Trans-Mountain Pipeline Expansion is Completed
Scenario:
Despite opposition from British Columbia, Kinder Morgan expands the Trans-Mountain pipeline. This causes the Canadian government to gain significant revenue
BACKGROUND
BENEFITS
OPPOSITION
Current Resources and Inputs
1
GOVERNMENT
3
INDIGENOUS ACTORS
In an interview with the National Observer, the Canadian government contends the construction of the Trans- Mountain Pipeline and the significant revenue gains for the Canadian government as well as Alberta, is integral to the Canadian government’s duties in upholding the Paris Agreement.[10]
Alberta is a key player in the Canadian economy due to its natural resources and therefore plays a large role in controlling carbon emission reduction. However, the Albertan government has argued that without the increased revenue from the pipeline, it will be unable to continue with its heavy carbon tax and cap on emissions.[11] Therefore, without Alberta receiving sufficient revenue from its natural resources it will be unable to pursue aggressive climate action, which is necessary for Canada to decrease its carbon production.[12]
Thus, upon the construction of the Trans-Mountain Pipeline the Canadian government expects the revenue gained to aid in the state’s responsibilities to the Paris Agreement.
The Canadian government contends that they have agreements from 42 Indigenous communities and does not specify any action that will be taken to remedy problems with opposing communities.[13]
2
KINDER MORGAN
Regarding the environment, in accordance with the NEB guidelines it has developed environmental protection policies for areas that the pipeline will affect.[14]
Additionally, Kinder Morgan has done their own environmental assessment. This environmental assessment started in 2012, and have produced an encompassing document that outline the perceived environmental affects and has promised to refurbish land where possible to a state similar to before the construction. Additionally, Kinder Morgan has promised to fulfill all of the environmental requirements set out by the National Energy Board.[15]
Due to the economic benefits from the construction of the pipeline and engagement with Indigenous communities, Kinder Morgan asserts it will have positive outcomes for Indigenous communities. These benefits include employment and training opportunities. Furthermore, Kinder Morgan has pledged to invest in community programs and infrastructure in Indigenous communities that will be affected by the pipeline.[16]
Additionally, Kinder Morgan has stated that where the pipeline crosses Reserves in British Columbia, Kinder Morgan will pay taxes on the land occupied.[17]
Concerning the Indigenous communities, particularly the Tsleil-Waututh, contests the construction of the pipeline and contends that it violates their laws, a statement released after independent assessment.[18] Moreover, Indigenous communities have challenged the federal governments’ approval of the pipeline by failing to properly fulfill their duty to consult.[19] This duty is outlined in Aboriginal Consultation and Accommodation policy.[20] Thus, with the creation of the pipeline, the likely outcome is that Indigenous Communities will assert rights violations and call upon the government for rectification.
Comparatively, there are Indigenous groups that are pro-pipeline, these groups contend that pipelines are necessary for the development of Indigenous communities. For instance, Calvin Helin, an executive with the Eagle Spirit Energy has asserted his support for pipelines, claiming it’s the way of the future. Helin stated that energy development has the potential to be beneficial for Indigenous communities given that energy companies do not take advantage of Indigenous people and share the benefits, and have an equal voice in the projects.[21] Therefore, Indigenous leaders such as Helin may support the construction the Trans-Mountain pipeline, given that Indigenous communities are included in the construction and benefit from the pipeline.
4
ENVIRONMENTAL ACTORS
Sharing the concerns of Indigenous communities about the negative effects the pipeline will have on the environment, many British Columbia residents will likely object to the construction of the Trans-Mountain Pipeline. Many environmental groups oppose the construction, due to environmental risks including the risk the pipeline will pose to endangered species.[22] Additionally, environmental groups have raised concern over the impact the pipeline could potentially have on Vancouver’s Stanley Park.[23]
These concerns are also being voiced in Alberta, specifically from Climate Justice Edmonton. Climate Justice Edmonton is concerned about the environmental impact the pipeline will have on Indigenous land as well as investing in infrastructure that is not sustainable, claiming it is an investment in “a dying industry.”[24]
Therefore, with the construction of the pipeline it can be expected that the environmental groups will call upon the government to act to protect the environment and prepare for a sustainable future.
Environmental Policy
Recommendations
The Environmental Policy Paradox refers to the argument that a transition must be made from fossil fuels to renewable energy, but there is little that can be done in the public sector to prepare for this change because of the influence of foreign investment and manufacturers on policy-makers.[25] As a result of this paradox, environmental activists will continue to criticize the federal government for favouring economic growth over the heath and future of the environment. To combat this, the government must return a portion of the revenues from the Trans-Mountain Pipeline to back this cause.
