Winnipeg Free Press

Winnipeg Free Press (Newspaper) - June 29, 1981, Winnipeg, Manitoba Winnipeg free press monday june 29, 1981 7 Power line plan adds Fidel to fires Ottawa minister Marc Lalonde has Given the Industry food for thought Over the Long summer. He has also deliberately thrown fuel on the Ever flaring fires of Federal provincial relations. Lalonde s vehicle is a discussion draft of the Energy Security act 1981, released last week. The draft it should be noted is not a Bill ready to be introduced to Parlia ment to is however somewhat More advanced than a White paper and is therefore an indication of if not the final word on the government s tons. Presumably the draft could be substantially revised without causing too much embarrassment to the govern ment. Nevertheless it is a potential bomb Shell. The most pertinent proposal is one that would give the National Energy Board the Power to expropriate property for construction of designated inter provincial and International Power lines to link electricity producers with Consumers elsewhere in Canada or North America. The expropriation right could apply anywhere to enable Calgary Power company to acquire a right of Way to Export electricity to the United states or to Speed up construction of a Prairie Power Grid from Manitoba to Alberta if Saskatchewan should drag the Issue on too Long. But the attention grabber is the transmission of hydroelectric Power from Churchill Falls in Newfoundland to new York state. There is a Long and sometimes bitter dispute Between Quebec and Newfoundland on the Issue. Lalonde is now threatening Federal intrusion into the dispute and on Newfoundland s Side. Under the existing arrangement by virtue of a contract signed in 1967, Hydro Quebec buys electricity at the Labrador Border from Newfoundland transports it across Quebec and Sells it at a much higher Price in new York. Quebec has been unwilling to renegotiate the contract. Newfoundland is tremendously anxious to develop lower Churchill Power and Export it itself to new York state. But Newfoundland has been stymied by the Prospect of getting into another Deal whereby Quebec would take no risk but get much of the Benefit by buying the Power cheap at the Labra Dor Border and Selling it at much higher prices into the . The Issue has been a stand off. Now however has come the threatened fed eral intervention. Quebec s reaction was prompt and predictable. Premier Rene Levesque denounced the proposal and flatly stated that the Quebec people would not permit Federal expropriation for electricity transmission. It is significant that Levesque immediately made it a political Issue with his reference to the Quebec people. Obviously Lalonde would proceed with this aspect of the discussion paper at his peril or More correctly at the peril of the Federal liberals in que . In his announcement Lalonde Down played but did not hide from the implications for the Quebec Newfoundland dispute. He stressed that the proposal would merely extend to the neb the same authority Over Power lines that it now has with regard to pipelines for the transmission of Oil and natural Gas. But he also noted that a designated Peter Thomson Ottawa editor International Power line could provide at least a partial solution to the dispute Between Newfoundland and Quebec concerning hydroelectric Power from the lower Churchill the neb he noted now lacks the authority to expropriate a right of Way for such a line. At the same time Lalonde stressed his preference for a negotiated solution to Newfoundland Quebec differences Over electricity transmission. He naturally would prefer to avoid a political slug est with Quebec on the Issue. In one respect Lalonde s discussion paper has already achieved the near impossible a muted response from Newfoundland Premier Brian Peck Ford the Champion of provincial Auton omy when it comes to offshore re sources and providing employment for newfound Landers. Peckford obviously cannot condemn the feds for this Extension of authority when it could be so beneficial to his province. The expropriation authority for the neb forms but a Small part of the 112-Page discussion draft but it is bound to attract the most attention. Other sections of the discussion paper Deal with controversial but Long Dis cussed Energy issues stemming from the National Energy program announced last october. The draft Bill would d establish a new incentive pro Gram to encourage Petroleum exploration and development d establish the legislative Frame work for guidelines concerning Canad an ownership and control to be applied to those seeking to qualify for Petroleum incentive Grants d allow the government to collect information As proposed in the National Energy program d provide legislative authority for a number of Petroleum and natural Gas pricing compensation and taxation initiatives d authorize the capital necessary to expand Petro Canada and d redefine the jurisdiction of the neb so that Public hearings need no longer be held regarding Export prices. Most of these matters have been announced debated discussed and re fined in the past eight months. In some cases the taxes mentioned Are already being collected. The legislation will merely make the collection Legal. Alberta Energy minister Merv Leitch s immediate reaction to the Dis Cussion draft was that it probably won t affect negotiations with Ottawa on Petroleum pricing and taxing. . S Energy minister Bob Mcclel land correctly observed that the draft legislation would merely make legitimate what already is happening. As for stripping the neb of the authority to hold hearings on Export Price and tax Levels Mcclelland suggested the neb does t move without first obtaining Cabinet approval any Way. Alberta and . Differences with Ottawa Are generally on questions of jurisdiction. They will eventually be settled in the courts not in any draft discussion paper. But the impending