LP_468x60
on-the-record-468x60-white

Yellow vests are appearing in central squares in Alberta.  Can tear gas be far behind?

Well no, tear gas is not in the offing.  And even though some punches were thrown at a recent protest in Edmonton, Alberta isn't France and the current malaise in the province isn't likely to shut down public services or tourism venues.

It's tough to sustain a really angry mob when the pavement underfoot is prohibitively icy and the temperature plummets after dark.

Despite the unlikelihood of protests getting out of hand, Ottawa needs to listen far more closely to complaints from Alberta if it wants to avoid escalating the west's alienation and creating possible serious fissures in confederation.

The core issue is the energy industry's frustration over Canada's inaction on pipelines to ease the price crisis crippling the business and killing jobs.

The federal government's tin-eared attempt to buy off the oilpatch with a $1.6 billion announcement this week did not furthering the cause of peace in our time.

No member of the provincial government turned up to the federal aid package press conference.  Clearly the Alberta NDP is anxious to avoid photo ops with Ottawa's hated Liberals these days.

Premier Rachel Notley was fairly savage in her assessment of the package during a press scrum in Calgary.

The money, she pointed out, actually doesn't involve much cash.  It is mostly loans, ostensibly to help energy companies invest in technology and seek new markets.  That access to capital might help a few small producers, said Notley but offering business the opportunity to go further into debt isn't the answer.

Alberta needs pipelines and, while waiting for those, it needs more railcars to get oil to market, argues Notley.  And how about some funds to put laid off oil workers to work cleaning up orphaned oil and gas wells?

Notley accused the feds of cutting and pasting previous aid programs for steel, aluminum and forestry sectors hit by trade disputes rather than listening to the people in Calgary and Edmonton who really know the solutions to the oil patch malaise.

"We can only assume this is a first step and there is more to come," said the premier.

UCP Leader Jason Kenney was quick to chime in.

"Not a single one (energy company) has said that what they want or need is government loans for 'energy diversification,'" he tweeted.

It's safe to say the average oil worker doesn't think the fix for the current crisis is capital for technological advancement.  The present technology is doing just fine at sucking oil and gas out of the ground or separating it from the oilsands, those workers would argue.

And there's no point in investing in pipeline technology when so far the central government can't find a way to push through pipeline expansion, despite its dramatic purchase of the Trans Mountain pipeline.

A few jobs may come out of the $1.6 billion announcement but not enough to calm strident protest voices.

Notley acknowledges that there will be no quick end to the kind of rallies that have popped up already in Edmonton, Calgary and Grande Prairie.  The government's economic development minister Deron Bilous and Kenney spoke at the Grande Prairie protest supporting pipelines.  RCMP estimated the crowd at about 1,500.

In Calgary protestors booed Mayor Nahid Nenshi for a comment acknowledging climate change.

So far, the bulk of the protestors have been focused on their opposition to the federal Liberals.  Anti-Trudeau, anti-Bill 69, anti-carbon tax signs dominate the crowds.  But more concerning is a broader unfocused anti-establishment sentiment.

Taking a leaf from the yellow vest movement, the message in these crowds includes other grievances.

Anti-UN and anti-immigration placards popped up on the edges of these crowds.

Those elements worry Notley, who alluded to them in her press conference.  Extremist positions around racism only undercut the message, she warned.

Free-floating discontent breeds those marginal sentiments.  Rather than let them gather strength, the federal Liberals needs to find a way to meaningfully address the cataclysm in the oil patch.  The touchstone elements are obvious in the signs: address the pipeline issue; scrap Bill-69 which has become a focus for the angry oil patch; chip in for railcars.

In the meantime Notley and Kenney are willing to fire up conventional protests in the interest of spurring political action on the oil crisis.  But neither wants to open the door to radical elements, or the need for tear gas.

Photo Credit: Jeff Burney, Loonie Politics

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


Oh look.  Free money for the oil patch from the government.  It must be Christmas.  Except that stuff is available year-round.  And the federal gift of $1.6 billion to the oil industry is typical cunning politics driven by bad economics that means a lump of coal for the rest of us.

