Oilpatch demonized

October 10, 2005
Oilpatch demonized
Essential industry convenient scapegoat for politicians
By EZRA LEVANT

Last Monday, the other Calgary daily ran a large editorial cartoon attacking the oilpatch. A cigar-chomping caricature of a corporate fat cat -- standing in front of a billboard saying "BIG OIL," just in case the cigar and wine glass were too subtle -- explains economics to Calgarians.

"It's a simple case of supply and demand," says the fat-cat. "I demand a lavish lifestyle, and you supply it." The editorial message is clear: people who work for oil companies are greedy and oil prices are high because of their greed.

One might have expected such a cartoon to run in a Montreal or Toronto newspaper, for those cities are a breeding ground for anti-Alberta envy these days. But in Calgary?

The personal demonization of oil executives is stomach-turning. Who is that fat-cat supposed to be? EnCana's Gwyn Morgan, Calgary's most respected businessman? Or Talisman's Jim Buckee, whose company donates millions to Calgary community projects?

Or is it supposed to represent the industry as a whole -- the thousands of Calgarians who work directly or indirectly in the energy sector as accountants, engineers and a hundred other noble professions and trades? Or is the target the families of those workers, whose "lavish lifestyles" are paid for by having a breadwinner in the oilpatch?

There is no satisfactory answer.

What is such an opinion called? What is it called to rename someone with an unappealing name (Big Oil), make them look physically repulsive (a cigar-chomping, wine-swilling egotist) put appalling words in their mouth ("I demand a lavish lifestyle") and blame that scapegoat for troubles in our lives (high oil prices)?

It's called bigotry.

Here's a lesson about oil prices for that cartoonist. Oil prices aren't set in Calgary. They're not set by "Big Oil." They're the result of growing demand, especially in the U.S., China and India, and tight supplies because of political uncertainty in the Middle East, Venezuela and Nigeria, and the hurricane-wrecked oil facilities in the Gulf of Mexico. How do Calgary oil men fit into that -- other than as people pumping as much as they can to fill the shortfall?

It's unlikely Paul Martin saw that cartoon, but he'd like it if he did. Last week he went to New York, where he threatened to restrict energy exports to the U.S.

Martin hinted to New York investors, and then again on CNN, that he would use energy exports as a way to punish the U.S. for not giving in to other Canadian diplomatic demands. According to news reports, Martin said Canada could easily shift its oil exports away from the U.S. and to China and India instead.

Let's not get distracted by focusing on how Martin has frittered away an already deteriorating relationship with the U.S., from his Ballistic Missile Defence flip-flop, to his passive-aggressive approach to the softwood lumber case. This is about Martin feeling comfortable using the oilpatch -- translation: Alberta -- as a weapon in Canada-U.S. relations. Do you think for a second that he'd get away with that if he threatened to use Ontario's auto industry in the same way?

The oilpatch already has enough enemies in Ottawa. It doesn't need more in Calgary newspapers. Where are the oilpatch's advocates? Or have they taken the cartoonist's cue, and become self-loathing?

Have they bought into the demonization?

As the poet W.B. Yeats wrote 85 years ago, "The best lack all conviction, while the worst/Are full of passionate intensity."