Alanna Koch would do more trade missions

Weyburn – Alanna Koch stands out as the only person running for the Saskatchewan Party leadership, and premier, who is not an MLA. Prior to entering the leadership race, Koch was deputy minister to Premier Brad Wall (making her head of the Saskatchewan public service), and has served nine years as deputy minister for agriculture.

The interview took place on Sept. 20, before TransCanada announced it was cancelling the Energy East Pipeline. On that day, Pipeline Newsspoke to her in Weyburn about her energy policy.

“Similar to what I’ve said on most policies – Brad Wall set us on the right path. I think that’s the same case for energy policy. We’re on the right path. We’ve seen the government provide a stable place for investment, an encouraging regulator climate, a strong business climate that has allowed businesses to build out and grow, when growth was there. Now, obviously, we’re in a different time. (He) made sure we had that encouraging, welcoming approach by government. Those would be the things I would ensure will be in place from an energy policy perspective,” Koch said.

“That stability that has occurred has been very important.”

On royalties on oil and gas, she said, “We’re not in a climate where we’ll be talking about changes to royalties. This stable approach to energy companies and seeing growth in the energy sector has been based on a stable approach, and now is not the time to be shaking things up. We would completely decimate the industry, that’s already had its challenges.”

Asked if royalties should vary with prices, she noted that Saskatchewan has lots of volatility on resource revenues, including on potash and uranium. As a result, the government took other tax measures to reduce the reliance on resource revenue, by broadening the tax base even if some of those decisions were difficult. “I think that’s the right approach. Some people might say, ‘Well, maybe they went too far in a little bit of this or a little bit in that, on the taxation side’ but overall, in principle, I think that’s the right approach, the steady-state approach.”

Wall went to Washington several times in support of energy, and in particular, the Keystone XL pipeline. Would Koch go to Washington or Ottawa?

“I think our premier was, in fact, very effective in getting out and speaking for Saskatchewan’s interests. In fact, Alberta, and others, were looking for us to speak up for their interests, too, because nobody else was speaking for them. So, I think that proactive, really aggressive, really clear message as to what it’s going to take to ensure Saskatchewan’s interests are being taken care of is vital for the leader of our province.

“We’re an export-based economy. We need to get out and talk to the people who we’re trading with and who we’re working with, and making sure that the message is getting out. The infrastructure we need, pipeline policy, the U.S. was going to have some of their decisions, and still are, on Keystone. This is vital we get the message out, clearly. We can’t count on the federal government, because sometimes the message is different. So I think, our premier, speaking directly to those decision makers down there, is vital. I would do the same.

“In fact, I would do more,” she said, adding she had travelled with Wall on all but one of his trade missions. “It’s vital. The difference is, I would do more.”

Sustained presence is vital, with ministers and businesses continuing such missions.

On the Keystone XL and Energy East pipelines, she said, “They’re both vital. We need to see them proceed. On Keystone, I understand there’s a few states in the way. It’s coming, is what I’m told. So we need to keep the pressure up.

“Energy East is a big challenge. We need to continue to work with who we can find support, for this, in Canada, and continue to get the message out that we don’t want to move oil by rail. It’s better to move by pipeline, for all kinds of reasons, and Eastern Canada needs our oil. It’s a common sense solution for what we need that seems to be meeting all kinds of challenges with emotional response and non-science-based approaches.

Is there anything she, as premier, could do about the downturn affecting the oilpatch?

Koch responded, “The way I look at it is, it’s up to governments to set the right climate. I think of the policies I put forward: free market solutions, competitive business climate, free trade, science-based decision making, fiscally responsible government. I also say we have to take care of our most vulnerable, and growth and prosperity takes care of everyone, right? Good quality of life. If you think of those other five, that’s what’s going to drive strength and growth in the energy sector. Beyond that, I guess I would take that same sort of approach. Otherwise, I need to get out of the way. Government needs to get out of the way. Government has its rightful place as the proper regulator; that we don’t over-regulate, that we properly regulate, so industry has this sound regulatory framework that we are able to count on, rely on and speak to those responsible, and get out of the way so business can do business.”

On carbon capture and storage, and a carbon tax, she said, “First of all, I’m opposed to the carbon tax, because it doesn’t do anything the federal government claims it would. We wouldn’t see a reduction in emissions. We’re going to see the economy buried. What’s the point of it? I’m opposed. I would stand up against the federal government for it. But what I would do differently is I would speak to that made-in-Saskatchewan solution, which is the science and tech and innovation, which BD3 (Boundary Dam Unit 3 Carbon Capture and Storage Project) is absolutely about, which carbon capture and storage is absolutely about.

“I was on those trade missions talking about them in Asia. I see the interest. We’ve got some leading edge technology. Take some time to prove it up, to get the word out, but I believe it’s the future. When you think of all the coal that Asia is relying on, they need to do something different. Our technology can allow them to help clean up their act, and it’s going to allow us to continue to use coal. We’ve got a resource here we need to make the best use of. Not only does it allow us to make the best use of our coal resources, it allows us to make the best use of our oil recovery. Think of our advancements in technology. That’s an exciting story for Saskatchewan. That’s part of our future.

“Absolutely, we’re going to see more of a case for renewables. We’ve said that, but it has to be part of the equation that includes our fossil fuels as well. We’ve got it here, we need to make smart use of it, we need to be responsible from an environment perspective and emissions perspective. But if we declare that we’re not going to use those resources anymore, it would seem to me pretty irresponsible, when you think of the power rate burden that will bury our industries and bury our citizens in unaffordable energy. Renewables – solar, wind, biomass, whatever, okay, they’re part of the answer, but we’ve got cold climates. They’re not stable energy sources. So it’s in combination with a futuristic approach to the use of coal and that’s why it’s that bigger Saskatchewan story we’ve not done a good job in telling.”

She added agriculture, grasslands and forests sequester carbon, and uranium production allows other places to reduce their carbon output.