Skip to main content

B.C. NDP Leader Adrian Dix speaks during a provincial election campaign stop at the South Granville Seniors Centre in Vancouver B.C., on Tuesday April 23, 2013.

DARRYL DYCK/THE CANADIAN PRESS

Adrian Dix says he made up his mind to oppose the Kinder Morgan pipeline proposal after the company signalled its expanded ambitions for the project in January. But until the moment that he stepped up to the podium at a carefully staged policy announcement on the banks of the North Thompson River on Monday, the BC NDP Leader publicly maintained his party would take no position until the proponents submit their formal application to the national review panel.

"I thought Earth Day was a good day to say clearly what I thought – we have no intention of seeing Metro Vancouver become a major oil tanker centre," Mr. Dix said in an interview Tuesday.

Mr. Dix said he wasn't rushed into the decision: "It's been an important question for some time, there wasn't any particular pressure other than the importance of the issue," he said. "I reflected on it for a long time."

Story continues below advertisement

But while he publicly sat on the fence, pressure was growing both inside and outside the party.

It was the first notable recalculation on Mr. Dix's part in this campaign. It reflects what his candidates have been hearing on the doorsteps, as well as a potential clash among those who are expected to be a part of the next NDP caucus.

The New Democrats still bear the scars of past internal battles when resource development collided with environmental values: Names such as Six Mile Ranch, Carmanah and Clayoquot Sound resonate for those who recall the caucus and party divided.

Party insiders say the evolution of the Earth Day announcement speaks to the strong opposition to the oil pipeline proposal in vote-rich Metro Vancouver. Environmentalists were cranking up the heat, which could end up pushing voters towards the B.C. Green Party at the polls. The non-position on the politically explosive Kinder Morgan pipeline was simply not sustainable in a party that has a strong environmental wing.

That's the external pressure. Internally, not taking a position on Kinder Morgan was also increasingly difficult to sustain. If Mr. Dix emerges as the victor on May 14, the decision on how to handle the pipeline question could easily have become Mr. Dix's first caucus challenge.

Pollster Mario Canseco of Angus Reid Public Opinion said the shift reflects a concern about the Green vote. "If it is born out of a political calculation, that was the one," he said. "This is a way to reconnect with the environmentally friendly base, including those who are flirting with the Greens."

It took little time for leading environmentalists to cheer the NDP move – it was a signal they had been waiting for, a key factor deciding whether they would help the party in this election or hinder it as they did in 2009 over the carbon tax.

Story continues below advertisement

Mike Harcourt was the NDP premier in the 1990s who was faced with a string of environmental conflicts – notably a war in the woods that saw his caucus fracture along rural and urban lines.

"Clayoquot was extraordinary," he recalled. "We made an announcement that didn't satsify the extremes on either side, so you had 800 people who went to jail … and 20,000 loggers decended on the lawns."

The challenge he faced on forestry, and that Mr. Dix would face on pipelines, comes down to reconciling the values of economic prosperity and environmental health.

"You are always trying to look through the lens of the urban MLAs and the rest of the province outside of the largest clear-cut in B.C. known as the Lower Mainland," Mr. Harcourt said.

By taking a stand now, Mr. Dix at least won't have to work his way through a debate in caucus in the aftermath of the election, if the NDP wins form government.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • All comments will be reviewed by one or more moderators before being posted to the site. This should only take a few moments.
  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed. Commenters who repeatedly violate community guidelines may be suspended, causing them to temporarily lose their ability to engage with comments.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.
Cannabis pro newsletter