ALF V1

“Canada needs new markets in Asia!”

The Enbridge case for the Northern Gateway pipeline rests on fetching a higher price for bitumen from Asian customers. The argument from Enbridge and their friends in the Harper and Redford governments is that Alberta’s oil is “trapped” in North America, and we can get a higher price from customers in Asia.

Indeed, without the increase in the price of oil, Enbridge’s economic case for the Northern Gateway pipeline evaporates.

Four reasons why the “New Markets” argument from Enbridge and the governments who support them are questionable at best

But will the Northern Gateway pipeline actually deliver what they say?

1. The oil is going to China. Enbridge’s own filings of evidence show the only refineries capable of refining the products Enbridge expects to ship on the Northern Gateway Pipeline are in China. Eventually, Enbridge says some products will go to Taiwan and Korea, but those exports are further into the theoretical future.

2. Bitumen needs to be diluted with something in order to ship it. Bitumen a thick, sticky, tar-like substance that needs lighter fluids added to it in order to make it flow down a pipeline. Enbridge has only today disclosed their forecasts for the cost of condensate and/or diluent – on the first day of the hearing and with little time for the public to examine it. The cost of diluent has a massive effect on the price of oil in North America. Because we don’t know the future market, supply, and cost of condensate and/or diluent, we can’t know whether Enbridge’s claims of a “price uplift” for bitumen are grounded in reality or not.

3. Will the government of China and their state-owned oil companies pay market prices for bitumen? Northern Gateway doesn’t opens up Canadian oil to a “free market” in Asia – it’s a market dominated by China, Russia, and Saudi Arabia – none of whom are free market, open economies like Canada. Making predictions – as Enbridge has done – about what kinds of prices our oil will fetch, and assuming normal “free market” principles, is questionable at best.

4. The question before us is not whether Canada sells petroleum products on the world market. We already do this. The question is what we are selling. Are we selling the product that fetches the lowest price and creates the fewest, most temporary jobs? Or are we refining our oil sands wealth in Canada, and using the resource to build a more sustainable economy?

About the AFL Northern Gateway Reality Check Series

The Alberta Federation of Labour is a full intervener in the Northern Gateway pipeline.

The debate around the Northern Gateway pipeline is heated, and we hear governments and industry saying all kinds of things to justify locking Canada in to being a raw resource producer, but never move up the value chain with our natural resource wealth.

“The Northern Gateway pipeline hollows out our value-added industries, imposes higher oil prices on consumers, and rewrites the rules of Canada’s oil industry by reducing the amount of oil refined in Canada and shipping those jobs to China.”

-          Gil McGowan, President, Alberta Federation of Labour.

Enbridge and their supporters in the Harper and Redford governments like to claim the Northern Gateway pipeline will create thousands of jobs for Canadians.

Those claims don’t stand up to the facts.

The real story on Northern Gateway jobs – 228 permanent jobs

The Northern Gateway pipeline will create only 228 permanent jobs.  For all the millions of dollars worth of oil sands resources flowing out of Canada, we will see just 228 jobs created, most of them in B.C.

Four reasons why Enbridge’s jobs claims don’t hold water (or oil)

1.       Enbridge’s own assessment of construction work is an average of 1,850 jobs per year for three years. Enbridge likes to claim there are 5,536 “person-years” of construction employment on the line with Northern Gateway. That sounds like a lot. But when translated into numbers ordinary people can understand, it’s an average of 1,850 actual jobs per year for just three years. Those jobs are short-lived. They’re only around for three years, and then those workers will be laid off.

2.       The steel pipe needed for the Northern Gateway pipeline won’t likely be made in Canada. Sinopec – China’s state oil company – has already said they would be happy to build the pipeline, and the pipe for Keystone XL was not built in North America. Enbridge’s claims that we’d gain thousands of jobs in steel manufacturing are shaky, at best.

3.       Enbridge likes to claim there will be 63,000 person-years of employment from the Northern Gateway project. If that sounds too good to be true, it likely is. These aren’t real, guaranteed jobs. They’re a guess based on what economists call “induced” effects estimated by trying to count spinoffs. Enbridge came up with these astounding figures, but didn’t release their math to the public.

The real story on jobs – layoffs and closures at Canadian refineries a virtual certainty

The only way the Northern Gateway pipeline makes economic sense for its foreign-owned backers is if the price of bitumen goes up by quite a bit. And this would make refining oil in Canada much more expensive. In fact, Enbridge predicts we will refine less oil in 2018 than we do now. Most of that reduction will be in Western Canada. Refineries will close, and people will lose good-paying, long-term jobs.

