Anti-Epcor Protest Misleads and Fizzles...As It Should

UPDATE: EDMONTON CITY COUNCIL VOTED 7-6 IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSET SALE TO EPCOR YESTERDAY JANUARY 21/09

I am fascinated over the various events and pieces of commentary on the proposed EPCOR purchase of the City of Edmonton Gold Bar Water Treatment Plant. The media coverage has been extensive including Letters to the Editor, an editorial, columnist coverage and an Op-Ed http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/Gold+proposal+much+more+than+just+harmless+transfer/1190969/story.html More about that in a minute.

Today the Edmonton City Council will have an all day non-statutory public hearing on the proposed transaction. My guess is more people will prudently opt to watch the Obama inauguration.

This issue has clearly not resulted in a spontaneous ground swell of citizen concern over the EPCOR proposal to buy the plant from the city. The protest rally to oppose the sale drew “about a dozen people” to the steps of City Hall on Sunday. Can you conclude anything other than the support for opposition to the deal is underwhelming?

Full disclosure, EPCOR is a client but we are not working on this file and I have not spoken to them about it. What I really want to discuss here is the astonishing misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the relationship between EPCOR and the City of Edmonton, especially as it relates to this proposed transaction and generally. The best place to illustrate this is the Parkland Institute’s Executive Director, Ricardo Acuna’s Op-ed in the Sunday Edmonton Journal.

The Gold Bar proposed sale deal is for $75 million and Mr Acuna says Edmontonians are being told the sale is “trifling detail.” I don’t recall anyone putting that characterization on a deal that large and I wish Mr. Acuna would provide the source of that representation. It would help us better understand the comment and add credibility to his framing and positioning of the transaction.

The proposed sale is said to superficially “…seem innocuous enough –a simple transfer from the city to its wholly owned corporations EPCOR.” However there is a suggestion my Mr. Acuna that on closer examination the deal “…raises some disturbing questions.”

So what are the “disturbing questions”? Well apparently one is the very purpose of the water treatment plant which is to process sewage to make it safe to return to the river. The city operation of the facility is truthfully said to do that job with “…admirable efficiency and effectiveness.” Mr. Acuna poses a question about how the Gold Bar asset transfer will benefit Edmontonians and says “the question is still largely unanswered.” Whatever that means!

I don’t know exactly what representations EPCOR has made in support of the transfer but I doubt it was to enhance their “expertise and reputation” around water treatment. They already run the E.L. Smith and Rossdale Water Treatment plant for Edmontonians. They provide water treatment services to 8 other Alberta communities and others in B.C. and Ontario. EPCOR’s expertise and reputation is clearly not the issue.

Mr Acuna’s next concern seems to be about the ownership and control of EPCOR. EPCOR is a corporation that is wholly owned by the City of Edmonton. Mr. Acuna is right about one thing, these are two legal entities but they are not “entirely separate” as Mr. Acuna states. The City of Edmonton owns EPCOR and appoints the Board of Directors to oversee the strategic and management operation of the corporation for the benefit of the citizens of Edmonton. The city wisely does not interfere with the day-to-day operation, just like the Province of Alberta deals with the Alberta Treasury Branches.

This asset sale transaction is not a privatization as per Mr. Acuna’s mischaracterization. It is merely a legal reallocation of asset management responsibility within the governing and control ambit and ultimate continuing ownership of the City of Edmonton.
The coalition campaigners to discredit a normal business transaction as something sinister include the Council of Canadians, CUPE and the Parkland Institute. They managed to draw an astonishing “dozen people” to rally in front of City Hall last Sunday to protest the deal.

Edmontonians obviously don’t feel like Mr. Acuna alleges that they are being given a “dismissive pat on the head and patronizing assertions that there is nothing to worry about.” What is happening is this “Keep Drainage Edmonton” coalition has been exposed and proved to be like the Wizard of Oz with the curtain pulled back.

People are entitled to their own opinions but not their own facts.

Yes We Can - Barack Obama Music Video

It is timely to revisit the will.i.am Yes We Can video that has over 15 million You Tube views so far. Tuesday is going to be enormous for those of us who want change and are up for the challenges.

@Issue Tobacco Cmopanies

I have not focused on the health issues from tobacco for a while and it is time to climb back on the soapbox. Allan Bonner and I work together and it is great to see hiim using this issue on his iChannel TV program. I publish some of his books through Sextant a subsidiary of Cambridge Strategies Inc. Email me if you want details.

Uncle Jay Explains: Jan. 12, 2009

Uncle Jay has more to say about the news. Enjoy this island of smart humour in a sea changing world.

Why Did Syncrude's Former COO House Burn Down?

The investigation into the recent fire that destroyed the Carter home is not complete. It is a sad situation for the Carter family that they would have to lose their home, possessions and personal effects by fire and possible arson. Then there is anxiety one would feel about personal safety if it was a fire bomb that started the blaze. If there was arson involved it is also sad for the rest of us and should make us wonder about the kind of society we are evolving into.

Some folks are already jumping to conclusions about eco-terrorism and linking that to the Carter fire to his role in oil sands development. Some are even linking this incident to the drowning of the ducks on the Syncrude tailings pond last year. We need a lot more information from investigation that is going on before that leap to any conclusions.

That said, one has to be concerned when such an event happens to a family of a man in the past and current position of Jim Carter. We have seen 3 or 4 unresolved eco-terrorists bombings on pipelines in the Alberta – B.C. border of late. We saw Greenpeace able to breach security and place a banner on a tailings pond berm as a publicity stunt but the ease with which they did this trespass stunt is pretty telling and chilling if you think about it. Oil sands facilities are strategic targets especially as we tout it as the safe, secure and reliable energy source for the Americans. Alberta better be on top of the implications and consequences of that reality and ready to deal with it.

The pressure is mounting on the Alberta energy sector to get serious about the environmental consequences and practices around oil sands development. There are indications that they are feeling this pressure. Some efforts are being made within the energy sector to respond but indications are that they are not yet fully aware and conscious of the breadth and depth of their social license to operate problems. Employing PR techniques and tactics will not do it…in fact it will just make the animosity and distrust worse and deeper.

I have known and admired Jim Carter for about 14 years and assure you we all owe him a debt of gratitude for his skill and wisdom that he brought to bear in the early days of oil sands development. He and his family don’t deserve the anxiety, loss and sorrow the burning of their home has caused. I hope these incidents are shown not to motivated by eco-terrorism. I am not ready to jump to that conclusion without evidence. But I am looking forward to the results of the current investigation and will form my judgment and engage on the issues and implications, if any, accordingly.