Get Canada Moving Again – Streamlining the Resource Development Approval Process

In Canada resource development projects must go through a lengthy approval process.  This is necessary so that all the factors are taken into consideration including, of course, environmental concerns.

However, radical environmentalists have used these approval processes to stop all resource developments, whether it involves pipelines, oil and gas development, hard rock mining or forestry.

The Financial Post has identified 35 projects valued at $129 billion that have been held up or stopped by extreme environmental extremists.

The approval process is designed with reasonable people in mind who can balance the different factors -environmental concerns, job creation, economic progress and supplying the raw materials which are required for the economy and the benefit of the people of Canada.

However, the “activists” are not reasonable people but fanatics who only consider the environmental aspects (as they themselves define them) and their own narrow interests. The activists are not monolithic, but a coalition of extreme environmentalists, those who fear the effects of anthropogenic global warming, those who want to bring down the capitalist system, anarchists, nimbyists etc.

Attempts to compromise with the activists fail every time. For example, Justin Trudeau attempted a compromise by not approving the Northern Gateway pipeline but approving the TransMountain Expansion pipeline. This had no effect on the activists since they are against all pipelines.

These extremists have developed four lines of attack.  These are:

1. Undermine the credibility of the institutions which approve big infrastructure projects
2. Delay projects for so long that companies cancel or suspend projects (e.g. challenging projects in courts of appeal.
3. Physically disrupt or blockade the construction of a project
4. Make project approvals politically contentious and untenable.

(“Activist Playbook – Four Strategies to Block Energy Projects” – video, Financial Post 19-12-2016)

Another factor with regards to the extremists is that many are based in the US. They are viscerally opposed to oilsands developments and Canadian pipelines but are strangely quiet about US pipelines or the flaring of associated gas in North Dakota. Thus President Obama did not approve the Keystone XL pipeline but under his watch, 50,000 miles of oil pipelines were built in the US. Satellite pictures of North America at night show North Dakota to be as bright as New York City; this is due to the flaring of natural gas which is associated with oil produced from the Bakken formation. This is not only wasteful, but also spews huge amounts of CO₂ and particulates into the atmosphere, but no-one complains about that.

This inability to get these developments approved is one of the reasons why Canada is falling behind economically. The graph shows the GDP per head in several countries (data from the IMF, 2017, nominal dollars)

Australia has a similar economy to Canada, yet their GDP per head is higher than Canada’s. Last year I visited Australia and spent some time in Newcastle, New South Wales. Trains laden with coal were constantly coming in, the coal loaded onto freighters and then sent to China. In Canada, the environmental lobby has virtually shut-down the coal industry.

What is needed is an approval process which is predictable, timely and free of political interference.

Here are some suggestions:

1. Institutions which govern the approval processes (e.g. NEB) should have the power to do their job. Attempts to undermine their credibility should be challenged legally.
2. All intervenors in an approval hearing must pay some of the cost of the hearing. Currently, intervenors can have some of their costs reimbursed by the government/regulatory body. The costs of each hearing should calculated on a per minute basis. Local intervenors should pay a nominal sum ($10 ?). Local authorities (City councils, rural districts etc.) should pay 50%, national NGOs 100% and international NGOs (e.g. Sierra Club, Greenpeace) 150% of the costs.
3. Blockades, barriers etc. which prevent a development to go ahead should be punished severely, preferably with jail terms. Currently, although arrests are made, the penalties are negligible (in one case, although the activists violated a previous court order, the cases against them were dismissed by the judge).
4. The whole process should be transparent and a free of politics as possible. The politicians should only be involved in setting the rules; activists and lobby groups should not be able to side-step the approval process by direct recourse to the politicians. Furthermore, once a project is approved, a change of government should not be able to reverse the approval.