By Michael Cleland
In the Calgary Herald

May 24, 2014


 

There’s an unhealthy imbalance in the debate over the development of Canada’s resources, one that threatens to hurt the country’s economy.

The majority of Canadians think resources are a good thing but most give the matter very little thought. This provides an opportunity for vocal opponents of development to dominate the debate.

Economists agree that one of the main reasons Canada weathered the 2009 recession was a strong resource economy. They also know that many urban jobs – from financial services to information technology to consulting to manufacturing of everything from steel pipe to remote sensing – exist in large measure to supply the resource economy.

Just as important, the viability of local economies in most remote, northern and especially Aboriginal communities depends on the employment, business opportunities and skills development that flow from the resource economy.

So, why the unbalanced debate?

For some people, resources represent the “old” economy or the cause of so-called “Dutch Disease” and a barrier to innovation. For others, resource development causes unacceptable disruption to the environment and it can bring sometimes unwelcome change to local communities. There is a widespread belief that resource development yields little more than profits for companies and royalties for provincial governments while local communities and the environment pick up the tab.

There are realities to these perceptions, but there are also many myths. For example, it is a myth that all resource companies are oblivious to local concerns. Companies know that unless they have the support of local communities they won’t get anything done – and they are responding accordingly. Despite that, virtually every resource and energy project has become a target and getting things done has become a tougher, longer and more uncertain prospect.

Increasingly, it feels like a standoff, and it is one that will hurt the Canadian economy while effectively eliminating the pathway to economic prosperity for many remote communities. Investors feel uncertain and look elsewhere; potential customers look elsewhere; provincial budgets become more at risk; local economic opportunities recede into the future.

What if we just take a deep breath and start acting like the practical problem solvers we like to think we are? There are two conversations that we need to have.

The first is on the big issues, where we need more adult conversations on issues such as greenhouse gas management, the effects of hydraulic fracturing, and managing big eco-systems such as the boreal forest. Canadians have been pretty good stewards of the land – admittedly, not perfect – for many decades, our scientific knowledge is steadily growing and we have among the best governing systems in the world. Our conversations, however, are infused more with distrust and zeal than common sense. That doesn’t sound very Canadian.

The other conversation would put much more focus on local communities – including Aboriginal communities – because they have the biggest stake in all of this.

It makes sense for local voices to have a bigger say in the choices we as a society make. We need to talk more with local communities about how they can benefit from resource development through jobs, business opportunities, training and community investment. We need to talk more about how best to manage risks to the environment, community health and cultural traditions. We need to talk about how to mobilize the investment needed to get it right.

Above all, we need to talk with local communities about how we talk with them. Those sorts of conversations would probably lead to at least two important outcomes. The first is better performance by companies, governments and local communities in managing impacts and maximizing benefits. Almost as important, much more understanding of where local communities are benefitting and more local voices joining the larger debates as real stakeholders with real knowledge.

Canada was built on resources. The future will be more urban and based more on the service economy. But resources will still play a large role and for remote communities – an indispensable one.

It’s time to start new conversations that add less heat and more light to controversial issues and which better engage the local communities for whom it matters the most.

Michael Cleland is the Nexen Executive-in-Residence at the Canada West Foundation. The Canada West Foundation is the only think tank with an exclusive focus on policies that shape the quality of life in western Canada.