[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[crazy canuck]

You have correctly identified the legal difficulty with BC's position.  But that was probably the most defensible position they could take in the circumstances.  Throw in the notion of cooperative federalism and at least there is something to argue - if nothing else to get further concessions from the feds regarding environmental safety issues.

[Barrister]

Jacob,

BC is not taking the position it has jurisdiction to regulate intraprovincial pipelines.  That is clearly within  Federal jurisdiction as the recent Burnaby city litigation has clarified. Instead the province has a more nuanced legal argument that it is within provincial jurisdiction to deal with some related environmental issues. That position may not find favour in the courts but it  is at least a more nuanced position then the one being debated in this thread.

The environmental concern over the coast is a heartfelt one for those so close to it, myself included having grown up with it... but this too is a federal concern ultimately, no?  Coastal issues, inclusive of the environment, are ultimately the concern of the government of Canada notwithstanding the moral claim of those who live upon it?

Navigable waters are federal jurisdiction under the Constitution Act.

[PRC]

And yet Trudeau's Liberals have more votes at stake in BC than Alberta... if the pipeline goes through this will leave a mark like Trudeau's NEP in Alberta.  BC may hate the Libs for a generation.  Irony abounds.  The only two NDP governments in power at odds with each other.   One has the far left at their heels, the other the far right.  Maybe not that FAR in either direction sure, but far enough to count the votes.  Jagmeet Singh has his tightwire to walk as well as Trudeau.  Interesting times.

[Valmy]

I take it Ottawa does not have the exclusive right to regulate inter-province commerce.

And yes - refusing to buy BC wines is just stupid - it's provoking a trade war.

No, there won't be a trade war.  The BC government has rightly identified that is in nobody's interest.

http://vancouversun.com/news/politics/b-c-premier-john-horgan-refuses-to-retaliate-on-alberta-wine-ban

The very fact their could be one is rather ridiculous. But you guys do have a confederation and not a federation. Maybe some things are not laws but customs.

[crazy canuck]

And yet Trudeau's Liberals have more votes at stake in BC than Alberta... if the pipeline goes through this will leave a mark like Trudeau's NEP in Alberta.  BC may hate the Libs for a generation.  Irony abounds.  The only two NDP governments in power at odds with each other.   One has the far left at their heels, the other the far right.  Maybe not that FAR in either direction sure, but far enough to count the votes.  Jagmeet Singh has his tightwire to walk as well as Trudeau.  Interesting times.

This is really an old fashioned fed/provincial dispute.  The feds have approved something the province doesn't like.  I am not sure anyone anticipated Notely turning this into an interprovincial dispute.  Before her move the Federal Liberals were in a bit of a bind with B.C. voters.  Notely has given the Feds a way to come out of this looking like peacemakers.  But BC may yet get the environmental protections it is after.

[Malthus]

And yet Trudeau's Liberals have more votes at stake in BC than Alberta... if the pipeline goes through this will leave a mark like Trudeau's NEP in Alberta.  BC may hate the Libs for a generation.  Irony abounds.  The only two NDP governments in power at odds with each other.   One has the far left at their heels, the other the far right.  Maybe not that FAR in either direction sure, but far enough to count the votes.  Jagmeet Singh has his tightwire to walk as well as Trudeau.  Interesting times.

This is really an old fashioned fed/provincial dispute.  The feds have approved something the province doesn't like.  I am not sure anyone anticipated Notely turning this into an interprovincial dispute.  Before her move the Federal Liberals were in a bit of a bind with B.C. voters.  Notely has given the Feds a way to come out of this looking like peacemakers.  But BC may yet get the environmental protections it is after.

That would appear to be a sensible compromise - pipeline, with beefed up environmental protections.

How likely is it that the parties involved will be sensible? I have no feel for the BC or Alberta mood on this.

[crazy canuck]

This is really a no lose proposition for the BC government.  They are taking steps to protect the Province's environment.  The Feds have been non existent on the issue since they gave approval.  Now Trudeau has been placed in the position of having to justify his decision.

Much will depend on his political calculus.  It seems he approved thinking that the trade off of imposing a nation wide carbon tax would provide sufficient justification.  But that was never going to be enough in BC.  We already have a carbon tax.

