While Conservatives intended these changes to be a regulatory blank cheque for their friends in the resource extraction industry, even industry leaders are now realizing that they are, in fact, a poisoned chalice. Forward-thinking business leaders understand that their industries can flourish only if they have not only a regulatory licence, but a social licence as well.<\/p>\n
That means adhering to the rules of sustainable development. It means full and public consultations with communities impacted by natural resource development. It means a thorough and trustworthy environmental assessment process. And, as the Supreme Court of Canada requires, it means working in partnership with Canada’s First Nations to ensure our resources are developed responsibly and with respect for their rights.<\/p>\n
By contrast, the pipeline project that has become the centrepiece of the Conservatives’ development agenda within Canada, the Northern Gateway Project, has failed these tests on every front \u2014\u00a0from inadequate consultations with First Nations and local communities, to the proposal to run ocean supertankers through a narrow inlet on a pristine coast.<\/p>\n Northern Gateway is typical of the Conservative approach, and in more ways than one. Aside from environmental concerns, it represents the worst of the Conservatives’ \u201crip-and-ship\u201d approach to resource development, designed to favour projects that export Canada’s raw resources to foreign markets.<\/p>\n The Conservatives’ single-minded focus on the export of raw resources \u2014\u00a0combined with their failure to internalize environmental costs \u2014\u00a0has contributed to an artificial rise in the value of the Canadian dollar that is hollowing out our other export industries \u2014\u00a0from forestry to fisheries, from manufacturing to agriculture. Ironically, even the Conservatives’ recent report to the United Nations on Canada’s progress in meeting our climate change commitments lists the economic shift away from manufacturing as one of the leading factors helping to limit growth in Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions.<\/p>\n The impact of this approach has been felt not only in manufacturing and other export industries, but within the natural resource sector itself. While the export of resources will always be an important part of our economic mix, the export of raw resources is not the obvious path to prosperity it is sometimes held up to be.<\/p>\n The cancellation of the Voyageur upgrader project is just the most recent illustration of this short-sightedness. Conservatives sat by as an $11-billion project to process raw bitumen was cancelled with seemingly no concern for the loss of tens of thousands of value-added jobs.<\/p>\n Conservative neglect doesn’t end there. Even with synthetic crude oil from Alberta trading for as much\u00a0as $41 a barrel less than imported Brent crude oil on the east coast, Conservatives have continued to pull out all the stops to promote the export of raw resources while ignoring the potential for increased pipeline capacity from west to east.<\/p>\n Within a framework of sustainable development \u2014\u00a0including a cap-and-trade system and thorough environmental assessments \u2014\u00a0New Democrats would prioritize our own energy security and with it\u00a0the creation of high-paying, value-added jobs, refining and upgrading our own natural resources right here in Canada \u2014\u00a0just as other resource-rich developed nations like Norway already have.<\/p>\n With unused refining capacity in eastern Canada already available, increasing west-east capacity is, in fact, a win-win-win \u2014\u00a0better prices for producers (and higher royalties for provinces),\u00a0more jobs here at home and greater energy security for all Canadians.<\/p>\n Shouldn’t that be Canada’s top priority for natural resource development?<\/p>\n As we move to seize these opportunities at home, we must also foster the international trade and foreign investment relationships\u00a0that will ensure we have the capacity to meet them. In the past two years alone, state-owned Chinese companies like PetroChina and CNOOC have invested more than\u00a0$25 billion in the Canadian oil and gas sector. That trend is expected only to grow.<\/p>\n New Democrats support breaking down trade barriers, lowering tariffs and reducing protectionism. We believe that government has a role to play in creating the predictability and clarity that potential investors count on. But we also believe that our government must stand first and foremost for Canadian interests, rather than ideological purity.<\/p>\n In 2010, Parliament unanimously supported a New Democratic motion calling on the government to put forth a clear definition of the so-called \u201cnet benefit\u201d test for foreign takeovers. Yet, more than two years later \u2014\u00a0to this day \u2014\u00a0Conservatives have still failed to act on that motion and are simply making up the rules as they go along.<\/p>\n Instead of clarity and vision, Canada’s foreign investment regime continues to be plagued by indecision and delay. This incompetence reached its peak late\u00a0last year with takeover bids by Petronas and CNOOC. Here we had a pair of state-owned foreign enterprises bidding for a stake in one of Canada’s most vital sectors. In CNOOC’s case, its bid was the largest by a state-owned firm in our country’s history.