Quirky
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 4,570
- Points
- 1,260
Are there no provisions within the federal government to force projects of national interest through? NWCs?
Pipelines, energy and natural resources
- Thread starter QV
- Start date
Are there no provisions within the federal government to force projects of national interest through? NWCs?
- Reaction score
- 11,691
- Points
- 1,160
Let's see what this MOU comes up with.
But.
If the government can grant a right of way, with expropriation rights, to a railway I find it hard to believe they can't do the same for a pipeline.
Or a navigation channel in federal waters.
As I understand it Provincial and First Nations jurisdiction ends at the low tide mark.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 16,644
- Points
- 1,260
This should be good... keep the popcorn handy
"What looks to be shaping up is a replay of the Trans Mountain pipeline argument, which consumed years and millions of dollars and which B.C. lost, mostly on the grounds that pipelines are a national responsibility."
Les Leyne: Team Canada fracturing over pipeline
What looks to be shaping up is a replay of the Trans Mountain pipeline argument, which B.C. lost.
Premier David Eby, one-time loyal cheerleader for “Team Canada,” will find out Thursday if he’s been benched.
The wraps will come off that day on whatever Prime Minister Mark Carney and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith have cooked up in the way of a new oil pipeline from Alberta to the north coast.
But Eby’s frustration about being left out of talks on a memorandum of understanding that only came to light last week is so acute by this point that he couldn’t wait. So he jumped the gun this week and launched an extended denunciation of whatever they are announcing well ahead of it actually being announced.
He talked directly to Carney on Monday, following news that Alberta and Ottawa have reportedly reached an agreement about the contentious pipeline idea. Carney played him along, saying that an agreement “is not finalized yet.” The prime minister tried to lower the temperature Tuesday, saying B.C. and First Nations support is essential.
Just the idea that Carney and Smith have been talking about a pipeline was enough to set Eby off.
What looks to be shaping up is a replay of the Trans Mountain pipeline argument, which consumed years and millions of dollars and which B.C. lost, mostly on the grounds that pipelines are a national responsibility.
Eby as attorney general led much of B.C.’s legal challenge to that line and none of them changed the outcome. The project finished last year, the oil is flowing to the Port of Vancouver, the tankers are sailing and billions of dollars are being made.
Recounting the conversation to reporters, Eby said he broadened the scope of B.C.’s opposition to the idea. He has camped for months on the fact there is no proposal at this point, and no proponent — it’s just an idea in Smith’s mind.
So if anything materializes, it would need taxpayer funding, by his thinking. Which prompted a new hypothetical grievance: “I do not believe that Alberta should have access to a $50 billion taxpayer-funded pipeline unless other provinces have access to similar amounts of taxpayer funding.”
It’s a clear illustration that Team Canada is fracturing, because the argument is based on the premise that only Alberta would benefit from the pipeline, not Canada.
In the early days of the U.S. assault on Canadian trade and sovereignty, Eby had a different line. In March, when the mood was “we’re all in this together,” he said: “We’re absolutely going to support other premiers. But we’re going to do it in a coordinated way with other premiers and the federal government.”
Those days are gone, because the “coordination” looks to have vanished.
Team Canada was never going to last.
- Reaction score
- 2,146
- Points
- 1,160
He was also against Site C.
Seems Eby can't think beyond his nose.
I believe she lives in Richmond, whether her residence is affected I do not know.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Fossil
- Reaction score
- 42,353
- Points
- 1,160
Historically speaking there never has been a 'Team Canada', unless we're talking about hockey of course
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 16,644
- Points
- 1,260
Historically speaking there never has been a 'Team Canada', unless we're talking about hockey of course
The only time we unite is to point out we're not Americans, IMHO.
Vastata potentiale.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Fossil
- Reaction score
- 42,353
- Points
- 1,160
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 16,644
- Points
- 1,260
There's that too
Ya you got me there. I defiantly fall into your highlighted addition.
Europe, to me, should be treated like a Zoo. Its fun place to visit and should be used as a reminder of how savage we used to be.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Fossil
- Reaction score
- 42,353
- Points
- 1,160
My Dad was amazed by his time in the UK during WW2.
He spoke of the British as if they were some newly discovered forest tribe who hadn't yet discovered the rudiments of modern life...
.... like warm, clear water from a tap and the right to individual self-determination.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 16,644
- Points
- 1,260
My Dad was amazed by his time in the UK during WW2.
He spoke of the British as if they were some newly discovered forest tribe who hadn't yet discovered the rudiments of modern life...
.... like warm, clear water from a tap and the right to individual self-determination.
They also like warm beer and deep fried toast.
MilEME09
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 6,277
- Points
- 1,210
Well the "Veto" is in name alone, technically interprovincial projects are federal domain, however Eby and others can drag things out and stall via things like the environmental assessment etc.
How I would do this is a federal assessment since Carney's gov passed the rules that 1 is good enough either fed or provincial, two make sure you follow existing rules to prevent court challenge loss, 3. since the NWC can't (to my knowledge) be used to trample aboriginal rights, use it to limit the number of allowed court challenges to 1. That is it, no appeal after appeal etc just one and done, lose the challenge move on
- Reaction score
- 11,691
- Points
- 1,160
Another Churchill, Nelson, Moosonee opportunity.
