Sask. industry leaders join first ministers in calls for pipeline, railway investment to boost trade
Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe says pipelines are paramount to diversifying trade, along with investments in rail and ports. Allison Bamford has more.
SASKATOON, SASK. — As Canadian politicians gathered in Saskatoon for the first ministers' meeting, some industry leaders are calling for infrastructure investment to help get product to market.
New pipelines and improvements to railways and ports would help producers increase cash flow, according to Bill Prybylski, farmer and president of the Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan.
'Grain movement has been slow,' Prybylski told CTV News.
If grain isn't delivered, farmers don't get paid, which can cause cash flow issues at a very critical time in seeding.
'There's a lot of cash going into the ground and producers need inputs now,' Prybylski said.
Like other industry leaders, Prybylski believes overcapacity demands on railways could be partly resolved if oil was transported through pipelines, rather than freight.
Potash companies have been advocating for similar investments.
'Our entire infrastructure system is congested,' said Marnel Jones, director of Government and Public Affairs for The Mosaic Company in Canada. 'Right now, we just need to be thinking in a bigger way about how we use our entire supply chain more efficiently, and that includes getting oil into pipelines and potash and wheat into railcars so we can get it to market.'
Michael Bourque, president and CEO of Fertilizer Canada, says he's in Saskatoon this week paying close attention to the first ministers' meeting. Bourque says 75 per cent of Canada's fertilizer is transported by rail, and millions of dollars can be lost when it isn't shipped.
'Rail doesn't have capacity, or there are bottlenecks along the way,' he said. 'So we need to build it out, make it more reliable, make it more efficient and that would go a long way toward helping us expand and serve global markets.'
Like other industries, Fertilizer Canada supports new pipelines. But Bourque says that isn't the only solution.
'In the long run, that will help the capacity. But in the short term, what we'd rather see is much more investment in the hard infrastructure, especially rails (and) ports,' Bourque said.
Simon Enoch, senior researcher with the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, says transportational costs tend to be the biggest trade barrier. Rather than new pipelines, Enoch believes upgrades to infrastructure could better facilitate trade.
'The private sector, the oil industry itself, has shown very little interest, which makes me think that they view it as not a good investment,' Enoch said. 'Something like this to be built I think it's going to require huge government subsidies.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
32 minutes ago
- Globe and Mail
Ontario's Bill 5 has passed. Here's why it has sparked conflict with First Nations
Ontario's Bill 5, which passed on Wednesday, will give the provincial government sweeping powers to disregard its own laws in order to speed up mining or other projects – and has prompted warning of protests or blockades from Indigenous leaders who say they should have been consulted. Formally known as the Protect Ontario by Unleashing Our Economy Act, the legislation allows the Ontario government to designate 'special economic zones' where it could suspend any provincial law – including environmental or labour rules and municipal bylaws – for companies or entities it labels 'trusted proponents.' The federal government, and B.C., are also pushing to accelerate major resource projects to try shore up the country's economy in the face of U.S. tariffs and China's dominance in critical minerals. But these moves are being made amid a shifting legal landscape on Indigenous issues – and could put governments on a collision course with First Nations. In addition to allowing for special economic zones, the bill also rewrites Ontario's endangered species legislation, allowing cabinet, instead of scientists, the final say on what species are protected. And it would loosen the rules around preserving Indigenous archeological sites. (It also includes other provisions to streamline mining approvals, supported both by the industry and even the opposition, that would see key projects funnelled through a centralized, 'one project, one process' system.) The government has said it aims to designate the remote northern Ring of Fire region, where it says reserves of critical minerals are key to Ontario's economy, as its first special economic zone. While three First Nations in and near the region are supporting plans for all-season roads to the area, others have opposed the push to mine there. How these zones will be implemented – and what rules will take the place of any laws wiped off the books – is supposed to be laid out in regulations that have not been released. Those regulations must also be subject to both First Nations and public consultations, which the government has promised over the summer. First Nations leaders say they should have been consulted first, and want the bill scrapped. As opposition to Bill 5 mounted from First Nations in recent days, the government said these future regulations could include provisions to allow 'Indigenous-led economic zones,' but provided no details. Bill 5 could affect these six species in Ontario, conservationists say Ontario's Bill 5 falls into a category lawyers label 'Henry VIII legislation,' as Laura Bowman, a staff lawyer at the group Ecojustice, has pointed out. The term invokes the infamous 16th-century English king – who had two of his wives beheaded – in giving the executive branch the power to pick and choose which laws passed by the legislature apply and to whom. This aspect has alarmed not just First Nations, but the Canadian Civil Liberties Association and opposition MPPs. Liberal MPP John Fraser compares Bill 5 to the executive powers now being abused by U.S. President Donald Trump. The government defends the need for the extraordinary powers, saying it can take 15 years to open a new mine in Ontario, much longer than in other jurisdictions. Properly called the 'duty to consult and accommodate' First Nations, it has been recognized in court rulings dating back to the 1980s. It obligates the Crown – meaning governments – to consult First Nations about activities that impact their treaty rights, which were embedded in Section 35 of the Constitution in 1982. Landmark Supreme Court of Canada rulings in the past 20 years have outlined and strengthened this obligation. In essence, if governments want to allow the construction of a mine or another project in a First Nation's traditional territory, they must engage in meaningful consultations and accommodate Indigenous concerns about its effects on treaty rights, such as hunting grounds of fishing grounds. The duty to consult has seen many First Nations sign 'impact benefit agreements' with mining companies or others operating on their traditional territories, which usually involve revenue for Indigenous governments. The Decibel: Unpacking the nationwide push to fast-track major