The National Post is Canada’s second largest national paper.
Albertans will know who their next premier will be Monday and the winner of the hotly contested provincial election between the Wildrose Party and the ruling Conservatives will have a big impact on the rest of Canada.
Both right-of-centre parties are well-liked by the province’s dominant oil-and-gas industry because of their favourable views of development, particularly of the oil sands.
But they project different styles, espouse different levels of government involvement and push different pet projects that have the potential to reshape Canada’s energy priorities.
If Danielle Smith’s Wildrose overthrows Alison Redford’s Conservative dynasty, as polls suggest, Canadians should expect a bolder approach by Alberta to develop and sell its energy riches. It will closely reflect that of Stephen Harper’s federal Conservative government.
Ms. Smith has come out guns blazing against environmentalists who are stalling pipeline plans and is skeptical about climate change. The ruling provincial Conservatives have failed to “rebut slanderous attacks on Alberta by radical greens and their political allies at home and abroad,” resulting in their failure to win support for new pipelines needed to deliver Alberta oil to national and international markets, she said.
“Our responsible, effective and practical Wildrose energy policies would put Albertans first, create jobs, encouraging investment and industry confidence and fuel economic growth,” she said in a statement.
Ms. Redford would take a more moderate approach and build alliances with other provinces and stakeholders. She believes one way to achieve that is through a national energy strategy.
Wildrose’s style will play well with Alberta’s oil entrepreneurs. But Ms. Smith may want to tread carefully outside the province. The major threats to the sector’s growth are coming from outside its borders, particularly British Columbia and the United States, where environmentalists are powerful and values different.
“When I go to Washington, and I talk to people in the White House, on Capitol Hill, and I’m trying to talk to them about why we need Keystone (pipeline), they don’t want to hear that I don’t believe in climate change,” Ms. Redford said this week.
“They want to know that they have a premier and a leader from our province who understand that this impacts our markets, this impacts our investors, and if we don’t take it seriously it’s going to impact our economy and our way of life.”
The big weakness with Ms. Redford’s centrepiece energy strategy is that it’s unrealistic because there are too many different views of what Canada needs to do. As Wildrose rightly notes, it also has the potential to lead to massive government intrusion.
For the rest of this article, please go to the National Post website: http://www.nationalpost.com/related/topics/vote+Canada+energy+priorities/6495942/story.html