Business
Enbridge to pay Bad River band $5.1M in Line 5 profits, move pipeline by 2026: judge
This June 29, 2018 photo shows tanks at the Enbridge Energy terminal in Superior, Wisc. A U.S. judge in that state has ordered the Calgary-based energy giant to pay an Indigenous band US$5.1 million and to remove the Line 5 pipeline from the band’s property within three years. THE CANADIAN PRESS/AP-Jim Mone
By James McCarten in Washington
Calgary-based Enbridge Inc. must pay an Indigenous band in Wisconsin more than US$5 million in Line 5 profits and relocate the controversial cross-border pipeline within the next three years, a U.S. judge says.
A rupture on territory that belongs to the Bad River Band of the Lake Superior Chippewa would constitute a clear public nuisance under federal law, district court Judge William Conley said in a decision late Friday.
But while the order affirms that Enbridge has been trespassing on Bad River land since 2013, when certain permits for the 70-year-old pipeline were allowed to lapse, it stops short of causing “economic havoc” with an immediate shutdown.
“The use of trespass on a few parcels to drive the effective closure of all of Line 5 has always been about a tail wagging a much larger dog,” Conley writes in his opinion.
In other words, there are “much larger public policy issues” surrounding cross-border pipelines like Line 5 that the band’s arguments, while valid, lack the power to overcome, he said.
Those issues “involve not only the sovereign rights of the band, but the rights of multiple states and international relations between the United States and Canada.”
Enbridge has already agreed to reroute the line, an essential energy conduit for much of the U.S. Midwest as well as Ontario and Quebec. But Conley wants that project completed more quickly than currently planned.
“Considering all the evidence, the court cannot countenance an infinite delay or even justify what would amount to a five-year forced easement with little realistic prospect of a reroute proceeding even then,” he wrote.
“The court will give Enbridge an additional three years to complete a reroute. If Enbridge fails to do so, the three years will at least give the public and other affected market players time to adjust to a permanent closure of Line 5.”
Enbridge’s lawyers continue to dispute the finding that the company is trespassing on Indigenous territory and intend to appeal the decision, and may also request a stay pending its outcome, said spokesperson Juli Kellner.
“Enbridge’s position has long been that a 1992 contract between Enbridge and the band provides legal permission for the line to remain in its current location,” Kellner said.
“Timely government permit approvals” would be necessary to complete the reroute within three years, while relocating the pipe currently on Bad River territory would take about a year, she added.
Any shutdown before then “would jeopardize the delivery of reliable and affordable energy to U.S. and Canadian families and businesses, disrupt local and regional economies, and violate the Transit Pipeline Treaty.”
Talks between the two countries have been ongoing for months under the terms of that treaty, a 1977 agreement that effectively prohibits either side from unilaterally closing off the flow of hydrocarbons.
In prior court documents, Enbridge has accused the band of being focused on a single outcome: the permanent closure of the pipeline on their territory “while refusing much less extreme alternative measures.”
The band argues that several weeks of spring flooding along the Bad River has washed away so much of the riverbank and supporting terrain that a breach is “imminent” and a shutdown order more than justified.
Enbridge insists the dangers are being overstated — and even if they were real, the company’s court-ordered contingency plan, which spells out the steps it would take, would be a far more rational solution.
Conley’s order Friday included tweaks to that plan to establish a more “conservative” threshold for the conditions that would trigger it, such as lower water levels and flow rates on the river.
“The court is particularly concerned that Enbridge’s plan does not account for inevitable delays that could occur due to weather conditions, supply and equipment problems and human error.”
Enbridge has also been rebuffed repeatedly in its efforts to perform remedial work on the site, which would include using sandbags and trees to fortify the riverbanks —decisions the band has defended as its sovereign right.
Heavy flooding that began in early April washed away significant portions of the riverbank where Line 5 intersects the Bad River, a meandering, 120-kilometre course that feeds Lake Superior and a complex network of ecologically delicate wetlands.
The band has been in court with Enbridge since 2019 in an effort to compel the pipeline’s owner and operator to reroute Line 5 around its traditional territory — something the company has already agreed to do.
But the flooding has turned a theoretical risk into a very real one, the band argued, and time is now of the essence.
Line 5 meets the river just past a location the court has come to know as the “meander,” where the riverbed snakes back and forth multiple times, separated from itself only by several metres of forest and the pipeline itself.
But it was clear both from Friday’s order and an in-person hearing last month, when Conley openly questioned the band’s motives, that he faults the band for rejecting Enbridge’s proposed plans to mitigate the danger.
