Article content continued

She said Couillard recognized the importance of energy to the economy, “and acknowledged as well that pipelines are ultimately the best way to move that product and that we needed to look at ways to enhance market access.

“That being said, he also described what is true for the people of Quebec, and I actually think (for) many people in Alberta as well, that we have an obligation to show that we’re taking real action on climate change concerns and overall environmental protection and environmental standards.

“And so, what I heard from him is that, you know, if we’re able to move forward on that in a meaningful and convincing way, there’s more likelihood of Quebec coming to terms with it.”

Notley seems to have no problem with this. She feels, and I think she’s right, that many Albertans now want a firm climate-change policy. By all means, let’s have it.

But … what if the policy is very firm, what if it’s even world-class, and Quebec or Ontario still reject the pipeline on grounds that the policy is not quite good enough?

What if the real agenda is to block pipelines to stop any growth in the oilsands, as seems to be true for some in the Ontario government?

Energy East would still fail no matter what Alberta does. All because provinces have gradually begun to use a veto power they don’t possess in the Constitution.

That veto is exercised not by any declaration, but through death by a thousand provincial processes and regulations that subject a project to escalating demands that can never be met.