Independent
journalism that swims
against the current.
Opinion
Energy
BC Politics

Site C Is a Political Sophie’s Choice for the NDP

Blame the BC Liberals for that.

Bill Tieleman 31 Oct 2017TheTyee.ca

Bill Tieleman is a former NDP strategist whose clients include unions and businesses in the resource and public sector. Tieleman is a regular Tyee contributor who writes a column on B.C. politics every Tuesday in 24 Hours newspaper. Email him at weststar@telus.net, find him on Twitter, or visit his blog.

Sophie’s Choice: A choice where every alternative has significant negative consequences. — Wiktionary definition

Politics is always about making choices, but what if you are faced with three choices and all of them are bad?

Plus billions of dollars will be spent — or wasted — and many of your supporters will be angry with you, no matter which choice you make.

That’s the uncomfortable position Premier John Horgan will be in after he receives a report Wednesday on whether to complete, scrap or pause construction on BC Hydro’s controversial Site C dam project on the Peace River.

Site C will cost $8.8 billion or potentially much more if completed. But cancelling it outright along with the remediation of construction so far would cost about $3.3 billion without producing a nightlight’s worth of electricity, says the independent BC Utilities Commission.

And energy alternatives for future needs would cost between $1.8 billion and $3.4 billion more, depending on electricity use projections.

Then there’s the third choice of pausing Site C: mothballing the dam as it currently stands to leave the option of restarting construction in 2025 — or cancelling it then. This would cost about $1.4 billion on top of existing “sunk costs” of $2 billion, according to a report from auditing firm Deloitte LLP commissioned by the BCUC.

Most importantly, every option means significantly increasing your BC Hydro electricity bills for years to come.

Those rates were originally projected in 2014 to jump by 28 per cent over five years because of a massive $58 billion in long-term contracts with private power producers signed by the BC Liberals before rate increases were capped before the May election at 10.5 per cent between 2017 and 2019.

“Site C is a genuine and profound dilemma,” energy expert Jim Quail told 175 attendees Friday at a politics and policy conference held by Composite Public Affairs. “And don’t expect that the BCUC will give an easy answer.”

It’s the consequence of the former BC Liberal government absolutely refusing to allow an independent review of Site C by the BC Utilities Commission, a body set up to examine in detail major projects and recommend advice before taxpayer dollars are invested.

There are good arguments both for and against Site C.

Opponents say the project:

But dam supporters say Site C:

Indeed, the BC NDP government will be facing a Sophie’s Choice not of their making, but the consequences will be laid at their doorstep regardless.

The BC NDP’s likely decision will be to hit the pause button despite the costs because BC Hydro’s recently released faulty cost estimates mean continuing the project without further review is simply too financially risky.

And complete cancellation would effectively mean burning more than $2 billion of taxpayer money on the banks of the Peace River, even if ex-premiers Christy Clark and Gordon Campbell were responsible by refusing to have an independent review that might have stopped the project years before construction began.

Stopping Site C would also play into the BC Liberals’ negative narrative that the BC NDP is anti-business and against all resource development, this despite Clark’s broken promise to develop several liquefied natural gas plants exporting billions in energy.

So, the best of three bad options is pausing Site C and continuing an extensive independent review to determine true costs and electricity needs.

Whether Site C is a white knight or a white elephant will remain a question, one not likely answered until after the next provincial election.  [Tyee]

Read more: Energy, BC Politics

  • Share:

Facts matter. Get The Tyee's in-depth journalism delivered to your inbox for free

Tyee Commenting Guidelines

Comments that violate guidelines risk being deleted, and violations may result in a temporary or permanent user ban. Maintain the spirit of good conversation to stay in the discussion.
*Please note The Tyee is not a forum for spreading misinformation about COVID-19, denying its existence or minimizing its risk to public health.

Do:

  • Be thoughtful about how your words may affect the communities you are addressing. Language matters
  • Challenge arguments, not commenters
  • Flag trolls and guideline violations
  • Treat all with respect and curiosity, learn from differences of opinion
  • Verify facts, debunk rumours, point out logical fallacies
  • Add context and background
  • Note typos and reporting blind spots
  • Stay on topic

Do not:

  • Use sexist, classist, racist, homophobic or transphobic language
  • Ridicule, misgender, bully, threaten, name call, troll or wish harm on others
  • Personally attack authors or contributors
  • Spread misinformation or perpetuate conspiracies
  • Libel, defame or publish falsehoods
  • Attempt to guess other commenters’ real-life identities
  • Post links without providing context

LATEST STORIES

The Barometer

Where Are You Feeling Inflation the Most?

Take this week's poll