Canada Letter: Pipelines, the Stuff of Canadian Politics

The Times’s recent Canada-related coverage with back stories and analysis from our reporters along with opinions from our readers. View in [Browser]( | Add nytdirect@nytimes.com to your address book. [The New York Times]( [The New York Times]( Friday, June 1, 2018 [NYTimes.com/Canada »]( [Pipelines, the Stuff of Canadian Politics]( By IAN AUSTEN Given that Canada’s economy still relies to a substantial degree on chopping down trees, digging up minerals and pumping out oil and gas, it’s perhaps not surprising that pipelines are one of the nation’s hot-button issues. [The construction of the Trans-Canada gas pipeline in the late 1950s.] The construction of the Trans-Canada gas pipeline in the late 1950s. A. Y. Owen/The LIFE Images Collection, via Getty Images When Stephen Harper was prime minister, one of his pet causes was getting approval from the Obama administration for Keystone XL, a pipeline to link the oils sands of Alberta with refineries on the American Gulf Coast. President Barack Obama, concerned about the plan’s environmental consequences and not exactly charmed by Mr. Harper’s declaration that approval was a “[complete no-brainer]( ultimately [rebuffed Mr. Harper’s pitch](. President Trump, of course, [has since reversed]( course. And now Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, a leader on efforts to address climate change, is [sticking up for pipelines.]( In a move that put him at odds with many voters in his Liberal Party, Mr. Trudeau said that the government would buy the Trans Mountain pipeline, which links Edmonton to suburban Vancouver, from its American owners for 4.5 billion Canadian dollars. The reason: to make sure that workers can begin threading a second pipeline along its length this month. [Here’s the news story: [Canadian Government to Buy Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain Pipeline]( That move had a familiar ring to any of us who have taken even a high school course in Canadian history. In 1956, a Liberal government’s efforts to use public money to make sure the construction of a major pipeline could begin by a June deadline ended up in a legendarily raucous parliamentary debate — and became a key factor in the Liberals’ defeat in the next election. There wasn’t a word about the environment or the land rights of Indigenous people during [the great pipeline debate]( of 1956. Nationalism and using public money to help a private business venture were the points of contention. Back then, the government of Prime Minister Louis St. Laurent brought in a bill to spend 118 million Canadian dollars — 1.1 billion in today’s money — to build part of the Trans-Canada Pipeline from Alberta to Eastern Canada, and also to lend money to the group of companies set up to run and own the project. (TransCanada, as it’s known today, is also the outfit now behind Keystone XL.) John Diefenbaker, the Conservative leader at the time, was known for his jowly speaking style, which allowed him to summon righteous indignation like few Canadian politicians before or since. Mr. Diefenbaker challenged the project’s American control. Members of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation, the precursor to today’s New Democratic Party, pushed for public ownership. The volume rose and tensions flared in the House of Commons. Then the Liberals, with an anxious eye on their construction deadline, used a ham-handed parliamentary procedure to shut down debate and forced a vote. [A protest on Tuesday against the government’s takeover of Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain pipeline in Vancouver.] A protest on Tuesday against the government’s takeover of Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain pipeline in Vancouver. Darryl Dyck/The Canadian Press, via Associated Press Mr. St. Laurent’s government got its pipeline. But Mr. Diefenbaker took power [a year]( later after a campaign in which he reminded voters, over and over, about what he called the Liberals’ contempt for Parliament. This time around, Mr. Trudeau was able to fund his pipeline deal without getting Parliament’s permission. So we’ve been spared a rousing debate in the House of Commons. But demonstrations against the purchase started in British Columbia just hours after the announcement. And the federal Conservatives, who remain staunch oil industry and pipeline boosters, [found other ways to denounce]( Mr. Trudeau’s solution. Mr. Trudeau appears to be gambling on the notion that most Canadians sit