Drawing from Alberta’s current Carbon Tax initiative, the federal government can allocate its pipeline revenue to reinvest in the Canadian economy. Alberta allocates carbon taxes toward green initiatives such as public transportation, large-scale renewable energy projects, energy efficiency, and assisting Indigenous communities in moving towards a more environmentally sustainable economy. Specifically, the government should focus on five main areas of environmental aid.
1. Sustainable Energy – Developing policy on climate and clean energy can increase transparency and improve the government’s credibility in terms of environmental impact.[26]
2. Research and Development – Canada has expressed a commitment to promoting market diversification and exploring fuel alternatives.[27] Carbon taxes can be funnelled into the Program of Energy Research and Development (PERD) to explore renewable energy technologies.[28] By channeling resources to research and development, the Canadian government shows genuine interest in sustainability and supports Canadians contributing significantly to the global scientific community.
3. Green Infrastructure – Currently, the Canadian Energy Strategy recognizes the need to build pipelines and energy infrastructures.[29]
4. Paris Agreement Commitments – Today, Canada is ranked “highly insufficient” in terms of completing the initiatives agreed upon in the Paris Agreement.[30] In order to fulfill this international obligation and maintain a positive environmental reputation, the government needs to contribute more resources into countering the carbon emissions.
5. Energy Efficiency – Promoting energy efficiency will allow for Canada to diversify its economy while promoting environmental sustainability.
The aforementioned green initiative are all firmly rooted in the pillars of the Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change. This framework centres on the core beliefs that:
-
Pricing carbon pollution is an efficient way to reduce emissions
-
There is an immediate need for Canada to adapt and build resilience to climate change
-
Investing in clean technology, innovation, and jobs will bring new Canadian technologies to the global market
-
Ministers must report regularly and transparently to Canadians on environmental progress
The federal government pledges to work in collaboration with other nations on climate solutions, while promoting these initiatives at home. In this framework, the carbon taxing approach is recommended to apply across the Canadian economy. Revenues from the Trans-Mountain pipeline would contribute a portion of its $12.6 billion into this stream, allowing for sustainability goals to be advanced.
The Asia-Pacific Gateway Corridor Initiative includes a system of transportation infrastructure in Western Canada facilitating global supply chains between North America and Asia.[31] Led by Transport Canada and marketed by the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, this initiative funds BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. The carbon tax initiative can be implemented within this existing framework. Incorporating it as such would allow the money to go towards environmental initiatives regarding clean transportation infrastructure as well as supporting increased trade with Asian countries.
Indigenous Policy
Recommendations
The Indigenous communities that support the pipeline are calling for increased participation in the economic activities, and increased share of the benefits, whereas anti-pipeline Indigenous groups are concerned about their ability to exercise their rights and the impact of the pipeline on the environment. Although, Kinder Morgan has stated its intention to work with Indigenous communities regarding all concerns, the Canadian government has not stated whether it will take action to support Indigenous communities affected for the pipeline.[32] This is problematic because, anti- and pro-pipeline Indigenous groups both deserve to benefit from the economic boom the pipeline will create.
Therefore, the Canadian government is suggesting it will use a portion of revenues gained from the expansion of the Trans-Mountain pipeline towards the improvement of Indigenous communities. It is suggested that the government work within the policy frameworks created by the British North American Act and the New Fiscal Relationship.[33][34] As well, the allocation of the revenues should be discussed with the Association of First Nations (AFN) with their resolutions concerning development and environmental protection consulted, to ensure the voices of Indigenous peoples are heard.[35]
British North America Act
New Fiscal Relationship
Association of First Nations
The British North America Act, created in 1867, determined the Federal government’s responsibility for Indigenous communities in Canada. This stipulated that the Federal government was required to oversee and maintain the need of Indigenous people in Canada.
The New Fiscal Relationship was created 2016, by the Canadian Government and the AFN, as framework for funding Indigenous communities. This framework works to ensure that funding is sufficient and respects the right to self-determination.
The AFN, is a body of Indigenous leaders the works with the Canadian government to represent the interests of Indigenous peoples in Canada. In 2017, the AFN’s General Assembly released a resolution that included a First Nations Energy Strategy that called for a new relationship with the Crown that results in Indigenous communities economically benefiting from energy revenues.
Thus, it is suggested to combat the perceived opposition from anti-pipeline Indigenous communities and to ensure the happiness of pro-pipeline Indigenous communities, the Canadian government should allocate a portion of the revenues gained from the Trans-Mountain Pipeline to the improvement of Indigenous communities. This allocation of revenues can be justified under the British North American Act. To ensure the proper amount allocated the direction of the revenues allocated the Canadian government should consult the New Fiscal Relationship as well as the AFN, specifically following the pathway wanted by the AFN to fulfill the First Nations Energy Strategy suggested in their 2017 resolution.