Author: admin

Encana Corp.’s founder and former Chief Executive Officer Gwyn Morgan said he’s disappointed by the driller’s US$5.5 billion purchase of Newfield Exploration Co., which moves focus to the U.S. and dashes his hopes that the company would represent Canada on the world stage.

Morgan, who named the oil and gas producer Encana to evoke “Energy Canada,” blames the move on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s environmental policies, which he has said are making the country irrelevant in the global energy industry. The Newfield deal extends Encana’s reach into the shale fields of Oklahoma. It also moves the company toward what current CEO Doug Suttles called a “headquarter-less model,” with operations controlled from offices near Houston, Suttles’ home city of Denver and in the company’s official base of Calgary.

“I’m deeply saddened that, as a result of the disastrous policies of the Trudeau government, what was once the largest Canadian-headquartered energy producer now sees both its CEO and the core of its asset base located in the U.S.,” Morgan, who served as Encana’s CEO from 2002 to 2005, said in an emailed statement Friday to BNN Bloomberg television.

Morgan said he had envisioned that “Canada should have an energy company that stood among the world’s biggest and best.”

Encana declined to respond to Morgan’s comments.

Canada’s Department of Natural Resources responded that Trudeau’s administration has done more to support the energy industry and get its resources to market in his three years in power than the rival Conservatives did in a decade. Spokeswoman Vanessa Adams said in an emailed statement that Canada is “one of the world’s most attractive destinations for investment in sustainable natural resources development” and pointed to LNG Canada’s decision to proceed with a US$31 billion facility last month as evidence.

Encana’s Newfield deal “does not change the fact that Canada is a great place to do business,” Adams said.

–With assistance from Theophilos Argitis.

Bloomberg.com

The family feud that’s tearing apart one of Canada’s richest families is getting nastier.

Former Magna International Inc. Chief Executive Officer Belinda Stronach — already the target of a $520 million lawsuit filed by her billionaire father Frank Stronach — is now being sued by her brother, Andrew. He says he’s lost trust in Belinda and wants her removed from a family trust and replaced by his father.

The suit claims Belinda and trustees “have undertaken a number of improvident and costly investments that have resulted in significant losses.” As a result, “the Stronach Group now finds itself in a liquidity crisis and is actively attempting to sell off valuable real estate and other assets.”

Andrew Stronach’s lawsuit, filed Nov. 1 in Toronto, is the latest twist in an increasingly bitter dispute that erupted after Frank Stronach left Canada in 2013 for a brief foray into politics in his native Austria — handing control over a key trust to his daughter, now 52, and trustees such as Alon Ossip, a former Magna executive.

Since November 2013, the lawsuit says, Belinda Stronach has controlled various trusts and companies that form the Stronach Group and hold most of the wealth created by the Magna founder. Andrew, whom the lawsuit says “has dedicated his life to agricultural pursuits,” owns 23 per cent of the Stronach Group through his own trust.

This year, as the dispute intensified, Andrew made numerous attempts to obtain “a proper accounting” for the trust — such as the three most recent financial statements. “To date, Andrew’s proper and reasonable requests for information have been ignored, or only partially answered after lengthy delays and following repeated requests for disclosure,” according to the lawsuit filed with the Ontario Superior Court.

‘Complete breakdown’

As a result of Belinda’s conduct, “there has been a complete breakdown in trust and confidence” between Andrew, his parents and the so-called “Belinda trustees,” according to the lawsuit. “Andrew has no confidence in the willingness or ability of the Belinda trustees to discharge properly, or at all, their duties as trustees.”

No statement of defence against either lawsuit has yet been filed.

“The filing on behalf of my brother is an extension of my father’s legal pursuit against me and my children, and the allegations remain just as untrue,” Belinda Stronach said in a statement Monday. “We will be responding formally in due course. It saddens me greatly that we have reached this juncture in our family.”

Paul Deegan, a spokesman for Ossip, called the claims “wholly without merit. Mr. Stronach and his lawyers have been provided with detailed financials of the trusts and subsidiary corporations. They have also been offered access repeatedly to key individuals in the organization to answer any questions and provide additional information. This is a Stronach family dispute that should be resolved by the family.”

In the original suit, Frank Stronach, 86, claims Belinda is starving his grass-fed-cattle farm of financing, selling off assets over his objections while using company funds to bankroll an extravagant lifestyle of parties, vacations and limousine rides.

Magna origins

Frank Stronach, who built Magna into a global auto-parts giant from a one-man shop, and his wife, Elfriede, say their relationship with their daughter has suffered a “complete breakdown.” The lawsuit against her is a “last resort” after trying for 20 months to find a settlement, according to a 73-page statement of claim filed in a Toronto court on Oct. 1.

The couple is seeking $520 million in compensation from Belinda, Ossip and her two adult children, Nicole and Frank Walker, whose father Don Walker is the current CEO of Magna. They want Belinda and Ossip removed from the management of various family companies and trusts.

Key to the lawsuit are what Frank and his wife say were “covert” and “unlawful” actions to appropriate family assets from at least 2011 until November 2016 — when the suit says Belinda and Ossip took the view that Frank was no longer in control of the family empire.

