SUN NEWS COLUMN: Teck mine is an enormous opportunity for Canada

AdobeStock_119017620

37 NHL-sized arenas.

That’s what the proposed Teck mine in Alberta is roughly equal to in terms of cost. It’s an absolutely enormous project for our country, and it has passed all of the government’s regulatory hurdles. It’s hard to understand why the federal government is still humming and hawing about the project.

Consider that when an NHL arena is built, an army of workers is involved – from those who survey the site, excavate it, build the structure and furnish it to the accountants and lawyers who help pull the project together. This doesn’t even include the countless companies that make various materials for the facility.

But if you take the Teck mine’s price tag of $20.6 billion and divide it by the cost of the new NHL arena in Calgary ($0.55 billion), you can see the project is roughly 37 times larger.

The Teck oilsands mining project will require men and women to survey the site, build the mine’s infrastructure, extract resources, crush and sort the product, manage the work camps, transport people to and from the site regularly, sell the resources, handle the paperwork, accounting, and much more.

The company estimates it will employ 7,000 workers during construction and 2,500 workers once the mine is up and running.

What’s also important to note is that the project will help with more than Alberta’s struggling economy. As with most natural resource sector projects, workers will likely come from across the country, and Canada’s interconnected supply chain means that businesses and workers outside Alberta will receive orders for parts and materials that are used at the mine.

Jocelyn Bamford from Automatic Coating in Scarborough made this point when we spoke with her last year. She noted that when natural resource projects proceed in Alberta, they’ll often order parts from Ontario companies – companies that sometimes send those parts to her firm to be coated with a protective seal. Trucks will then transport the product to Alberta, with the driver likely making stops along the way for fuel, food, accommodations and more.

Furthermore, companies like Jocelyn’s often outsource different services, so the benefits continue to spread throughout the economy – for example, the company that cleans their door mats, a coffee service, legal work and others.

When one looks at the magnitude of the Teck project – and the potential benefits nationwide – it’s hard to understand what the political hold-up is at the federal level.

The proposed mine has already received approval from a federal-provincial bureaucratic panel, noting that it’s “in the public interest” to proceed.

Teck Resources is subject to paying a carbon tax and the company has even committed to eliminate its emissions by 2050. The 14 local Aboriginal bands around the mining site are also on board, seeing the project as a significant economic opportunity for their people.

And yet here we are again in Canada, putting another significant natural resources project in limbo by humming and hawing over it.

What readers should note is that even if Ottawa gives the project the green light, Teck still needs to make a final investment decision – yea or nay. It’s hard to understand why Ottawa isn’t rolling out the red carpet for the Teck mine project … 37 NHL arenas don’t come around very often.

 

Colin Craig is the President of SecondStreet.org, a new Canadian think tank.

This column was published in the February 9 , 2020 edition of the Toronto Sun, Ottawa Sun, Edmonton Sun and Calgary Sun.

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter

Other Canadians Share Similar Experiences:

Play Video

Don and Jackie, Winnipeg

Play Video

Jerry and Becky, Calgary

Play Video

Troy and Erika, Victoria

Play Video

Jim Jones, Toronto

You can help us continue to research and tell stories about this issue by making a donation
or sharing this content with your friends. Be sure to sign up for our updates too!

Prevention – reduce demand in the first place

If Canadians lived healthier lives, we could reduce demand for emergency services, orthopaedic surgeries, primary care and more. 

For instance, if you visit the Canadian Cancer Society’s website, you’ll read that “about four in ten” cancer cases are preventable. The Heart and Stroke Foundation notes that “almost 80 percent of premature heart disease and stroke can be prevented through healthy behaviours.” A similar number of Diabetes cases are also preventable. 

Many joint replacements and visits to ERs and walk-in clinics could also be avoided through healthy living. 

To be sure, not all health problems can be avoided through healthy living – everyday the system treats Canadians with genetic conditions, helps those injured in unavoidable accidents and more.  

But there is an opportunity to reduce pressure on the health care system through Canadians shifting to healthier lifestyles – better diets, more exercise, etc. 

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or see this column. 

Partner with non-profits and for-profit clinics

European countries will partner with anyone who can help patients. 

It doesn’t matter if it’s a non-profit, a government entity or a private clinic. What matters is that patients receive quality treatment, in a timely manner and for a competitive price.  

In Canada, governments often delivery services using government-run hospitals instead of seeing if non-profit or private clinics could deliver the services more effectively. 

When governments have partnered with non-profit and private clinics, the results have often been quite good – Saskatchewan, Ontario and British Columbia are just a few examples of where partnerships have worked well. 

Canada should pursue more of these partnerships to reduce wait times and increase the volume of services provided to patients.  

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or see the links above. 

Make cross border care more accessible

In Canada, citizens pay high taxes each year and we’re promised universal health care services in return. The problem is, wait times are often extremely long in our health system – sometimes patients have to wait years to see a specialist or receive surgery. 

If patients don’t want to wait long periods, they often have to reach into their own pocket and pay for treatment outside the province or country. 

Throughout the European Union, we also find universal health care systems. But a key difference is that EU patients have the right to go to other EU countries, pay for surgery and then be reimbursed by their home government. Reimbursements cover up to what the patient’s home government would have spent to provide the treatment locally. 

If Canada copied this approach, a patient waiting a year to get their hip operation could instead receive treatment next week in one of thousands of surgical clinics throughout the developed world. 

Governments benefit too as the patient is now back on their feet and avoiding complications that sometimes come with long wait times – meaning the government doesn’t have to treat those complications on top of the initial health problem. 

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or this shorter video. 

Legalize access to non-government providers

Canada is the only country in the world that puts up barriers, or outright bans patients from paying for health services locally. 

For instance, a patient in Toronto cannot pay for a hip operation at a private clinic in Toronto. Their only option is to wait for the government to eventually provide treatment or leave the province and pay elsewhere. 

Countries with better-performing universal health care systems do not have such bans. They allow patients a choice – use the public system or pay privately for treatment. Sweden, France, Australia and more – they all allow choice. 

Why? One reason is that allowing choice means some patients will decide to pay privately. This takes pressure off the public system. For instance, in Sweden, 87% of patients use the public system, but 13% purchase private health insurance. 

Ultimately, more choice improves access for patients. 

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or watch this short clip on this topic. 

Shift to funding services for patients, not bureaucracies

In Canada, most hospitals receive a cheque from the government each year and are then asked to do their best to help patients. This approach is known as “block funding”. 

Under this model, a patient walking in the door represents a drain on the hospital’s budget. Over the course of a year, hospital administrators have to make sure the budget stretches out so services are rationed. This is why you might have to wait until next year or the year after for a hip operation, knee operation, etc. 

In better-performing universal health systems, they take the opposite approach – hospitals receive money from the government each time they help a patient. If a hospital completes a knee operation, it might receive, say, $10,000. If it completes a knee operation on another patient, it receives another $10,000. 

This model incentivizes hospitals to help more patients – to help more patients with knee operations, cataract surgery, etc. This approach also incentivizes hospitals to spend money on expenses that help patients (e.g. more doctors, nurses, equipment, etc.) rather than using the money on expenses that don’t help patients (e.g. more admin staff). 

To learn more about this policy option, please watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or see this post by MEI.