A single refinery can employs 2,000 people for a period of 30-40 years. In other words, we could have more employment, for much longer, with real economic benefits, if we refine our oil sands resources in Canada.

An independent assessment of the number of jobs Canada could have – if we upgraded and refined all the bitumen products going down the Northern Gateway pipeline – puts the total amount of employment at 26,000 good jobs going to China.

Enbridge wants Canadians to trade 26,000 good, long-term jobs, along with all the taxes and other spinoffs that come with upgraders and refineries, for 228 permanent pipeline jobs. It’s not a fair trade.

About the AFL Northern Gateway reality check series

 The Alberta Federation of Labour is a full intervener in the Northern Gateway Pipeline hearings.

The debate around the Northern Gateway pipeline is heated, and we hear governments and industry saying all kinds of things to justify locking Canada in to being a raw resource producer, but never move up the value chain with our natural resource wealth.

“The Northern Gateway pipeline hollows out our value-added industries, imposes higher oil prices on consumers, and rewrites the rules of Canada’s oil industry. Gateway will reduce the amount of oil refined in Canada and ship thousands of jobs to China.”

- Gil McGowan, President, Alberta Federation of Labour.

Enbridge’s figures show dramatic drop in Western Canada refinery activity: AFL

EDMONTON – Western Canada’s refineries will lose tens of thousands of barrels of oil per day when the Northern Gateway pipeline is constructed, according to a new analysis released by the Alberta Federation of Labour.

The AFL is before the Joint Review Panel on the Northern Gateway pipeline in Edmonton. AFL President Gil McGowan says Western Canadian refineries – most of which are in Alberta – are in for a massive drop in throughput due to the Northern Gateway pipeline.

“The drop in refinery activity will mean thousands of jobs lost,” says Gil McGowan, President of the Alberta Federation of Labour, which represents 150,000 working Albertans, including 25,000 in the energy sector and energy-related construction.

“This pipeline will ship our raw resources to refineries in China. It will raise the price of bitumen and permanently undermine our ability to refine oil sands in Canada,” says McGowan. “It will hollow out our refining industry and impose higher costs on our refineries, and ultimately, Canadian consumers.”

The AFL report examined Enbridge’s predictions for refinery throughput, as contained in their evidence before the Northern Gateway Joint Review Panel.  Most of the losses in refinery throughput are likely to be in Western Canada. Western Canada is forecast, by Enbridge, to shed 46,000 barrels per day in refinery throughput. 

Job loss estimates were modeled using a recent report by the Conference Board of Canada. A 5 per cent reduction in refinery throughput results in approximately 8,000 jobs lost.

The full AFL report, released as the Edmonton hearings on the economic impact of the Northern Gateway pipeline, can be found here.

-30-

MEDIA CONTACT: 

Gil McGowan, President Alberta Federation of Labour at 780-218-9888 (cell) or 780-483-3021 (office)

Enbridge Inc. will face tough questions from intervenors at the Northern Gateway Joint Review Panel's hearing in Edmonton this afternoon.

Among them are the Government of BC, the Alberta Federation of Labour, Ecojustice (representing ForestEthics Advocacy, Living Oceans Society and Raincoast Conservation Foundation) and various First Nations communities.

The proposed Northern Gateway pipeline involves constructing two pipelines approximately 1,170 km long carrying up to 525,000 barrels per day of diluted bitumen (dilbit) from Bruderheim, AB to Kitimat, BC. The other pipeline would carry 193,000 barrels of condensate per day east to Bruderheim.

Questions will center around issues such as the economic need for the Project, the potential impacts of the proposed Project on commercial interests and financial and tolling matters, according to a release.

The proceedings are being webcast live from 2 pm to 6 pm Mountain (MT), 1 pm-5 pm Pacific Standard (PST). Note: full transcripts are also available after the hearing at the official Joint Review Panel site hearings page.

17:58: Committee closes; will reconvene tomorrow morning at 09:30 MT.

17:57: Chahley: I can't believe how fast times goes when we're looking at these figures.

17:55: Five minutes remaining-- Chahley is asking detailed questions about figures used in the economic tables.

17:49: Now Chahley is fact-checking year-by-year the export numbers...

17:44: Riffling of pages as Chahley hones in on specific economic numbers on report.

17:38: Chahley confirms that those 17 additional modules are not listed. Mansell confirms.

17:37: Chahley asks where in the report Mansell lists these 17 modules. Mansell points to a brief note on page 37.

