Enbridge pipeline review - Just who is getting hijacked?
By Peter Ewart
Monday, January 09, 2012 03:46 AM
By Peter Ewart
Prime Minister Harper has recently made comments that the Enbridge pipeline review process is being "hijacked" by "outside interests". By this he means that certain environmental groups and other organizations have accepted funding from U.S. sources to oppose the pipeline.
But looking at the Enbridge issue from a BC perspective, just who is an "outside interest"? This is an important issue because, when the inevitable oil spills happen, whether on land or ocean, it will be British Columbians who ultimately will have to live with the toxic mess and the damage to the environment. It will not be Eastern Canadians, Americans, or Chinese. It will be us, pure and simple.
So let's first take a look at the Review panel that the Harper government has appointed to conduct hearings and make recommendations on whether the pipeline should go ahead. Are there any British Columbians on that panel? Well no, all three panel members just so happen to come from Alberta or Ontario. Given the risk to British Columbia because of its mountainous terrain and extensive waterways, and given the strong opposition in the province, why wasn't someone from BC put on that panel? Was there no qualified person from the four million people who live in British Columbia? One thing for sure - it is a telling omission on Harper's part.
What about the Enbridge Corporation itself that will be responsible for the hundreds of kilometres of pipeline across Northern BC? Surely Enbridge must have someone from BC on its Board of Directors, even for the sake of tokenism?
Well no, it doesn't. In fact, six of the twelve Directors of Enbridge are based in the U.S., including David A. Artledge, who is a resident of Naples, Florida; and James J. Blanchard, who is a former governor of the U.S. state of Michigan. The other six directors live in either Alberta or Ontario. Many of these twelve directors, whether Canadian or American, are connected, in one way or another, to various foreign multinationals through former positions or current directorships.
What about major shareholders in Enbridge? Are any British Columbian? Again, no. According to the fund tracking site Stockzoa, the largest shareholder is "Caisse de depot et placement du Quebec", which is based in Quebec City, thousands of kilometres away on the other side of the country. The next largest is FMR (Fidelity Investments) which is a U.S. financial services multinational. Third largest is Sumitomo Trust and Banking Company, which is tied to the giant Japanese Conglomerate "Sumitomo Group". Fourth in size is Bank of America, one of the largest banks in the U.S.
There are, of course, numerous smaller investors, some of whom may be from British Columbia. But the principal investors who control the bulk of Enbridge shares are based a long way from the province.
Some, like Prime Minister Stephen Harper, imply that Enbridge is a "Canadian" company. According to Enbridge's own site, its publicly traded shares are 48% "Canadian institutional" and 23% foreign and U.S. But, if it is so "Canadian", why are 50% of its directors based in the U.S.? According to Stephen Harper's own definition, doesn't that amount to "outside influence"?
In fact, Enbridge is one of those hybrid creatures that has emerged over the decades that, despite the Calgary location of its head office, cannot really be classified as "Canadian" but rather "North American" or "global". It has extensive operations in various U.S. states, including Michigan where, in 2010, an Enbridge pipeline leaked 840,000 gallons of of crude oil into the Kalamazoo river. Indeed the company boasts that its vision "is to become the leading energy delivery company in North America" and "our assets connect North Americans with energy they need". No mention of "Canada" in these statements. One thing for sure - not a chance in hell that anyone could call it a "British Columbian" company.
Which brings us to the principal financial backers of the Enbridge pipeline project. Indeed, the names of five of these backers were released recently. One of them is "Total EP" which is a French-owned global energy monopoly with head offices in Paris, France. Another is Sinopec, which is a state-owned energy corporation based in China. Nexen is an energy multinational with operations in the North Sea, Gulf of Mexico and Africa. Suncor is mainly based in Canada, but has operations in the U.S. Even MEG Energy, which is probably the most "Canadian-based" company of the five, is 16.9% owned by the giant Chinese company CNOO. None of these companies have their head offices in British Columbia. To them, the province is just a "moose pasture" on a map to build a pipeline across.
