Oily in Canada, eh?

Franke James, the artist who was blacklisted by the HarperCons, lives in Joe Oliver’s riding.  She was excited to learn that he is open to meeting with environmental groups.  So, she’s issued a public letter, taking him up on his offer and requesting a meeting with him. Today in the

Continue reading

Enemygate: Harper’s divisive politics

Margaret Atwood has dubbed it ‘Enemygate’. ForestEthics whistleblower Andrew Frank accuses Harper of bullying tactics. John Bennett of the Sierra Club frets that this is “a scary time for Canadian democracy”. With the Prime Minister calling any opposition to his pet Keystone project, “enemy of the Government of Canada”, the

Continue reading

Straight Outta Edmonton: Harper’s Attack, Redford’s Consensus: Building National Support for the Oilsands

The Alberta Oilsands are a source of intense debate and discord both domestically and internationally. However, the future prosperity of the nation is inherently linked to Canada’s ability to take advantage of the resource and harness its potential. The challenge for proponents therefore becomes to cultivate broad based support, particularly domestically, as the resource’s land locked status and increasing role in the growth of national carbon emissions fosters political opposition that may well stifle development.

With Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Alberta Premier Alison Redford, we see two starkly different strategies employed to build support for the oilsands nationally.

In recent weeks, Prime Minister Harper, as well as Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver, have adopted the meme first introduced by Ethical Oil and its acolytes, painting all opponents to the Northern Gateway Pipeline — which seeks to ship oilsands bitumen from Alberta to Asia via Kitimat, B.C — as foreign proxies sabotaging Canada’s economic interests. Unabashedly disingenuous as it attempts to other First Nations and non-First Nations communities along the proposed route that oppose the pipeline, as well as the numerous Canadian ENGOs whose history of advancing environmental causes in this country dates back well before the oilsands became an economic imperative.

The goal here is to impose the oilsands on the country by masking it in the language of “Canadian” versus “Foreign” interests, McCarthyizing acceptance. Far from winning over critics, the approach is likely to further polarize Canadians on the issue.

In contrast to bullying opponents, Premier Redford has quietly been working to build consensus on the oilsands, winning over provinces that her predecessors may at one time have labeled as detractors through her push for a national energy strategy. First championed at the Intergovernmental Energy and Mines Ministers Conference in Kananaskis last July, Redford has won support from western allies such Saskatchewan and British Columbia, as well as traditional critics such as Quebec, where support for the oilsands are at the lowest levels in the country.

Redford’s message to her counterparts is for them to collectively harness their province’s unique energy strengths, transforming Canada into both an energy and environmental super power. This level of collaboration will invariably require trade offs, which although currently undefined, may require Alberta to address the oilsand’s poor environmental performance sooner than anticipated.

Yet to Redford, this is likely a welcomed risk. Committing the provinces to a national energy strategy where the oilsands play a pivotal role, strengthens the resource’s economic viability at home and abroad.

Canadian history is rife with examples of the federal government unilaterally proceeding on divisive matters of national concern in a belligerent manner with little regard to opponents. Trust erodes, federalism is undermined, and matters that require consensus to proceed and sustain in the long term become polarized to the extreme.

National projects in the national interest — as the oilsands should be viewed — require consensus building, bringing critics on board through compromise, whether they are provincial counterparts, First Nations, or ENGOs. In this case, its requires the oilsands to transform from being the Alberta Oilsands to the Canadian Oilsands, with opponents buying in at various stages of development. The subsequent policy erosion will be offset with a strong, broad base of support, which will reap far greater rewards for the resource than proceeding along its current trajectory.

Continue reading