A CAUTIONARY TALE — Once upon a time, back in 2021, the Canada Infrastructure Bank (CIB) made an announcement. Great news! We’re investing up to C$655 million in the Lake Erie Connector, it said.
The project, to build a C$1.7-billion, 117-kilometer underwater transmission line to move power between Ontario and Pennsylvania, was billed partly as a way to export clean electricity to the United States. It would have linked the province to the PJM Interconnection, a consortium of 13 states. “Canada has an opportunity to export clean power, helping to reduce emissions, maximizing clean power use and making electricity more affordable for Canadians,” then-infrastructure minister CATHERINE MCKENNA said in a statement at the time . — Early warnings: There were some doubts raised off the bat , including from those who suggested Ontario would end up relying on gas-fired electricity — not clean power — to meet the demand. But the CIB hailed the project as “another example” of its “momentum to quickly implement” its C$10-billion Growth Plan, focused on investments to accelerate Canada’s low-carbon transition. ITC Holdings Corp., a subsidiary of Fortis and the project’s proponent, said it could start construction that year. — Slow progress: In March 2022, the Logic took a closer look . In a story titled “The Canada Infrastructure Bank and the $655M mystery,” PAUL WELLS observed the CIB board had not yet approved the investment, in part due to doubts about its impact on emissions. And then there was silence, more or less. Over the summer, a few local outlets reported the project had been suspended , but it barely made news. Then last week, Conservative infrastructure critic LESLYN LEWIS asked about it in the House of Commons. The Ontario end of the transmission line would have been built in her riding. Yes, the project has been suspended, the Liberals responded . But don’t worry! The CIB never actually forked over that C$655 million. — So what happened? According to a statement Fortis sent Playbook, the decision was driven by “macroeconomic conditions.” So there’s that. JACK GIBBONS , chair of the Ontario Clean Air Alliance, suggested the Liberals’ plan for a net-zero electricity grid by 2035 may have ruined the business case for a project that was inevitably going to depend on gas-fired power. Which would be … ironic. For its part, the CIB tells Playbook the Lake Erie project never received the board’s final approval. The bank never provided any funding to develop the project, but it did “incur routine due diligence expenses and staff time in undertaking its assessment of the investment opportunity.” The spokesperson didn’t say how much that cost. — What’s the lesson for the infrastructure bank? According to a statement Lewis released, the story is further proof “this $35-billion-dollar boondoggle [should] be abolished.” Gibbons tells Playbook it was “complete stupidity” for the CIB to get involved in the Lake Erie Connector. “It’s got to get a lot smarter,” he said. “And it’s got to focus on projects that will actually reduce greenhouse-gas pollution.” IN HIS OWN WORDS — Conservative Leader PIERRE POILIEVRE has granted another interview , this time to right-wing outlet True North’s ANDREW LAWTON. Here are a few of the highlights: On the Alberta sovereignty act: “I suspect not long after I become prime minister, most premiers will stop talking about this stuff.” On the “Freedom Convoy” protesters in Ottawa: “My preference would have been for them to be on foot and to park their trucks off-site. I think that would have been better. But that said, I think, overall, the reason we had these protests and all of this disruption was because of an unnecessary and very disruptive vaccine mandate.” On the invocation of the Emergencies Act: “We need to have another look at the Emergencies Act powers to make sure that no prime minister is able to abuse the power in the act like that again. And there may be some more checks and balances required to do it.” On why he’s (mostly) avoiding the parliamentary press gallery: “For the most part, there is a definite bias in favor of just defending the government and regurgitating its talking points, and I don’t need to validate that.” | 