Don't at least some of these companies count as "foreign interests" in Stephen Harper's calculation? By his definition, doesn't their substantial financial backing of Enbridge amount to "outside interference" and "highjacking" of the pipeline review process?
And then there is the pitiful case of "Ethical Oil", which is running ads in Northern BC claiming that foreign billionaires are financing the opposition to Enbridge. But "Ethical Oil" itself, based in Calgary, is a well-known lobbyist for the billionaire oil companies (many of which are owned or controlled by foreign interests). Interestingly enough, when pressed to reveal just who is paying for the radio ads, a spokesperson for "Ethical Oil" declined to comment.
So, if by some chance the Enbridge pipeline is built across Northern BC, where will the above players be when there is the inevitable major oil spill on the land, river or ocean waters of our beautiful BC? The answer is simple. All of these "outside interests" will be far away in another province or in a foreign country as they watch the disaster unfold on CNN. Even Stephen Harper will be thousands of kilometres off in Ottawa.
If the spill is catastrophic enough, Enbridge might just declare bankruptcy. Then what? Will the federal government step up to the plate with taxpayer's dollars?
To answer that question, why don't we look at the Harper government's response to the pine beetle epidemic in British Columbia in the last few years? This epidemic is considered by many to be the worst natural disaster of its kind in North American recorded history. Amid much fanfare back in 2006, the federal government announced that it would be providing $1 billion in aid over ten years (i.e. $100 million a year) to mitigate the effects of the pine beetle to BC land and communities. It was a piddling amount compared to the taxes and other revenues that BC forests have generated for governments over the past hundred years. Nor was it much relative to the long term cost of the catastrophe to BC. But at least it was something.
So where is this $100 million a year payment that was promised? We don't here anything about it these days. It has disappeared into the murk and fog of other federal government funding programs such as the "economic stimulus plan" (this is a favourite tactic of federal governments - make a big hoopla about providing funding for some issue, then, after a couple of years, "lose" the funding in other budgetary envelopes).
In any case, so much for the federal government's commitment to environmental disasters. Will a catastrophic Enbridge spill be any different? What do the federal government mandarins back in Ottawa care about a sparsely-populated part of the country way out by the Pacific Ocean that has only 3 seats in a 308 seat parliament?
That being said, Stephen Harper is right about one thing: There is a "highjacking" going on here, but not the one he is claiming. Rather it is our province that is being highjacked in the interests of big oil. They get most of the benefit, we get most of the risk.
Peter Ewart is a columnist and writer based in Prince George, British Columbia. He can be reached at: peter.ewart@shaw.ca
Previous Story - Next Story
Email
Print
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
Del.icio.usReturn to Home
Posted by: Eagleone on January 9 2012 5:28 AM
I would really like them to answer if we will also be paying more for our oil than the Chinese if this pipeline goes through.
They say its going through to take advantage of market pricing that can get them 20% more... so we know our energy costs will go up by minimum that amount... but if we are also paying the carbon tax and the exports to China are not themselves paying the carbon tax (as the Chinese government has already made clear)... then how will they account for this? IMO that should be nine red flags going off for everyone. We're being had on many levels on the economic competitive level of our own national resources.
If we produce 3 million barrels of oil in Canada, use 2 million barrels, and export 2 million barrels to the USA... then my math says we still import a million barrels of oil a day. Its a national tragedy and a national energy security risk to Canada to rely on Iranian controlled oil for large parts of Eastern Canada... why are we not talking about building a pipeline east where the oil is needed... building refining capabilities in Ontario where the jobs are needed, and keeping 100% of each dollar value of economic activity here in Canada... as opposed to 50% at best with a Gateway pipeline that threatens so much for so little in return just to make a few rich.
I think it comes down to a political system that is corrupt and losing credibility daily.
IMHO