projects Ontario Indigenous Affairs Minister Greg Rickford has repeatedly asserted it does not, referencing a 2018 Supreme Court ruling. In that case, the Mikisew Cree First Nation argued the then federal Conservative government had a duty to consult before bringing in contentious 2012 legislation that sparked the 'Idle No More' protest movement. In a split decision, the top court ruled against the First Nation, concluding that parliamentary privilege means governments do not trip over their constitutional obligation if they draft legislation without consulting first. But lawyers say the Mikisew ruling does not preclude governments from choosing to consult First Nations before tabling a bill. Governments routinely consult industry or other interest groups while drafting legislation. That phrase, routinely invoked by First Nations, comes from the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which Canada had at first avoided endorsing but fully signed onto in 2016. Federal legislation in 2021 began the implementation of this new standard, which clearly goes beyond a 'duty to consult.' However, Ontario has not signed onto UNDRIP or adopted it in its law. And lawyers say what 'free, prior and informed consent' will precisely mean across Canada, in different contexts, remains legally contested ground. This is also increasingly contested ground, as First Nations argue their forebears understood these documents, signed hundreds of years ago in many cases, much differently than governments did. In a case working its way through the courts, 10 First Nations that signed Treaty 9 in 1905 – which covers two-thirds of Ontario's land mass and includes the Ring of Fire – argue they never gave up decision-making power on their lands and that a new 'co-jurisdiction' regime must be established. They are also seeking $95-billion they say they are owed under the treaty, which was signed by both Ontario and Canada. 'What First Nations are really saying is, forget the duty to consult,' said Kate Kempton, a veteran lawyer for First Nations in battles with mining companies who is leading the Treaty 9 case. 'It doesn't work. It needs to be the right to decide. Bill 5 is really just the straw that is breaking the camel's back.' The government has committed to consultations with the public and First Nations on the regulations it must draft before any 'special economic zones' are named. But Grand Chief Alvin Fiddler of the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, which represents 49 First Nations across Northern Ontario including those in the Ring of Fire, has warned of an 'Idle No More 2.0″ wave of protests against bill, as have other Indigenous leaders.
CTV News
41 minutes ago
- CTV News
Durham Region bus drivers strike could begin Saturday
A Durham Region Transit bus is seen in this undated photo (Unifor). Bus service in Durham Region will end early on Friday ahead of a potential strike which could begin at the stroke of midnight. Durham Region Transit says that it plans to end scheduled service at 11 p.m. on Friday due to the possible strike by members of Unifor Local 222. However, it says that if Unifor Local 222 members do not walk off the job at 12:01 a.m. on June 7, scheduled service would resume on Saturday. On Wednesday, Unifor Local 222 said that it was awaiting a final offer from Durham Region but 'is not confident it will be enough to deter strike action.' The union has said that its key issue at the bargaining table is wages and bringing them in line with transit workers in Mississauga and Brampton, who it says earn up to $5 per hour more than its members. 'We are fighting tirelessly to close this unjust wage gap and secure a fair contract that recognizes the hard work, dedication and professionalism of DRT members,' Unifor Local 222 President Jeff Gray said in a news release on Wednesday. Unifor Local 222 represents approximately 616 employees, who work as transit operations maintenance workers as well as in dispatch and specialized services at Durham Regional Transit. Durham Region Transit has said that it has been participating in collective bargaining with the union since March 31 but has been unable to negotiate a new agreement. The union says its members voted 98 per cent in favour of strike action on May 21.
National Post
41 minutes ago
- National Post
Two glaring omissions in the Canucks' current marketing campaign
Article content Plenty of people have taken note that Elias Pettersson is prominently absent from the Vancouver Canucks' current ticket sales efforts. Article content There is a Facebook advertisement that caught everyone's eye, for a start. Pettersson is not visible in it. Article content Article content And if you click on the Canucks' season ticket membership website, the video that plays at the top does not feature the visage of the team's best-paid player, just a fan sign that features his number. Article content Is this because he's on the trade block? Maybe. Is it because his image carries too much negative connotations for fans right now? Perhaps also. Article content Either way, what a spot to be in, given where Pettersson's star was 18 months ago, when he was one of the NHL's stars of the month. You can't even market the guy who is supposed to be one of your most marketable stars? Article content That's one thing to note. Article content But there's another face missing from the same imagery that should stand out more — goalie Thatcher Demko. Article content Kevin Lankinen is in the website video. But Demko, still the Canucks' No. 1 guy in the crease, is not. Article content It does make you wonder if Demko is quietly being shopped around. One league source said that trading Demko made sense to them since he is a solid trade chip, even if he is coming off multiple seasons in a row with injuries, and could help bring back the kind of No. 2 centre the Canucks openly covet. Article content Another source said management is looking to 'get rid of the emotionally soft, diva, drama-type, cancerous players, without doing a traditional rebuild.' Article content Article content Line that up as you will. Article content Article content Fans know this dressing room was a mess this past season. There has long been frustration with management and coaches over some aspects of the team culture that they inherited when president Jim Rutherford and general manager Patrik Allvin took over in 2022. Article content There was too much entitlement, they felt, amongst a group of players that had very little to show for their work to date. Sure, the 2020 bubble playoff run was an impressive thing, but that was all they had in their cap. That was the only playoff run this group had put together to that point. Article content And that's why Allvin in his first end-of-season news conference made note of what he wanted to see from his players in the future. He wanted to see more. He wanted to see a get-it-done attitude. He wanted to see players who focused on the task and got on with the job. Article content There certainly have been rumours that management has been frustrated with how some players have prepared themselves. How they have worked to get back from injury. How they have operated once they have been cleared to return.
