• 4 minutes 2nd Annual Great Oil Price Prediction Challenge of 2019
  • 7 minutes Nucelar Deal Is Dead? Iran Distances Itself Further From ND, Alarming Russia And France
  • 10 minutes Don Jr. Tweets name Ukraine Whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella. Worked for CIA during Obama Administration, Hold over to Trump National Security Counsel under Gen McCallister, more . . . .
  • 13 minutes Shale pioneer Chesepeak will file bankruptcy soon. FINALLY ! The consolidation begins
  • 30 mins EU has already lost the Trump vs. EU Trade War
  • 10 mins More dumbed down? re Hong Kong Act of Congress
  • 16 hours Impeachment S**te
  • 50 mins Pope Proposes New Sin: Thou Shalt Not Destroy The Harmony Of The Environment
  • 3 hours Article: Did Exxon only make $39 Million onshore U.S. last quarter ?
  • 23 hours 55.00 WTI
  • 8 hours Visualizing Pennsylvania Oil & Gas Production (Through September 2019)
  • 4 hours U.S. Shale To Break Records Despite Bearish Rhetoric
  • 1 day Water, Trump, and Israel’s National Security
  • 1 day Everything You Need To Know About Trump
  • 2 hours Last I Checked
  • 2 days IEA predicts oil demand will grow annually at 1 million barrels a day for the next 5 years
  • 2 days Pioneer's Sheffield in Doghouse. Oil upset his bragging about Shale hurt prices. Now on campaign to lower expectations, prop up price.
  • 41 mins Petroleum Industry Domain Names
  • 45 mins What are the odds of 4 U.S. politicians all having children working for Ukraine Gas Companies?

Breaking News:

China’s Hunger For Coal Is Growing

6 Gold Companies Investors Can’t Ignore In 2020

6 Gold Companies Investors Can’t Ignore In 2020

Bullish signs are mounting for…

U.S. Shale To Break Records Despite Bearish Rhetoric

U.S. Shale To Break Records Despite Bearish Rhetoric

EIA forecasts predict US shale…

B.C. Admits It Can’t Stop Trans Mountain But Wants To Limit Oil Flow

B.C. Admits It Can’t Stop Trans Mountain But Wants To Limit Oil Flow

The British Columbia government has admitted it has no power to stop the Trans Mountain oil pipeline expansion project but has argued it should have the power to limit the amount of crude oil that flows across its territory from Alberta, the Globe and Mail reports, citing a lawyer for the B.C. government.

The argument was heard by the B.C. Court of Appeals where the NDP government of British Columbia took its case against the Trans Mountain project.

“(B.C.) accepts it could not stop a federally regulated pipeline … But so too a federal undertaking is not immune from provincial environmental laws,” the lead lawyer for the plaintiffs, Joseph Arvay said. “The likelihood of an event [of an oil spill] is uncertain but carries the possibility of catastrophic impacts.”

The government of Alberta submitted their own statements regarding the issue, with the former asserting that the B.C. government “has repeatedly committed publicly to doing everything it can to prevent the (Trans Mountain) Pipeline Expansion Project from going ahead. It lacks the constitutional authority to do it directly, that is: stop the project or place sufficient roadblocks in its way that it cannot realistically proceed.”

The federal government, for its part, has acknowledged the potential adverse environmental impact of an oil spill from the pipeline, but has signaled it will continue to support the Trans Mountain expansion project as a crucial piece of infrastructure to get Albertan heavy to international markets.

In its statement for the court, Ottawa struck at the B.C. government for trying to find a loophole in the law to get its way.

It said B.C.’s attempt to restrict the flow of oil raised “a significant concern that the proposed legislation is in fact a legislative Trojan Horse, a bill that has been carefully crafted to appear constitutionally valid so that it might receive a preliminary judicial seal of approval in this reference, but which in substance is an unconstitutional ‘tool’ whose only logical purpose is to limit federally regulated pipelines and railways.”

B.C.’s lawyers have insisted that the province has no “axe to grind” with pipelines in general and was motivated by purely environmental concerns. The case has attracted a lot of attention from the legislative profession as it basically comes down to how much power provinces have over infrastructure on their territory as opposed to the federal government, which is by law in charge of said infrastructure.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:



Join the discussion | Back to homepage

Leave a comment
  • Ron MacMillan on March 20 2019 said:
    Just who might this be???? "federal government of Alberta"

Leave a comment

Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News
Download on the App Store Get it on Google Play