Coal, of course, is not just a stingy gift these days.  It's evil.  It gives off sky-igniting CO2 when burned.  Like natural gas.  And… what's this?  Oil?

Oh yes.  The federal government is subsidizing an industry it says must die.  As Trudeau blurted out in early 2017 "We can't shut down the oilsands tomorrow.  We need to phase them out."  So why give the industry CPR now?  Does CPR stand for Cash for Political Reasons?  Up to a point.  But don't underestimate the Liberals' confusion about the real consequences of their pseudo-largesse.

In his year-end interview with CTV's Evan Solomon, Andrew Coyne noted in Tuesday's National Post, the PM brushed aside the possibility of restarting the Energy East pipeline: "There is no support for a pipeline through Quebec."  To which Coyne retorted "You thought pipelines were a federal matter?  You thought Trudeau's professed willingness to push Trans Mountain through over B.C.'s objections had confirmed that?  Think again.  This is Quebec, after all."

Yes, urbane, sophisticated, pleasing Quebec, whose market-friendly premier François Legault recently sneered that there is "no social acceptability" in La Belle Province for "dirty energy" from dirty Alberta.  But the thing is, and Trudeau must know it in the loose sense that he knows anything, Quebecers need oil to cook, heat and especially to move around, and revenue from Alberta to fuel equalization.

You might also think he'd know the gas Quebecers put in their growing fleet of SUVs must be delivered somehow.  Say, through 12,521 kilometres of transmission and distribution pipelines in the province, according to Natural Resources Canada.  (I Googled.)  But it's not the sort of thing Trudeau knows.

To him goods and services just appear by magic, generally of the government sort.  Which is why he also knows, setting aside philosophical quibbles that you can't know an untrue thing, that you can grow the economy by subsidizing everybody at everybody else's expense.

A person who understood economics would ask how on Earth a government could expect to subsidize a vital economic sector they'd spent years pounding into the ground.  As Alberta resident Lorne Gunter recently wrote, "Our province is losing around $40 billion a year in oil and gas investment, not to mention the spinoffs like housing starts, retail sales and vehicle purchases that come with a booming energy sector.  And we are losing that money because we have no pipelines to take our oil and bitumen to ports and because the 'green' taxes and regulations of the federal Liberals and provincial NDP are scaring away investors."

You're going to fix that with $1.6 billion?  There seems to be a problem of scale here.  When oil and gas takes a beating, it's a multi-billion beating.  Where do they think they're going to get enough money to nurse it back to health?  From the auto sector they gave billions to under Harper so it would burst into profit except it left instead?  From Bombardier?

Sure, you can subsidize something small ("$1.1 million for the Northumberland Community Futures Development Corporation (CFDC) to expand its N1M program", for instance, a real FedDev Ontario gift on Dec. 18).  But oil is too big to make a difference without finding tens of billions somewhere.  Unless you cling to the old John Kenneth Galbraith fantasy, popular when big glasses were too, that companies are greedy and sluggish while government is kind, nimble and spritely.

Listening to Natural Resources Minister Amarjeet Sohi drone on Tuesday about the handout I did start wondering where my platform shoes had gone.  See, this $1.6 billion is for things like commercial financing, clean growth investment and the dreaded strategic innovation funding.  Say, one is tempted to ask, aren't there banks offering commercial financing, oil companies chasing "clean growth" investment in less carboniferous fuels, and an astonishing level of innovation in the equipment the modern hydrocarbon industry uses?  But he apparently still buys the idea that with government money firms become smart instead of stupid.

The government is even offering export financing, which takes some kind of unselfaware gall since the big problem with exporting oil is that the feds have failed to allow construction even of pipelines they approved.  Oh, and there's job training, since it never occurs to a business that it would be good if their staff knew how all the big expensive fancy equipment worked until a politician said so while waving a cheque.

It's easy to brush all this feeble reasoning aside as window-dressing on a political handout.  Surely this $1.6 billion wasn't an investment in the oil patch but in the vote patch.  Unfortunately, politicians who don't know economics think by happy coincidence handing out money benefits the economy and their election prospects.  So it's win-win.

Except the rest of us get lumps of coal we can't even burn.

Photo Credit: Jeff Burney, Loonie Politics

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.