Now the Northern Gateway pipeline has cleared its environmental review, both sides are gearing up for a tooth-and-nail fight. Opponents are threatening a 鈥減ipeline war鈥� that dates back to the 鈥渨ar in the woods.鈥�
On that occasion, 20 years ago, protesters stared down logging trucks at Clayoquot Sound and brought clear-cutting to a halt.
Now, environmental groups and First Nations leaders are promising a repeat performance.
For their part, members of the business community are lobbying hard in Ottawa and ginning up opinion polls that appear to show support. All of which is appropriate, up to a point.
However, there are genuine risks here, not just for our province, but for our country. If the federal government wishes to go forward, it must demonstrate that a broad, general consensus exists. Ramming a project through that benefits one part of the country, at the expense of another, amounts to Ottawa declaring war on sa国际传媒
The prime minister should remember what happened when Pierre Trudeau imposed his infamous National Energy Program.
Albertans never forgave Trudeau (or the federal Liberal party) for taxing their oil to subsidize fuel prices in eastern sa国际传媒.
For their part, opponents must keep in mind that there is an essential difference between the scope of the issues at Clayoquot Sound and the scope of the issues here.
The war in the woods was, in a sense, a family dispute, fought within our own borders. If there is to be a pipeline war, it will be more of a civil war between provinces.
The oilfields in Alberta and western Saskatchewan are landlocked. The only route to market is through adjacent jurisdictions. Stopping the pipeline will, unavoidably, impose considerable harm on those provinces. The energy sector represents nearly 30 per cent of Alberta鈥檚 economy.
There is also an example from history here, in the dispute between Quebec and Newfoundland over the Churchill Falls power contract. That deal saw Quebec use raw muscle to extort Newfoundland electricity at rates far below fair market prices. More than 40 years and several court cases later, it is still a bitter bone of contention.
A pipeline 鈥渨ar鈥� between British Columbia and the provinces to the east would raise similar emotions. Argue the matter out in a reasoned manner, and it remains political. Erect blockades along the Alberta border and you are not conducting a political campaign, you are picking a fight with a neighbour.
None of this means that anyone should be silenced. But it does mean that both sides should tread carefully.
The proper place to resolve this dispute is Parliament Hill. Decisions of this kind are vested with the federal government precisely so we don鈥檛 end up with provinces battering each other to a standstill.
The Tofino Chamber of Commerce, which opposes the project, gave a good example of how to proceed. Gord Johns, executive director of the chamber, cited objective evidence of the threat to his region.
In 1988, an oil spill that originated in Grays Harbour, Wash., spread to the west coast of Vancouver Island, killing seabirds and fouling shellfish beds. 鈥淥ur business community can鈥檛 afford any spills,鈥� Johns said. 鈥淓ffectively, that would just wipe us out.鈥�
If we can find a way to treat this contentious issue in a thoughtful manner, as Johns did, we鈥檒l get through it in one piece.
It鈥檚 understandable that people who feel deeply about this issue want to register their views in the strongest possible manner.
Yet it is essential to remember that there are people on the other side who feel equally strongly. And they are fellow Canadians, not enemies.
In a war between neighbours, no one wins. We pride ourselves on our capacity for civility. Never were those qualities more urgently required.
