Canada's Economy: Pipeline Approval Necessary To Boost Employment, Government Says

* Endless debate on projects is unacceptable - minister

* Environmental measures included in omnibus budget bill

* Opposition says inclusion undermines political debate

OTTAWA, May 7 (Reuters) - Canadian government measures to speed up environmental approvals for pipelines and other major projects are crucial to help expand the economy and boost employment, Natural Resources Joe Oliver said on Monday.

"The need for this legislation is urgent," Oliver told reporters outside the House of Commons. "The world will not stand by and wait while Canada endlessly deliberates the merits of its resource potential and squanders its legacy."

The environmental measures have been folded into an omnibus budget implementation bill, drawing sharp criticism from opposition parties and environmental groups who say the move would short-circuit political debate.

"There is no transparency, no accountability," Nathan Cullen, House leader for the opposition New Democratic Party, said as he asked the Conservative government to separate out the environmental components from the budget bill.

In his remarks to reporters, Oliver said a finance subcommittee would be set up to deal separately and openly with the measures for what the government calls "responsible resource development."

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty defended the inclusion of diverse issues in the budget legislation. "A large budget begets a large budget implementation bill," he told the House.

The Conservatives say the current regulatory system is too complex and can lead to development projects being held up for a decade or more, but ecologists say anything less risks serious damage to the environment.

Citing estimates from the Canadian Energy Research Institute, Oliver said proposed pipeline expansion and projected oil output increases would generate 700,000 jobs on average over the next 25 years and add C$3.3 trillion ($3.3 trillion) in economic activity.

($1=$0.99 Canadian) (Reporting by Randall Palmer; Editing by Frank McGurty)

Also on HuffPost:

From our partners

• How Two Determined Sisters Set Up A Pet Rescue Pipeline To Colorado - Mother Nature Network
• Panel Finds Flaws In Hurricane Sandy Warning System - Climate Central
• 11 Images And Facts About A Misunderstood Creature - Mother Nature Network

Comments

[Kenz300]

12:37 PM on 05/08/2012

If we require the oil to be sold in the US rather than being pipped to Texas to be shipped to Asia there might be more support.

[Kenz300]

12:35 PM on 05/08/2012

We all need clean air, clean water, and safe food to eat.

Sane, sensible regulation is also needed.

[n1ne1]

08:55 AM on 05/08/2012

RUN THE DAMN LINE ALREADY!!! END OF STORY

[onlyaquarterdelusional]

12:40 PM on 05/08/2012

Run the damn line through Canada...problem is many Canadians don't want it.

[wesnwendy]

08:45 AM on 05/08/2012

There is NOTHING to debate. NO PIPELINE!!! NO! NO! NO! ENOUGH with the pollution and profit, ENOUGH with wasting our plant, NO PIPELINE, NEVER!!!!

[Billie Burk]

05:47 AM on 05/08/2012

Rather than pipe oil across our entire country for a few construction jobs let canada build there own refinery or sell us all the oil and we can build our own refinery in Detroit or New York. Would like to hear why this idea will not work

[WESmith]

08:47 AM on 05/08/2012

First, it is not oil. It is asphaltenes. Secondly, refineries don't make a profit most years. Right now the profit margin is 1.7% and this is a good year. Thirdly, ExxonMobil spent billions of dollars upgrading their refineries to handle Venezuelan heavy crude. It is not being utilized for this capability. It can handle asphaltenes. Lastly, a refinery proposed to be built in Detroit or New York wouldn't be completed in 30 years, probably never.

[ModMark]

09:19 AM on 05/08/2012

The Detroit area is already using tar sand oil, BP is upgrading a major refinery in Toledo to refine the oil. Tar sand oil is being pump thru Michigan on a existing pipeline. Much of the gasoline used in Michigan is refined south of Chicago which uses tar sand oil. FYI, here is a map of crude line.

http://www.capp.ca/getdoc.aspx?DocID=191097

[PlayTOE]

01:21 AM on 05/08/2012

Just because Harper is pushing this pipe, don't believe Canadians support it, we mostly don't.

