Ottawa and Alberta Split Over Kyoto (Alaska gas pipeline involved?)

National Post ^ | 8-31-2002 | Alan Toulin, Ian Jack and Tony Seskus

[Trailer Trash]

Ottawa alone will decide Kyoto, PM says

 

'We had a lot of discussion with the provinces ... but there is a moment where a decision will be made': Dismisses Alberta's threat to opt out of environment accord

Alan Toulin, Ian Jack and Tony Seskus
National Post, with files from Joan Bryden, Southam News

Jean Chrétien, the Prime Minister, said the ratification of the Kyoto accord will go ahead without the approval of the provinces, including Alberta.

He said the federal government alone will make the final decision on Kyoto ratification, one day after Ralph Klein, the Alberta Premier, accused the Prime Minister of reneging on a promise to consult with the provinces.

"We have waited because of the provinces. We wanted to make a decision earlier, and we had a lot of discussion with the provinces and others, but there is a moment where a decision will be made," said Mr. Chrétien, while attending a conference on federalism in Switzerland. "It is our federal responsibility."

The Prime Minister also dismissed the threat by Alberta that it may choose to opt out of the agreement if it impinges on areas of provincial authority such as the development and use of natural resources.

"Canada is a country and the treaties are signed by national authorities," Mr. Chretien said.

The Prime Minister was responding to a comment by Jean-Pierre Charbonneau, Quebec's intergovernmental relations minister, who said provinces should be able to opt out of treaties such as Kyoto if they wish. Mr. Charbonneau's remarks were philosophical in nature; Quebec is one of the provinces urging Ottawa to ratify the Kyoto Protocol.

Senior aides travelling with the Prime Minister left little doubt that ratification of Kyoto is moving forward quickly. The treaty is expected to go before Parliament this fall, after the federal Cabinet approves an implementation plan. The plan will be presented to the provinces in October.

"You can't continue this [consultation process] forever. This is a final stage," said a senior official with the Prime Minister's Office.

However, Herb Dhaliwal, the Natural Resources Minister, yesterday appeared to contradict the Prime Minister and others on how and when ratification of the accord, intended to reduce greenhouse gases, would occur.

Senior Liberal ministers, including Charles Caccia, the chairman of the parliamentary environment committee, have indicated they expect the accord to go to Parliament in October.

Mr. Dhaliwal said no final decision on climate change will be made without consultation with industry and the provinces, and the decision might not be made until the end of the year, or early in the new year.

He said no decision to adopt the international treaty would be made until the costs of implementing Kyoto are determined and the government has a workable plan.

The international treaty commits Canada to reducing its greenhouse gas output to 6% below the levels produced in 1990.

Alberta and industry groups believe the treaty will have a devastating impact on jobs and on the oil and gas industry. Greenhouse gases, believed by some scientists to be the source of global warming and climate change, are produced by burning fossil fuels.

"We're doing the consultations and we'll have a workable plan and then we'll make a decision on Kyoto. That's what we're committed to. That's what we are going to do," Mr. Dhaliwal said.

Mr. Chrétien yesterday declined to quell speculation he will use a speech at the forum of the Earth Summit in Johannesburg, South Africa, on Monday to give more detail on Canada's approach to dealing with climate change.

"Just wait," Mr. Chrétien told reporters asking about the potential for an announcement Canada will ratify the treaty.

David Anderson, the Minister of the Environment, dismissed the idea of Mr. Chrétien announcing a ratification decision.

"The likelihood of any announcement on ratification here at Johannesburg is remote. The Prime Minister has confirmed it is non-existent," said Mr. Anderson, who is at the Earth Summit.

"The issue now is to continue with what we're doing. We expect to have a plan [for implementing the treaty]. This would be a plan that will not unduly penalize any region of the country. We expect, of course, such a plan to be commented on. We also expect the consultations to continue," he said.

Mr. Anderson said consultations with industry and the provinces will continue and be more intense once a decision to accept the Kyoto treaty is embraced by Canada.