Now we will see how Trudeau responds.  One thing is certain, Notely's actions have galvanized support in BC for the position taken by the BC government and BC certainly appears to be the adults in the room.

[crazy canuck]

Here is a good summary of the legal issues



http://vancouversun.com/news/politics/can-b-c-really-stop-the-trans-mountain-pipeline-and-how-can-the-federal-government-make-sure-it-is-built/wcm/7f12e7dc-149d-48a8-b644-88186f13f51c

[Jacob]

That would appear to be a sensible compromise - pipeline, with beefed up environmental protections.

How likely is it that the parties involved will be sensible? I have no feel for the BC or Alberta mood on this.

I reckon there's a hard core in BC for whom "no pipeline" is the only acceptable answer, but I think it's potentially sellable in BC if someone tries to sell it.

[Barrister]

Now we will see how Trudeau responds.  One thing is certain, Notely's actions have galvanized support in BC for the position taken by the BC government and BC certainly appears to be the adults in the room.

  BC is the one taking a blatantly unconstitutional stance here.

I can't see much room for compromise here.  Much of the environmental claims opposing the pipeline are a figleaf - I read an article talking about the Exxon Valdez and the oil spill in China - sorry,environmental standards are far different now than they were 30 years ago, or then they are in China.

No, the real basis for the objection over pipelines is based on the "leave it in the ground" environmentalists - they oppose any pipeline, in any circumstances.

[Jacob]

I guess that's what you are telling yourself in Alberta to justify your "shut up and take it" approach.

The reality is that there's no one making the case that standards are different than during the Exxon Valdez era or in China.

[crazy canuck]

I guess that's what you are telling yourself in Alberta to justify your "shut up and take it" approach.

The reality is that there's no one making the case that standards are different than during the Exxon Valdez era or in China.

The Feds have really dropped the ball.  Once they decided to approve the had a corresponding obligation to explain how BC concerns would be addressed.

[crazy canuck]

Now we will see how Trudeau responds.  One thing is certain, Notely's actions have galvanized support in BC for the position taken by the BC government and BC certainly appears to be the adults in the room.

No, the real basis for the objection over pipelines is based on the "leave it in the ground" environmentalists - they oppose any pipeline, in any circumstances.

No, the real basis is if the Feds are going to allow an increase in traffic, make sure appropriate measures are in place.

[Barrister]

I guess that's what you are telling yourself in Alberta to justify your "shut up and take it" approach.

The reality is that there's no one making the case that standards are different than during the Exxon Valdez era or in China.

Perhaps CC is right, that Trudeau and Co should do a better job in messaging on this.  But nobody has been saying "just shut up and take it".  Trans-Mountain pipeline went through a full review by the National Energy Board, over a review process that has gone on for five years.  It was only approved with 157 conditions imposed on it by the NEB.

Then even after NEB (which should have been enough - that's what the NEB is for), Trudeau decided to step in and conduct its own review, which it too ultimately approved.

In both steps stakeholders from BC were consulted.  And appropriate measures were put in place - the 157 conditions imposed by the NEB.

[crazy canuck]

I guess that's what you are telling yourself in Alberta to justify your "shut up and take it" approach.

The reality is that there's no one making the case that standards are different than during the Exxon Valdez era or in China.

Perhaps CC is right, that Trudeau and Co should do a better job in messaging on this.  But nobody has been saying "just shut up and take it".  Trans-Mountain pipeline went through a full review by the National Energy Board, over a review process that has gone on for five years.  It was only approved with 157 conditions imposed on it by the NEB.

Then even after NEB (which should have been enough - that's what the NEB is for), Trudeau decided to step in and conduct its own review, which it too ultimately approved.

In both steps stakeholders from BC were consulted.  And appropriate measures were put in place - the 157 conditions imposed by the NEB.

I think the piece that people in Alberta might be missing is that the NEB process was widely criticized in media in this province both as to the scope and substance of the review.  It is cold comfort for most British Colombians to point to the conditions created as a result of that process.

I am a bit surprised you are relying on something called a review conducted by Trudeau - wasn't that just a weekend with caucus deciding the matter on the basis of politics?