Kinder-Morgan

Trudeau bought the bloody pipeline. Says he will, anyway, to make sure it goes through. I may never vote Liberal again.
Not that I'm against th pipeline. I think we need more refinery capacity in Canada and it's too bad there would be so much tanker traffic through Burrard Inlet but if the oil has to move to market better a pipeline than any of the alternatives. But the government has no business owning that kind of infrastructure. For one thing, it's too much of a committment of public funds. For another, it's too much participation in the national economy. For another, it makes the government a stakeholder when it might need to be an arbitrator in the future.
I might be about done with Trudeau 2.0. I've always voted Liberal, when I voted, but I'm pretty sure I'll sit the next one out because of this issue. Won't be the first time.

Grand Mal said:

Trudeau bought the bloody pipeline. Says he will, anyway, to make sure it goes through. I may never vote Liberal again.
Not that I'm against th pipeline. I think we need more refinery capacity in Canada and it's too bad there would be so much tanker traffic through Burrard Inlet but if the oil has to move to market better a pipeline than any of the alternatives. But the government has no business owning that kind of infrastructure. For one thing, it's too much of a committment of public funds. For another, it's too much participation in the national economy. For another, it makes the government a stakeholder when it might need to be an arbitrator in the future.
I might be about done with Trudeau 2.0. I've always voted Liberal, when I voted, but I'm pretty sure I'll sit the next one out because of this issue. Won't be the first time.

Click to expand...

Nationalized oil worked exceedingly well for Norway, so direct govt involvement/participation in the oil industry isn't necessarily a negative whatsoever. On the flipside, this acquisition is pretty piecemeal and slapshod, and more an instance of corporate coddling than true nationalization (Trudeau plans to pay a whopping $4.5 billion for something that cost Kinder a mere $1.55 billion: $550 mil to acquire the existing pipeline, and $1 billion further in expansions since to date), nevermind the possibility of overpaying for a stake in something that may well end up being economically unviable given the potential for oil to depreciate considerably in the foreseeable future. This is just a boondoggle of a corporate subsidy per a federal government that is and has been incestuously close with the fossil fuel industry.

More broadly, I personally don't mind pipelines, and feel them to be probably the best overall mode of oil transport, but there damn well better be rigourous standards with regards to integrity monitoring and maintenance, with hell to pay by the builder/owner in the event of any structural compromise/leakage; who should be responsible for footing both the entirety of clean up costs, and considerable civil damages if any such leak were due to neglect or other fault.

Surrealistik said:

Nationalized oil worked exceedingly well for Norway, so direct govt involvement/participation in the oil industry isn't necessarily a negative whatsoever. On the flipside, this acquisition is pretty piecemeal and slapshod, and more an instance of corporate coddling than true nationalization (Trudeau plans to pay a whopping $4.5 billion for something that cost Kinder a mere $1.55 billion: $550 mil to acquire the existing pipeline, and $1 billion further in expansions since to date), nevermind the possibility of overpaying for a stake in something that may well end up being economically unviable given the potential for oil to depreciate considerably in the foreseeable future. This is just a boondoggle of a corporate subsidy per a federal government that is and has been incestuously close with the fossil fuel industry.

More broadly, I personally don't mind pipelines, and feel them to be probably the best overall mode of oil transport, but there damn well better be rigourous standards with regards to integrity monitoring and maintenance, with hell to pay by the builder/owner in the event of any structural compromise/leakage; who should be responsible for footing both the entirety of clean up costs, and considerable civil damages if any such leak were due to neglect or other fault.

Click to expand...

No, this is the opposite of a corporate boondoggle. It's showing potential investors in Canada that even though a project receives full government approval, it can be derailed by a rogue provincial government, and that Captain Selfie doesn't have the political will to do the right thing and steward the thing through. Trudeau grew up the Prince of Canada never having to worry about a thing or make a major decision in his life, and now we're paying for his inexperience, naivety, and weakness. He's still a little boy.

stevecanuck said:

No, this is the opposite of a corporate boondoggle. It's showing potential investors in Canada that even though a project receives full government approval, it can be derailed by a rogue provincial government, and that Captain Selfie doesn't have the political will to do the right thing and steward the thing through.

Click to expand...

I think he just did show he has the political will to do the right thing and steward the thing through. This is similar to how the Conservatives got the Transcontinental railroad built. It is how the original Trans-Canada pipeline was built in the late 1950's. C.D. Howe created a Crown Corporation. When the Canadian Government has taken over a pipeline, it has usually made money. If they can't sell Trans Mountain, then it means more profit for the government.
If anyone here know a better solution within the current legal and political parameters, I would like to hear them.
Please skip the name calling and coulda-woulda-shoulda nonsense.

queenmandy85 said:

I think he just did show he has the political will to do the right thing and steward the thing through. This is similar to how the Conservatives got the Transcontinental railroad built. It is how the original Trans-Canada pipeline was built in the late 1950's. C.D. Howe created a Crown Corporation. When the Canadian Government has taken over a pipeline, it has usually made money. If they can't sell Trans Mountain, then it means more profit for the government.
If anyone here know a better solution within the current legal and political parameters, I would like to hear them.
Please skip the name calling and coulda-woulda-shoulda nonsense.