"If we move to ratification, then of course everybody [the provinces and industry] takes up a new question, which is: 'How do we ratify and how do we do it cheapest, how do we do it with the least dislocation?' And that is when you are going to have people -- who have been quite negative -- suddenly unleashing the ingenuity of private enterprise to keep costs down and keep industry competitive," he said.

John Godrey, a Liberal MP who sponsored a petition, signed by at least 90 members of the Liberal caucus, urging the government to ratify the treaty, said a detailed plan as demanded by the provinces and industry is unrealistic.

Canadians, he said, did not ask how much the Second World War would cost or what the plan to fight it would be, Mr. Godfrey told the CBC yesterday.

"To insist on an absolute dollar figure and an absolute plan is simply unrealistic given the urgency of climate change," he said.

© Copyright 2002 National Post

 

Also in the post today...

 

Dhaliwal to voice Alaska concerns

Tony Seskus
Financial Post

http://www.nationalpost.com/financialpost/story.html?id={EDE6A886-ED9D-4E3D-998D-5D65DC8574BB}
Saturday, August 31, 2002

 

Herb Dhaliwal

 

CALGARY - Herb Dhaliwal, the federal Minister of Natural Resources, will hold discussions with key members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives next month to fight for the removal of proposed Alaskan natural gas subsidies from a controversial energy bill.

He is to meet with members of the congressional committee resuming work next week on the final details of the proposed U.S. legislation, which includes gas subsidies and tax incentives to help spur construction of a US$20-billion Alaskan Highway pipeline.

He will argue in his discussions, due to take place Sept. 9 and 10, that the subsidies would distort the market and harm natural gas development in other regions of North America. There are also Canadian concerns that a subsidized U.S. pipeline would cripple plans for a similar $4-billion project in the Mackenzie Valley region of the Northwest Territories.

Mr. Dhaliwal said in an interview yesterday that he will not mince words in Washington.

"We want to make sure that our position is clear to the people who are going to make the final decision on the energy bill," Mr. Dhaliwal said. "We believe the private sector should determine the route and that subsidies would be wrong and unacceptable to Canada."

Under the U.S. proposal, Alaska producers would get a subsidy if natural gas prices fall below US$3.25 per thousand cubic feet. It also proposes US$10-billion in loan guarantees for the project.

Supporters of the Alaska line say the proposed U.S. floor price is not a subsidy but a tax credit that is repayable and that other types of energy projects in Canada, including the Alberta tar sands and the development of oil and gas fields in the Atlantic offshore, also depended on government financial aid.

But Ottawa argues that the financial incentives would distort the market for natural gas and leave gas assets in the Mackenzie Delta stranded.

A study by U.S.-based energy consultancy Purvin & Gertz Inc. completed this spring for the N.W.T. supported those concerns. It concluded that the subsidies would "encourage overinvestment in Alaskan gas production" by creating false market signals.

The report also said gas resource owners in Canada and the U.S. would be "negatively impacted" by the plan, with investment shrinking in other regions.

Executives with a number of independent U.S. oil companies have expressed concern about the plan for that reason, but Washington insiders believe the congressional committee, which is essentially working to merge proposals from the House and Senate into a single energy bill, will be finish with the legislation by the start of October.

The committee has already signed off on many of the less-contentious items, but will now deal with more difficult issues, like the pipeline subsidies, said one source who expects the bill to pass with the subsidies in place.

The bill's ultimate aim is to help the U.S. become less dependent on foreign oil by developing domestic supplies -- and critics fear a looming confrontation with Iraq may give the bill the momentum needed to pass with the subsidies intact.

Given the current political climate in Washington, some observers say it is unlikely that the U.S. will pay much heed to the concerns of Canadians, but Mr. Dhaliwal yesterday insisted that the beltway politicians should hear what he has to say.

"I think it is in their interest to listen because, in the end, Canada will make the decision," he said, noting that the majority of the pipeline would still have to run through Canada.