[rastasandliza]

01:04 AM on 05/08/2012

Let Canada keep their dirty tar sands oil and figure out how they going to sell it to China. Let America keep their clean air, lands and aquifers. Am tired of ALL oil companies greed for the almighty dollar, while socking it to the public in high prices for gasoline, heating oil and other fuels.

[wesnwendy]

08:50 AM on 05/08/2012

ALL national resources should be a national treasure, NOT IN THE HANDS OF PRIVATE OWNERSHIP. ALL profit should be applied to the national expense, health care and any balance paid to THE PEOPLE as a dividend. We should be moving to a nanotechnology using and converting light to energy, eliminating any need for polluting fossil fuels (which is just a fancy way of saying... digging up the worlds dead black oily remains and burning it for energy).

[WESmith]

09:33 AM on 05/08/2012

The US nationalized oil (along with coal, natural gas and any other valuable mineral) in 1977. We The People make over a trillion dollars a year selling and taxing our natural resources. This is only in government owned land. Private individuals who own minerals rights can sell their oil, etc. Oil companies are not allowed to own oil. The government mandates Speculators so that all taxes can be collected. The last oil company that tried to use oil from their wells to refine and make gasoline, etc was fined $4 billion for tax evasion and forced to raise gasoline prices to market level.
Light is energy. All sources of energy we use on Earth is solar energy. All use of energy results in pollution due to entropy. The only real answer is energy efficiency and conservation. Chemically, there is no difference between carbohydrates and hydrocarbons. Oil is dead plants and animals. That stuff we put down the drain followed by dispersants is dead plants and animals. No difference, unless one is a politician. CO2 from oil and CO2 from biofuel is identical. We can't get away from polluting with our wasteful use of resources.

[ModMark]

09:33 AM on 05/08/2012

"We should be moving to a nanotechnology using and converting light to energy, eliminating any need for polluting fossil fuels"

Electric does not solve the problem of a portable fuel for long distance transportation. Using electric for urban transportation may reduce oil consumption but we have nothing to replace oil of natural gas for long distance transportation.

[CrustyCSM]

10:12 AM on 05/08/2012

And why do you think the price of gas is so high? Speculators maybe? Well if we werent so exposed to trafficking so much of our oil from OPEC the prices wouldnt go up every time a camel farted. Lower energy prices = lower market costs and jobs for the needy. Everything Obama doesnt want. He needs to have wards of the state voting for him.

[ibsteve2u]

01:02 AM on 05/08/2012

Oliver: "The world will not stand by and wait..."

Now there is a man who is very representative of Big Carbon: Hurry up and get that oil online before the world starts getting serious about alternatives...

[wesnwendy]

08:51 AM on 05/08/2012

"The world will not stand by and wait..."
True. The world WILL stand by and do nothing... and die

[susanbsbi]

12:51 AM on 05/08/2012

See it is coming out that all the profits and jobs go to Canada people.

[aligatorhardt]

12:20 AM on 05/08/2012

It is hardly responsible resource management to destroy water resources for the sake of some years of oil revenue.  They certainly are good at inflating the number of job claims from pipelines. Meanwhile, eastern Canada has clean hydro and wind in construction that allows them to sell clean power to New England states. These jobs are more permanent and far less damaging. 
Hydro's Untapped Potential | Renewable Energy World (North America Edition) Magazine Article

[PlayTOE]

06:52 AM on 05/08/2012

Western Canada could be producing wind power instead of polluting the country with oil ... but oil interests have poisoned the politics as well as the environment.

[ModMark]

09:39 AM on 05/08/2012

Once again, how does electric replace our need for gasoline for long distance transportation (over 40 mile round trip)?

Build all the wind turbines you want, we still need gasoline or diesel.

[ModMark]

09:41 AM on 05/08/2012

"Meanwhile, eastern Canada has clean hydro "

Just need to point, those major hydro dams in northern Quebec destroy thousand of acres of pristine forest.

