The MacKenzie Gas Pipeline Project has been part of the lore of generations of Canadians, particularly in Northern Canada, since the 1970’s. It was then that the dream of building a huge natural gas pipeline from the delta of the MacKenzie River to southern Canada first took shape. At that time it was spurred on by energy shortage fears and a nationalistic desire to mount another great Canadian dream of the magnitude of the first transcontinental raiway. The Liberal Government of the day granted huge exploration subsidies to find and secure gas fields in the Beaufort Sea and surrounding areas, with great success. The government had been latecomers to the realization that the aboriginal owned lands of the MacKenzie Valley would have to be acquired before the line went through, but was soon convinced of this, largely thanks to the pathbreaking inquiry and report on the impact of the pipeline by Mr. Justice Thomas Berger. Berger traveled up and down the valley to community meetings, consulted with aboriginal leaders, listened to oil and gas company executives and studied the environmental, economic and social implications of the pipeline. In his report in 1977, he agreed that the pipeline could proceed under strict environmental controls and operational regulations, provided the consent of the aboriginal residents, who own much of the land, was obtained, just as it had been obtained before the railroad went through the prairies.

By the time he reported, energy markets had cooled and the industry lost immediate interest in the pipeline. However everyone knew it would be coming some day when the gas would inevitably be needed. As a result treaty negotiations continued between the federal government, the territorial government and the aboriginal groups to settle the land issue. At the same time the aboriginal groups began to see land ownership and governance as inseparable, and thus most demanded treaties that included recognized self government powers. Negotiations went on for a long time, but settlements were reached with the Inuvialiat on the north slope and the other aboriginal people down the MacKenzie to Yellowknife, some coming as late as the mid part of this decade. Today only the Deh Cho Dene in the south west corner of the NWT and a group of Metis in the Yellowknife area are without a Treaty. The rest now have unequivocal and uncontested ownership over thousands of hectares of northern land, self government powers, large capital funds and other things they sought in return for giving up ownership and control over vast amounts of the land.

Not so the Deh Cho. The Deh Cho Dene want a different kind of settlement. In the other settlements the First Nations agreed to drop their claims to large territories of land in return for clear ownership over a smaller territory, continuing wildlife harvesting rights, compensation, financial support and self government powers and other assets of value. The Deh Cho Dene have held out for co-ownership of all of the land with the Federal Government, co-management of resources, co-equal resources revenue sharing, and other provisions that would leave it with a high degree of continuing control over and interest in all of the lands and resources in their region. The Federal Government has outright refused, saying the Deh Cho must accept something similar to the rest. In response the Deh Cho have said that they will not give their go ahead to the pipeline. Not long ago that sounded like a real obstacle to the pipeline proceeding.

The industry led by Imperial Oil have promised aboriginal governments a substantial ownership interest in the pipeline provided the federal government will come up with the money. An Environmental Assessment, underway for the past five plus years, is due to report and give its approval in two or three weeks. Feverish survey and other preparatory work has been going at full tilt for some time and the communities along the river and in the delta region have been booming as things ramp up.

However, there now have been a couple of immense doses of cold water thrown on the project. Today much of the talk in the north is about a long and often bungled regulatory process, federal neglect and declining industry interest. The big industry players say that major federal financial support to offset some of the total costs estimated to be in the range of $15 – $20 billion dollars is needed. Opponents say that this is just standard industry rhetoric in search of government subsidies. But now it has come out that the federal cabinet see industry demands as serious obstacles, has reviewed the demands for money and other things and said no to proceeding on these terms.

Some think this means the project is just stalled. But it is more than that. The project just does not make sense in today’s terms. Gas prices have collapsed. New sources of shale gas in the south are hanging over an already well supplied market into the foreseeable future.

In fact, ten years of planning, $750 million of Imperial Oil Ltd. and parent Exxon Mobil Corp., Royal Dutch Shell PLC, ConocoPhillips Ltd. and the Aboriginal Pipeline Group (APG) money already spent, hundreds of millions spent by exploration firms, millions spent by Northern businesses and governments to provide services and infrastructure, and millions of hours of person time is now about to be washed away as sure as if it were flushed down the mighty MacKenzie into the Beaufort Sea.

The project is dead. The disappointment of northern and aboriginal groups is palpable. The waste, disruption of lives, communities and the environment, and the social disruption has been immense. For the big companies the termination of plans will be nothing more than a deductible blip on immense balance sheets bloated by recent high energy prices. Not so for many many others, particularly in the north.

This may all be a good thing in the end. But unless you live in the north, it is hard to understand the pain, bitterness, and disappointment. Those who oppose the pipeline might well have some sympathy for those in the north who awaited its arrival as a sure route to prosperity. Another dream has come and gone. It is a hard life north of 60*.