"They need Canada's support to build the Alaska pipeline."

Hart Searle, a spokesman for Imperial Oil Ltd., one of the major players behind the development of gas reserves in the Northwest Territories, welcomed the efforts of Mr. Dhaliwal.

He said the subsidies would be harmful for producers across North America.

"It's really an issue for all North American producers who sell gas into the North American marketplace," Mr. Searle said. "This proposed subsidy represents a potential intrusion into the marketplace ... [and] has the capability of negatively impacting a number of producers and not just the Mackenzie gas producers."

© Copyright  2002 National Post

 

[Husker24]

Alberta should just declare its independance, Canada has no military to take it back.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Interesting!

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

However, Herb Dhaliwal, the Natural Resources Minister, yesterday appeared to contradict the Prime Minister and others on how and when ratification of the accord, intended to reduce greenhouse gases, would occur.

More BS!!

Global Warming Hoax :

To find all articles tagged or indexed using Global Warming Hoax , click below:
	click here >>>	Global Warming Hoax	<<< click here
(To view all FR Bump Lists, click here)

[Trailer Trash]

There's a ton of news in this one.

But, FR moves so fast these days that it's hard for involved stories like these to get focused exposure.

[Dog Gone]

Excellent post. It's the Socialists vs. the Realists in Canada, and the Socialists have the upper hand.

I'd gladly trade Vermont to Canada for Alberta. Heck, they can even have Connecticutt.

[snopercod]

Jean Chrétien, the Prime Minister, said the ratification of the Kyoto accord will go ahead without the approval of the provinces, including Alberta.

See The Rise of the FU Movement

... The West is in thrall to a great FU movement that's been growing for 30 years. You're one of the 90 per cent of the American people who opposed court-mandated 'busing'? FU! You're a New Hampshire voter and you're happy with your tax structure the way it is? FU! You're a white Canadian who likes to hunt and you don't see why natives alone should have been given (as a court recently decreed) the right to kill as many moose and deer as they want? FU! You're an Austrian and you'd like the right to choose your elected representatives? FU!

It's later than we think.

[Koblenz]

I'd gladly trade Vermont to Canada for Alberta. Heck, they can even have Connecticutt

I live in Fairfield County, Connecticut, and thus would hope that our little wealthy county could stay part of the US. But I'd be willing to give up the rest of New England. We'd lose a bunch of Democratic Senators: 1 from VT, 2 from MA, 1 from RI, 2 from CT, and Jeffords. We'd lose a few Republicans: 2 from NH, 2 from ME and 1 from RI. So the Senate would be, after this, 44 Democrats and 44 Republicans, with Cheney breaking the tie. And there'd be no more idiot Republican Senator from RI threatening to switch sides.

We'd also gain politically if we got western Canada. Ontario could be its own country, Quebec could be independent and poor, and the Maritimes could be a third world country.

[Dog Gone]

Okay, the US keeps your county, but the rest of the place has got to go.

If you like barbecue, we'll let you be part of Texas. ;-)

[Faraday]

Alberta and industry groups believe the treaty will have a devastating impact on jobs and on the oil and gas industry.

Hey, Alberta and BC, come on down!

[VOA]

Alberta should just declare its independance, Canada has no military to take it back.

Independence, h-ll!
(This ain't a sermonette...just expressing my opinion...)

As an Okie with relatives in Sherwood Park (suburb of Edmondton), I'd gladly take
Alberta as the 51st State of The United States of America.

And British Columbia, The Northwest Territories and a few other provinces can get
"no-waiting statehood" as far as I'm concerned!!!

As for the "no military", stand advised that we should be lucky if we get the
"Princess Patricia's Light Infantry" that I believe is stationed near Edmondton.
It was one of the members of this group that made what is (reportedly) the longest sniper shot
on record killing an Al Quida/Taliban puke that was pinning down US forces.
(Our military have been trying to give this group medals...the Politically-Correct
nutburgers in Ottawa have been delaying this award.)