17:35: Mansell explains that his unique economic model is a framework that has input/output model at its center. It has 17 modules for oil sands, conventional oil and gas, electrical sources, demographic changes, population aging, migration. He has based his modelling on the Alberta economy, and applied nationally over time.

17:34: Chahley asks what else Mansell adjusted for, in addition to labour productivity. Mansell said loyalties are one factor. He flips through his reports for more factors.

17:34: Mansell says that labour productivity changes over time, otherwise there's an overestimate of employment impact.

17:33: Chahley is asking whether the modelling used is static, Mansell insists it's dynamic. Mansell said that "it's much more than simple application of static framework."

17:31: Now Mansell is talking about "varying impact year by year."

17:30: Chahley and Mansell do not seem to be on the same page on the economic modelling factors used to determine the economic impact of the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline.

17:23: Chahley asks further questions on economic impacts of pipeline year by year.

17:15: Chahley now referring to specific models listed in reports by expert witnesses.

17:11: Chahley: this panel has to look at the best interests of Canadians, and need to look at short, mid and long term impact of pipeline-- that's why she says she's spending so much time focusing on that aspect.

17:10: Pipeline is a long term investment-- 30 years is the approximate timeline for looking at economic modeling. (one of the expert witnesses)

17:06: Chahley gets blunt- says when you spend $5.5 billion on a pipeline, that's a shock to the economy, is it good or bad? Questions directly Mansell's economic modelling which shows the pipeline would be a positive gain for the Canadian economy.

17:02: Chahley still grilling Mansell about oil prices and productivity.

16:53: JRP back in session. Chahley dives right back into specific methodologies used in reports by Mansell.

16:39: Break called.

16:17: Chahley keeps pressing on whether refining crude oil is out of the question. Mansell denies it's out of the question.

16:09: Detailed questions about condensate prices (increase/decrease).

16:06: Confirmed (not clear who by the webcast).

16:05: Chahley asks whether Enbridge knows what Asian countries will do with condensate oil once it arrives.

16:00 Carruthers: Going into details of types of oil that can be used to move it through the pipeline system.

15:57: Chahley: Some of it is dilbit, some of it is synbit, how much of each will go through pipes will be determined by how much can be transported by rail, correct?

15:55: Chahley honing in on what specific types of dilbit and synbit will flow through the pipelines.

15:53: Carruthers: confirms that pipelines carry dilbit and synbit (50/50 blend of bitumen and synthetic crude oil).

15:51: Chahley now looking up shipment figures.

15:49: Priddle: Reminds Chahley that systems built as crude oil pipelines are now carrying several grades of crude oil and refined oil products.

15:48: Chahley: The problem with this pipeline is shipping away unproccessed resources if they were processed in Canada it would keep jobs in Canada.

15:40: Earnest won't answer that question.

15:39: Chahley: Enbridge's interests are for corporate bottom line, not for public interest. Asks whether expert witnesses whether they can agree on that.

15:34: Earnest still not answering clearly. Fischer said Enbridge has committed "substantial" amount of money-- close to $130 million to do an "analysis" of economic benefits.

15:29: Earnest dodges Chahley's questions about the economic benefits of the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline.

15:24: Chahley is going to question mostly about economic benefits of the pipeline.

15:19: Chahley asks whether Northern Gateway and the expert witnesses will accept that between 89 and 89 per cent of the benefits arrives is due to projected increase in oil prices?

15:17: Leanne Chahley from Alberta Federation of Labour begins presentation.

15:16: JRP back in session.

15:05: Alberta Federation of Labour requests five minute break.

15:04: Witnesses now available for questioning.

15:03: Carruthers: Northern Gateway should get approval, while addressing 'remaining concerns.'

14:59: Carruthers: Northern Gateway recognizes the importance of questions re: the Michigan oil spill.

14:55: Carruthers: "Create a framework that puts reconciliation over division, fact over rhetoric..."

14:55: Curruthers: Has taken note of concerns particularly in British Columbia. Starting today Enbridge will respond. It will through witness panel do their best through Joint Review Panel to demonstrate economic benefits as well as addressing concerns.

14:48: Curruthers confirms he is President of Enbridge Northern Gateway.

14:43: Going now into specifics of changes in reports authored by witnesses. None of the changes have a significant impact on their findings.

16:34: Further detailed questioning prices of crude oil.

14:54: Curruthers: Majority of those who have appeared before the panel have argued that projects should be refused.

14:53: Curruthers: compares Enbridge to Canadian National Railway.

