Article content continued

The emissions cap wasn’t going to affect the industry for years, if not decades, he told Postmedia, adding the province is the best regulator.

“I think it’s inappropriate for the federal government to use that as a lever to put the responsibility into a regulator that doesn’t have the expertise,” he said.

Consultations continue

Canada’s Senate is in the midst of nationwide hearings on Bill C-69.

The Alberta NDP government had a ream of concerns with the bill, and both Notley and her environment minister Shannon Phillips took those worries to Ottawa.

One of their problems was the bill’s perceived over-reach into provincial jurisdiction. Sohi said Tuesday his government “gave an assurance” to Notley that wouldn’t be the case.

“(Notley’s) other concern was that as long as the cap remains on emissions, in-situ projects should not fall under C-69, and we gave her assurance on that,” Sohi said.

And if the cap is lifted, as Kenney has promised?

“Then in-situ will be part of Bill C-69,” he said.

‘Federal sucker punch’

Whether Kenney knew of the implications for in-situ sites before he promised to lift the emissions cap is unclear.

Christine Myatt, spokeswoman for the premier-designate’s office, wanted to know when NDP and federal Liberals agreed to a deal.

“It’s well known the issues with Bill C-69 go far beyond whether in-situ projects are exempted. According to experts, the legislation makes it unlikely that new pipelines can be built,” Myatt said in an email.

“The incoming UCP government looks forward to a productive discussion with the federal government on these key issues.”

Kenney has made no secret of his dislike of the bill.

During the election campaign he repeatedly vowed to launch a constitutional challenge to Bill C-69, saying it would prevent the building of future pipelines.

“Bill C-69 is a federal sucker punch to an already reeling Alberta economy,” he said.

egraney@postmedia.com

twitter.com/EmmaLGraney

Listen to our new business podcast, Down to Business