It was good of Minister Wilkinson to do the interview. I found however many of his messages were at odds with my recollection and view of the Liberal government’s performance over the Trudeau years. For example, looking at pipelines, under the previous Conservative government there were a number of pipeline projects that were approved including the Enbridge Alberta Clipper project. Under the Liberal, Energy East was cancelled on Oct 5, 2017 because at the 11th hour the Liberal government changed the assessment requirements to include significant new ones including downstream greenhouse gas emissions assessments. It was clear, based on political calculations, that the Liberals would have had a fight with Quebec if they were to have allowed that line to be built to supply Quebec and the Maritimes with oil and refined products. So they changed the goal posts to remove any certainty of approval. I’m sure the proponents decided to not put more money into a losing proposition. TransMountain’s approval was overturned by the Federal Court on August 30, 2018 because the Federal government had failed to consult adequately with aboriginal groups and to include potential offshore environmental effects on killer whales. It was no surprise that the federal government ended up announcing the purchase of Trans mountain on August 31, 2018. What a coincidence. My guess is the Liberals figured having squashed Energy East, they would have had major political issues in western Canada if they failed again with pipelines. And then there’s the famous “no business case for east coast LNG” statement made by Mr. Trudeau.
I find it incredible that Liberal Ministers are trying to say now they were supportive of energy development when they clearly have been otherwise.
I forgot Northern Gateway - similar issues and federal response to Energy East in addition to banning tankers off the west coast.
Pivot? Hypocrisy is not too strong a word to describe the Liberals (every last one)180 to valuing Canadian resources and believing there is a "business case" for them. The only thing they value and that is their political hides. Anyone who thinks Carney can save Canada needs to read his economic plan and follow his ideology (net zero). I guess his focus on the brass ring is stronger than that what he was taught at Oxford.
Boy, the reincarnation of Jonathan Wilkinson as CD Howe is very hard to swallow. For the last ten years Wilkinson has sneeringly obstructed development of Canada's resource sector. And we're now supposed to believe he will be our economic saviour? Puh-leeze.
Enjoyed the interview Paul.... but.... a bit of revisionist history going on by Mr Wilkinson.
Kinder Morgan walked away from the project because they saw the writing on the wall. BC and Ottawa were both opposed to the plan, the Liberals had already cancelled energy East and the Northern Gateway, so as a few others have already noted the hypocrisy of Wilkinson in "Championing" the trans mountain project is pretty rich.
Marc Carney, I believe is the same kind of climate zealot as Stephen Guilbeault, and if the Canadian public were to re-elect a Liberal government, this country would be in a whole lot of hurt, as the goose that lays the golden egg would be further decimated.
In other words Paul, I don't believe Mr Wilkinson, or Mr Carney or any other Liberal who would champion any fossil fuel development. The track record of the Liberal party for the last 9 years is a very clear indication of what they see for the future of Canada.
My hope is that the media (yourself included) will push back every time that the Liberals "champion" the trans mountain pipeline.
You let him off the hook for his revisionist history. Is there any chance that the LPC got TMX built using our tax dollars because 50% of our oil exports are to China much from Chinese oil sands companies CNOOC, PetroChina and Sinopec? When Japan (among others) offered to INVEST in LNG facilities we told them to pound salt.
Wilkinson speaks like a Laurentian elite. He is yesterday's man and deep into the Trudeau/Liberal cabal. He is speaking of nothing brave or contentious. How many times did he say that he does not support Energy East? He is an activist, rather under the talk but you can niggle it out in this discussion. Would not trust him at all.
That was a wonderful interview. I am significantly more informed on Canada’s energy activities. Hopefully, we remain sovereign and make the correct decisions going forward.
Thanks for the interview, Paul. He sounded, for better or worse, how I remember most governing politicians sounded twenty or thirty years ago. Actual use of nouns and verbs about specific things.
That being said there was the usual sucking and blowing at the same time.
Over the current Trudeau years (calling it the Trudeau regime is way more fun) I don't recall natural resources being front and centre at all unless cast in terms involving indigenous peoples.
Mr. Wilkinson seemed unable to say that the goal is to increase the number of BTUs shipped world-wide as this runs contrary to all the PMO messaging calibrated to the progressive flank. I don't think Mr. Guilbeault will sit next to Mr. Guilbeault in the Parliament Hill canteen with such heresys.
I suspect the PMO knows Canada can only pay for entitlements if it can make money. Don't tell the urban base. (Picture governing MPs having sweaty, arousing dreams of Norwegian style sovereign wealth funds. Thank you North Sea oil!)
Liberals can turn on a dime when it is in their favour, unfortunately they are out of favours at this point. 9 years of No Oil and Gas and all of a sudden they had a revelation.