14:52: Panel accepts witnesses as experts in these fields.

14:51: Moderator asks witnesses to be qualified as expert witnesses to the Board:

Mansell: expert on economics

Earnest: expert on petroleum refining and transportaion

Priddle: expert in enegry policy and regulations of pipelines on the National Energy Board

14:38: Now going into specific appendices on reports, going through each witness.

14:32: Continuing to confirm who wrote what report, and to confirm all evidence in reports as accurate.

14:30: Correction of minor errors on report.

14:25: Swearing in of expert witnesses, who wrote reports on Enbridge Northern Gateway: Dr.J. Ruitenbeek, Mr.Mark Anielski, Dr. Robert Mansell, John William Carruthers (president of Enbridge Northern Gateway), Paul William Fischer, Neil Earnest, Roland Priddle. Also present near the panel (not witnesses) Dr.Peter Eglington Mr.Murray Fraser, Drew Armstrong.

14:20: Panel moderator announces that members of the Joint Review Panel are not available for media interviews during breaks or after the hearing.

14:14: Reading of various intervenors and questioners.

14:00: Mountain Time (MT)- The hearing in Edmonton, AB begins.

Vancouver Observer, Tuesday September 4, 2012

Byline: Beth Hong (live blog)

Two-Tier Minimum Wage

• lberta's poorly written two-tier minimum wage system is open to abuse by employers who are taking advantage of these laws to rip off the lowest-paid workers in Alberta. West End Swiss Chalet is one example. For more information see Aug 31 AFL release and backgrounder

AFL's 100 Years

• sure to have a look at our insert in the Edmonton Journal on Friday, August 31, 2012 – a special Labour Day message from Gil McGowan and a 10 page special on the past and present struggles of workers in Alberta.

Government trying to erase agricultural workers by no longer reporting farm fatalities

• The Alberta government's decision to stop reporting farm fatalities is an attempt to move the issue to the back burner and off the public radar. Farm workers are already left unprotected under health and safety regulations. For more information see Aug 20 AFL release.

Government documents reveal source of Harper's low-wage agenda

• nternal federal government documents show the source of Harper's low-wage agenda. Last year, a select group of CEOs and other business leaders were invited by the federal Conservatives to an annual closed-doors conference where they urged the Tories to adopt measures to reduce the pay of Canadian workers, limit union power by enacting U.S.-style right-to-work legislation, and allow two-tier health care. For more information...

 AFL shows government using bogus labour-shortage figures

• The government is using bizarre calculations to show a catastrophic "labour shortage" even though their own figures show a labour surplus for every year until 2021. The AFL revealed that the government's own figures show the supply of labour exceeding the demand for labour – a labour surplus – well into the future. For more information see July 25 AFL release and backgrounder

New Study shows billions in lost royalty revenue after Northern Gateway

• he Alberta Federation of Labour (AFL) and Parkland Institute released a study showing Albertans will let billions slip through their fingers if the Northern Gateway Pipeline is approved and constructed. If Alberta met royalty targets in place when Lougheed was Premier, the province would have $1 trillion in the Heritage Fund by 2039. For more information... see Aug 9 AFL release and backgrounder

Statement from Gil McGowan on the proposed takeover of Nexen by the China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC)

• Does it matter who owns the oil sands? You bet it does!" explains AFL president Gil McGowan. "If foreign governments are allowed to expand in Alberta through companies like China National, they'll develop the oil sands in their own best interest, not in the best interest of Canadians." For more information...July 24 AFL release

Urgent Action

---

UFCW 1118 workers on strike for fair wages and working conditions

• FCW 1118 sisters and brothers at Lilydale Foods' North Edmonton shop are on strike for wages comparable to those in other Lilydale plants. The employer refuses to pay wages on par with other Lilydale plants despite the fact that these workers work harder by handling larger and heavier poultry. The employer has cut the number of workers on the floor, meaning those left on the floor have to work harder while their wages have remained the same. Workers are also asking for a guaranteed minimum number of hours per week. There are about 200 workers on strike in shifts of about 75. Support these workers on the picket line at 127 Avenue and 76 Street in Edmonton. Pickets will be going in shifts between Monday and Friday, 6:00 AM and 6:30 PM.

