Submission-To-Alberta-Energy-Inquiry
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Direct Phone: (780) 421-0261 e-mail: [email protected] Delivered electronically to [email protected] November 2, 2019 Mr. Steve Allan Commissioner CALGARY, Alberta Dear Commissioner Allan: Our Board of Directors has instructed me to provide you with its submission on issues falling within the terms of reference of your inquiry. We would be pleased to clarify any point you wish to discuss further. Yours truly Bob Wyatt Executive Director SUBMISSION TO THE PUBLIC INQUIRY INTO ANTI-ALBERTA ENERGY CAMPAIGNS November 2019 INTRODUCTION The Muttart Foundation submits that the most important recommendation that could come out of this inquiry is very simple: “Everybody tone down the rhetoric.” Comments around the establishment of the inquiry, and the events leading up to it, have been polarizing, hyperbolic and inappropriate in a democracy. Threats as to what could result from the inquiry, ranging from court challenges to demands that some organizations lose their charitable status have generated more heat than light. These comments have come from people and organizations on both sides of the issue; they are equally unhelpful. The economic future of Alberta is a critical issue, to Alberta and to Canada. So is the state of the environment and threats to it. These issues can, and do, co-exist, and they will continue to co-exist for the foreseeable future. Reasonable people can disagree on how to balance these issues. Indeed, were there a simple answer, everyone would rush to adopt it. But suggesting that people on one side of the debate are anti-Alberta, or that people on the other are undemocratic, will not help anyone reach a resolution. Indeed, as is already evident, it will just cause people to become more firmly entrenched in the “rightness” of their position. Many people have People and organizations are already stopped listening. They have stopped trying to entitled to hold different determine facts. They continue to resort to allegations opinions on important issues of bad faith and even illegal conduct. of the day. The Commissioner is called upon to report on organizations that have made “false and misleading statements” about Alberta’s energy industry. The Muttart Foundation respectfully suggests that the Commissioner make clear in his report that people and organizations are entitled to hold different opinions on important issues of the day. Throughout Canada’s history, commissions of inquiry, at both the provincial and federal level, have been used for purposes both good and bad. They have been used to shed light on issues affecting democracy and good governance. And they have been used in attempts to make political points. The latter type of inquiry can have lasting and inappropriate side effects, intentionally or not. They can, as this one has, raise fears amongst some about the “price” to be paid for taking a position that is different than that of the government of the day. Charities are integral to Albertans’ way of life. They exist in every community in the province. They provide services to those who are in need. They enhance the quality of life. And they serve – as charities have served since the earliest days of North America – as a means for people to gather together around common issues and contribute to democracy. Stifling these efforts, or creating a climate of fear, is not an acceptable “price.” We encourage the Commissioner to avoid tainting the work of the tens of thousands of Albertans who are involved in these charities, or to make it more difficult for them to advocate on behalf of their causes and, more importantly, their clients. The Muttart Foundation is not an environmental funder, nor has its Board of Directors taken a stand on current issues related to pipelines and the environment. It has, however, for 66 years, been a presence in Alberta, seeking to support Albertans and Canadians by ensuring that charitable organizations have the resources they need. Through granting, education and advocacy, The Muttart Foundation has attempted to help ensure a healthy society and ensure that Canada’s charitable sector remains strong and robust. As part of its work, the Foundation has, for almost a quarter-century, used its ability as an “honest broker”, to convene groups of people – governmental, charitable leaders, academics and allied professionals – to address common issues and learn from one another. These gatherings provide an opportunity for honest communication in a safe environment. More often than not, people discover that they have more in common than they thought. And they demonstrate that polarization can be overcome, if people of good will come together in a desire to make things better for some part of the Canadian society. This submission is meant to further that work. 2 CONTEXT There can be no debate that energy resources are critical to Alberta’s future. More than four million people call Alberta home and, as the owners of those resources, expect them to be used to ensure continued services and quality of life. Neither can one seriously debate that the economic health of Alberta is important for the economic health of Canada. The province’s contributions are not only financial; for decades, energy-related industries have provided work for people from across the country. Successive governments have taken steps to try to increase the revenue available from the energy industry, pointing particularly to the need to expand the list of purchasers beyond just the United States. Such efforts cannot be legitimately criticized; they are efforts that would be (and have been) taken by any government. Equally undebatable, however, is that the world’s environmental situation is precarious. Given the state of the science, no credibility can be given to those who deny climate change. Equally, it defies belief to suggest that climate change is not exacerbated by the extraction and consumption of energy resources, including in Alberta. While Alberta is Any solution is going to making progress in dealing with emissions, some people require creativity and a feel that there is still more than can be done. willingness to listen. Reconciling these two imperatives is critical, and will require decision-makers to understand there is no “silver bullet.” Any solution is going to require creativity and a willingness to listen. What is happening, instead, is that we are once again witnessing a polarization. People cannot listen to one another because they are trying to talk over one another. The only creativity being demonstrated is seemingly in the ability to develop blaming sound bites. Even the language of the Order in Council1 establishing this inquiry reflects attempts to frame the narrative. In the second paragraph of the preamble, reference is made to allegations of false and misleading statements about Alberta’s oil and gas industry. By the third paragraph of the preamble, these allegations are taken as fact. 1 Order in Council 125/2019, dated July 4, 2019 3 What is of most concern, however, is that the Order in Council construes criticism of the oil and gas industry – or, depending on one’s perspective, concern about the environment – as “anti-Alberta.” There can be few terms that are more pejorative. It is a term that should rarely, if ever, be uttered by anyone and even more rarely, by people who have been elected as the leadership of the province. Surely, in a democracy as lively and as firmly entrenched as that of Alberta, it cannot be anti-Alberta or “unAlbertan” to engage in serious debate about significant issues. Indeed, surely the opposite must be true: it is to the detriment of the province if contrary opinions can simply be dismissed as anti-Alberta. There must be recognition that the “truth” is not the exclusive preserve of one advocate or the other. There must also be recognition that honest criticism is not a sin. The emphasis must be on “honest.” Albertans do not benefit from either “Chicken Little” predictions of imminent doom or a “Pollyannish” approach that contends there are no problems. We accept that the inquiry is meant to ferret out those organizations that received funding from outside Canada and made misleading or false statements about the energy industry. Opinions – pro or con – are not misleading or false; they are opinions; they may be informed or uninformed. Disagreeing with government or with those involved in the energy industry is not evidence of wrongdoing; it is simply what happens in a free and democratic society. People differ on issues of the day. One can argue that any “misleading or false information” is unacceptable, whether it criticizes the energy industry or supports it. In an era when people struggle to find credible information, attempts to shape public opinion through twisting of data or the presentation of opinion as fact, are troublesome, no matter what side of the debate they are on. It is thus unfortunate that the inquiry is focusing only on people or organizations who are on one side of a debate. Some of those on the other side of the debate are also charities and if they have made “false and misleading statements,” they are – and should be – deserving of just as much criticism. Even if it comes from organizations that are not charities, the use of false or misleading information does not help create good public policy, no matter what side of the debate is furthered. 4 FACTS ABOUT FOREIGN FUNDING Some of the rhetoric around the acceptance of funding from outside Canada is not supported by evidence. Charities in Canada have received funding from outside Canada for as long as there have been Canadian charities. It is not something new. Some of that funding may well have come from people or organizations outside Canada that wished to support Canadian charities in their attempts to change laws or policies.