Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

OneCrazyDiamond

(2,029 posts)
Mon Oct 4, 2021, 04:56 PM Oct 2021

Canada formally invokes 1977 pipeline treaty with U.S. over Line 5 dispute

Source: Reuters

CALGARY, Alberta, Oct 4 (Reuters) - Canada on Monday formally invoked a 1977 treaty with the United States to request bilateral negotiations over Enbridge Inc's (ENB.TO) Line 5, escalating a long-running dispute over one of Canada's major oil export pipelines.

Line 5 ships 540,000 barrels per day of crude and refined products from Superior, Wisconsin, to Sarnia, Ontario, but the state of Michigan ordered Enbridge to shut it down due to worries a leak could develop in a four-mile section running beneath the Straits of Mackinac in the Great Lakes.

Enbridge ignored Michigan's order and the sides are embroiled in a legal battle. The government of Canada has been pushing counterparts in the United States to intervene, and Monday's move marks a step up in Ottawa's efforts to help safeguard the pipeline.

In a letter to the federal judge presiding over the case, Gordon Giffin, legal counsel for the Canadian government, said Canada had formally invoked Article Six of the 1977 Transit Pipelines Treaty.

Read more: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/canada-formally-invokes-1977-pipeline-treaty-with-us-over-line-5-dispute-2021-10-04/



Gov. Witmer is trying to protect our waters. Ottawa should pound (tar) sand on this one.
10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Canada formally invokes 1977 pipeline treaty with U.S. over Line 5 dispute (Original Post) OneCrazyDiamond Oct 2021 OP
Treaties are made to be broken MichMan Oct 2021 #1
They are? Goodness. We should throw them all out then. jimfields33 Oct 2021 #2
That was the opinion of the OP MichMan Oct 2021 #3
Not all treaties. OneCrazyDiamond Oct 2021 #4
Pipeline #3 is shoving its way across MN treaty land Champp Oct 2021 #5
I guess next The Canadian Government will tell their Indigenous Population abqtommy Oct 2021 #6
The treaty dispute is actually more interesting to me when I read the text of the treaty rpannier Oct 2021 #7
I cannot over emphasize ShepKat Oct 2021 #8
But but but pipelines are safe! The Jungle 1 Oct 2021 #9
Line 5 has spilled 33 times and at least 1.1 million gallons along its length since 1968. The Jungle 1 Oct 2021 #10

MichMan

(11,790 posts)
3. That was the opinion of the OP
Mon Oct 4, 2021, 06:04 PM
Oct 2021
"Gov. Witmer is trying to protect our waters. Ottawa should pound (tar) sand on this one."

Champp

(2,114 posts)
5. Pipeline #3 is shoving its way across MN treaty land
Mon Oct 4, 2021, 06:30 PM
Oct 2021

The indigenous folk are actively opposing. MN government, and US gov, are looking the other way and whistling, pretending they haven't noticed the gross TREATY VIOLATIONS.

Read all about it: https://www.honorearth.org/sandpiper_line_3_corridor

abqtommy

(14,118 posts)
6. I guess next The Canadian Government will tell their Indigenous Population
Mon Oct 4, 2021, 07:56 PM
Oct 2021

that they were only kidding when the word "Sovereignty" was written into their
treaties. Who woulda thunk?

rpannier

(24,304 posts)
7. The treaty dispute is actually more interesting to me when I read the text of the treaty
Mon Oct 4, 2021, 08:35 PM
Oct 2021

Givens:
The Treaty was signed between the US Government and Canadian Government
Under the treaty, she lacks the authority to do what she is doing (Article 2 and 5).
It might have been possible to use Article IV to support her position, were she the federal government.
As the Treaty was signed between the US-Canada, at the request of and with the support of Congress (Senate provided consent by a 92-1 vote), it rests solely at the federal level (Article II.1) and must be negotiated between the two national governments, or thru a 3rd party (Article IX)

What I find unclear is in Article X. Though, I must admit, the text is probably more clear to smarter people and/or people involved in treaty related law
Article X Section 3:
This Agreement shall remain in force for an initial period of thirty-five years. It may be terminated at the end of the initial thirty-five year period by either Party giving written notice to the other Party, not less than ten years prior to the end of such initial period, of its intention to terminate this Agreement. If neither Party has given such notice of termination, this Agreement will thereafter continue in force automatically until ten years after either Party has given written notice to the other Party of its intention to terminate the Agreement.

Me: So, I am trying to understand if the treaty ends after 35 years, but is self-reissuing and requires 10 year notice meaning if the US or Canada said it was not reissuing it would not go into effect until 2030.

Analysis from Van de Biezenbos

The US promised that no American “public authority” would “institute any measures” that “would have the effect of, impeding, diverting, redirecting or interfering with in any way the transmission of hydrocarbon in transit” unless there was a “natural disaster, an operating emergency, or other demonstrable need temporarily to reduce or stop for safety or technical reasons the normal operation of a pipeline.” Enbridge’s Line 5 carries oil from Western Canada to Ontario so the treaty would seem to apply.

The State of Michigan may make several arguments to avoid operation of the treaty, including the argument that it is shutting the pipeline down in response to one of the explicit grounds for halting the operation of a pipeline under the treaty. The difficulty is that Michigan has also opposed efforts to replace the existing pipeline, making it harder to claim the shutdown would only be temporary.

Relying on recent US Supreme Court decisions, Michigan could also claim that the Pipeline Transit Treaty is not self-executing – meaning Congress would need to pass specific legislation to implement it – and was not intended to preempt state law.

At the end of the day, I think she is likely going to lose this fight in the courts.

copy of the text of the treaty
https://www.treaty-accord.gc.ca/text-texte.aspx?id=101884

Pres Jimmy Carter's message on the Pipeline
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/united-states-canada-transit-pipeline-agreement-message-the-senate-transmitting-the

cdhowe.org analysis
https://www.cdhowe.org/intelligence-memos/van-de-biezenbos-coleman-%E2%80%93-40-year-old-treaty-could-save-line-5

 

The Jungle 1

(4,552 posts)
9. But but but pipelines are safe!
Tue Oct 5, 2021, 09:03 AM
Oct 2021

Just ask California.
The pipe line was built in 1953 and this dumb redneck thinks it may need some maintenance. Rip it out and replace it with state of the art equipment and steel. News flash there has been a lot of improvement in steel in the last 68 years. That pipe has been underwater for 68 years.

 

The Jungle 1

(4,552 posts)
10. Line 5 has spilled 33 times and at least 1.1 million gallons along its length since 1968.
Tue Oct 5, 2021, 09:25 AM
Oct 2021

What is the big deal, what could go wrong? (sarcasm)
This pipe line sits exposed on the lake bottom and is in a busy shipping channel. Some supports that hold up the pipe are broken.
******** The Great Lakes are home to 21 percent of the world's fresh surface water. **********
This is a huge risk and the pipeline needs to be shut down.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Canada formally invokes 1...