Click to expand...

You skipped the message to investors part. And nope, Captain Selfie he is, and always will be.

stevecanuck said:

No, this is the opposite of a corporate boondoggle. It's showing potential investors in Canada that even though a project receives full government approval, it can be derailed by a rogue provincial government, and that Captain Selfie doesn't have the political will to do the right thing and steward the thing through. Trudeau grew up the Prince of Canada never having to worry about a thing or make a major decision in his life, and now we're paying for his inexperience, naivety, and weakness. He's still a little boy.

Click to expand...

I said it's a boondoggle of corporate subsidy, which it is; he's subsidizing Kinder to the tune of at least $3 billion above and beyond the money they're out on the pipeline thus far. As to 'stewarding' the thing through, if by that you mean he works with BC's govt to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution, absolutely; that would be the ideal, and it's what he should have done.

queenmandy85 said:

I think he just did show he has the political will to do the right thing and steward the thing through. This is similar to how the Conservatives got the Transcontinental railroad built. It is how the original Trans-Canada pipeline was built in the late 1950's. C.D. Howe created a Crown Corporation. When the Canadian Government has taken over a pipeline, it has usually made money. If they can't sell Trans Mountain, then it means more profit for the government.
If anyone here know a better solution within the current legal and political parameters, I would like to hear them.
Please skip the name calling and coulda-woulda-shoulda nonsense.

Click to expand...

My biggest issue with this is that Trudeau intends to buy the damn thing in a sweetheart deal at least 3x above cost with tax payer dollero, other than that, it's not so bad, though I have serious reservations about such an imposition in defiance of the will of a duly and rightfully elected provincial govt.

Personally I would have preferred him to either pay a sum more reasonable, or better still, actually work with BC's govt to try and achieve a mutually beneficial and acceptable outcome, such as agreeing to move ahead with what appeared to be a very reasonable list of environmental safeguarding demands, rather than acting unilaterally and recklessly as he did:

B.C. government denies Trudeau'''s claim it has been silent on Trans Mountain environmental demands | CBC News

That having been said though, now that we're (or are to be) $4.5 billion in the hole on this, we better damn well be getting a substantial return on investment at the least, or Trudeau can kiss his govt goodbye.

The real problem is Weaver. He will never agree to the pipeline. The federal and BC Governments can negotiate but 3 Greens who do not represent the voters of BC are holding up the pipeline.
If the Feds didn't meet KM's price, could they have been able to get construction under way? Expropriation would have had a nasty effect on attracting investment. KM was looking for an excuse to bail.
Politically, the easy thing for Trudeau would have been to not approve TM and thereby saving his BC seats. However, the Federal Government believes the TM pipeline is the right thing to do and is probably sacrificing the 2019 majority.

stevecanuck said:

You skipped the message to investors part. And nope, Captain Selfie he is, and always will be.

Click to expand...

The message to investors is, indeed, a rogue Green holding the balance of power can make projects difficult. How do you overcome that?

queenmandy85 said:

The real problem is Weaver. He will never agree to the pipeline. The federal and BC Governments can negotiate but 3 Greens who do not represent the voters of BC are holding up the pipeline.
If the Feds didn't meet KM's price, could they have been able to get construction under way? Expropriation would have had a nasty effect on attracting investment. KM was looking for an excuse to bail.
Politically, the easy thing for Trudeau would have been to not approve TM and thereby saving his BC seats. However, the Federal Government believes the TM pipeline is the right thing to do and is probably sacrificing the 2019 majority.

Click to expand...

Weaver is a problem, but I don't think he's an _intractable_ problem, especially if Trudeau were willing to agree to and pursue to the letter the, again, eminently reasonable list of demands from BC; both he and Horgan would well describe that as a victory to their constituents, and things might have worked out very differently. Even if, by the end, Weaver wanted Trudeau to sweeten things up a bit further, it would have been eminently preferable to this outcome.

As to the price, I'm not saying that expropriation would have been the better option, but we could have absolutely done better than giving away effectively 3 billion in subsidy.

Concerning the loss of a 2019 majority, there are many demons that'll come back to deny Trudeau as much beyond this, such as his betrayal of electoral reform; his approval ratings have steadily declined, and were sub 50% even prior to this announcement.

Weaver will never budge. He has no interest in a deal. There is a better chance of Kim giving up nuclear weapons than Weaver agreeing to the pipeline. The only way to get BC on side is a provincial election to get Weaver off Horgan's back.