The Federal Government has established an inquiry into the management of west coast salmon stocks. This has long been sought by John Cummins, MP from Delta, BC, who lays the primary blame on the First Nations and the aboriginal right to fish. It has also been sought by the NDP, who profess to care only about the salmon, and by various environmental and fish protection groups who variously lay the blame on habitat destruction, over fishing, El Nino, farm fisheries, the traditional small boat fishers, and the use of gill nets and other destructive gear. Others blame the Americans, Japanese and other non-Canadian fishers. Virtually all blame DFO and the bureaucrats and politicians who run it.

The difficulty is that all of these to some degree and in their own way are at fault. First Nations’ fishers rightfully point out that there has been a hundred year plus effort to deny them the harvest that they enjoy as a property right under the law and the constitution. Governments have ignored, denied and curtailed their access to their rightful harvest through all kinds of regulations and laws. Many First Nations have understandably seen the whole management regime as unlawful – and they are right – and so have gone ahead and ignored it all. The result has been that the management of harvests has often times become chaotic. How much overall impact this has had is hard to estimate, but it points out the difficulty of laying blame. Who is to blame – the First Nations who have rejected an illegitimate and unlawful management regime, or the governments that have created a regime that lacks credibility and is thus ignored by many?

Habitat destruction has been killing salmon stocks for generations. The whole of the lower mainland was once one of the richest salmon producing areas of the world. Developers and governments have destroyed it. Do they get a free pass because that is all in the past? Forest harvesting destroys large amounts of habitat every year. So does mining and dredging. Now hundreds of private hydro projects are set to lay waste to rivers and streams all over the province. The provincial government, municipalities and industry are hugely to blame. The inquiry can’t give them a pass.

The commercial fishers for years have operated as if their purpose is to destroy the stocks. They have often refused to accept the reality of declining stocks. They have insisted on continuing to use gill nets, one of the most destructive forms of fisheries possible. They regularly refused to accept the First Nations fisheries, making much needed co-management impossible. And they have fought amongst themselves about allocations when the real question should have been conservation. They carry more than enough blame.

Governments and industry often blame commercial fishers and fishing communities for putting social objectives ahead of industry needs. For instance, commercial fishers have long been resistant to the creation of an industrial fishery based on a few very large boats, long a favourite of government because of the ease of enforcement of catch limits with a small number of boats and of industry because of economies of scale. But who can really blame the commercial fishers – of what social use is a fishery benefiting a few large corporations with 20 or 30 monster ships plying the coast?

Fish farms undeniably are killing salmon, especially because of sea lice. But the farm fish industry remains in denial, and government and some communities want the jobs and industry wants the profits, so nothing is done. All are to blame, no question about it.

The Americans steal our fish every year, reducing our catches and undermining recovery efforts. But the Federal Government doesn’t want a fight with the US over such small potatoes and so Canada goes along. It is only ten years ago the David Anderson signed away Canada’s salmon to the Americans without a moment of remorse. He and Chretien wanted to avoid a fight with the US whatever the costs in fish. So they are to blame for sure.

The Japanese are likely aware of where at least some of our stock stay over the four years they are in the ocean. If they are, they are fishing them. This could be a big part of the explanation. So they are likely to blame, although if they are they are too clever to admit it.

And then there is El Nino. El Nino disrupts ocean habitats and ocean migrations. That is without doubt playing a part.

Salmon management is also very political. Under pressure from fishing interests, excessively high allowable catches were allowed for a very long time. Bureaucrats and politicians have let themselves be pressured into making decisions that have run down spawning numbers and thus stocks. They are for sure to be blamed.

I haven’t mentioned the scientists. They are the ones that generate the information upon which all harvesting and conservation is based. They have clearly got it wrong consistently and frequently. Just this year they estimated that 4,000,000 salmon would return to the Fraser River. None did. It is hard to be that far off. Many will ask why they can’t get it right.

The inquiry will be public as it should be. All of the claims I have set out will be made with passion. They will equally strongly be rejected by those who won’t or can’t accept their share of the responsibility. Nothing will be done by government until the Commission is finished in the hope that some claims will be rejected and others embraced by the Commission. The salmon will be swimming in treacherous water for some time to come. One hopes enough survive to see the report come out. And when it does, odds are it will sit on the shelf.

Sometimes I think it would be better if 15 or 20 people from all of these groups were locked in a room until they come up with a result that saves the salmon. This would focus them on solving the problem rather than arguing about who is to blame before a costly Commission. Of course come to think of it it would probably only work if I had the key. And come to think of it, I am available.

What is really needed are substantial allocations to First Nations, and an independent, BC located, credible, effective, powerful, informed, science driven management institution with First Nation involvement and all the provincial and federal powers needed to protect, conserve and rebuild and allocate the salmon stocks. That would take a few short months to design and set up. But it isn’t going to happen.

