Alison Redford won't back down on pipeline profits -

Alison Redford won’t back down on pipeline profits

Alberta and B.C. remain at odds over proposed pipeline profit sharing.


Alberta Premier Alison Redford has doubled down on her position that she will not be meeting with B.C. Premier Christy Clark to discuss sharing the profits of the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline.

From the Financial Post:

“She made her position very clear. Ours is very clear. Our position hasn’t changed,” Redford told reporters following a speech to the Canadian Bar Association.

“We believe that it’s very important for economic benefits to be spread across the country and we don’t believe that fundamentally changing Confederation to allow that to happen is appropriate, and so wouldn’t entertain any discussion with respect to sharing of Alberta royalties.”

Redford says she hasn’t heard from Clark since the two were at odds over the pipeline at a premiers’ meeting. She also said she will be going on ahead with the national energy strategy without Clark.

Filed under:

Alison Redford won’t back down on pipeline profits

  1. Hey, Redford, while you’re at it can you please fix the abominable Quebec/Labrador power corridor issue?

    If Quebec gets to cream off the bulk of the profits from the current Churchill Falls power generation – with the blessing of the SCC and the Federal government – and insists on doing the same for any future developments if NL wants to ship that power across its boundaries (in contravention of NAFTA) why should Alberta be treated any differently by BC? The risk to BC is far greater than that to Quebec, after all; there aren’t any risk of environmental disasters from electricity spills.

    Harper: fair play across the board please! If you try to press BC into a deal with Alta, clean up the same problem on the East Coast first!!!

    • Keith, is it not true that Joey Smallwood made this awful deal with Quebec on behalf of Newfoundland? Is it also not true that even Rene Levesque realized that Quebec was taking advantage of Newfoundland and had a “twinge” of conscience before he raked you over the coals. I am sorry Keith that you had a completely inept premier and a PM that felt okay about letting Quebec take you to the cleaners. In the case of Alberta and BC however, things are a little bit different. BC already has an “alliance” pipeline that runs from northern BC through Alberta…so you see, we in Alberta already run the risk of a “spill” of BC oil in Alberta. Also, we in Alberta have trucked BC logs through Alberta on our highways for decades. We have experienced accidents and never asked for compensation…it is the price of doing business. There is no such thing is confederation that allows a province to charge a toll to another province for transporting its resources through for sale. That is why the federal government control these decisions and provinces do not. As Premier Redford said, it is not her decision to make. However, the NWT would happy to have the pipeline run through their province. Either way, I don’t think this issue will make much difference in the Joey Smallwood situation. Why did you vote for him?

      • 1) To answer your closing question first – I wasn’t old enough to vote until 1981. Joey was given the boot long before that.
        2) Yes the original hydro deal was a bad contract but any province with one whit of concern for its neighbour provinces would long ago have renegotiated. The SCC and the Feds refused to correct this unconscionable contract.
        3) Ignoring the existing hydro contract – despite your claim that “[t]here is no such thing is confederation that allows a province to charge a toll to another province for transporting its resources through for sale” Quebec insists it can and will do just that if NL wants to develop new hydro power in Labrador and ship it to US markets via Quebec. Harper made it abundantly clear he would NOT get involved – even though this contradicts NAFTA. So NL had to come up with a more costly alternative: route it across the Strait of Belle Isle, down the west coast of the island, and back across the Gulf of St. Lawrence to NS and onward rather than be once again held hostage by Quebec.

        Sorry HI but you’re waaaay off base on this one. Equitable treatment in this country first requires enough economic clout and sufficient MPs. NL has neither; Alta has them in spades – so guess who gets the grease and who gets the shaft?

  2. BC is stuck with a low qualify government, which is reflected in the premier’s attempts at “negotiations”. First she says “no” because of environmental concerns, then she says “yes”, but only if she gets more royalties. Unless she really doesn’t want the project and is trying to spoil it (which I think is too much strategic thinking for Clark), she is obviously bluffing, and Redford is comfortably calling her bluff. We really need a new, more competent, government in BC.

  3. BC is stuck with a low-quality government, which is reflected in Clark’s attempts at “negotiating”. First she says “absolutely no” for environmental reasons, then she says “yes”, but you have to pay us more royalties. Unless she is trying to sabotage the negotiations to stop the project (which I think is too clever for her), she is clearly bluffing and Redford is comfortably calling her on it. I think it’s really time to get some high-quality government in BC. It’s getting ridiculous.