Events

---

September2:Calgary Pride Parade

September 3: EDLC Labour Day BBQ

September 3: Labour Day

September 5: Official Opening Historical Display, Alberta Provincial Museum

September 7: AFL Education Committee

September 8: World Literacy Day

September 10: AFL Women's Committee

September 11: AFL WOCAW Committee

October 1: AFL Pride and Solidarity Committee

October 2-3: AFL Executive Council

October 8: Thanksgiving

October  14-17: CEP National Convention

October 17: National Day for the Eradication of Poverty

October 18: Persons Day

November 23-25: Parkland Fall Conference

January 14-19, 2013: AFL Weeklong School

After a bumpy ride this summer, Enbridge will face a tough grilling this week on its $6 billion Northern Gateway project as public hearings enter their final phase in which interveners can challenge the company's evidence.

Enbridge will square off with unions and First Nations while big oilsands players, including MEG Energy, Cenovus, Suncor, Nexen and Total appear in a joint witness panel. The Alberta government is also prepared to appear for the "questioning" phase of the federal Joint Review Panel hearings to examine the economic benefits of the proposed $6-billion pipeline project to carry Alberta bitumen to Kitimat on the coast of British Columbia for export to China.

Critics like the Alberta Federation of Labour will argue Canada's refining industry will shrink — with a loss of 8,000 jobs expected — if the pipeline project goes ahead and diverts bitumen feedstock to China. Opponents will also argue there is plenty of room in existing pipelines to handle growing bitumen exports.

Enbridge, however, is " very confident" going into the hearings as it will finally have a chance to respond to critics, says spokesperson Ivan Giesbrecht, noting the company will speak Tuesday.

"This is our first chance to speak; it's going to be a rigorous questioning and we welcome that," Giesbrecht said. "We really feel the project will benefit both provinces and Canada. It's an opportunity for Canadians to listen in on a very democratic process."

Enbridge is also required, by noon Tuesday, to submit a highly critical U.S. report on the 2010 Michigan pipeline spill that saw 12,000 barrels of heavy oil spill into Kalamazoo River from its pipeline. Initially, the federal review panel said it would not take the report, but reversed its decision mid-August.

Enbridge's project — twin pipelines, with one to carry 585,000 barrels of diluted bitumen west and another to carry the diluent — faced growing resistance, starting in late July when B.C. Premier Christy Clark raised the stakes. Her province will not approve the pipeline unless B.C. gets a share of the increased revenues Alberta will gain from shipping more bitumen, she said.

With the project stuck in political hot water, B.C. newspaper tycoon David Black stepped in with a proposal for a $13-billion refinery in Kitimat as a way to bring economic benefit to the province. The oilpatch was not keen on the idea.

Meanwhile, Enbridge came under fire for a smaller spill in late July in Wisconsin. It also hit rough water when it posted a map of the Douglas Channel route into the Kitimat port that left out many islands, rocks and narrow channels that make the route particularly difficult to navigate. Around the same time, the company also announced $500 million in improvements to pipeline safety for the Northern Gateway pipelines which start in Bruderheim northeast of Edmonton. Those include increasing the thickness of the line by 20 per cent, adding 50 per cent more shut-off valves and increasing inspections by 50 per cent.

Company officials said such improvements are meant to respond to concerns raised by First Nations and other members of the public during a federal review that started six months ago.

The federal review panel is jointly operated by the National Energy Board and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency.

The Alberta government remains firmly committed to the project to diversify markets for bitumen, said Tim Markle, spokesman for Alberta Energy. Oilsands producers will only get higher world prices when they have access to Asian markets, said Markle, noting the price differential is up to $20 a barrel.

The province will be represented at the hearings by Christopher Holly from Alberta Energy and Skip York of Wood Mackenzie Consulting, the consulting company which predicted the province will lose $72 billion over nine years if the pipeline is not built.

Gil McGowan, leader of the Alberta Federation of Labour, disputes the province's figures.

"We think this project will kill more jobs than it will create," said McGowan, noting that Enbridge's own figures estimate a four-per-cent reduction in refining capacity by 2018 in Canada as a result of the pipeline.

"This isn't just about losing value-added jobs in the future, it's now becoming clear that existing jobs in the refining sector are also threatened," McGowan said.

He said "we will be raising questions" that there is no agreement in the evidence of the proposed pipeline's impact on refining jobs in Alberta.

Oilsands producers will get higher prices for their product in Asia, but that will only be temporary, McGowan said, noting that China's industry is state-run so there is no real market pricing.

In a report for Forest Ethics Advocacy, David Hughes, a former geologist with the federal government, says the price differential will be eliminated when the glut at Cushing, Oklahoma in the U.S. Midwest is relieved.

"Once it gets to the Gulf coast, the oil can go around the world and they will be forced to pay world price and that's important," said Hughes, adding that could eliminate the need for the Northern Gateway.