Federal Quebec Row will be for some time a Public relations Battle. It will keep the heat in Federal provincial relations for some time. Marc Lalonde s discussion paper on Energy pleased Brian Peckford but angered Rene Levesque West German clergy enters arms debate by Bradley Graham the Washington Post Bonn growing Militancy and political activism within West Germany s powerful protestant evangelical Church has injected a potent element into the country s already turbulent political Arena putting some clergy at Odds with prominent social democrats who traditionally have looked to the protestant Church As their religious wellspring. Of crucial importance in the Contro Versy is opposition within the Church to a new generation of nato missiles a key part of future Alliance defence strategy in Western Europe. The missiles were a chief target of a four Day gathering in Hamburg last week that included leaders and members of the evangelical Church West Germany s major protestant federation grouping the lutheran United and reformed churches and represent ing nearly half of the population. While dramatizing the degree of political unrest in West Germany today the conference also underscored an important feature of the peace move ment Here the support it draws from religious argument and from some in the protestant Church. In april both Chancellor Helmut Schmidt and president Karl car Stens members of opposing political parties attacked Church officials accusing them of misusing their office by interfering in politics and siding with the anti missile protest. Senior Church officials who appear to have less quarrel with the govern ment than Many local pastors do see it As bad form for religious officers to be cloaking themselves in the authority of their Parish positions when preaching opposition to official policies but they say the clergy have a right to carry out political duties. The West German Church is particularly sensitive to its political responsibilities As a result of the nazi past. We have been strongly influenced by the experience under the third Reich by the sense that the Church then did not do enough when the government was explained Cornelius Van Heyl chairman of the protestant Synod and a Church specialist on Security issues. We feel we have a responsibility now when dangerous and inhuman developments to some Church officials the new nato missiles appear to be just such a development. The weapons Are viewed not simply As a further expansion of the arms race but As an especially menacing one since it is argued they could allow the superpowers to limit a nuclear War to Europe. We Are in a difficult position of conflicting opinion misunderstanding accusations and said Heyl. Naturally the Church is looking for new answers to express what the com Mon basis for belief peace groups have gone to the Bible to find one of their favorite arguments for renouncing the nato decision Christ s Sermon on the mount which advises turning the other Cheek to aggressors. Bonn officials say that while Christ s words May be an appropriate guidepost for individual behaviour the Sermon is an inadequate prescription for political leaders who must Bear responsibility for the Security of nations. Government officials Are especially sensitive to Church participation in the peace movement because it has Given it institutional legitimacy making More difficult the government s attempts to dismiss opposition to the missiles As Youthful idealism Radical protest or political opportunism. Schmidt used an interview in april with a West German protestant publication to launch his drive against the anti missile campaigners. He said that if the Western allies had turned the other Cheek during the Stalin Era so Viet divisions would now be stationed along the Rhine. Last week debating critics in a Tele vision broadcast Schmidt said the ser Mon on the mount has practical limitations. You can t make it so easy for he said that you say 1 will put up with someone else building up arms and missiles that Are directed against my town and against other towns 1 will stand Back on the ground that god will look after me you can t do with protestants divided or Uncer Tain on where to stand in the debate on the nuclear arms race senior Church officials have raised the possibility the West German protestant Church May reconsider its 22-year-old position on nuclear weapons a position so even handed As to be non committal. The policy was issued As a guideline for military pastors by a committee that concluded that both opposition and support of nuclear armament provided such arms were for deterrence were allowable Christian ways to peace. Heyl has said that the current Contro Versy could prompt a review of this position during the annual protestant Church Synod in november. Protestants and catholics each claim about 43 percent of the West German population. Traditionally the two have differed in their approach to Public policy. The catholics tend to pursue specific policy Aims such As opposing abortion and favouring religious schools. The protestants have keyed their Politi Cal activity to such broader issues As German reunification and civil Liber ties. The government s feud is chiefly with protestant clergy who have traditionally been Friend and religious Tutor of West Germany s ruling social democrats rather than with catholics who historically have opposed them. Schmidt a lutheran has asked Why recent youth revolts have occurred mostly in protestant cities. He suggested that a protestant upbringing May be less suited to raising children with a sense of tradition. Protestant officials like to recall the Welcome they got from an earlier socialist government when in the 1960s the Church supported Bonn s detente policy with Eastern Europe. Church officials say the government appears to favor Church involvement Only when pastors Side with official policy. The Church s