Skip to main content
The Globe and Mail
Support Quality Journalism
The Globe and Mail
First Access to Latest
Investment News
Collection of curated
e-books and guides
Inform your decisions via
Globe Investor Tools
Just$1.99
per week
for first 24 weeks

Enjoy unlimited digital access
Enjoy Unlimited Digital Access
Get full access to globeandmail.com
Just $1.99 per week for the first 24 weeks
Just $1.99 per week for the first 24 weeks
var select={root:".js-sub-pencil",control:".js-sub-pencil-control",open:"o-sub-pencil--open",closed:"o-sub-pencil--closed"},dom={},allowExpand=!0;function pencilInit(o){var e=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1];select.root=o,dom.root=document.querySelector(select.root),dom.root&&(dom.control=document.querySelector(select.control),dom.control.addEventListener("click",onToggleClicked),setPanelState(e),window.addEventListener("scroll",onWindowScroll),dom.root.removeAttribute("hidden"))}function isPanelOpen(){return dom.root.classList.contains(select.open)}function setPanelState(o){dom.root.classList[o?"add":"remove"](select.open),dom.root.classList[o?"remove":"add"](select.closed),dom.control.setAttribute("aria-expanded",o)}function onToggleClicked(){var l=!isPanelOpen();setPanelState(l)}function onWindowScroll(){window.requestAnimationFrame(function() {var l=isPanelOpen(),n=0===(document.body.scrollTop||document.documentElement.scrollTop);n||l||!allowExpand?n&&l&&(allowExpand=!0,setPanelState(!1)):(allowExpand=!1,setPanelState(!0))});}pencilInit(".js-sub-pencil",!1); // via darwin-bg var slideIndex = 0; carousel(); function carousel() { var i; var x = document.getElementsByClassName("subs_valueprop"); for (i = 0; i < x.length; i++) { x[i].style.display = "none"; } slideIndex++; if (slideIndex> x.length) { slideIndex = 1; } x[slideIndex - 1].style.display = "block"; setTimeout(carousel, 2500); }

Veto supporters rally in front of the White House on the same day U.S. President Barack Obama vetoed a Republican bill approving the Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada, in Washington, February 24, 2015. Prime Minister Stephen Harper voiced his frustration over Mr. Obama’s refusal to approve the project in an interview with Bloomberg News.

LARRY DOWNING/Reuters

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has voiced his frustration over Barack Obama's failure to approve the Keystone XL pipeline, saying the President is ignoring U.S. public opinion and the advice of his own officials.

"I think there's very peculiar politics of this particular administration" on the pipeline issue, Mr. Harper said in an interview with Bloomberg television on Wednesday. He said opinion polls consistently show Americans support the project, while the U.S. State Department has concluded it would not significantly add to global warming, a key criterion for the President.

The Prime Minister's criticism of Mr. Obama's politics was a rare comment by one national leader on the machinations of another, and Mr. Harper quickly qualified it by suggesting he did not want to interfere with an internal decision, other than stating Canada's position.

Story continues below advertisement

The Harper government has lobbied aggressively for approval of TransCanada Corp.'s plan to ship oil sands crude from Alberta to the U.S. Gulf Coast, and the multiyear delay in the review process has driven a wedge between Ottawa and the Obama administration.

Mr. Harper now appears to have given up hope Mr. Obama will approve Keystone XL, but said he remains optimistic the project will proceed under a future administration.

"Notwithstanding the facts, a positive decision has not been rendered for a very long time," he said. "That's obviously not a hopeful sign."

Even as the pipeline issue roils, the U.S. administration has waged a public campaign to force Canada to open its supply-managed agricultural sectors to more competition from imports at the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade talks. On Wednesday, Mr. Harper said Canada must be part of any TPP deal, and his government will protect the dairy and poultry sectors "as best we can."

TransCanada Corp.'s pipeline plan would move 800,000 barrels a day of oil sands bitumen from Alberta to the U.S. Gulf Coast, where refiners are configured to process the heavy crude and eager for additional supply. Mr. Harper once called approval a "no-brainer" for the United States, despite the determined opposition from environmentalists. Mr. Obama said he would not approve the project if it added significantly to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

"I believe that whether this project goes ahead or not under this administration, it will ultimately go ahead under a subsequent administration," the Prime Minister said on Wednesday.

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has dodged all questions on Keystone, including one at a town hall in New Hampshire earlier this week. Ms. Clinton – who oversaw the review process as Mr. Obama's first secretary of state – said she did not want to second-guess the President on a file that she once managed, although critics suggest she is clearly trying to evade a divisive internal party debate.

Story continues below advertisement

Republican presidential hopefuls have no such qualms. Former Florida governor Jeb Bush tweeted that the decision on Keystone XL is an "easy" one. Republicans in Congress accuse Mr. Obama of hamstringing Canadian oil producers while making it easier for Iran to boost production – a reference to the proposed easing of sanctions that will accompany a deal on the Iranian nuclear weapons program.

A U.S. State Department review concluded the pipeline would not affect the pace of development in the oil sands – and hence GHG emissions – because oil sands producers would find other ways to get their crude to market. But that analysis was for the price of a barrel of crude at $100 (U.S.). It concluded that, at prices below $75 a barrel, the pipeline would be more crucial for Alberta shippers, who are increasingly desperate for access to new markets.

Earlier this week, U.S. Senator John Hoeven – a North Dakota Republican – said "sources" have told him Mr. Obama will announce a decision to reject the project next month, after Congress has recessed for the summer. The White House will say only that the President will decide before he leaves office in January, 2017.

TransCanada – which has been seeking approval for the project for seven years – insists the Keystone XL pipeline would bring a secure, reliable source of imported crude into the United States – which still requires 7.5 million barrels a day of foreign oil – and that pipelines are preferable to rail transportation from an environmental and safety perspective.

"If it's not coming from Canada, it's coming from another source," TransCanada spokesman James Millar said in an interview. "It's coming from Venezuela, or Iran, or Algeria, or Nigeria." Even without Keystone XL, Canadian oil exports to the United States have grown in recent years, to nearly three million barrels a day this summer from 2.5 million a year ago.

Mr. Millar said TransCanada will await a decision before talking about what it would do if turned down. "The stated rationale for a decision would impact our way forward," he said. "Both with approval or denial, the devil is in the detail."

Story continues below advertisement

Environmentalists argue the pipeline would facilitate expansion of the oil sands, one of the most emissions-intensive sources of crude in the world. As the world works to conclude an international climate-change agreement at the United Nations summit in Paris in December, the U.S. administration would be out of step if it approved Keystone XL, said Anthony Swift of the Washington-based Natural Resources Defense Council.

"It's clear the pipeline's prospects look very grim," Mr. Swift said in an interview. "There's no question at this point, the pipeline would have an impact on carbon emissions. As the U.S. looks toward Paris, Canada's lack of progress in meeting its climate targets is really front and centre."

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Tickers mentioned in this story
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.

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:

  • 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.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies