Clear Full Forecast

Ridley Terminals - Do We Live in Canada or some other country called 'North America'?

By Peter Ewart

Thursday, February 03, 2011 03:44 AM

Ocean waters can be deceptive. On the surface, all appears to be calm. But beneath the sparkling waves lurk powerful currents and treacherous undertows. And so it is with nation states in today's globalized economy.

Take for example, Ridley Terminals which is situated at the port of Prince Rupert on the Pacific Ocean, and is used to export coal and other resources to Asia and other parts of the world.

Recent announcements about the facility, which is a federal government crown corporation, appear to be all good news. For example, Ridley Terminals has recently signed new contracts with certain coal shippers which, according to the terminal's chairperson, promises to "protect jobs" in northern BC, "increase tax revenues" and "enable miners in both northern BC and Northwest Alberta to open new mines or grow existing [ones]."

But let's delve a little deeper here. Just who are the "coal shippers" that the crown corporation Ridley Terminals has signed these contracts with? It turns out that they are U.S. coal mining companies with operations in Wyoming and Montana. It also turns out that the contracts have allowed these U.S. companies to lock up 40% of Ridley Terminals shipping capacity.

Why is this a problem? Well, both northern and southern British Columbia are major coal producing regions. Companies like Teck Resources, Western Coal and Grande Cache Coal, all have substantial operations in British Columbia and rely on Ridley Terminals to ship their coal out in a timely manner to the ravenous Asian market.

According to these Canadian producers, handing over 40% of Ridley Terminal capacity to U.S. coal producers will clog up shipping for them and, in the long run, choke off Canadian mining investment. In that regard, First Coal Corp., which has plans to start a new coal mine in B.C., is already expressing concerns about its investment.

Teck CEO Don Lindsay has strongly criticized this decision, as has Pierre Gratton, of the Mining Association of BC. Gratton says that "What this effectively means is that a Canadian Crown corporation is putting the interests of U.S. production and U.S. jobs ahead of Canadian jobs, and that is a real concern for us and it should be for all Canadians" (Globe and Mail, Jan. 25, 2011).

On the CFIS 93.1 Meisner Show on Jan. 31, Blair Lekstrom, MLA for Peace River South, stated, in regards to this controversy, that BC producers must have first priority in terms of shipping coal out of Ridley Terminal.

In addition, the Ridley Terminals Users Group, which is made up of Teck and other Canadian coal producers, has called for a meeting with the federal government to discuss what it terms is Ridley Terminal's "complete lack of faith in addressing the requirements of Canadian commodity producers." As one possible solution, the coal producers want Ottawa to "fast track" terminal expansion to accommodate increased demand.

So just who is Ridley Terminals, a federal crown corporation, supposed to be serving? For its part, the Harper government in Ottawa has not clarified this issue in any meaningful way.

However, according to the Ridley Terminal "profile" on the Government of Canada website, "the terminal was built to provide an export point for vast reserves of metallurgical and thermal coal in northeastern British Columbia." Note the emphasis on "northeastern British Columbia."

In still another part of the federal government website, the "mandate" of the terminal is also described. According to this "mandate", the purpose of the terminal is "[to play] an important role in supporting Canada's export coal, petroleum coke and wood pellet business", and that the terminal's "focus" is to "help Canadian shippers compete more effectively in the international market by minimizing transportation costs." Note the reference to "Canada" and "Canadians".

It all seems pretty clear. That is until we examine recent statements by the CEO of Ridley Terminals, George Dorsey. Just for some background here. George Dorsey is the CEO of Edgewood Holdings, a private equity and advisory firm, that was awarded a contract in 2008 to manage the operations of Ridley Terminals. Dorsey is originally from the U.S. and Edgewood Holdings itself is based in the state of Vermont. Both Dorsey and Edgewood Holdings have had extensive business dealings with a variety of North American coal, energy, mining, and other resource interests.

Why was Dorsey and his American-based company, given the position of managing a Canadian crown corporation, which has a highly strategic location for the national interest of Canada? That is a whole other question unto itself.

