In my humble opinion, buying a pipeline was not a bad idea

Before this summer, “heat dome” was an unfamiliar term to most of us. Then two weeks of extremely hot weather broke temperature records across western Canada. The heat wave led to 569 deaths in BC alone.

In solo three days, the city of Lytton, BC, broke record after record, eventually reaching 49.6 C before burning to the ground in one of the over 900 wildfires that followed. The air was dangerous to breathe, and air quality advisories were issued across the country, from Edmonton to Ottawa.

Our grasslands are having a historical drought, while news of devastating floods in Europe and in the East Coast of the USA It further increased that gnawing sensation that something is not correct.

Climate change is here, happening now, and it is affecting us all.

In this context, it is not surprising that climate change is the most important as Canadians head to the polls on September 20. Because climate policy can quickly become complicated, numerous academics and independent organizations have published clear assessments of the climate policies of different parties (see some examples here, here, here and here).

However, there is one aspect of the climate debate that is rarely reflected in these assessments, but that nonetheless seems to weigh heavily on the minds of voters.

What people are reading

I mean the Liberals’ purchase of the Trans Mountain pipeline in 2018. We are often told that true climate leaders do not buy fossil fuel pipelines.

As an Albertan who cares deeply about climate change, I have no doubt that were it not for this purchase, Canada would now be in the grip of a serious crisis of national unity, which, among other things, would have been disastrous for politics. climatic. .

Despite all the clamor from the Alberta government, I don’t think the rest of Canada is following Alberta’s policy closely. If I did, I would know that even the previous NDP government, when faced with opposition to the pipeline, threatened to “turn off the taps“To BC. You would know that even before he was Prime Minister, Jason Kenney persecuted a designated commissioner outside the Alberta Energy Regulator simply because of his previous role in an environmental NGO.

He would know that shortly after his election, the Kenney government called all opposition to oil and gas “anti-Alberta” and released what would become a McCarthy-esque Inquisition about the funding of environmental groups, one full of climate denialism and conspiracy theories along the way.

If you were to follow Alberta policy, you would know that even these drastic and deeply undemocratic measures were deemed insufficient for some Albertans, whose devotion to the oil and gas industry is so complete that it has led to the formation of separatist parties in both countries. . federal and provincial levels. All of this in the face of recent and conflicting evidence from our provincial regulators that the oil and gas industry’s outstanding environmental liabilities (i.e. the cleanup costs for idle wells, tailings ponds, pipelines, etc.) can come at $ 260 billion. .

Not all, or even most, Albertans are uncritically pro-oil, but they live and work in a place that for decades has been shaped, both economically and culturally, by the oil and gas industry. Faced with this political reality, I have no doubt that all the major federal parties would have bought Trans Mountain. In fact, I’m not surprised NDP leader Jagmeet Singh spoke recently on this issue..

None of the above is intended to lessen the many remaining concerns about the Trans Mountain Pipeline, including its impacts on indigenous rights and the marine environment. Those need to be addressed.

But my point is this: Instead of fighting growing separatism, Canada has been able to develop a set of climate laws and policies, including a national carbon pricing regime, and is in the middle of an election in which each party important it has some kind of climate. plan. Scrutinize those plans carefully, they are by no means created equal, but understand that they were most likely made possible with a complicated purchase of a pipe.

Martin Olszynski is Associate Professor at the University of Calgary School of Law. His main research interests are environmental and natural resource laws and policies.