Canada no longer goes from coast to coast to coast: Clark’s demands for pipeline payoff restricting
Who owns our coast?
That's easy. We do, of course. But in the context of the heated debate over Enbridge's proposed Northern Gateway pipeline and the related increase in tanker traffic, that simple question gets a lot more complicated.
The trouble starts with who we include in "we."
In an interview with the CBC this week, Alberta Premier Alison Redford said the "we" includes all Canadians.
"This is not British Columbia's coast, it's Canada's coast," she said.
While that might rile some British Columbians, she went on to remind us that Premier Christy Clark said the same thing last year during a visit to Edmonton.
And since it's Canada's coast, Redford continued, "a Canadian coast is a coast that should be available for all Canadians to be able to make use of to be able to export their product."
In a September 2011 speech to the Vancouver Board of Trade in which she introduced her BC Jobs Plan, Clark repeated that theme in exactly the same context.
"Our ports are not just British Columbia's, they are Saskatchewan's ports too. The workers building the Port Mann Bridge know they aren't just building it for the Lower Mainland - they are building it for families in places like Woodstock, Ont., so they can get auto parts delivered from Asia."
"This coast is Canada's coast," Clark said.
That was while Clark was still sitting on the fence about the pipeline, insisting the government wasn't going to prejudge the outcome of the federal Joint Review Panel. That was before she tabled her demands for a special risk premium for allowing bitumen from the oilsands to be shipped to "Canada's coast."
The new demand for a yet-undefined fair share was one of five conditions Clark said must be met before British Columbia would allow the pipeline to be built. While the conditions are a long way from being met, Redford says she has no problem with the first four, which involved environmental protections and involvement of First Nations. So the only bone of contention, the only thing that is chilling the self-described frosty relationship between Clark and Redford, is B.C.'s demand for a bigger share of the benefits. It's about the money.
On that front, Redford says there is really nothing to talk about. Alberta isn't going to discuss sharing its royalties and while there are ways for Clark to siphon financial benefits from the pipeline by applying provincial or municipal levies, that really is the B.C. premier's business in which Alberta has no role to play.
Clark's demand for a premium for allowing more bitumen to be shipped through B.C. makes the issue of who owns the coast more than just a legal question. On that front, the answer is fairly clear, if complicated. The federal government is responsible for defending the coast. It is responsible for the fisheries, for environmental protection, including oil spills on the water and regulating shipping.
The province controls the land above the normal high-tide line and the sea bed in inland waters such as the Strait of Georgia. First Nations have claims to all of the above. But the legality of who owns the coast, while interesting, has been tossed in the back seat by Clark's new definition of the province's right to dictate access to the coast based on its own economic interests.
In that context, Clark clearly sees it as British Columbia's coast, a title that is unencumbered by any right of access to the rest of the country.
"I can tell you this, Peter, there is no way that if our government and the people of British Columbia have not consented to that pipeline, that pipeline is going to get past me. It just isn't," she replied to CBC anchor Peter Mansbridge's query over whether B.C. would be able to stop the pipeline on its own.
The protesters who have been rallying this week under the banner of "defend our coast" have another definition of who owns the coast. It doesn't include anyone who wants to use it as a launching point to load oil tankers, regardless of how much they are willing to pay for the privilege. They believe if they can make enough noise, Clark or whoever leads the provincial government will have to adopt their definition through their version of might makes right.
Right perhaps, but a nation diminished.