Should B.C. undertake all the risk and bother of getting the oilsands bounty to market while Alberta scoops the billions in benefits?
The question arises as Alberta Premier Alison Redford steps up efforts to promote the oilsands as a national asset, yielding gains for the entire country.
That notion sparked a tiff earlier this week between Redford and Ontario's Dalton McGuinty, who complains the strong petro dollar resulting from a booming oilsands industry is hurting his province's manufacturing sec-tor, making the goods produced more expensive and discouraging export markets.
For B.C., the issue is entirely different, relating mainly to construction and operation of pipelines across the province's turf, and tanker ports to transport the crude to U.S. and Asian markets.
It should be noted that Redford is quite correct; both B.C. and Ontario do benefit substantially from the Alberta resource.
According to the Calgary-based Canadian Energy Research Institute, Ontario is the province that will benefit most, other than Alberta.
Between 2010 and 2035, Canada's most populous province stands to receive 52 per cent of all oilsands-related employment outside Alberta. B.C. is on target to snare 31,500 jobs, or 25 per cent of all employment out-side Alberta.
This province also will reap some $28 billion in economic benefits.
The fact is, B.C. and its lone provincial neighbour have long enjoyed friendly relations. The two were provincial pioneers when, in 2006, they conceived a Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement, aimed at easing movement of goods, ser-vices and people between the jurisdictions. (In 2010, the pact was expanded to include Saskatchewan in the New West Partnership Trade Agreement.)
But lately, B.C. is being asked by Alberta to play a role that could com-plicate their relations.
New pipelines are needed to keep Alberta's bitumen flowing to market, and the most sensible Canadian route is through B.C. to Pacific coast waters.
A proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway twin pipeline, traversing B.C.'s midsection to connect with a tanker port in Kitimat, is forcing a showdown with environmentalists and aboriginal people who fear oil spills along the pipeline route and potentially from tanker traffic off the west coast.
Last January, Premier Christy Clark reportedly advised Redford of problems regarding B.C. public opinion, which has resulted in Alberta letting it be known it will explore ways to compensate B.C. - possibly with federal help - for risks involved.
Last month, Alberta Finance Minister Ron Liepert was quoted as stating that his cabinet colleagues were debating: "Is there some way that British Columbia could benefit more than other provinces in Canada because of the impact [pipeline development] has in that province?"
Such outreach to B.C. by Alberta would stand in sharp contrast to a hostile relationship that has developed between Newfoundland and Quebec over the former's huge stock of hydro power.
Under a 65-year contract signed in 1969, Quebec buys at bargain prices all of Newfoundland's Upper Churchill hydroelectricity at the provincial boundary, reselling it to U.S. markets at much higher prices and pocketing all profits - while Newfoundlanders seethe.
Redford's approach focuses on having other provinces embrace the oil-sands, an objective that may be fanciful in the case of Quebec and Ontario, so reliant on manufacturing. B.C., however, has considerable potential to be a supportive partner, if economic benefits to the province are sufficiently plummy.
However, B.C.'s government first will have to overcome vigorous opposition from formidable opponents of pipeline development, opponents who doubtless will be quick to diss any "bribes" from Edmonton.
Original Article
Source: vancouver sun
Author: Barbara Yaffe
The question arises as Alberta Premier Alison Redford steps up efforts to promote the oilsands as a national asset, yielding gains for the entire country.
That notion sparked a tiff earlier this week between Redford and Ontario's Dalton McGuinty, who complains the strong petro dollar resulting from a booming oilsands industry is hurting his province's manufacturing sec-tor, making the goods produced more expensive and discouraging export markets.
For B.C., the issue is entirely different, relating mainly to construction and operation of pipelines across the province's turf, and tanker ports to transport the crude to U.S. and Asian markets.
It should be noted that Redford is quite correct; both B.C. and Ontario do benefit substantially from the Alberta resource.
According to the Calgary-based Canadian Energy Research Institute, Ontario is the province that will benefit most, other than Alberta.
Between 2010 and 2035, Canada's most populous province stands to receive 52 per cent of all oilsands-related employment outside Alberta. B.C. is on target to snare 31,500 jobs, or 25 per cent of all employment out-side Alberta.
This province also will reap some $28 billion in economic benefits.
The fact is, B.C. and its lone provincial neighbour have long enjoyed friendly relations. The two were provincial pioneers when, in 2006, they conceived a Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement, aimed at easing movement of goods, ser-vices and people between the jurisdictions. (In 2010, the pact was expanded to include Saskatchewan in the New West Partnership Trade Agreement.)
But lately, B.C. is being asked by Alberta to play a role that could com-plicate their relations.
New pipelines are needed to keep Alberta's bitumen flowing to market, and the most sensible Canadian route is through B.C. to Pacific coast waters.
A proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway twin pipeline, traversing B.C.'s midsection to connect with a tanker port in Kitimat, is forcing a showdown with environmentalists and aboriginal people who fear oil spills along the pipeline route and potentially from tanker traffic off the west coast.
Last January, Premier Christy Clark reportedly advised Redford of problems regarding B.C. public opinion, which has resulted in Alberta letting it be known it will explore ways to compensate B.C. - possibly with federal help - for risks involved.
Last month, Alberta Finance Minister Ron Liepert was quoted as stating that his cabinet colleagues were debating: "Is there some way that British Columbia could benefit more than other provinces in Canada because of the impact [pipeline development] has in that province?"
Such outreach to B.C. by Alberta would stand in sharp contrast to a hostile relationship that has developed between Newfoundland and Quebec over the former's huge stock of hydro power.
Under a 65-year contract signed in 1969, Quebec buys at bargain prices all of Newfoundland's Upper Churchill hydroelectricity at the provincial boundary, reselling it to U.S. markets at much higher prices and pocketing all profits - while Newfoundlanders seethe.
Redford's approach focuses on having other provinces embrace the oil-sands, an objective that may be fanciful in the case of Quebec and Ontario, so reliant on manufacturing. B.C., however, has considerable potential to be a supportive partner, if economic benefits to the province are sufficiently plummy.
However, B.C.'s government first will have to overcome vigorous opposition from formidable opponents of pipeline development, opponents who doubtless will be quick to diss any "bribes" from Edmonton.
Original Article
Source: vancouver sun
Author: Barbara Yaffe
No comments:
Post a Comment