Meanwhile, Canadians should talk about whether "we should liquidate our energy resources to sovereign countries like China" or look at longer-term strategies for national energy security, he added.

The hearings begin Tuesday at 2 p.m. at the Holiday Inn at 4485 Gateway Blvd. They run until Saturday Sept. 9, then resume again Sept. 17 at 9:30 a.m. for ten days at the Westwood Inn at 18035 Stony Plain Road.

In November, hearings continue in Prince George to deal with pipeline safety and later in Prince Rupert to deal with marine issues.

Last week, just days before the hearing, Enbridge received approval from the Energy Resources Conservation Board Alberta for a new 400,000-barrel-a-day pipeline to bring bitumen from Fort McMurray to its Edmonton hub. The company says the new Woodland pipeline project is not connected to the Northern Gateway.

Edmonton Journal, Tuesday September 4, 2012
Byline: Sheila Spratt

Compares pipeline to Canadian Pacific Railway and the St. Laurence Seaway

Enbridge has told the National Energy Board that the company's $6-billion plan to build a pipeline from the Alberta oilsands to the B.C. coast is similar to other massive industrial projects in Canada's history.

Speaking at a hearing in Edmonton Tuesday, John Carruthers, president of Enbridge's Northern Gateway Pipelines division, compared the project to the Canadian Pacific Railway and the St. Lawrence Seaway, which he says were controversial but ended up benefiting the country.

"Our project is no different," Carruthers told the three-member panel.

"There is a path forward that will ... provide a significant improved quality of life for all Canadians, including Aboriginal Canadians, while protecting the environment."

Calgary-based Enbridge Inc. wants to build the $6-billion pipeline to transport raw bitumen from the oilsands to Kitimat, B.C., where it can then be shipped to Asian markets.

The project has met with widespread opposition in British Columbia, particularly among environmentalists and First Nations people who worry about the potential damage to inland and coastal areas that would be caused by a pipeline leak.

Many opponents have pointed to damage done when a 2010 spill from an Enbridge pipeline damaged waterways and wetlands near Marshall, Mich., and cost $800 million to clean up.

Carruthers directly referenced the Marshall spill in his opening remarks, saying that the company had made improvements to the safety of its pipelines.

"Canadians have asked why, and how that event happened," he said. "Northern Gateway understands the importance of those questions and will answer them as this hearing proceeds."

Labour group questions Enbridge numbers

The Alberta Federation of Labour spent the afternoon questioning Enbridge's experts. The group, which represents organized labour in Alberta, plans to argue that the project is not in the public's interest because it will send refining jobs out of the province.

There is also political opposition to the project. B.C. Premier Christy Clark sparked a battle with her Alberta counterpart, Alison Redford, when she announced that British Columbia would not approve the project unless conditions, including a larger share of royalties, were met.

Two weeks have been set aside for the Edmonton portion of the hearings. The panel will move on to Prince George in October and Prince Rupert in November and December.

Final arguments will be presented to the panel next spring, which must make a recommendation by the end of 2013.

Ottawa is expected to make a decision with six months of the panel's review.

CBC News, Tuesday, September 4, 2012 

Compares pipeline to Canadian Pacific Railway and the St. Lawrence Seaway

Enbridge has told the National Energy Board that the company's $6-billion plan to build a pipeline from the Alberta oilsands to the B.C. coast is similar to other massive industrial projects in Canada's history.

Speaking at a hearing in Edmonton Tuesday, John Carruthers, president of Enbridge's Northern Gateway Pipelines division, compared the project to the Canadian Pacific Railway and the St. Lawrence Seaway, which he says were controversial but ended up benefiting the country.

"Our project is no different," Carruthers told the three-member panel.

"There is a path forward that will ... provide a significant improved quality of life for all Canadians, including Aboriginal Canadians, while protecting the environment."

Calgary-based Enbridge Inc. wants to build the $6-billion pipeline to transport raw bitumen from the oilsands to Kitimat, B.C., where it can then be shipped to Asian markets.

The project has met with widespread opposition in British Columbia, particularly among environmentalists and First Nations people who worry about the potential damage to inland and coastal areas that would be caused by a pipeline leak.

Many opponents have pointed to damage done when a 2010 spill from an Enbridge pipeline damaged waterways and wetlands near Marshall, Mich., and cost $800 million to clean up.

Carruthers directly referenced the Marshall spill in his opening remarks, saying that the company had made improvements to the safety of its pipelines.

