KAMLOOPS — The dream of a liquefied natural gas-funded future for BC is clearly as faded as its ever been right now.
Want a perfect piece of evidence?
In speaking with Kamloops-South Thompson MLA Todd Stone about the budget this week, I asked him a question about the economic future of the province, and specifically if the government feels LNG is still a big part of that future.
His answer lasted exactly two minutes, and while it touched on several reasons the province's economic future is bright, he didn't mention LNG even once.
He had every chance to keep the dream alive, and he avoided it all together.
And you know what, maybe that's not such a bad thing.
The liquefied natural gas dream always seemed far too good to be true.
Premier Christy Clark promised billions of dollars in revenue, thousands and thousands of jobs, and essentially an end to our financial worries.
It played on all of our dreams of winning the lottery, and it helped propel Clark's Liberals back into power in 2013.
That election victory might be the most tangible result Clark ever sees from LNG.
What Clark was describing was essentially Alberta at the height of the oilsands boom.
We know now that, when it comes to energy, what goes up often comes crashing down.
As I've said here before, pinning hopes on a boom and bust industry, is often not the most prudent route.
It's good when it's good, but when it's bad, it's really bad.
If BC is in a good economic position now, it's because the economy is diverse enough to weather the ups and downs.
If LNG works out, and we can do it responsibly while maintaining that diversity, then so be it.
But pinning all of the province's economic hopes on LNG was never the best way to go, and if the Clark government is realizing that now, more power to it.
Join the Discussion
We are happy to provide a forum for commenting and discussion. Please respect and abide by the house rules: Keep it clean, keep it civil, keep it truthful, stay on topic, be responsible, share your knowledge, and please suggest removal of comments that violate these standards. See full commenting rules.