"As to the price, I'm not saying that expropriation would have been the better option, but we could have absolutely done better than giving away effectively 3 billion in subsidy."

Did KM show any willingness to take less?

(Thread drift- It was the NDP who blocked electoral reform by refusing to budge from PR, the stupidest electoral system ever foisted on a parliamentary system)

queenmandy85 said:

Weaver will never budge. He has no interest in a deal. There is a better chance of Kim giving up nuclear weapons than Weaver agreeing to the pipeline. The only way to get BC on side is a provincial election to get Weaver off Horgan's back.

Click to expand...

I disagree, I mean, if Trudeau actually gave this approach an earnest shot, he'd have to be the absolute dumbest politico alive not to make a big stink about how he's given Weaver and Horgan everything they've asked for and a bag of chips, and they're still not moving on the issue, yet I've not seen anything like this on the news (and it's not like anything in that list would be politically damaging to agree to).

(Thread drift- It was the NDP who blocked electoral reform)

Click to expand...

Oh? The NDP blocked federal electoral reform and the onus is primarily on them? How? If you've got a link, I'm willing to check it out. Definitely thread drift but my curiosity has been piqued.

queenmandy85 said:

The message to investors is, indeed, a rogue Green holding the balance of power can make projects difficult. How do you overcome that?

Click to expand...

Withhold government subsidies/payments/largesse/etc. to BC for starters. They are defying parliament and should suffer the consequences.

Politics is the art of acquiring support, not creating confrontation. You need to give Premier Horgan an out so he can save face. If you are a Prime Minister, the last thing you want to do is create an enemy. "Friends may come and friends may go, but, enemies accumulate." Sorry, I don't remember the source...maybe Alfred E. Neuman?

Grand Mal said:

Trudeau bought the bloody pipeline. Says he will, anyway, to make sure it goes through. I may never vote Liberal again.
Not that I'm against th pipeline. I think we need more refinery capacity in Canada and it's too bad there would be so much tanker traffic through Burrard Inlet but if the oil has to move to market better a pipeline than any of the alternatives. But the government has no business owning that kind of infrastructure. For one thing, it's too much of a committment of public funds. For another, it's too much participation in the national economy. For another, it makes the government a stakeholder when it might need to be an arbitrator in the future.
I might be about done with Trudeau 2.0. I've always voted Liberal, when I voted, but I'm pretty sure I'll sit the next one out because of this issue. Won't be the first time.

Click to expand...

They can't even fix that blasted Phoenix payroll system.....and here, he suddenly gets us into the pipeline business! :lol:

He bought a 65 year old pipeline for 4 billion bucks..........which we could've gotten for free!

He's probably scared off would-be investors after they witnessed what happened to Kinder Morgan. Who'd want to buy this pipeline?

tosca1 said:

They can't even fix that blasted Phoenix payroll system.....and here, he suddenly gets us into the pipeline business! :lol:

He bought a 65 year old pipeline for 4 billion bucks..........which we could've gotten for free!

He's probably scared off would-be investors after they witnessed what happened to Kinder Morgan. Who'd want to buy this pipeline?

Click to expand...

I blame Horgan and his Green Party masters for precipitating this fiasco but I'd hope a Liberal government could come up with a better solution than spending money on a private business asset.
Pissed off I was, until Trudeau announced his retaliatory measure today. I nearly forgive him.

Grand Mal said:

I blame Horgan and his Green Party masters for precipitating this fiasco but I'd hope a Liberal government could come up with a better solution than spending money on a private business asset.
Pissed off I was, until Trudeau announced his retaliatory measure today. I nearly forgive him.

Click to expand...

From what I have seen it was very much a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. So he picked the that may at least provide jobs and future revenue.

Carjosse said:

From what I have seen it was very much a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. So he picked the that may at least provide jobs and future revenue.

Click to expand...

Yeah I know. The outcome aimed for is a desirable one. I just wish a Liberal government had found another route that didn't involve using government money to buy a private enterprise asset. Like I said elsewhere here, I don't know what that other route would look like but that's why I don't run for parliament.
I'm a fickle voter. I vote Liberal federally if I vote at all- I sit it out if they piss me off, which has happened often. I was going to sit out the last one because I was unsure about Trudeau 2.0 but the Conservative attack ads pissed me off enough to get my butt off my chair. Justin? I've been up and down about him and the pipeline thing decided me that I wouldn't vote again as long as he was the leader but then his response to the American duties made me forgive him, nearly.

Carjosse said:

From what I have seen it was very much a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. So he picked the that may at least provide jobs and future revenue.

Click to expand...