“The band has refused to approve any of Enbridge’s remediation and prevention proposals, much less proposed even one project of its own to prevent or at least slow further erosion at the meander,” he wrote.
The neighbouring state of Michigan, led by Attorney General Dana Nessel, has been waging its own war against Line 5, fearing a leak in the Straits of Mackinac, the ecologically delicate waterway where the pipeline crosses the Great Lakes.
The economic arguments against shutting down the pipeline, which carries 540,000 barrels of oil and natural gas liquids daily across Wisconsin and Michigan to refineries in Sarnia, Ont., are by now well-known.
Line 5’s defenders, which include the federal government, say a shutdown would cause major economic disruption across the Prairies and the U.S. Midwest, where it provides feedstock to refineries in Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania.
It also supplies key refining facilities in Ontario and Quebec, and is vital to the production of jet fuel for major airports on both sides of the Canada-U.S. border, including Detroit Metropolitan and Pearson International in Toronto.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 17, 2023.
From The Center Square
By
After the self-described socialist Zohran Mamdani won the Democratic primary for mayor in New York, Dallas Mayor Eric Johnson invited New Yorkers and others to move to Dallas.
Mamdani has vowed to implement a wide range of tax increases on corporations and property and to “shift the tax burden” to “richer and whiter neighborhoods.”
New York businesses and individuals have already been relocating to states like Texas, which has no corporate or personal income taxes.
Johnson, a Black mayor and former Democrat, switched parties to become a Republican in 2023 after opposing a city council tax hike, The Center Square reported.
“Dear Concerned New York City Resident or Business Owner: Don’t panic,” Johnson said. “Just move to Dallas, where we strongly support our police, value our partners in the business community, embrace free markets, shun excessive regulation, and protect the American Dream!”
Fortune 500 companies and others in recent years continue to relocate their headquarters to Dallas; it’s also home to the new Texas Stock Exchange (TXSE). The TXSE will provide an alternative to the New York Stock Exchange and Nasdaq and there are already more finance professionals in Texas than in New York, TXSE Group Inc. founder and CEO James Lee argues.
From 2020-2023, the Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington MSA reported the greatest percentage of growth in the country of 34%, The Center Square reported.
Johnson on Thursday continued his invitation to New Yorkers and others living in “socialist” sanctuary cities, saying on social media, “If your city is (or is about to be) a sanctuary for criminals, mayhem, job-killing regulations, and failed socialist experiments, I have a modest invitation for you: MOVE TO DALLAS. You can call us the nation’s first official ‘Sanctuary City from Socialism.’”
“We value free enterprise, law and order, and our first responders. Common sense and the American Dream still reside here. We have all your big-city comforts and conveniences without the suffocating vice grip of government bureaucrats.”
As many Democratic-led cities joined a movement to defund their police departments, Johnson prioritized police funding and supporting law and order.
“Back in the 1800s, people moving to Texas for greater opportunities would etch ‘GTT’ for ‘Gone to Texas’ on their doors moving to the Mexican colony of Tejas,” Johnson continued, referring to Americans who moved to the Mexican colony of Tejas to acquire land grants from the Mexican government.
“If you’re a New Yorker heading to Dallas, maybe try ‘GTD’ to let fellow lovers of law and order know where you’ve gone,” Johnson said.
Modern-day GTT movers, including a large number of New Yorkers, cite high personal income taxes, high property taxes, high costs of living, high crime, and other factors as their reasons for leaving their states and moving to Texas, according to multiple reports over the last few years.
In response to Johnson’s invitation, Gov. Greg Abbott said, “Dallas is the first self-declared “Sanctuary City from Socialism. The State of Texas will provide whatever support is needed to fulfill that mission.”
The governor has already been doing this by signing pro-business bills into law and awarding Texas Enterprise Grants to businesses that relocate or expand operations in Texas, many of which are doing so in the Dallas area.
“Texas truly is the Best State for Business and stands as a model for the nation,” Abbott said. “Freedom is a magnet, and Texas offers entrepreneurs and hardworking Texans the freedom to succeed. When choosing where to relocate or expand their businesses, more innovative industry leaders recognize the competitive advantages found only in Texas. The nation’s leading CEOs continually cite our pro-growth economic policies – with no corporate income tax and no personal income tax – along with our young, skilled, diverse, and growing workforce, easy access to global markets, robust infrastructure, and predictable business-friendly regulations.”