somewhere in the middle, and like him believe that Canada can balance environmental protection and a strong energy industry. I’ll bet this becomes a defining issue in next year’s election. Late in the week, I was in Hamilton, Ontario, the country’s steel capital, to [sample its reaction]( to President Trump’s decision to stick steep tariffs on Canadian exports of the product that made that city famous. After we talked about that, most of the people I met brought up the pipeline. Mr. Trudeau may now be facing his greatest political sales job. Troublesome Neighbor [The industrial skyline in Hamilton, Ontario, the center of the steel industry in Canada.] The industrial skyline in Hamilton, Ontario, the center of the steel industry in Canada. Tara Walton for The New York Times Canadian readers were also keen to comment on the[informative and sweeping article]( Mr. Trump’s decision to place tariffs on steel and aluminum from Canada, Mexico and Europe by Ana Swanson, our Washington-based trade expert. Here is a sampling, shortened for space: “Canuck Lit Lover” from British Columbia: “I am finally relieved that our Prime Minister has stood up to the neighborhood bully. So many of us have waited with bated breath, in disappointed and disbelief that Trudeau seemed to have checked his duty to defend our honor, avoided calling out hateful and antagonistic speech, and sidestepped critical moments that could have drawn some kind of line between us and the frightening devolution of political and moral standards in this American government.” Brian in Toronto: “America’s allies will trade with each other, and with China, and America will become less and less relevant in the world. As it becomes less relevant, it will become poorer, starting with the heartland.” Mark, somewhere in Canada: “The silver lining to this mess is that it will finally teach Canadians a lesson they should have learned since the 1950s: don’t put all your eggs in one basket. Diversify. It has been convenient hitching the one economy onto the other, but by now the folly of the underlying premise — that the other side can be trusted — is surely exposed for the folly it always was.” [White House to Impose Metal Tariffs on E.U., Canada and Mexico]( [‘A Slap in the Canadians’ Face.’ Ontario Steel Town Reacts to Trump’s Tariffs.]( [Opinion: Trump Tariffs Threaten National Security]( Screen Time The new month means another batch of viewing recommendations for Netflix subscribers in Canada from my colleagues in Watching, The New York Times’s pathfinder for screens big and small. Among other things, June’s list includes Philip Seymour Hoffman’s portrayal of a C.I.A. agent in “Charlie Wilson’s War” and the Coen brothers’ sort of sequel to “Barton Fink,” “Hail, Caesar!” Trans Canada [A One-Eyed Québécois ‘Rambo’ Captures Imaginations in Canada]( It’s taken more than 70 years but Léo Major’s courageous acts during World War II have now made him Quebec’s newest hero. [A River of Warblers: ‘The Greatest Birding Day of My Life’]( Ian Davies went to Quebec’s Tadoussac bird observatory on Monday and saw 700,000 warblers. James Gorman, a science writer at The Times, explains how Mr. Davies counted them. [Butter Tarts Clear Customs]( Butter tarts are invading the United States, at least in a small way. [The Stanley Cup’s Namesake Produced a Great Trophy. Not Much Else.]( When Sir Frederick Arthur Stanley, the British lord and governor general who gave Canada a hockey cup in his name, died there was no mention of the sport in his obituary in The Times. HOW ARE WE DOING? We’re eager to have your thoughts about this newsletter and events in Canada in general. Please send them to [nytcanada@nytimes.com](mailto:nytcanada@nytimes.com? subject=Canada%20Letter%20Newsletter%20Feedback). A native of Windsor, Ontario, Ian Austen was educated in Toronto, lives in Ottawa and has reported about Canada for The New York Times for over a decade. Follow him on Twitter at @ianrausten. LIKE THIS EMAIL? Forward it to your friends, and let them know they can sign up [here](. ADVERTISEMENT FOLLOW NYTIMES [Facebook] [FACEBOOK]( [Twitter] [@nytimes]( Get more [NYTimes.com newsletters »]( | Get unlimited access to NYTimes.com and our NYTimes apps. [Subscribe »]( ABOUT THIS EMAIL You received this message because you signed up for NYTimes.com's Canada Letter newsletter. [Unsubscribe]( | [Manage Subscriptions]( | [Change Your Email]( | [Privacy Policy]( | [Contact]( | [Advertise]( Copyright 2018 The New York Times Company 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018