"Canadians have asked why, and how that event happened," he said. "Northern Gateway understands the importance of those questions and will answer them as this hearing proceeds."

Labour group questions Enbridge numbers

The Alberta Federation of Labour spent the afternoon questioning Enbridge's experts. The group, which represents organized labour in Alberta, plans to argue that the project is not in the public's interest because it will send refining jobs out of the province.

There is also political opposition to the project. B.C. Premier Christy Clark sparked a battle with her Alberta counterpart, Alison Redford, when she announced that British Columbia would not approve the project unless conditions, including a larger share of royalties, were met.

Two weeks have been set aside for the Edmonton portion of the hearings. The panel will move on to Prince George in October and Prince Rupert in November and December.

Final arguments will be presented to the panel next spring, which must make a recommendation by the end of 2013.

Ottawa is expected to make a decision with six months of the panel's review.

CBC News, Tuesday Sept 4 2012

This Labour Day, working Albertans have a lot to be thankful for. We have the highest wages, the best job prospects and the highest standard of living in Canada.

Life here in the land of oil is pretty good.

But before we get too comfortable, it's important to recognize that not everyone is pleased with how well working people are doing.

In fact, recently disclosed documents show that some of our country's most influential chief executives are asking the federal Conservative government to help them suppress wages.

This revelation comes from a Department of Finance briefing note that summarizes an economic policy retreat organized by Finance Minister Jim Flaherty last summer.

The retreat was attended by a long list of business leaders and representatives from right-wing think-tanks - all eager to advise members of the Harper Conservatives on how they should use their majority in Parliament.

The business audience told Flaherty that Canadian workers are overpriced and that Canada could only become truly competitive if the government addressed the "wage differential in labour markets between countries."

In order to drive down wages, participants pushed for American-style anti-union labour laws. They also called for deep cuts to public services and two-tiered health care - while asking for even more corporate tax cuts.

There are reasons why working Canadians should be concerned about this meeting.

First, there is no evidence that the government challenged the notion that Canadians are overpaid.

This is troubling because, after adjusting for inflation, wages for average Canadian workers have stagnated over the past 30 years, while corporate profits and incomes for the wealthy have increased. Even here in prosperous Alberta, nearly a quarter of all working people earn $15 an hour or less, not nearly enough for a decent home in Edmonton or Calgary.

Second, Canadians should be concerned because the wage suppression wish list outlined by business leaders has quietly, but clearly, become a central part the federal government's low-wage agenda. How else can we interpret the Harper government's decision to allow employers to use more temporary foreign workers and to pay them as much as 15 per cent less than Canadians?

Or rule changes that force many unemployed Canadians to take any available work even if it pays up to 30 per cent less than their previous job?

There's also the Harper government's decision to raise the retirement age to 67 and its ongoing attacks on unions designed to undermine the ability of workers to have a say in their own wages and working conditions.

Finally, working people should be concerned that Flaherty's secret meeting with business leaders is not an isolated case. The truth is that business leaders and groups like Merit Contractors (representing non-union construction companies) have ramped up their lobbying across Canada. With the most ideologically conservative prime minister in Canadian history leading a majority government, they see this as their political moment.

Some people may shrug and say "who needs unions anyway?"

But as Nobel-Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman has said, unions are the only counterbalance we have to unbridled corporate power. They provide one of the only mechanisms we have to build and maintain a vibrant middle class.

So as working Albertans enjoy the Labour Day long weekend, it's important for them to understand that a battle rages around them.

Will the low-wage advocates who attended Flaherty's private policy summit win the day?

Or will Canadians reassert a traditional, progressive approach - fair taxation, investment in quality education and infrastructure, and policies that see unions as vital partners in the economy?

For the sake of Canada's middle class, let's hope that the high road vision prevails. Because if it doesn't, more of us may end up flipping burgers at McDonald's on Labour Day instead of flipping burgers at the lake.

Gil McGowan is president of the Alberta Federation of Labour

The Edmonton Journal, Mon Sept 3 2012
Byline: Gil McGowan

After a bumpy ride this summer, Enbridge will face a tough grilling this week on its $6 billion Northern Gateway project as public hearings enter their final phase in which interveners can challenge the company's evidence.

Enbridge will square off with unions and First Nations while big oilsands players, including MEG Energy, Cenovus, Suncor, Nexen and Total appear in a joint witness panel. The Alberta government is also prepared to appear for the "questioning" phase of the federal Joint Review Panel hearings to examine the economic benefits of the proposed $6-billion pipeline project to carry Alberta bitumen to Kitimat on the coast of British Columbia for export to China.