Instead we are going to have a long drawn out blame game and talk fest. This is just going to put off the day of reckoning some more. There is no leadership, no visionary, and no problem solver on the salmon file in BC or Ottawa. Sadly, this is all about politics. And just as sadly, we will get the predicted results.

Fish farms.

The word corruption is one not normally given much credence as an explanation of government behavior in Canada. I have of late written much about the pervasive corruption of the Karzai government in Afghanistan. Now an essay by a reputable economist and analyst has raised the spectre of corruption in the recent behavior of the BC Liberals in setting hydro electricity policy. (See Marvin Shaffer at http://www.policynote.ca/2009/11/03/you-dont-have-to-sell-bc-hydro-to-give-it-away/ ).

This is not to be taken lightly. Shaffer is a careful, thorough researcher highly regarded by experts in the field, including the BC Utilities Commission. There are some extremely sophisticated ways governments can use today to pay off those who have provided support and money to the party in power. Shaffer knows how the hydro power system works. He makes a pretty convincing case that only corruption offers a meaningful explanation of what is happening, or at a minimum that that is where we should look if we are serious about getting an answer.

The government has just announced three highly important moves around hydro power. First it has gotten rid of the top manager at BC Hydro. It is no secret that he and the senior executives of Hydro BC are deeply disturbed by government directives that run contrary to the interests of Hydro and BC citizens. Clearly it was untenable for him to continue in the face of gross government malfeasance.

Second the government has directed that the large, cheap, efficient and clean burning Burrard Thermal generating plant be taken out of the base generating capacity of BC Hydro. This means that Hydro can no longer plan its power development with the Burrard plant as part of its continuing base supply. Because by law, Hydro must have the capacity to supply BC on a continuing basis, Hydro must now find a large new replacement source of power generation. Where is that to come from? The government has directed that Hydro must obtain any new supplies of power from private power producers, therefore, it will come from investors in private power. It is well known that these investors are supporters and close friends of the Liberal Government. It is now clear that they will all at government direction be paid a much higher price than the cost of producing it at Burrard Thermal. BC Hydro eats the loss and power customers must make up the difference in increased power rates. These are the same power producers who helped organize for the Liberals in the last election campaign and who contributed large amounts of money to the campaign. The power deal is the same as a direct transfer of taxpayer money to corporate coffers. If not corrupt, what?

The Government claims that the Burrard power station adds to greenhouse gases. That is a lie, although a somewhat complicated one, as all good lies are. Burrard Thermal uses natural gas, which is one of the cleanest energy sources available. It is very cheap and efficient. True, gas supplies will decline in supply in the future, and so there is an argument for conserving it, but the government will not conserve the gas not burned at Burrard. It will sell it to be burned elsewhere. It aggressively markets BC natural gas in unlimited quantities for shipment to the US and elsewhere, where it is burned. It has no intention of curtailing the overall burning of BC gas to help global warming. Every unit of BC gas not burned at Burrard will be sold cheap to other markets to be burned, with an equal or greater impact on total green house gases. As I explain below, much of it will be sold back to BC in the form of externally generated electricity at much higher gas equivalent prices in the late fall and winter. The claimed benefit in reducing global warming is another of the lies this government has become practiced at telling as a matter or course.

As I said, replacement power capacity will have to be found for Burrard by law. Who in the main will this come from? Surprise, surprise largely from private hydro producers, as set out in the third government directive just issued. Not surprisingly, however this is not quite as the government claims either. Private hydro produces most of its power in the spring and summer when BC already has a surplus of power from Hydro’s already established large Hydro plants. It doesn’t need more power in the spring and summer when the run off is high. But the government is making Hydro buy the power from these producers at inflated prices, even though it will have to turn around and sell it into export markets at much lower spring and summer market prices. Then, in the winter, BC Hydro will have to buy very expensive power from producers in the US. The private hydro producers will make a lot of money, Hydro will lose huge amounts of money on the whole complicated deal, and BC Hydro customers will make up the difference in higher rates. Thus it is that the Liberal Government rewards its supporters with our money. Frankly, it makes sense only if that is its purpose.

Does that sound like corruption to you? You can decide. But the government explanations just don’t add up when subject to scrutiny. If this was happening in India or Pakistan we would be raising no end of questions. Let’s be honest with ourselves. Possible corruption should be named and exposed wherever it appears.

It is a puzzle as to why this has not been exposed in higher profile mainstream media sources. Rafe Mair and the irrepressible Tyee have been doing an admirable job – thank goodness for the new media – but they are a lone voice. Perhaps the government has made it sufficiently complicated that it is very hard for the general journalist to understand. Cut backs in the media have meant that the experts in fields like energy are no longer around. Still, one would hope that the general outlines of what is happening would be enough to cause journalistic outrage.

Or maybe it points to the failure of the professional training of journalists. Perhaps it is time for the return of the muckrackers. That may be the only way the government will be called to account and the truth will be out.