“Belinda and Alon have asserted control over the Stronach Group in an oppressive manner and have taken steps to shut the rest of the Stronach family out of the family’s business,” Frank says in the suit.

‘Belinda and Alon have asserted control over the Stronach Group in an oppressive manner and have taken steps to shut the rest of the Stronach family out,’ Frank said in his suit

Hormone-free

Frank Stronach’s post-Magna life has included a stint as a member of parliament in his native Austria from late 2013 to early 2014, the development of Adena Farms, a Florida-based agricultural business dedicated to producing hormone-free, grass-fed beef, and a golf and country club in Florida that included restaurants serving all-natural foods. Stronach is worth about $1.9 billion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index.

After demanding that Frank “take immediate steps to rein in or terminate” expenditures associated with Adena and other ventures, Belinda and Ossip moved to “impair, undermine and dismantle” the agricultural businesses — cutting off funding, cancelling leases and laying off employees, according to the Oct. 1 suit. As a result, Adena Farms has been “placed in a precarious position and may never reach its full potential.”

Extravagant lifestyle

Separately, the suit alleges Belinda, who ran Magna from 2001 to 2004, has appropriated more than $70 million to maintain her lifestyle over the years, “routinely” asking to be reimbursed for “hundreds of thousands of dollars” of personal expenses — including parties, vacations, limousine rides and expensive meals.

That included the $10 million purchase and refurbishment of a personal office in Toronto — at a time when the Stronach group was suffering from liquidity issues, an “irresponsible” and “extravagant” move when Magna and related companies already have offices nearby in Aurora, Ont., about 50km north.

Amazon.com Inc. will choose two locations for its new headquarters, according the Wall Street Journal, which cited an unidentified person familiar with the matter.

The e-commerce giant last year announced plans to invest US$5 billion in a second HQ and hire up to 50,000 people, setting off a frenzy of interest from cities in the U.S. and Canada. It has announced 20 finalists and is scheduled to make a final decision by the end of the year.

The company will choose two locations instead of one, according to the Wall Street Journal, which said one location lacked sufficient technology talent. Amazon may want to avoid criticism that its arrival in a new town overwhelms the area. Amazon has fuelled an economic boom in its hometown of Seattle, where it is also often blamed for traffic problems and skyrocketing housing costs that squeeze some residents out of the city.

“You could look to Seattle and see that it’s had great positive consequences, but it also probably has had some unintended ones that maybe aren’t as well received,” SunTrust Robinson Humphrey Inc. real-estate analyst Michael Lewis said. “You can see what it’s done to the cost of living in Seattle.”

The Washington Post reported on Saturday that Amazon was in advanced discussions with the Washington suburb of Crystal City, Virginia, for the second headquarters. An Amazon spokesman declined to comment.

Some of contenders are close to each other and draw from the same labour pools. New York City and Newark, New Jersey, are among the finalists, as are Washington, Northern Virginia and Montgomery County, Maryland. Amazon could choose one metropolitan region and still have to negotiate with multiple states and local governments for tax incentives.

Bloomberg.com

Canada’s pursuit of deeper trade ties with China will not be hindered by the USMCA pact, as Ottawa seeks to make the Asian superpower an “essential component” of its trade diversification strategy, International Trade Diversification Minister Jim Carr said Monday.

Carr, who will co-chair a two-day business conference in China with Finance Minister Bill Morneau later this week, told the Toronto Region Board of Trade that “no conversation about the Pacific Region would be complete without talking about Canada’s second-largest trading partner, China.”

“We should be under no misapprehensions that our trading relationship with the United States will continue to be the most important of all; of course it will be,” he said. “But there’s a value in expanding trade markets, including to China.”

Asked about a controversial clause in the USMCA that would give any party the option to leave the pact with six months’ notice if another enters a free trade agreement with a non-market economy — widely believed to be China — Carr insisted “it doesn’t change anything.” The clause has fuelled worries that Washington, currently engaged in a trade war with Beijing, will attempt to interfere in Ottawa’s trade relationships.

“We’ve given up no sovereignty and no, I’m not concerned about it,” Carr said, noting that the current North American Free Trade Agreement also has a provision allowing for an exit with six months’ notice.

Carr and Morneau’s trip to Beijing comes during the same week as a separate trade mission to China led by Federal Agriculture Minister Lawrence McAulay, Treasury Board president Scott Brison and the premiers of Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labrador. The goal of that effort is to promote Canada’s food, education, clean growth and tourism sectors.

Exports to China from Atlantic Canada grew 37 per cent last year to more than $1.5 billion, with seafood exports having doubled in the past five years alone, according to the federal government. Chinese tourism is also on the rise, while Atlantic Canadian universities currently get more than 30 per cent of their international students from the economic powerhouse.

Our trading relationship with the U.S. will continue to be the most important of all. But there’s value in expanding trade markets, including to China

Canada has built an “unparalleled platform” of trade relationships spanning 14 free trade agreements covering 51 countries, Carr said, including the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) with the European Union and the recently ratified 11-nation Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP).