Let's just look at what, according to George Dorsey, is the purpose of Ridley Terminals. Arch Coal, which is one of the U.S. companies that has locked up 40% of the terminal capacity, issued a press release on January 18 just after the deal was reached. In this press release, Dorsey is quoted as saying that "[Ridley Terminal's] vision is to provide value to its parent company and expand its role as a leading trade gateway between North American and world markets."

Note that Dorsey is not saying "northeastern BC" or "Canadian", as the federal government Ridley Terminal website does, but rather "North American" markets. And so it is that BC and Canada disappear beneath the waves of what is now termed "North America".

Interestingly enough, Ridley Terminals has praised the role of CN Rail in "advancing the discussion" to cinch the deal with the American coal producers. CN Rail, of course, thanks to privatization at the federal level, is now primarily a U.S. controlled company and has an obvious vested interest in shipping American coal over its thousands of miles of tracks to the port of Prince Rupert.

Thus we have a U.S. firm, Edgewood Holdings, put in charge of a highly strategic Canadian crown corporation, and then arranging, with the help of a U.S. rail company, a deal that gives 40% terminal capacity to a group of U.S. coal companies at the expense of Canadian coal producers. Sweet deal, indeed.

All of this, of course, is further complicated by the fact that a number of the Canadian-based coal companies are themselves multinationals, with operations in the U.S. and other countries, and in that regard, also have conflicting loyalties. One of the charges levelled against these companies is that they have been receiving subsidized rates from the terminal.

But that issue aside, the question must be asked: Where is the BC and Canadian public interest in this recent shipping deal that appears to give huge advantage to American coal interests over BC-based coal mining operations? In this "brave new world" of globalization, it appears that the public interest of the people of BC and of Canada are in grave danger of being lost in the treacherous currents of inter-monopoly competition and multinational deal-making. In this regard, the issue is not to line up with one or other of the competing monopoly interests but rather with what is the public interest.

Some business analysts are suggesting that Ridley Terminals should be completely privatized, and there are rumblings that the Harper government may go this route eventually, whether it be handing over the facility to a consortium of coal producers or to some other kind of private corporate interests. This would be a huge mistake. We have already seen the problems associated with selling off publicly-owned national and provincial railways to a foreign monopoly such as CN Rail.

As a result of these rail privatizations, serious contradictions have arisen between CN Rail and its Canadian-based forestry, grain and coal suppliers. In effect, key sections of the Canadian economy are now subject to the whims and sectional interests of a foreign rail monopoly, which has the power to favour or punish suppliers, and expand or whither economic growth.

Privatizing Ridley Terminals would be a disaster for British Columbian and Canadian national interests. The opposite should take place. A strategic facility like the terminal should be made completely public, run by Canadians, and in the interest of the people of northeastern BC and other regions of BC and Canada.

In case George Dorsey and Prime Minister Harper missed it, our country is Canada, not "North America".

(This article is a revised version of one that was published earlier today that had incorrect information regarding locations of mining operations in BC. Thanks to readers for pointing out errors.)

Peter Ewart is a writer and columnist based in Prince George, British Columbia. He can be reached at:

peter.ewart@shaw.ca


Previous Story - Next Story



Return to Home
NetBistro

Comments

Teck and Grande Cache Coal do not produce coal in Northeast BC. Do your homework.
S.N.A.F.U.
Government involved, that's why.
metalman.
Teck plans to reopen the Quintette mine in Tumbler Ridge in 2012, presumably only if they can ship out of Prince Rupert.
Very good information to know about. Thanks Peter for your research. I think you are spot on with your analysis of the situation.
Considering Prince Rupert's history, Ridley Terminals are really not that old. However there is a storied history behind PR and the terminals.
First touted by Charles Hayes as potentially one of the greatest port facilities in the world, that dream sank with Charlie and the Titanic.
But an ongoing group of enterprising people lobbied diligently over the years with Ottawa, to bring this huge natural port into being.
Men like Thomas Pattulo from Prince Rupert, the 21 Premier of BC, Peter Lester, mayor of Prince Rupert for over 30 years; enterprising business man Joseph Scott and elected Liberal MP Iona Campagnola worked tirelessly over the years to convince the powers in Ottawa to recognize this potential, particularly with regard to the Orient proximity.
Those in Ottawa power regardless of political affiliation ignored, scoffed at, abandoned, and sold of the potential of this port to foreign enterprise.
Ottawa couldn't give two hoots in hell about this port and history shows this.
They have given over the management to a foreign company just to get rid of what they deem to be a nuisance.
Prince Rupert should have been a major world renowned port 75-80 years ago. Instead her port facilities are less than 10% of potential.