[aligatorhardt]

09:58 AM on 05/08/2012

And tar sands destroys the entire atmosphere, wastes and pollutes water resources over a far greater area than the size of a reservoir. After the first few years, the dam no longer creates greenhouse gases, then provides power for many decades with no further damage. The dam also provides flood control and the reservoir provides fresh water reserves.

[lulex]

11:45 PM on 05/07/2012

Canadians want to move beyond oil folks. This headline is nothing but a shill for the oil industry.

[mm3264]

10:11 PM on 05/07/2012

karlbmiles on May 7, 2012 at 20:16:59
“It wasn't even about "the" pipeline, but "environmental approvals for pipelines and other major projects crucial to help expand the economy".
Everybody wants Fox, don't be surprised that Canada wants it too.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Only the prime minister and others that big oil has in their pockets want Fox. The citizens want no part of it. They want honest reporting, like we had here before Reagan had our Fairness Doctrine repealed and Fox then came out as the propaganda wing of the Republican Party.

[ajcp2006]

08:26 PM on 05/07/2012

Having been in the oil industry, which by the way is highly pollutant across the board to get the oil to above ground , i can tell you that the process to extract oil from the oil sands increases Canada's greenhouse emissions by 40 %. That one entity. Its exhaust is like dozens of coal power plants at once.

[Ihaveadream]

08:43 PM on 05/07/2012

It is absolutely the dirtiest, most environmentally destructive way to get it. So what if there are a few jobs when the result is that the most pristine places on earth incl the seas, oceans, mountain tops to get to the coal, the ground water (fracking) are destroyed to get oil and gas to keep up with the demand for a few short years. Nobody looks long term at what future generations will be left with, if anything. Considering how old the earth is, modern man has been very shortsighted and greedy. They knew that these fossil fuel resources would be scarce and also about the pollution 40-50 years ago but did nothing.

[Americanwoman55]

08:14 PM on 05/07/2012

One more comment!!!

Give all the oil to the US at a huge disount or no deal at all!!!

[WESmith]

08:50 AM on 05/08/2012

We The People own more oil than all 13,000 American oil companies combined.
We The People make more profit from oil than all 13,000 American oil companies combined. We The People are quite greedy aren't we?

[Americanwoman55]

04:27 PM on 05/08/2012

We the people are the largest consumers in the world. That said in this case we are also taking the risks, 100%. it actually is a bad deal just like fracking, bad 100% all the way around!!

[Americanwoman55]

08:12 PM on 05/07/2012

BP left a mess on the Southern shore lines of this country and CONGRESS LET THEM!!!

We are still cleaning up from the last mess!!

Profits from a corproation are not the American people's problem!! We need to protect our land and our children's future!!!

[mm3264]

10:12 PM on 05/07/2012

Not according to the Republicans

[Americanwoman55]

04:28 PM on 05/08/2012

Well, that means nothing in the real world. Republicans and the truth are strangers !!

[WESmith]

08:58 AM on 05/08/2012

If we want to protect our land and our children's future, we need to quit allowing oil companies to produce our oil and we need to quit demanding cheap gasoline, etc. As a matter of fact, we need to get rid of gasoline-powered vehicles. We were warned over 40 years ago, we were destroying our environment with these pollution machines.

We should clean up the mess on the Southern shore lines. That was our oil they spilled. But if that oil hadn't spilled, we would have purchased the final products and polluted the environment with it anyway.

We voted Congress in. We allow Congress to handle all money matters. Congress is suppose to be our employees. We pay their wages, but they don't work for us. But we still hold power over them. We can stop using gasoline (just a first step) and that will cripple the entire industry. The remaining oil companies will go bankrupt or move overseas like Exxon Mobil, Conoco Chevron, etc did a few decades ago.

[Americanwoman55]

04:19 PM on 05/08/2012

Do you have idea how many by products come from oil? it goes far beyond just gas and oil!! It is not that simple but it is a start. I agree. Passing laws that mandate cars must get more miles per gallon would be huge in this country!!