Roundup: The meaningless debate over Teck Frontier

Posted on by

The debate over approval of the Teck Frontier oilsands mine is reaching completely absurd levels, right up to warning that this will be an existential crisis for Confederation if the federal government rejects it. There is a fight brewing within the Liberal caucus, and Jason Kenney’s bombast is back to its dangerous stoking of anger for promises that nobody can deliver on. Conservative talking points, as with Kenney’s, are full of complete mistruths about the proposed emissions targets of the mine if it goes ahead, and they exaggerate the initial environmental assessment, which was skeptical about many of the claims the company made about their emissions. That Teck has promised to try and be carbon neutral by 2050 is also something that should be taken with a massive grain of salt because they haven’t outlined how they’ll get there, and it sounds an awful lot like technosalvation – that they hope to develop some miracle technology between now and then.

And it’s just so stupid because it’s unlikely that the project would even go ahead even if it were granted approval, and yet this is somehow supposed to be the great saviour of the Alberta economy. It won’t be. Teck has stated that even if they get approval, they would need another partner, more pipeline capacity, and the price of oil to be at least $75/barrel, and it’s currently sitting around $50, and unlikely to start climbing anytime soon as the global supply glut continues, and the shale boom in the US continues to drive down prices.

Nevertheless, a number of outlets are reporting that the federal government is preparing a fiscal rescue package in the event that it doesn’t get approval, which people are already panning as tone deaf, and the death knell of investment in Canada, but not one of them is looking at the current economics – that even if approved, it’s not financially viable, and as Andrew Leach points out, there are plenty of other approved projects that are not moving ahead because it’s not economically viable. Should the government prepare fiscal rescue packages for that eventuality too? The problems in the province and in the sector are not the fault of the current federal government, as much as people like to blame them. It’s a bigger, structural problem that has been decades in the making, and the ship isn’t going to be turned on a dime. Blaming Trudeau won’t solve anything.

Meanwhile, if you think this is somehow related to the former Bill C-69 and its environmental assessment process, it’s worth a reminder that this assessment process is under the process that the Harper government put into place, and even then, it’s not like this project is getting anywhere. That should be another signal.

Good reads:

  • The airlift of 176 Canadians from Wuhan departed yesterday, with about another 50 aboard an American plan hours later.
  • Marc Garneau has issued a directive for trains carrying dangerous goods to reduce their speed after a fiery derailment in Saskatchewan caused an evacuation.
  • After two days of protests from the Quebec government and the Bloc, the English School Board of Montreal has turned down Court Challenges Programme funds.
  • The federal Privacy Commissioner wants the Federal Court to test whether Facebook has been in violation of Canadian privacy laws.
  • The latest expansion of the US “Muslim Ban” now includes Nigeria, which could prove to be a boon for Canadian immigration.
  • A new harassment policy is being proposed in the Senate.
  • Two senators want to change the rules to make private members’ bills easier to get through the Chamber. (This is terrible, and my column on why is out later today).
  • The Conservative leadership race closes to new entrants in three weeks, and so far, only Peter MacKay and Erin O’Toole have passed the early thresholds.
  • Maclean’s delves into research that suggests that social conservatives would accept a moderate Conservative party leader (but they’re still playing kingmaker).
  • Six protesters were arrested by the RCMP at the anti-Coastal Gas Link pipeline protest camp to enforce a court order.
  • The Canadian Press’ Baloney Meter™ tests the Conservative claim that Canada’s GDP is worse than half of the G7. (Spoiler: They’re lying with statistics again).
  • Gib van Ert expands on his concerns about the resurrection of Rona Ambrose’ bill to train judges in sexual assault law.
  • Heather Scoffield recounts the work done by political management students when it comes to figuring out the problems associated with the single-use plastics ban.
  • Matt Gurney suspects that Canadians being slow to alarm is why we are days behind other countries in evacuating our citizens from Wuhan.

Want more Routine Proceedings? Become a patron and get exclusive new content.

5 thoughts on “Roundup: The meaningless debate over Teck Frontier”

  1. The inverse is that the eco-extremist arguments are equally as shrill and nonsensical and all about the “optics” of Trudeau’s decision, if the mine isn’t likely to get built anyway. I’m sick and tired of politics being about “optics” and “narrative” rather than facts. Blaming Trudeau for everything wrong with the world today has become a cottage industry for the likes of Kenney, Moe and Scheer as much as it has for the likes of Tzeporah Berman, Greta Thunberg, Naomi Klein and Bill McKibben. The man could find a cure for cancer and get blamed for putting oncologists out of work, or for contributing to the climate crisis by increasing overpopulation. It’s getting lonely out here in centrist land, and the notion of “Common Ground” feels so quaint, so “because it’s 2015.” No wonder so many people are turned off by political engagement. It’s an industry that thrives on recyclable bullsh!t.

    • Yep, Kenney, Moe and Scheer are Canadian politicians who are lying to their constituents. But Thunberg & Berman are “just as bad”.

      Listen to yourself.

      • I’m saying there’s no point in armchair critics bashing Trudeau, as McKibben did this past week in the Guardian, and driving votes to the unelectable spoiler parties — thus risking the far worse Conservatives who don’t care about environment at all being elected — for something that’s out of his control and/or not likely to happen anyway.

        Even a Conservative strategist admitted it in a CBC column last week: the NDP is the CPC’s best friend whenever progressives get frustrated with the Liberals. See the U.S. equivalent of Ralph Nader and Jill Stein playing a role in electing, respectively, Bush and Trump. Single-issue obsessiveness is self-defeatist. What’s that old Canadian saying, “as good as possible under the circumstances”? That’s what Trudeau is aiming for and something that seems to be lost on the all-or-nothing crowd.

        I am no fan of extremism, hysterics, or absolutism on either side. I simply want a debate based on facts rather than emotional headlines and soundbites. Thus, there is no reason for the Bermans and McKibbens to get all bent out of shape if Teck is approved, any more than Kenney should if Teck is rejected, because due to market forces, it’s effectively a moot point either way. I’m not even sure why it’s an issue at all.

        But instead of economics, they go into a tailspin about “optics” and the “message being sent.” So yes, both sides are just as bad. The environmentalists will go ahead and vote for the Greens or NDP, thus risking a Conservative government that does nothing whatsoever about the environment, rather than looking at the bigger picture of what the Liberals are trying to balance here. “As good as possible under the circumstances.”

        Compromise, unfortunately, seems to be in short order these days.

        • “I am no fan of extremism, hysterics, or absolutism…”

          This will come as a great surprise to just about anyone reading your diatribes over the past few months.

  2. “That Teck has promised to try and be carbon neutral by 2050 is also something that should be taken with a massive grain of salt because they haven’t outlined how they’ll get there…”

    Fair enough. But, regrettably, neither has the Trudeau government.

Comments are closed.