke?
In the last decade, his Conservative government has done everything but roll out the red carpet for the energy sector. Whether it's multi-million dollar advertising campaigns in the United States, gold-plated junkets to foreign energy markets, or muzzling opposition from domestic environmentalists, never before have we seen Ottawa shill so unabashedly for a single industry ... Unfortunately for Canadians, it’s becoming clear that despite the Prime Minister’s best attempts at economic intervention, their government is playing a losing hand.
If Harper's Reform Party used the revisionist history of the impact of Trudeau's energy policies, with a tagline "The West Wants In", maybe the next election ours should be:

CANADA WANTS IN

But that won't happen until Harper is out.

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

When is "Foreign" Money and Influence, Not "Foreign" Money and Influence?


The Harper government has tried a new strategy in pushing through the Gateway Pipeline.  Apparently, we are now under attack by "foreigners".  "Foreign" money is driving the debate.  "Foreign" radicals are trying to stop progress.

And yet "foreign" ownership of the Tar Sands has accelerated since they took power.  Our new Natural Resources minister is in fact an investment banker.  He sees our natural resources not as something that need to be protected, but something that can be exploited.
Foreign corporations, some controlled by national governments, have been using their economic clout to buy into Alberta's oil sands and take control of our natural resources.  U.S., French, British, Chinese, Thai, Korean and Norwegian interests have all bought stakes in oil-sands projects. According to the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), international companies have invested nearly $20 billion in the last three years through mergers, partnerships and outright purchases of projects.

This increased foreign investment raises questions. Who has the right to develop our natural resources? Who sets the rules for how these resources are developed? Who controls where the resources are processed and sold?
For Harper to use the "foreign" argument is hypocrisy at its worst.
 
Not only is he selling off all of our industry to global interests, but he used "foreign" influence to gain power.  Top Republican pollster, John McLaughlin takes credit for Harper's career

Within the past year, John McLaughlin has helped elect Iain Duncan Smith, the leader of the Conservative Party (United Kingdom); Stephen Harper, the leader of the Canadian Alliance Party (Canada); Virginia Attorney General Jerry Kilgore; and a historic 30-seat Republican majority in the Virginia House of Delegates.
The American NRA is writing our gun laws. Frank Luntz and the Americans, including Dick Cheney, helped to write our environmental policy (summarized as "screw the environment, we're going drilling") and Religious Right leader James Dobson poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into Stephen Harper's anti same-sex marriage campaign.

Mike Robinson has an excellent piece in the Edmonton Journal today:  History repeats itself with Gateway debate:  Old questions linger about wisdom of project.
 
He wonders why the Harper government is working so hard to push this pipeline through.  Mr. Robinson knows the dangers because he was involved in similar debates decades ago.  The only difference was that many public meetings took place with First Nation communities, where the environmental impact would be felt the most. 
Looking back, I was glad the B.C. offshore play never happened, be-cause at the local information sessions we heard too many seasoned fishing boat skippers talk about 80-foot waves, high tidal energy, howling southeasters in Hecate Strait and the growing fragility of the marine ecosystem.


I also heard scores of First Nations speakers decry putting their home-lands and food chains at risk for the sake of oil. I also remember having a few beers with technical members of the company's public-information team. Privately, especially after a raucous community meeting, they would confide to me that high wave and wind action would hamper and disrupt oil spill boom placement and slick-licker deployment, and a major blowout or spill near a tidal estuary would likely be very difficult to contain.
Another concern of mine is something not getting a lot of media attention.  The secret deal signed in Texas, that allows the U.S. to send its troops to Canada in the case of a "civil emergency".  Stuart Trew, a researcher with the Council of Canadians, rightfully said:
... there is potential for the agreement to militarize civilian responses to emergency incidents. He noted that work is also underway for the two nations to put in place a joint plan to protect common infrastructure such as roadways and oil pipelines.  “Are we going to see (U.S.) troops on our soil for minor potential threats to a pipeline or a road?”
A license to invade?

The threat to the pipeline would of course be a threat to Stephen Harper's benefactors, like:

Thailand's state-owned PTTEP who bought a 40-per-cent stake in Statoil's Kai Kos Dehseh project for $2.3 billion.  "Statoil is a Norwegian company whose largest owner is the government of Norway, with 67 per cent of the shares. Under the terms of the deal, Statoil remained the majority owner and operator of the project, which ends up being a Norwegian-Thai, public-private enterprise developing Albertan energy resources."

Korean National Oil Company that took over Calgary's Harvest Energy Trust for $4.1 billion ($1.8 billion in cash and $2.3 billion in assumed debt). The deal allowed the Korean state-run company to grab an estimated oil production of 50,000 barrels per day (b/d) and 154 million barrels of oil-equivalent reserves.  "In 2006, the Korean firm set up an office in Calgary and purchased the Black Gold Oil Sands leases near Conklin. These leases gave the company 10,000 b/d of bitumen for about 25 years."

PetroChina now owns 60-per-cent share of Athabasca Oil Sands Corp.'s giving them a majority share in a company with access to more than five million barrels of oil.

Chinese company Sinopec, a majority-owned subsidiary of a national company, paid $4.65 billion for Houston-based ConocoPhillips' stake in Syncrude. What makes this deal significant is that under the terms of the deal, the state-controlled Sinopec has a veto on the critical decision of whether the company should upgrade bitumen here or export it in raw form overseas.

In January 2011, Enbridge announced Sinopec's funding of the $5.5-billion Northern Gateway Pipeline.

And what do Canadians get out of all this?  The bill for cleanup, the threat of an American invasion and the joy of listening to our prime minister warn of "foreign" involvement in a Canadian (??!!?) pipeline.