From the Fraser Institute
By Matthew Lau
At the beginning of June, the Canadian Dental Care Plan expanded to include all eligible adults. To be eligible, you must: not have access to dental insurance, have filed your 2024 tax return in Canada, have an adjusted family net income under $90,000, and be a Canadian resident for tax purposes.
As a result, millions more Canadians will be able to access certain dental services at reduced—or no—out-of-pocket costs, as government shoves the costs onto the backs of taxpayers. The first half of the proposition, accessing services at reduced or no out-of-pocket costs, is always popular; the second half, paying higher taxes, is less so.
A Leger poll conducted in 2022 found 72 per cent of Canadians supported a national dental program for Canadians with family incomes up to $90,000—but when asked whether they would support the program if it’s paid for by an increase in the sales tax, support fell to 42 per cent. The taxpayer burden is considerable; when first announced two years ago, the estimated price tag was $13 billion over five years, and then $4.4 billion ongoing.
Already, there are signs the final cost to taxpayers will far exceed these estimates. Dr. Maneesh Jain, the immediate past-president of the Ontario Dental Association, has pointed out that according to Health Canada the average patient saved more than $850 in out-of-pocket costs in the program’s first year. However, the Trudeau government’s initial projections in the 2023 federal budget amounted to $280 per eligible Canadian per year.
Not all eligible Canadians will necessarily access dental services every year, but the massive gap between $850 and $280 suggests the initial price tag may well have understated taxpayer costs—a habit of the federal government, which over the past decade has routinely spent above its initial projections and consistently revises its spending estimates higher with each fiscal update.
To make matters worse there are also significant administrative costs. According to a story in Canadian Affairs, “Dental associations across Canada are flagging concerns with the plan’s structure and sustainability. They say the Canadian Dental Care Plan imposes significant administrative burdens on dentists, and that the majority of eligible patients are being denied care for complex dental treatments.”
Determining eligibility and coverage is a huge burden. Canadians must first apply through the government portal, then wait weeks for Sun Life (the insurer selected by the federal government) to confirm their eligibility and coverage. Unless dentists refuse to provide treatment until they have that confirmation, they or their staff must sometimes chase down patients after the fact for any co-pay or fees not covered.
Moreover, family income determines coverage eligibility, but even if patients are enrolled in the government program, dentists may not be able to access this information quickly. This leaves dentists in what Dr. Hans Herchen, president of the Alberta Dental Association, describes as the “very awkward spot” of having to verify their patients’ family income.
Dentists must also try to explain the program, which features high rejection rates, to patients. According to Dr. Anita Gartner, president of the British Columbia Dental Association, more than half of applications for complex treatment are rejected without explanation. This reduces trust in the government program.
Finally, the program creates “moral hazard” where people are encouraged to take riskier behaviour because they do not bear the full costs. For example, while we can significantly curtail tooth decay by diligent toothbrushing and flossing, people might be encouraged to neglect these activities if their dental services are paid by taxpayers instead of out-of-pocket. It’s a principle of basic economics that socializing costs will encourage people to incur higher costs than is really appropriate (see Canada’s health-care system).
At a projected ongoing cost of $4.4 billion to taxpayers, the newly expanded national dental program is already not cheap. Alas, not only may the true taxpayer cost be much higher than this initial projection, but like many other government initiatives, the dental program already seems to be more costly than initially advertised.
Matthew Lau
Adjunct Scholar, Fraser Institute
New Peer-Reviewed Study Affirms COVID Vaccines Reduce Fertility
Ottawa Funded the China Ferry Deal—Then Pretended to Oppose It
The permanent CO2 storage site at the end of the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line is just getting started
Canada’s euthanasia regime is not health care, but a death machine for the unwanted
-
Alberta6 hours agoAlberta Independence Seekers Take First Step: Citizen Initiative Application Approved, Notice of Initiative Petition Issued
-
Crime5 hours agoNational Health Care Fraud Takedown Results in 324 Defendants Charged in Connection with Over $14.6 Billion in Alleged Fraud
-
Health4 hours agoRFK Jr. Unloads Disturbing Vaccine Secrets on Tucker—And Surprises Everyone on Trump
-
Bruce Dowbiggin7 hours agoThe Game That Let Canadians Forgive The Liberals — Again
-
Agriculture2 days agoCanada’s supply management system is failing consumers
-
Alberta1 day agoCOVID mandates protester in Canada released on bail after over 2 years in jail
-
armed forces1 day agoCanada’s Military Can’t Be Fixed With Cash Alone
-
Alberta1 day agoAlberta uncorks new rules for liquor and cannabis