When it comes to the Kinder Morgan pipeline, the federal Liberal government says it is in the national interest for the project to proceed, and Ottawa’s constitutional powers will allow it to move forward.
The issue is very similar to Newfoundland and Labrador’s energy transmission plan since joining Canada in 1949, and our desire and need to transmit power from Labrador west through Quebec to a market of our choice, giving us the independence to be a partner in hydro developments that would be of national interest.
But no national government — neither Progressive Conservative, Liberal nor Conservative governments — has ever had the guts to stand up to Quebec and exercise Ottawa’s constitutional powers to ensure a national strategy of clean energy transmission — a strategy that would have benefitted not just Newfoundland and Labrador, but also many other provinces in Canada.
What we have gotten instead is Quebec and Hydro-Quebec making billions on energy from Labrador because they held us for ransom by setting the terms of the Upper Churchill development that included a veto on any negotiations, meaning “we will not allow you to use our transmission or build transmission through Quebec, even though the Canadian constitution says otherwise” — the same constitution that western Canada and the federal government reference today related to the transfer of Alberta oil to the coast of British Columbia.
I fully support the Kinder Morgan project and the right of transmission of oil across other provinces.
Why would Canada not want to allow the sale of oil for all Canadians’ benefit?
By the same token, why would Canada not want to support a province rich in hydro power wheeling power in accordance with the constitution, when that can be the foundation of a national strategy for clean energy that reduces greenhouse gas emissions and is renewable?
Imagine, in pre-Upper Churchill negotiation time, if Lester Pearson had not reportedly told then-premier Joe Smallwood of Newfoundland and Labrador not to press for power transmission across Quebec to get to markets of our choice as it would not be supported.
In pre-Muskrat Falls decision time, imagine if Quebec had agreed to allow the transmission of power — even if we invested and paid for transmission. Imagine what that would have initiated for Newfoundland and Labrador and a Canadian clean energy strategy.
Imagine if we were able to move forward under a new national hydro energy strategy and could wheel power from Muskrat Falls and any new development of a Gull Island project through Quebec to a negotiated buyer of our choice, not dictated by a province that balks at the Canadian constitution and is allowed to do so.
Instead of a national hydro energy strategy, we have a carbon tax train coming that has been forced on us by the federal Liberal government — a government that has never demonstrated how a carbon tax will be able to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. A carbon tax will make Canada even less competitive for investment at a time when we particularly need it in Newfoundland and Labrador. This is the opposite of a national hydro energy strategy — but it’s the approach that’s being imposed on us by our federal Liberal government.
Best of luck to Kinder Morgan, Alberta and Western Canada. The returns on this oil project for Canadian industry and workers are much needed. But it would be great to see this same vision reciprocated on the East Coast of Canada with a national commitment to hydro energy transmission from sources originating in our province. Indeed, such a national strategy would be just as beneficial to Canadians.
Keith Hutchings,
PC MHA Ferryland
Opposition Natural Resources Critic