Dear Mr. Leugner,
I am dismayed once again reading your inflammatory and divisive remarks about what is happening in Canadian politics.
It is one thing to object truthfully to questionable political decisions , but distorting facts and riding old band wagons is not very helpful in what should and could be an objective discussion.
You predict that Bill C-69 “will literally destroy any future oil, gas, and mining industrial development in the province.” This bill is a direct outcome of the failure to get final approval for the Trans-Mountain pipeline. The government had followed the existing federal review process which involved two pieces of legislation: the National Energy Board Act and the Environmental Assessment Agency Act. Since that approach did not lead to the greatly anticipated result, the federal government is trying to streamline and clarify this process that in the future major energy projects will not suffer the same fate as the pipeline. The bill is currently being reviewed by the Senate and may require some tweaking; but the intent is to improve the approval process, not make it more difficult.
To suggest that Trudeau’s goal is to destroy one of the country’s most important economic engines is ludicrous; he bought the pipeline to ensure its construction – not block Alberta’s continued extraction of its resources. You scoff at the $1.6 billion dollars out of federal coffers to support the energy industry – what might your comments have been if the federal government had not offered any financial assistance. Merely saying we need a pipeline, (which has been made clear to every Canadian) is being unreasonably impatient with the process being followed that was outlined be the court decision, which put that project on hold. Hopefully, a clear and strong Bill C-69 will avoid any future blocking of important major infrastructure projects.
Now let’s talk about Quebec. Premier Francois Legault’s remark about Alberta’s “dirty oil” was certainly uncalled for – more so when you look at the facts:
In 2015, Enbridge's reversal of the flow of line 9B, which connects Ontario and the east end of Montreal, caused Quebec’s consumption of Canadian oil to explode. In 2017, 47.6 per cent of oil consumed in Quebec came from Alberta. In June 2018, it rose to 53 per cent – which translates to 70 million barrels at $50 – putting 3.5 billion dollars into the Alberta economy. Not a drop of Saudi oil has been used since 2006. In addition, 40 per cent of Western Canadian natural gas is used in Quebec.
Also, Alberta does not make equalization payments to Quebec; equalization payments are necessary to ensure that all provinces and territories can provide some of the basic services to all Canadians. The contributions and benefits are calculated using a complex formula which is reviewed on a regular basis. And, even though Alberta has seen a significant downturn in its economy with the low oil prices, it still rates as a “have province” compared to other less fortunates. The fact that Quebec offers lower tuition, cheaper child care services and other benefits has more to do with their provincial tax (7.5 per cent) paid by a large population base. Some economists have indicated that an Alberta provincial sales tax would easily eliminate our current provincial deficit.
I think it is up to us, as individual engaged voters, to not just repeat popular slogans but to inform ourselves of what is true and what is just hype. Making unsubstantiated claims is unfortunately the new normal – I sure hope we don’t fall prey to that and not vote emotionally but intelligently.
Barbara Kohn