Grand Mal said:

Yeah I know. The outcome aimed for is a desirable one. I just wish a Liberal government had found another route that didn't involve using government money to buy a private enterprise asset. Like I said elsewhere here, I don't know what that other route would look like but that's why I don't run for parliament.
I'm a fickle voter. I vote Liberal federally if I vote at all- I sit it out if they piss me off, which has happened often. I was going to sit out the last one because I was unsure about Trudeau 2.0 but the Conservative attack ads pissed me off enough to get my butt off my chair. Justin? I've been up and down about him and the pipeline thing decided me that I wouldn't vote again as long as he was the leader but then his response to the American duties made me forgive him, nearly.

Click to expand...

Y'know, he could have just given what Weaver and Horgan were asking for per their very reasonable list of environmentally oriented demands, and if they still refused to proceed after that, Trudeau would then have had every right and justification both to crucify the BC govt, and to take dramatic action; for whatever reason, he chose not to (or alternately, didn't raise a stink about those demands being accommodated which would be too stupid to contemplate).

Grand Mal said:

I blame Horgan and his Green Party masters for precipitating this fiasco but I'd hope a Liberal government could come up with a better solution than spending money on a private business asset.
Pissed off I was, until Trudeau announced his retaliatory measure today. I nearly forgive him.

Click to expand...

Horgan is NDP.....his socialist ideology will be the driving force behind most, if not all his decisions. That's what capitalist-hating NDP does. That's expected.


Trudeau, on the other hand, is responsible for letting Horgan get away with this fiasco for so long.

Since 2014, the courts ruled in Trans Mountain’s favour 14 out of 14 times

Click to expand...

B.C.’s opposition to the Trans Mountain pipeline appears to be running out of tools | Financial Post


Court decisions don't count anymore? Why did the Feds let this happen?
Imagine what goes in would-be investors minds when they think about this: Canada is not consistent....therefore, it's too risky to invest in Canada!

Trudeau was more concerned about trying to keep votes in BC!

Surrealistik said:

Y'know, he could have just given what Weaver and Horgan were asking for per their very reasonable list of environmentally oriented demands, and if they still refused to proceed after that, Trudeau would then have had every right and justification both to crucify the BC govt, and to take dramatic action; for whatever reason, he chose not to (or alternately, didn't raise a stink about those demands being accommodated which would be too stupid to contemplate).

Click to expand...

He is not going to crucify the BC government, he does not want any opportunity for a constitutional challenge.

Grand Mal said:

Pissed off I was, until Trudeau announced his retaliatory measure today. I nearly forgive him.

Click to expand...

I wonder how things would've turned out had Trudeau restrained his big mouth from running off during his recent speech before graduate students in New York - on diversity - a veiled poke at Trump's policy - at the same time that his ministers were in the middle of a crucial negotiations.

Trudeau is showing his catty feminine side when it comes to Trump! No matter how tempting, Trudeau should know better! You don't make drive-by attacks on someone who might not forgive and forget! Especially when you're negotiating to do trade!

I wouldn't be surprised that Trudeau is getting played by Trump. Trump is toying with him. Now, some people are asking is it practical to kill the negotiation over the sunset clause? After all, it's not like as if Trump will be president for life!

Even way back, I kinda see that Trump could be pivotal in having a new Prime Minister in the next election.
Another reason why I like Trump.


That's the biggest problem about our PM. He's got a big mouth he can't control.
Look what happened when he opened his big mouth to make himself look good before the world (in contrast to Trump) - issue an open invitation for all refugees to come to Canada. Now, don't tell me Trump didn't hear about that.
That's another problem Trudeau's dealing with now - the provinces that are affected by his big mouth, are all struggling to accomodate the influx! They want funding! Heck, that's another massive expense that we tax-payers, have to shoulder!


We're in for a very rough ride. Just grin and bear it.
The best thing that could happen to Canada is to get rid of Trudeau. All he ever did was prove his own incompetence.
But we'll be stuck with the mess he's created......and will still be creating. He's still got 18 months to do more damage.
Hopefully, we're still standing by that time.


Mind you, he may not be the worse yet. Imagine a Wynne-Horvath coalition in Ontario? Doomsday.
Boy, when it rains it pours.

Carjosse said:

He is not going to crucify the BC government, he does not want any opportunity for a constitutional challenge.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you think I meant, but it was more along the lines of blasting/castigating/reprimanding them when he had the moral high ground and justification to do so.

tosca1 said:

Mind you, he may not be the worse yet. Imagine a Wynne-Horvath coalition in Ontario? Doomsday.
Boy, when it rains it pours.

Click to expand...

Definitely beats the alternative of Doug Ford whose platform looks to be the most fiscally irresponsible of all as it stands (i.e. we'll cut taxes _and_ give away goodies!), nevermind pushing rubbish policy like the repeal of the foreign buyer tax that has worked admirably in cooling Toronto's real estate market.