But taking advantage of those deals will mean engaging small and medium-size enterprises in global supply chains and infrastructure projects and mobilizing “non-traditional and first time exporters,” including businesses led by women and indigenous people, Carr said.

“When only 11 per cent of women-owned businesses export, we are leaving hundreds of billions of dollars on the table.”

The previous government scaled back programs available through the Trade Commissioner Service to only serve companies already established in overseas markets, Carr said.

“We will reverse that trend and get our sales numbers way up,” he said. “And Canada will not see the multilateral trading system eroded. We will defend it and we will reform it.”

OTTAWA  Industry groups are warning Ottawa against introducing certain exemptions on a project list set to be released under Bill C-69 this fall, saying such a move would politicize decisions over which oil and gas projects will be subject to new federal regulations.

The warnings come in response to a proposal by Ottawa to force some oilsands projects to face stricter federal environmental reviews if Alberta scraps its hard cap on oilsands emissions, now set at 100 million tonnes per year. The move was widely viewed as a political snare for United Conservative Party leader Jason Kenney, who has threatened to axe some of Alberta’s climate policies if he wins the upcoming provincial election.

The decision by Ottawa would put so-called “in-situ” oilsands developments on a list of projects that specifies what kind of industrial activity will be subject to tough new federal environmental assessments. Under current legislation, in-situ projects, which use steam to loosen up bitumen reservoirs deep below the earth’s surface, are only subject to provincial reviews.

Tim McMillan, president and CEO of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, said Ottawa is “holding the hammer over industry” with its project list, and has long called for in-situ developments to fall under provincial jurisdiction.

“If you have a good rationale, let’s talk about it,” McMillan said. “But if you’re going to put [in situ] on the list only to exempt it off, even though you have no rationale, that just doesn’t make sense.”

His comments add to growing concerns over Bill C-69, a sprawling piece of legislation that will substantially broaden the scope of environmental reviews for major projects such as pipelines, hydro dams and offshore oil wells. Lobby groups have been putting pressure on Ottawa as it prepares to release its project list this fall, calling for relief on certain pipeline expansions, in-situ projects and offshore drilling programs.

Earlier this year, Environment and Climate Change Canada released a discussion paper that laid out guidelines for what projects might be subjected to environmental assessments under C-69. It said in-situ oilsands facilities “could be” added to the project list, but said they could also be “exempted from federal assessment if a jurisdiction has in place a hard cap on greenhouse gas emissions.” Alberta is the only province with a hard cap on oil-related GHG emissions.

A spokesperson for Environment Minister Catherine McKenna declined to specify when the project list would be released. She said in-situ projects could be subject to review under those environmental conditions because GHG emissions are “shared jurisdiction,” and therefore require some level of climate policy to be in place.

“We are working to depoliticize the process — criteria for major projects have been made public, with decision making based on science and evidence,” Environment spokesperson Caroline Thériault said in a statement.

CAPP has also called on Ottawa to remove offshore exploration drilling programs from the project list. Such drilling programs may take just three to six months to complete, the group said, but take years to secure the relevant regulatory approvals.

We are working to depoliticize the process

Meanwhile, the Canadian Energy Pipelines Association has asked for a sizable extension to its thresholds for pipeline projects that are subject to federal review. Currently, any pipeline that crosses provincial borders and is longer than 40 kilometres is subject to a federal environmental assessment; CEPA has asked that threshold to be expanded to 500 kilometres.

“This impact assessment review should only be for those major, nation-building infrastructure projects,” said Chris Bloomer, head of the CEPA.

Such concessions could go a long way in quieting industry criticism of C-69, which has been widespread ever since Kinder Morgan Canada’s Trans Mountain pipeline was quashed by a Federal Court of Appeal ruling in August.

Bloomer has been among the fiercest critics of the legislation, telling a House committee this year that it was “difficult to imagine that a new major pipeline could be built in Canada” under the looming C-69 changes.

Last month, Alberta Environment Minister Shannon Phillips called on Ottawa to “stop dithering” and release the project list.

Alberta, as well as several industry lobby groups, have said Bill C-69 creates unnecessary regulatory overlap between the provinces and federal government. Many regulatory decisions are best left to provincial bodies like the Alberta Energy Regulator or the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board.

Environmental groups have called on Ottawa to include in-situ projects on the list, saying to do otherwise would mark a contradiction in the Liberals’ environmentally-minded climate policies.

“That’s like saying you’re going to study the environmental impact of road vehicles and then giving a free pass to SUVs and transport trucks — it doesn’t make any sense,” said Patrick DeRochie at Environmental Defence.

The in-situ process, unlike the open-pit mines that have come to symbolize the oilsands, involves injecting steam through well bores as a way to tap bitumen seams well below the Earth’s surface. Because most near-surface oil deposits have been tapped in northern Alberta, analysts expect that as much as 80 per cent of future oilsands growth will come through in-situ methods.

“Really, the future of oilsands expansion, if there’s going to be any expansion, is in situ oil production,” DeRochie said.

Bill C-69 is currently in second reading in the Senate. A committee is expected to study the bill this winter.