Kanoke46 / Depositphotos.com
OTTAWA — A Calgary Conservative MP is pushing to repeal the federal oil tanker moratorium, arguing the change would give Canadian producers more options to reach overseas markets without weakening existing environmental protections.
Calgary Signal Hill MP David McKenzie’s private member’s Bill C-264 is scheduled for a vote in the House of Commons Wednesday after completing the second hour of second-reading debate Monday.
The bill would repeal the Oil Tanker Moratorium Act, also known as Bill C-48, which restricts large tankers carrying crude and persistent oils from loading or unloading along much of British Columbia’s coast from northern Vancouver Island to the Alaska border.
“It’s a very straightforward and simple bill,” McKenzie said in an interview. “It simply repeals Bill C-48, which is commonly known as the West Coast Tanker Ban.”
McKenzie argues the legislation has limited Canada’s ability to develop additional West Coast oil export routes at a time when trade tensions with the United States have renewed attention on finding other buyers for Canadian energy.
He said Canada’s long-standing dependence on the U.S. market has contributed to Western Canadian crude selling at a discount compared with other benchmarks.
McKenzie said the current disruptions in Canada-U.S. trade have reinforced an argument governments and industry have made for decades: Canada needs more diversified export markets.
“The importance of diversifying is not a brand new concept, but it’s certainly been underlined with what’s happening currently,” he said.
He pointed to Asian markets as a major opportunity, saying testimony heard during his work on the House of Commons International Trade Committee has indicated demand exists for Canadian crude.
McKenzie said instability affecting energy routes through the Strait of Hormuz has also highlighted Canada’s potential value as a stable and reliable energy supplier.
He said closer energy ties with democratic trading partners in the Asia-Pacific region could provide Canada with additional customers while reducing its reliance on the United States.
“Respecting closer ties to our allies in the Asian Pacific region, absolutely,” McKenzie said. “The opportunity to be a secure supplier to those nations who are democratic and are tremendous trading partners and present great opportunities for Canada, just as their growth and development domestically presents great opportunities for those countries.”
One potential beneficiary of a repeal has already emerged.
Calgary-based Strathcona Resources has proposed moving up to 250,000 barrels of crude a day by rail from Hardisty, Alta., to Prince Rupert using existing rail infrastructure.
That proposal is separate from plans for a new oil pipeline to the Pacific coast.
Under Strathcona’s concept, crude would travel to Prince Rupert by rail rather than pipeline. New infrastructure would still be required at the port to unload rail cars and transfer the oil to ships.
McKenzie said the tanker moratorium is a key obstacle because the crude could reach Prince Rupert by rail but could not then be loaded onto large oil tankers without a change to the federal restrictions.
He said the proposal demonstrates the kinds of private-sector projects that could become possible if the moratorium were removed.
McKenzie also rejected the argument that repealing the Oil Tanker Moratorium Act would amount to removing environmental safeguards governing oil transportation on the West Coast.
He said the legislation itself does not establish the broader environmental rules governing marine shipping, meaning its repeal would leave those protections in place.
“The repeal of that bill does not alter the environmental protection laws that are in place and will remain in place,” McKenzie said.
He said federal obligations surrounding Indigenous consultation would likewise remain in place if C-264 passes.
McKenzie said he does not support reducing environmental or marine safety standards and believes additional oil exports can proceed within the regulatory protections already governing transportation and shipping.
“I have no intention, no desire to see shortcuts taken with respect to the environment,” he said. “Rather, I believe that we can ship safely and effectively.”
McKenzie also argues opening Prince Rupert to additional crude exports does not need to come at the expense of proposed pipeline capacity elsewhere on the B.C. coast.
He said additional export routes could complement each other, with Prince Rupert offering another outlet while reducing the concentration of marine traffic around Vancouver.
Premier Danielle Smith and Alberta Energy and Minerals Minister Brian Jean have both endorsed C-264, arguing repealing the moratorium would provide additional access to international markets and could allow projects such as crude-by-rail exports through Prince Rupert to advance.
Whether McKenzie’s private member’s bill can secure enough support in the House of Commons will be determined in Wednesday’s vote.
He said its prospects will depend heavily on whether Liberal MPs are prepared to support repealing the moratorium.
“I think it depends a lot on whether the Liberals realize that the time has come for C-48 to be put in the dustbin,” McKenzie said.
“But I don’t know. We will find out in just one more day as to whether or not the Liberal Party is prepared to move our country forward.”
Comments