If this body of water was in any other country on the Pacific Rim other than Canada, forward visioned Governments or entrepreneurs would have turned the City surrounding it into one of the top three ports in the world!

Peter you are right in that Ridley should never be privatized, as we know first hand in BC how well it is working with CN and its former head Hunter Harrison, and the debacle of BC Ferries and David Haun.

So where does Prince Rupert stand? Between Governments who don't give a good GD to so called free enterprise that will strip the port and the City of all resources let alone dignity, I predict Prince Rupert will wax in mediocrity for decades to come.

What a bloody shame!
Trackster also the development of the port in Prince Rupert has also been blocked for decades by interests in the ports of Vancouver.
What a bunch of whiners. Suppose I have a widget store and have 1 Billion widgets in stock. Someone comes along and says hey I'll buy 60% of those widgets and you sell them the widgets. Then someone else says hey you shouldn't have sold him all those widgets. I ask why not? They say well because some time in the future I may want to buy 80 or 100% of your widgets and now I can't because you sold 60% of them already. I ask well when would you buy all 100% of my widgets? No idea, we just might want to in the future ...

And that's how we should run a coal terminal?? If you need more capacity build a bigger terminal! Until then shut up.
NECoal, Peter did not say Teck and Grande Cache Coal produce coal in NE BC, this is what he said."Well,both northern and southern British Columbia are major coal Producing regions.Companies like Teck Resources,Western Coal and Grande Cache Coal,all have substantial operations in British Columbia."I believe he has done his homework!
Ewarts information is misleading....I did some checking and while the US shipments may reach 40% based on current shipments, infact the terminal is currently shipping under capacity, and I hear plans to to a major expeansion at the terminal, which would make the current contract with the US comapny far less than 40%. In addition, coal shipping contracts are not based on percentage of capacity, but rather on tonnage, and Ridley of course will be seeking to expand that tonnage as much as they can because... ( and I'm sure even a socialist like Ewart would understand this)...THE MORE TONNAGE THEY HANDLE..THE MORE MONEY THEY MAKE. Afterall thats what they are in business for. And if they find that somewhere down the road even after the expansion, that they need more capacity...well then they will expand again, thats just good business.

Folks like Ewart seem to be able to find a bogeyman everytime the big bad USA is mentioned..even as a customer of a Canadian company....sad that they dont understand that without the USA, Canada would be very hard pressed to find a market for all the goods and services that we are able to produce. Does Ewart think money just falls from the sky into Federal and Provincial coffers....HUH!
The Container Terminal in Prince Rupert was built with money from Maher Terminals, a huge Company who's main Ports are in New Jersey. The CN Rail, and some money from the Federal Government. Without the Maher Terminal, and CN Money this terminal would never have been built.

Pr Rupert has always been a second cousin to other Ports on the Pacific Coast, and I suspect that it always will be, if history is any indication.

I am at a loss to understand why a coal mine in Wyoming would be shipping coal to Prince Rupert, unless there is in fact a huge shortage of space in Vancouver and the US Ports.

Its more likely that they are using the Port of Prince Rupert as a bargaining chip to get cheaper rates at other ports. Or maybe CN Rail has some money invested in the Wyoming coal mines. Who knows?? From a logistics point of view it makes no sense to go all the way to Rupert and haul all the empty cars back.

There is more to this story than meets the eye.