No cross-border pipeline has ever been turned down in the cause of saving the world
One of the main purposes of free trade deals is to protect legitimate corporate activity from political expediency. On that basis, TransCanada’s proposed US$15 billion NAFTA claim against President Barack Obama’s rejection of its Keystone XL pipeline would appear as big a “no brainer” as the pipeline’s approval was once claimed to be by Stephen Harper.
Keystone XL was thrown under the bus of Obama’s egotistical climate “legacy,” as the man who single-handedly rolled back the oceans and healed the earth. The rejection was also his sacrificial offering to the monstrously hypocritical climate conference in Paris.
Then again, NAFTA arbitrators have also ruled in a number of cases that governments obviously retain the power to legislate for the “public good,” which is nowhere both more ideological and nebulous than when it comes to the climate issue.
Much has rightly been made of the demonization of Keystone XL by powerful environmental non-governmental organizations, ENGOs, but those who chained themselves to the White House were far from unwelcome to the Oval Office.
Obama’s problem has always been how to make some rational basis for rejection. His statement turning down Keystone XL in November fell apart like a Soviet tractor when subjected to the most superficial analysis. Moreover, Obama’s staunchest allies might be cited to make TransCanada’s case.
For the rest of this column, click here: http://business.financialpost.com/fp-comment/peter-foster-transcanadas-keystone-legal-action-may-lead-to-airing-of-state-of-climate-science