Critics like the Alberta Federation of Labour will argue Canada's refining industry will shrink — with a loss of 8,000 jobs expected — if the pipeline project goes ahead and diverts bitumen feedstock to China. Opponents will also argue there is plenty of room in existing pipelines to handle growing bitumen exports.

Enbridge, however, is " very confident" going into the hearings as it will finally have a chance to respond to critics, says spokesperson Ivan Giesbrecht, noting the company will speak Tuesday.

"This is our first chance to speak; it's going to be a rigorous questioning and we welcome that," Giesbrecht said. "We really feel the project will benefit both provinces and Canada. It's an opportunity for Canadians to listen in on a very democratic process."

Enbridge is also required, by noon Tuesday, to submit a highly critical U.S. report on the 2010 Michigan pipeline spill that saw 12,000 barrels of heavy oil spill into Kalamazoo River from its pipeline. Initially, the federal review panel said it would not take the report, but reversed its decision mid-August.

Enbridge's project — twin pipelines, with one to carry 585,000 barrels of diluted bitumen west and another to carry the diluent — faced growing resistance, starting in late July when B.C. Premier Christy Clark raised the stakes. Her province will not approve the pipeline unless B.C. gets a share of the increased revenues Alberta will gain from shipping more bitumen, she said.

With the project stuck in political hot water, B.C. newspaper tycoon David Black stepped in with a proposal for a $13-billion refinery in Kitimat as a way to bring economic benefit to the province. The oilpatch was not keen on the idea.

Meanwhile, Enbridge came under fire for a smaller spill in late July in Wisconsin. It also hit rough water when it posted a map of the Douglas Channel route into the Kitimat port that left out many islands, rocks and narrow channels that make the route particularly difficult to navigate. Around the same time, the company also announced $500 million in improvements to pipeline safety for the Northern Gateway pipelines which start in Bruderheim northeast of Edmonton. Those include increasing the thickness of the line by 20 per cent, adding 50 per cent more shut-off valves and increasing inspections by 50 per cent.

Company officials said such improvements are meant to respond to concerns raised by First Nations and other members of the public during a federal review that started six months ago.

The federal review panel is jointly operated by the National Energy Board and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency.

The Alberta government remains firmly committed to the project to diversify markets for bitumen, said Tim Markle, spokesman for Alberta Energy. Oilsands producers will only get higher world prices when they have access to Asian markets, said Markle, noting the price differential is up to $20 a barrel.

The province will be represented at the hearings by Christopher Holly from Alberta Energy and Skip York of Wood Mackenzie Consulting, the consulting company which predicted the province will lose $72 billion over nine years if the pipeline is not built.

Gil McGowan, leader of the Alberta Federation of Labour, disputes the province's figures.

"We think this project will kill more jobs than it will create," said McGowan, noting that Enbridge's own figures estimate a four-per-cent reduction in refining capacity by 2018 in Canada as a result of the pipeline.

"This isn't just about losing value-added jobs in the future, it's now becoming clear that existing jobs in the refining sector are also threatened," McGowan said.

He said "we will be raising questions" that there is no agreement in the evidence of the proposed pipeline's impact on refining jobs in Alberta.

Oilsands producers will get higher prices for their product in Asia, but that will only be temporary, McGowan said, noting that China's industry is state-run so there is no real market pricing.

In a report for Forest Ethics Advocacy, David Hughes, a former geologist with the federal government, says the price differential will be eliminated when the glut at Cushing, Oklahoma in the U.S. Midwest is relieved.

"Once it gets to the Gulf coast, the oil can go around the world and they will be forced to pay world price and that's important," said Hughes, adding that could eliminate the need for the Northern Gateway.

Meanwhile, Canadians should talk about whether "we should liquidate our energy resources to sovereign countries like China" or look at longer-term strategies for national energy security, he added.

The hearings begin Tuesday at 2 p.m. at the Holiday Inn at 4485 Gateway Blvd. They run until Saturday Sept. 9, then resume again Sept. 17 at 9:30 a.m. for ten days at the Westwood Inn at 18035 Stony Plain Road.

In November, hearings continue in Prince George to deal with pipeline safety and later in Prince Rupert to deal with marine issues.

Last week, just days before the hearing, Enbridge received approval from the Energy Resources Conservation Board Alberta for a new 400,000-barrel-a-day pipeline to bring bitumen from Fort McMurray to its Edmonton hub. The company says the new Woodland pipeline project is not connected to the Northern Gateway.

Global News, Monday September 3 2012