recent activism has been interpreted by some critics As an Effort by some clergy to appear More relevant in a period of declining Church attendance. Heyl disputed this saying the theme of peace does not make the Church full. Just the opposite. It causes tension and that is supreme court ruling could bring elections Canada s chief Justice Bora Laskin has announced he plans to break his summer vacation Early in july but other court officials have warned against any speculation that this change in plans indicates an Early decision on the legality of the constitutional changes proposed by prime min ister Trudeau. Since the chief Justice s Holiday break will not begin until july 5, every one can be quite certain that the Constitution in a revised form will not be in Ottawa this wednesday As the prime minister had hoped. What May be available will be the supreme court s opinion of whether the parliament of Canada or More realistically the majority party in the parliament of Canada has the Legal right to juggle unilaterally the Powers of the provinces and ship the rearranged Puzzle picture to Westminster. If the opinion is unanimous it will carry More weight than if it is split and the closer the split the less weight the opinion will carry. Manitoba Premier Sterling Lyon is convinced that if the opinion comes Down against the Posi Tion taken by eight of the ten provinces then there will be in the Premier s words one hell of a political fight. Of course there will also be a fight of equal intensity fought on the political battlefields of Canada if the decision comes Down in favor of the eight prov Fred Cleverley inces and against the Federal govern ment. The fact that the Manitoba pre Mier usually mentions Only the first possibility indicates that As Leader of the eight dissenting provinces he most Likely thinks that the supreme court will decide that the Federal government has the Legal right to do what it pro poses. His argument is that simply because something is Legal does not make it right although he has to live with the fact that it was the provinces which took the matter to court. They were pushed into taking it to court but some Public opinion will certainly Drift to the position that As originators of the court action the provinces should be willing to live with the decision. It is Clear that they Are not prepared to live with the decision if it goes against them. Lest there be too much criticism of this everyone should re member that prime minister Trudeau is not Likely to live with any supreme court decision that goes against his position at least not before he tests that decision at the polls. Thus the supreme court decision could become Only a stepping Stone along the Road to the final Resolution of the differences that exist Between the Federal government Ontario and new Brunswick on the one hand and the governments of the remaining eight provinces on the other. All of which leads to Only one thing speculation about the tactics to be adopted by the losing Side after the decision is brought Down. There seems Little doubt what the Federal govern ment would do. If its proposal is struck Down by the court it will do what any Federal government would do under similar circumstances. It would Appeal to the court that is Superior to the supreme court the court of Public support for its plans. A Federal election could be called and Given the pattern of support in the last such contest and the split in support for the opposition Leader Joe Clark could Likely be won by the liberals. If the election is called on the constitutional Issue and if it is won then the dissenting provincial governments would find it most difficult to pursue their position much further. However the More Likely decision of the supreme court is that the Federal government does have the Legal right to change the Constitution and ask the British parliament to ratify the changes. The decision May be split but it is most Likely that the majority of the court will Rule strictly on the legality of the Federal proposal recognizing that other standards of acceptance Are really outside the court s jurisdiction. The political action will then be left up to the losers in the court Battle the dissenting provinces. No one should be surprised if the premiers of these prov inces then hold their own version of a Federal election by calling provincial votes All on the same Day and with but a single Issue that of the future of Canada. This action would carry with it much greater risk for individual premiers than would a Federal election for the prime minister. The decision would require extreme courage on the part of several premiers including Quebec s Rene Levesque who has just weath ered a provincial fight and who might not relish putting his political future on an Issue he has supported for reasons quite different than those of the other dissenting premiers. Western premiers would probably support the idea of eight simultaneous provincial elections. The larger Issue of the Constitution and the distaste for a Bill of rights shared in Manitoba by both Premier Lyon and progressive party Leader Sid Green would help sweep Many of the other complaints against the provincial government under the carpet. Allan Blakeney could Call on the support of the Saskatchewan Federal members who have broken with de Broadbent Over his support of the Federal constitutional position. Peter Lougheed could win on such an Issue even if he did not bother to Campaign and Bill Bennett might Wel come a Chance to fight a provincial election on a National Issue. Eight provincial elections All fought on the same National Issue could carry As much weight As one Federal con test. Doonesbury thanks for. Cvsk., Al. Edh to teus me my favorite paper has tur Hep Otto be a fair tale. K. Well not the conclusions sir we by human but Tab stabilize future 55e, that s expat Ai what a i think i la 60 kipin6 Noui ;