Motion 504, Electric Statutes Amendment Act, 2009

April 18, 2011

Mr. Anderson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There’s not a lot of time here in the last five minutes, but I would just like to clarify a few things. I don’t think anyone in this House – I don’t know; I’m just going to speak for the Wildrose. We’re certainly not opposed to building new transmission in Alberta that’s needed to keep the lights on. We’re not opposed to that. What we’re opposed to is the overbuild of unnecessary transmission and then having ratepayers in Alberta have to foot the bill for unnecessary lines and expenses. That’s what we’re against.

We had a process in place. We had the Alberta Utilities Com-mission, an independent arbiter, hear all sides and all stakeholders in the situation, and they put out a needs assessment finding of whether the new transmission proposals are needed. That is so critical. When you take out that independent needs assessment process, you make this a political issue, and it is a political issue that will absolutely lose dozens of PC Party MLAs their seats, especially in rural Alberta, in the next election just on this issue. It will happen. You can take it to the bank if you do not repeal this bill. It’s a bad bill. It’s a bill that allows you to spend billions of dollars on the backs of Alberta ratepayers without going through the objective needs assessment process.

There’s no need for it. If you’re so sure that it’s needed and of all the facts that were being thrown around on all sides today, fine. Okay. Even if you believe that, should you not, then, be very comfortable or confident that if there’s an independent needs assessment process before the AUC, they will find that what you are saying is true or that they would find that a certain amount of it’s true, that we need a certain amount built, et cetera? Then we build the lines. Absolutely. Albertans will get behind that. We all want electricity. We need electricity. But when you take the AUC, the independent, objective arbiter, out of the equation here, you make it a completely political decision – completely political – and people see it.

There’s no reason why we should be sitting here. I mean, aside from the tender – yes, they should have been tendered openly, and there are a whole bunch of things wrong with Bill 50 – just take home one thing, that if you’re so confident in what you feel is needed for our electrical grid here, then let’s go before the experts. Let’s have people from industry and landowners and all stakeholders – government officials, the AESO, everybody – come before the AUC and make their case. If it so happens that we do need more electricity, let’s build it. Then it’ll be on people’s power bills, and that’s okay because it’s needed. But right now how can we honestly in this House say that we need the degree of electricity build that is being proposed in Bill 50? It’s just nonsensical. If it isn’t nonsensical, if I’m totally wrong, great. Let’s go to the AUC. Let’s have a needs assessment process that’s open and accountable.

I’ll end quickly with one thing that was said here by IPCCAA, which represents industrial, 35 per cent of the power users in Alberta. They say that this plan will make Alberta less competitive. It will push companies to leave. These lines will cost billions. We’re going to spend billions of dollars, and there’s no return on this investment. We’re going to be pushing jobs out of this province. I know you think this is going to help promote growth. It won’t. It will drive up power prices unnecessarily. We’ll be un-competitive. Jobs will leave, companies will leave, and all because we didn’t allow an independent needs assessment process to take place, as was clearly called for by the U of C School of Public Policy and IPCCAA and the consumers for competitive transmission – and there are literally dozens more – all calling for an independent needs assessment process.

Mr. Speaker, I just hope that people in this Assembly will do the right thing, that they’ll repeal this bill. Let’s go back to the drawing board. Let’s put it before the AUC and, on behalf of the people we represent, make sure that we’re giving our consumers, our voters the best possible electricity rates that we possibly can, and the only way to do that, in my view, is to bring it before the AUC.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Dim lights