Oh and we might pick up the frigate HMCS "Vancouver" that has been serving with our
coalition forces in interdiction work (stopping and boarding ships that might be
carrying Taliban/Al-Quida away from Afghanistan/Pakistan).

But I'm not suggesting we invade Canada...we couldn't have much better neighbors
even if they are confused about socialism.

But there is some "join the USA" sentiment there...it just usually manifests itself
with immigration (about 24,000 last years, half of which are "professional" class,
bringing their brain power to the USA).

[Dog Gone]

I'm not so sure about British Columbia. From what I can tell, they have the same political leanings as Seattle.

[Husker24]

I think Alberta and some of the other provinces would be better off forming their own country rather than joining us, why let California drag them down too. As for my comments about the military, i was just suggesting that their military is too small to occupy those large provinces, not that their individual soliers suck.

[VOA]

I think Alberta and some of the other provinces would be better off forming their own
country rather than joining us, why let California drag them down too.

Being that I'm temporarily in Southern California, I get your point.
And thanks for taking my post in good nature.

[VOA]

I'm not so sure about British Columbia. From what I can tell, they have the same
political leanings as Seattle.

I suspect that you are right, in the main.
But there is a flip side to that coin. The influx of rich Chinese from Hong Kong
has brought a good bit of working capital into the place. And the guvmint
even gives tax breaks to lure "run-away" television/film production from the USA.
It was interesting to see an episode of "The X Files" and be able to say "hey, that's
Vancouver...I've been there!"
This is a HUGE issue here in Los Angeles/Hollywood with much grinding of teeth by
entertainment workers and union honchos.

Kinda' fun to hear a bunch of Southern California liberals saying nasty things
about those socialists north of the border!
And to reveal that really, even for them, it's ALL about the money!

[Dog Gone]

I thought it was rather ironic that the socialists in British Columbia who run BC Power were the ones who charged California the most for electricity last year.

Maybe they are really capitalists after all.

[VOA]

...it was rather ironic that the socialists in British Columbia who run BC Power
were the ones who charged California the most for electricity last year.

LOL! Amen to that. And you are on top of the issue, knowin that.

I did relish getting to report that factoid to one of my Canadian cousins in Dallas
(of course he's now a US citizen and been seduced into capitalism!).

Oh, and David (or Daniel) Freeman, the folksy guy from Tennessee that ran the
LADWP (Los Angeles Dept. of Water and Power, for lurkers) is now getting a bit
of bad press because some reporters have had the cojones to report that he
charged the State of California the same sort of stratospheric rates for
electricity during the time of maximum crisis.

And I took even more relish telling him how a state representative from Texas (and
a dentist) had sketched out a graphic during a flight to CA to investigate de-regulation
and told the CA authorities that they were going to have a "gamable" system and
that CA would be at the mercy of suppliers.

It IS all about the money!!! LOL!

[Brad C.]

He is to meet with members of the congressional committee resuming work next week on the final details of the proposed U.S. legislation, which includes gas subsidies and tax incentives to help spur construction of a US$20-billion Alaskan Highway pipeline.

He will argue in his discussions, due to take place Sept. 9 and 10, that the subsidies would distort the market and harm natural gas development in other regions of North America. There are also Canadian concerns that a subsidized U.S. pipeline would cripple plans for a similar $4-billion project in the Mackenzie Valley region of the Northwest Territories.

I really think that this Canadian should be spending time lobbying his own government to subsidize their pipeline project, instead of trying to prevent our government from developing our own natural resources. The only thing that makes the McKenzie project viable is if the Canadians can sell the gas to America. It is not cost efficient for them to build it strictly for domestic use. There are several reasons why they really want the gas pipeline from Alaska routed through them. They get to market their gas, and they don't have to bear 100% of the cost of building the pipe.

[Shermy]

I missed this one on the pipeline from Alaska. Looks like Chretien in league with the Saudis, almost. there's plenty of capacity to change to gas, these guys fighting it.

[mafree]

One mo' time-- follow da oil!