Roundup: Freeland’s non-contradictory position on energy

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Chrystia Freeland gave a speech at the Brookings Institute in Washington, DC, and she outlined some fairly ambitious economic policy that involves a retrenching of keeping our supply chains within fellow democracies, because relying on regimes like Russia and China can prove costly in the end—particularly if you look at what’s happening in Europe with their energy crisis. It also means accelerating the green energy transition, which is also happening at a faster pace. But what got a bunch of people in Canada curious was Freeland talking about fast-tracking energy and mining projects to help Europe with that transition. But there is nuance there, however.

The CBC in particular got excited because they claimed to see some kind of contradiction with what Freeland was saying with the fact that the government won’t do anything to fast-track LNG projects, and that we somehow sent German Chancellor Olaf Scholz packing when he came looking for LNG. Erm, except he didn’t, because he knows as well as anyone that we don’t have the infrastructure for LNG, and so he came looking for hydrogen, which he got. But the CBC’s Vassy Kapelos did an interview with Scholz, where she spent half of it badgering and hectoring him about LNG until he said that he would like Canadian LNG if we had it, and they kept bringing that clip up in isolation. But again, Scholz knows we don’t, that it would take too long to build, and frankly that the market case isn’t there. As I wrote in this column, the timelines for these projects don’t make sense, and frankly, the LNG projects that have been on the drawing table for decades never took off because they couldn’t get commitments from buyers for the project. And while Kapelos was hectoring and badgering natural resources minister Jonathan Wilkinson yesterday about LNG, and insisting that the Americans can get theirs to export and why not us, the difference is that they have been converting LNG import terminals for export, which we can’t do. We have one import terminal in New Brunswick, and it would take two years to retrofit, assuming they could get a steady supply of gas, which they don’t have without importing. That’s why it’s an import terminal. But apparently there are no producers at Power & Politics who can pick up the phone and call a gods damned energy economist who can explain these things before they talk to the minister and not waste everyone’s time.

So no, Freeland didn’t contradict anyone. They are putting a focus on mining critical minerals in Canada—Trudeau made such an announcement earlier in the week. They are focusing on hydrogen, some of which may come from natural gas, which again, is not LNG, but is an energy project. “Energy project” is not simply code for LNG, guys. It’s only slightly alarming that the gods damned public broadcaster can’t be bothered to do their homework to put things in context before they start hyperventilating, but this is apparently the era we’re living in.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 231:

Ukrainian forces say that they have recaptured five settlements in the southern Kherson region, while the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant has lost external power for the second time in five days, which puts stress on the cooling systems.

Good reads:

  • While at an affordability announcement, Justin Trudeau said that there is no timeline yet for finding a workaround to get aid to Afghanistan.
  • At a NATO defence ministers’ meeting in Brussels, Anita Anand says that Canada is discussing bolstering the battlegroup in Latvia that Canada leads.
  • Anand also announced a new military aid package for Ukraine that includes both ammunition for the Howitzers we donated, as well as winter gear.
  • The federal Disaster Mitigation and Adaptation Fund is oversubscribed, and advocates are calling for even more money.
  • Global Affairs says they are “carefully considering” pleas to help in Haiti.
  • A federal occupational health and safety tribunal ruled against CBSA, saying its firearms training used bullets whose splashback regularly injured trainees.
  • There are questions about the actual First Nations status of famed jurist Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond, who claimed to be the first Indigenous judge in Saskatchewan.
  • The Commons immigration committee won’t study the allegations that Marco Mendicino backdated documents, as the actual documents prove that to be false.
  • MPs on the Heritage committee say they are looking at how to expand their safe sports study beyond what is happening at Hockey Canada.
  • Pierre Poilievre released a hugely inflated list of critic portfolios, and then called it an “inflation-busting shadow cabinet.” There were a few notable absences from it.
  • Danielle Smith offered a clarification—not an apology—saying she didn’t mean to trivialise actual discrimination, and then framed it in a way that still did.
  • Heather Scoffield regards Chrystia Freeland’s speech, and the fact that there will be a price tag to reorienting our economies to democratic countries.
  • Paul Wells wonders if Chrystia Freeland was freelancing her comments in Washington (until he talked to people who understood the context).

Odds and ends:

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

2 thoughts on “Roundup: Freeland’s non-contradictory position on energy”

  1. Out of duty, I watch Power and Politics daily. What is clear to me is that Vassy Kapelos is a host with little sense of balance but lest I be criticized as mean{I am not a conservative} she displays a certain bias against the current government and in particular the PM. There is nothing one can do to change this. It is clear that the editorial board of the mother Corp wants this as part of their coverage.

    • It’s not a bias against the current government. It’s an attempt to hold every government to account—the Harper government always whined that the CBC was mean to them too.

Comments are closed.