<\/p>\n Instead of full and public consultations, the government offered deliberations in secret \u2014\u00a0with no clear rules or guidelines \u2014 and in Petronas’ case, an initial rejection announced in the middle of the night. It should come as no surprise \u2014\u00a0yet it is of great concern \u2014\u00a0that Petronas’ chief executive expressed regret last November for not having received any information on how his company’s bid would be evaluated.<\/p>\n As he told the Wall Street Journal<\/em>: \u201cAt this point, the whole industry has no clue.\u201d<\/p>\n Just a few weeks later, the Prime Minister reversed his position on Petronas and approved both the Petronas and CNOOC bids. Remarkably, he stood at the podium and warned of the dangers of state-owned investments in Canada’s natural resource sector, then approved two such investments moments later. But instead of clarifying the rules for foreign takeovers going forward, Mr. Harper only added to the country’s confusion and once again exposed his own.<\/p>\n What concerns New Democrats even more is the implications of the CNOOC\/ Nexen deal once the Conservatives’ new Canada-China Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (the Canada-China FIPA) is ratified.<\/p>\n This is an agreement negotiated by the federal government in complete secrecy \u2014\u00a0without any consultation or debate in Parliament \u2014\u00a0and that is intended to bind Canada’s hands for a full 31 years.<\/p>\n Under article 6 of FIPA, once a Chinese company is established in Canada, it must receive \u201cnational treatment\u201d for expansion and operations \u2014\u00a0meaning it must be treated as if it were a Canadian company. These provisions would guarantee companies like CNOOC the unlimited right to buy up new oil leases and expand their ownership of our natural resources.<\/p>\n Unfortunately, Conservative ministers seemed to have misjudged the consequences of their own agreement,\u00a0or perhaps simply do not understand the effect of its very clear provisions. When questioned about this agreement in Parliament, Conservatives replied that the Investment Canada Act<\/em> would still apply to future takeovers, apparently not realizing the fundamental difference between acquisition and expansion.<\/p>\n It’s true that foreign investments by any country, including China, are still subject to Investment Canada Act<\/em>, if they meet a certain threshold.\u00a0But there are means to expand control of oil resources without triggering a review under the Act. In CNOOC’s case \u2014\u00a0with its foot already in the door and newly armed with the rights of a Canadian company \u2014\u00a0its ability to purchase new leases will not be subject to review and cannot be limited.<\/p>\n The consequences for our national sovereignty and our system of federalism \u2014\u00a0not to mention our economic potential \u2014\u00a0are stark. Perhaps that is why, despite the Conservatives’ stubborn defence of the Canada-China FIPA\u00a0in public, they have still not ratified this agreement and brought its provisions into force a full 230 days (as of this writing) since it was signed.<\/p>\n That this entire negotiation took place in secret, with virtually no input from the public, is all the more distressing. The future of Canada’s natural resource sector \u2014\u00a0and, indeed, the impact that its development will have on our planet \u2014\u00a0should not be the subject of closed negotiations with industry insiders, but rather should be the concern of every Canadian.<\/p>\n Premier Alison Redford of Alberta has called for a \u201cnational conversation\u201d about how we develop our country’s natural resources, and for the development of a national energy strategy. As leader of the Official Opposition and of the New Democratic Party of Canada, I echo that call.<\/p>\n For over 150 years, Canada’s abundance of natural resources has shaped our history and helped drive our economy. With the right vision, there is no reason they cannot help fuel our prosperity for another 150 years to come.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" James Miller Williams is not among Canada’s most prominent historical figures, but he is among our most influential. In 1856, this carriage maker from Hamilton, Ontario, bought a failed asphalt mine on a small property in nearby Lambton County; a year later he began producing kerosene there, using state-of-the-art techniques developed by Nova Scotia scientist […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":249409,"template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"content-type":"","ep_exclude_from_search":false,"apple_news_api_created_at":"","apple_news_api_id":"","apple_news_api_modified_at":"","apple_news_api_revision":"","apple_news_api_share_url":"","apple_news_cover_media_provider":"image","apple_news_coverimage":0,"apple_news_coverimage_caption":"","apple_news_cover_video_id":0,"apple_news_cover_video_url":"","apple_news_cover_embedwebvideo_url":"","apple_news_is_hidden":"","apple_news_is_paid":"","apple_news_is_preview":"","apple_news_is_sponsored":"","apple_news_maturity_rating":"","apple_news_metadata":"\"\"","apple_news_pullquote":"","apple_news_pullquote_position":"","apple_news_slug":"","apple_news_sections":[],"apple_news_suppress_video_url":false,"apple_news_use_image_component":false},"categories":[9361,9358],"tags":[],"article-status":[],"irpp-category":[4261,4295],"section":[],"irpp-tag":[],"class_list":["post-263423","issues","type-issues","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-environnement","category-politique","irpp-category-environnement","irpp-category-politique"],"acf":[],"apple_news_notices":[],"yoast_head":"\n![\"mulcair](\"\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/assets\/Uploads\/_resampled\/resizedimage799598-mulcair-apr-2013.png\")