Skip to content

Editorial: Weiler gets it from both sides on rail blockade

Member of Parliament Patrick Weiler got it from both sides in Tuesday night’s emergency debate in the House of Commons, after serving up a word salad on the railroad blockade that matched the prime minister’s offering from earlier in the day. Mr.
blockades

Member of Parliament Patrick Weiler got it from both sides in Tuesday night’s emergency debate in the House of Commons, after serving up a word salad on the railroad blockade that matched the prime minister’s offering from earlier in the day.

Mr. Weiler’s speech began with a long prelude in which he bemoaned Canada’s terrible “lack of progress” in recognizing First Nations’ rights, bringing the country now to “the boiling point,” while gladly relating how the Liberal government has taken “essential” steps in the right direction, including “unprecedented investments,” “new opportunities” and “fundamental changes.” No contradiction in that analysis.

He then described the current situation as “the outcome of reconciliation not making progress and Canadians letting each other down.” And while saying “the impacts to our transportation systems cannot continue,” and acknowledging that the “losses our country is facing are in the billions every day, and the need for action has never been more urgent,” he then switched gears, so to speak, arguing that neither force nor “endless drawn-out court cases” will lead to a solution.

“The divides in this country require dialogue,” he said. “We need to show that we have a process that will lead us down the path to reconciliation. Where we can show that, we can provide an off-ramp to de-escalate the crisis we are in and get our people, goods and economy rolling again.”

Conservative MP Derek Sloan, whose Ontario riding has been unhappily hosting the Tyendinaga blockade, responded by trying to bring Mr. Weiler back to earth.

“People are upset and angry and want to know why the law does not apply to everyone. If anyone else blocked the railway, they would be arrested, and yet here we stand, 13 days later, and nothing has happened. There is no plan from the government. Massive layoffs are starting and will continue,” Mr. Sloan said. “We are looking at propane shortages out east, supplies for hospitals are at risk and thousands of workers will be laid off. These protests must end.”

Mr. Weiler’s answer: “The solution lies in having a meaningful dialogue that will get to the root of the problem. Once we are able to provide a process and move down that process of addressing the root causes of this problem, that will be the most effective and long-term solution to addressing the crisis we have today.”

During his speech, Mr. Weiler had alluded to the Squamish Nation’s deal with Woodfibre LNG as a positive example of a First Nation and gas company collaborating on a project that benefits both parties. That was an opening for the NDP’s Peter Julian to call Mr. Weiler out on the Liberals engaging in “meaningful dialogue” with First Nations, since the Squamish are among those opposed to the Trans Mountain pipeline. But it was Green Party Leader Elizabeth May who cut into Mr. Weiler on his apparent support for LNG. “This is fracked gas,” Ms. May said. “I know the member for West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast-Sea to Sky Country is concerned about climate. Is he not concerned that fracked gas has the same carbon footprint as coal and worsens the climate situation?” In answer, Mr. Weiler said the Liberals have invested in companies that are making efforts to lower LNG emissions.

By which time our parliamentarians were far from the matter at hand. Indeed, those protesters who support Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs for being “opposed to an LNG pipeline crossing their territory” are poorly informed, as the chiefs had suggested an alternate route through their territory but it was rejected by Coastal GasLink, in part due to increased environmental impacts, just as a compromise route proposed by the company has been ignored by the chiefs. This is a dispute over a pipeline route, not over fossil fuels.

And it’s a local dispute, in which the chiefs do not have the support of neighbouring First Nations or even many of their own people, who have expressed anger at the protesters for misrepresenting them and harming their interests. But that hasn’t stopped the Liberals from elevating it into yet another demoralizing narrative of Canada’s failure to live up to its obligations to First Nations people. In toeing that rather destructive line, Mr. Weiler has shown himself to be a very good party man.