I have mentioned previously a Yasmal fleet of 15 ice-breaking LNG carriers built in Japan to Scandinavian designs. That fleet is under sanctions. They are largely foreign owned and controlled.
gcaptain.com
"For one company in particular, the announcement landed like a depth charge. Seapeak Maritime (Glasgow) Ltd., a UK-registered arm of the broader Seapeak group, controls six of the fifteen specialised carriers that serve Russia’s Yamal LNG project on the Arctic coast. Last year alone, those six ships are reported to have transported 7.56 million tonnes of liquified gas from the frozen north, worth almost $4 Billion and generating enough tax revenue for Moscow to purchase 2,700 attack drones or 45 ballistic missiles.
"Now, under the new regulations being phased in throughout 2026, all of that comes to an end. A UK government spokesperson confirmed explicitly to industry observers that Seapeak is included within the scope of the sanctions with no exceptions. The company will no longer be permitted to provide shipping, insurance, or any other maritime-related services for Russian LNG cargoes once the ban takes full effect."
Specialized ships with no cargo but lots of willing customers.
How quickly can we get an LNG line to a deep water buoy in James or Hudson Bay?
I have mentioned previously a Yasmal fleet of 15 ice-breaking LNG carriers built in Japan to Scandinavian designs. That fleet is under sanctions. They are largely foreign owned and controlled.
UK Strikes at Heart of Russia's Arctic Energy Empire
New maritime services ban threatens to sever lifeline for Yamal LNG exports By Paul Morgan (gCaptain) – In the frozen waters above the Arctic Circle, a fleet of specialised ships...
gcaptain.com
"For one company in particular, the announcement landed like a depth charge. Seapeak Maritime (Glasgow) Ltd., a UK-registered arm of the broader Seapeak group, controls six of the fifteen specialised carriers that serve Russia’s Yamal LNG project on the Arctic coast. Last year alone, those six ships are reported to have transported 7.56 million tonnes of liquified gas from the frozen north, worth almost $4 Billion and generating enough tax revenue for Moscow to purchase 2,700 attack drones or 45 ballistic missiles.
"Now, under the new regulations being phased in throughout 2026, all of that comes to an end. A UK government spokesperson confirmed explicitly to industry observers that Seapeak is included within the scope of the sanctions with no exceptions. The company will no longer be permitted to provide shipping, insurance, or any other maritime-related services for Russian LNG cargoes once the ban takes full effect."
Specialized ships with no cargo but lots of willing customers.
How quickly can we get an LNG line to a deep water buoy in James or Hudson Bay?
- Reaction score
- 11,691
- Points
- 1,160
And three more with Mitsui ownership idled for a while before being diverted from the Yamnal trade.
Underutilized on blue water runs?
www.marineinsight.com
Underutilized on blue water runs?
EU Lifts Sanctions On 3 LNG Ships After Firm Confirms Exit From Russian Gas Trade
Marine Insight - The maritime industry guide.
www.marineinsight.com
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Fossil
- Reaction score
- 42,353
- Points
- 1,160
Looks like BC has officially been given the Gypsy's warning...
B.C. Premier David Eby has vehemently opposed the approval of a new oil pipeline to the west coast and has called it unacceptable that his province has been excluded from proposed pipeline talks.
The MOU notes the two governments have agreed to “engage” with British Columbia “to further the economic interests of B.C. related to their own projects of interest,” and involve B.C. First Nations, to ensure they share in the financial benefits, should the pipeline proceed.
Though, it also notes that if an Alberta bitumen pipeline does get approved by the Major Projects Office (MPO), the federal government will make any appropriate adjustments to the Oil Tanker Moratorium Act, essentially opening up an exemption to the federal tanker ban.
www.ctvnews.ca
Carney signs major energy agreement with Alberta, laying out conditions for new oil pipeline
Tanker ban exemption possible
The new federal-provincial agreement marks a historic reset of relations between the two governments, but has the potential to complicate dynamics with another.B.C. Premier David Eby has vehemently opposed the approval of a new oil pipeline to the west coast and has called it unacceptable that his province has been excluded from proposed pipeline talks.
The MOU notes the two governments have agreed to “engage” with British Columbia “to further the economic interests of B.C. related to their own projects of interest,” and involve B.C. First Nations, to ensure they share in the financial benefits, should the pipeline proceed.
Though, it also notes that if an Alberta bitumen pipeline does get approved by the Major Projects Office (MPO), the federal government will make any appropriate adjustments to the Oil Tanker Moratorium Act, essentially opening up an exemption to the federal tanker ban.
Carney signs major energy agreement with Alberta, laying out conditions for new oil pipeline
Prime Minister Mark Carney and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith have signed a major new energy co-operation agreement outlining the emission and other climate conditions that need to be met in order for a new oil pipeline to the Pacific to be approved under the federal major projects law.
www.ctvnews.ca
- Reaction score
- 21,855
- Points
- 1,010
Similar threads