It was good of Minister Wilkinson to do the interview. I found however many of his messages were at odds with my recollection and view of the Liberal government’s performance over the Trudeau years. For example, looking at pipelines, under the previous Conservative government there were a number of pipeline projects that were approved including the Enbridge Alberta Clipper project. Under the Liberal, Energy East was cancelled on Oct 5, 2017 because at the 11th hour the Liberal government changed the assessment requirements to include significant new ones including downstream greenhouse gas emissions assessments. It was clear, based on political calculations, that the Liberals would have had a fight with Quebec if they were to have allowed that line to be built to supply Quebec and the Maritimes with oil and refined products. So they changed the goal posts to remove any certainty of approval. I’m sure the proponents decided to not put more money into a losing proposition. TransMountain’s approval was overturned by the Federal Court on August 30, 2018 because the Federal government had failed to consult adequately with aboriginal groups and to include potential offshore environmental effects on killer whales. It was no surprise that the federal government ended up announcing the purchase of Trans mountain on August 31, 2018. What a coincidence. My guess is the Liberals figured having squashed Energy East, they would have had major political issues in western Canada if they failed again with pipelines. And then there’s the famous “no business case for east coast LNG” statement made by Mr. Trudeau.
I find it incredible that Liberal Ministers are trying to say now they were supportive of energy development when they clearly have been otherwise.
I forgot Northern Gateway - similar issues and federal response to Energy East in addition to banning tankers off the west coast.
Pivot? Hypocrisy is not too strong a word to describe the Liberals (every last one)180 to valuing Canadian resources and believing there is a "business case" for them. The only thing they value and that is their political hides. Anyone who thinks Carney can save Canada needs to read his economic plan and follow his ideology (net zero). I guess his focus on the brass ring is stronger than that what he was taught at Oxford.
Amen. No one should believe that the Liberals have suddenly found Jesus.
Lots of ’reflecting’ and ‘conversations’. You’d swear the Liberals were champions of resource development.
A great example of gaslighting.
Boy, the reincarnation of Jonathan Wilkinson as CD Howe is very hard to swallow. For the last ten years Wilkinson has sneeringly obstructed development of Canada's resource sector. And we're now supposed to believe he will be our economic saviour? Puh-leeze.
Enjoyed the interview Paul.... but.... a bit of revisionist history going on by Mr Wilkinson.
Kinder Morgan walked away from the project because they saw the writing on the wall. BC and Ottawa were both opposed to the plan, the Liberals had already cancelled energy East and the Northern Gateway, so as a few others have already noted the hypocrisy of Wilkinson in "Championing" the trans mountain project is pretty rich.
Marc Carney, I believe is the same kind of climate zealot as Stephen Guilbeault, and if the Canadian public were to re-elect a Liberal government, this country would be in a whole lot of hurt, as the goose that lays the golden egg would be further decimated.
In other words Paul, I don't believe Mr Wilkinson, or Mr Carney or any other Liberal who would champion any fossil fuel development. The track record of the Liberal party for the last 9 years is a very clear indication of what they see for the future of Canada.
My hope is that the media (yourself included) will push back every time that the Liberals "champion" the trans mountain pipeline.
You let him off the hook for his revisionist history. Is there any chance that the LPC got TMX built using our tax dollars because 50% of our oil exports are to China much from Chinese oil sands companies CNOOC, PetroChina and Sinopec? When Japan (among others) offered to INVEST in LNG facilities we told them to pound salt.
https://www.biv.com/news/resources-agriculture/china-accounted-for-50-of-oil-exports-via-vancouver-in-2024-china-institute-10190694
Paul,
Sounds to me like the Liberal Government has a lot of "reflecting" to do.
Not sure that's what Canadians are looking for.
Val
Wilkinson speaks like a Laurentian elite. He is yesterday's man and deep into the Trudeau/Liberal cabal. He is speaking of nothing brave or contentious. How many times did he say that he does not support Energy East? He is an activist, rather under the talk but you can niggle it out in this discussion. Would not trust him at all.
Paul.
That was a wonderful interview. I am significantly more informed on Canada’s energy activities. Hopefully, we remain sovereign and make the correct decisions going forward.
Thanks for the interview, Paul. He sounded, for better or worse, how I remember most governing politicians sounded twenty or thirty years ago. Actual use of nouns and verbs about specific things.
That being said there was the usual sucking and blowing at the same time.
Over the current Trudeau years (calling it the Trudeau regime is way more fun) I don't recall natural resources being front and centre at all unless cast in terms involving indigenous peoples.
Mr. Wilkinson seemed unable to say that the goal is to increase the number of BTUs shipped world-wide as this runs contrary to all the PMO messaging calibrated to the progressive flank. I don't think Mr. Guilbeault will sit next to Mr. Guilbeault in the Parliament Hill canteen with such heresys.
I suspect the PMO knows Canada can only pay for entitlements if it can make money. Don't tell the urban base. (Picture governing MPs having sweaty, arousing dreams of Norwegian style sovereign wealth funds. Thank you North Sea oil!)
Liberals can turn on a dime when it is in their favour, unfortunately they are out of favours at this point. 9 years of No Oil and Gas and all of a sudden they had a revelation.