BC Hydro

Never retreat, never retract…

BC Hydro suffers a lack of managerial competence, contempt for fiduciary responsibilities, a disregard for present day energy realities and, perhaps most important, a failure of vision.

The first exists because Government turned the company into a politicized utility, with senior managers and board members selected for Liberal Party loyalty, not for competence. As a result, BC Hydro dares not plot a new course with even a hint that recent energy policies have been a grand mistake.

As a dead French emperor once said:

In politics… never retreat, never retract… never admit a mistake.

In 2008, BC Hydro CEO Bob Elton declared:

Conservation is the cleanest, easiest and least expensive way to meet the increasing demand for electricity in B.C.

Because Gordon Campbell’s Government planned to buy power worth more than a billion dollars a year from independent producers, Elton was fired. Conservation was no way to put public money into the private hands of important Liberal friends and supporters.

Dave Cobb, a subsequent CEO at Hydro, was overheard speaking about government policy:

If it doesn’t change, it would be hundreds of millions of dollars per year that we would be spending of our ratepayers’ money with no value in return.

The way the self-sufficiency policy is defined now…would require us to buy far more long-term power than we need.

I think they’re going to make a major change there, which will significantly reduce the amount of power we will be buying from independent power producers and anybody else. Government has to make a change…

Government chose not to change policy. Instead, it changed the CEO. In five years following, Cobb was shown to be correct. Uninformed taxpayers lost billions. Captured Press Gallery members stayed silent.

The decision to proceed with the Site C facility is not based on economic considerations; it is a political one, prioritized to deliver financial benefits to Liberal friends. Were there demonstrable needs for Site C power, those would have been shown to the BC Utilities Commission (BCUC), the quasi-judicial agency charged with ensuring British Columbians “get value from their utilities, with safe, reliable energy services.”

Pushing forward without effective oversight is but one indicator of a questionable project. Another is the considered decision to tell lies about the province’s need for electricity.

Premier Gordon Campbell said in 2011 that the primary reason for Site C was to meet future energy demand within British Columbia. He knew better because the province’s demand had been flat since 2005. But Campbell also understood the Napoleonic dictum quoted above.

demand 2

Writing in the Vancouver Observer in 2014, Warren Bell surmised that building Site C was:

…not purely about addressing future energy requirements for ordinary British Columbians, or managing the water resource. It’s to give a boost to the brand new fracking industry –  Christy Clark always softens the name to the “LNG” industry – which the Liberal government believes will form the basis of the provincial economy for the foreseeable future.

Even when the Liberal’s trillion dollar LNG fantasy was proven an empty electioneering stunt, Liberals hurried to get Site C beyond a foggy point of no return, even if that meant contracting with an impecunious Alberta company and two foreign corporations elsewhere accused of fraudulent business practices. That latter quality particularly endeared Samsung C&T and Acciona to BC Liberals.

In  2017, the downward slope of clean alternative energy pricing is well established. Utility scale solar power is coming onstream at less than half the cost of Site C and wind power is also being produced at under 5¢ a KWh. Power about equivalent to Site C’s output is available for 2.6¢ a KWh by returning the Canadian Entitlement of Columbia River downstream benefits.

Because Liberals cannot argue that new electricity capacity is needed in the foreseeable future, they now argue, as Christy Clark did, that its purpose is to provide jobs and “opportunities for apprenticeships, skills training, and business contracts.”

Many small and medium sized enterprises throughout the province could offer the same benefits for a fraction of the cost of the province’s most expensive project of all time. And, encouraging SMEs wouldn’t result in destruction of First Nation cultural sites or flooding of Class 1 farmlands.

Clearly, Site C is a massive waste of public dollars and BC Liberals simply don’t care. Nor does the Board of Directors of BC Hydro. It should be replaced post-haste.

Taxpayer Accountability Principles

14 replies »

  1. Will send you the story of what Hydro did to us.

    More BC Liberal crimes.

    It will blow your mind.

    BC Liberals, starting with Gordon Campbell, used BC Crown Corporations for their …schemes so as to avoid ethics and government oversight issues.

    Thanks for your great work in exposing this.



  2. Total incompetence in decision making. I can’t call it leadership because generally that word has a positive connotation. This is a tragic example of how badly our valuable money and resources are being squandered.


  3. and let’s throw in selling off the real estate properties owned by BC Hydro. Eg. BC Hydro substation adjacent to Murdo Frazer golf and park. Plans are already afoot with DNV staff to demolish the substation and convert the land to an office tower. Which, goes a long way to explain why Rokstad has been removing all of the underground copper that serves the Edgemont area and north there of. The contractor, Rocstad gets to keep the copper (2.5 inches in diameter) just like Kiewit taking down the old Port Mann Bridge.

    That’s copper that should have gone to help with BC Hydro’s bottom line…. eh

    PS the parking for the new office tower? Murdo Frazer


  4. After reading through the Taxpayer Accountability Principles linked here, I conclude these don’t apply to B.C. Hydro directors.

    As a group, they fail six out of six.


  5. Way back in the early 90’s I happened to be in a meeting with a former CEO of a Crown Corporation. One of his statements was that all his fellow CEO’s of Crown Corporations spend a lot of their time in stopping politicians from interfering with our Corporations. Most of the time they were successful, but not all the time. Also back then, whatever political party was in power, loaded up the Board of Directors of our Crown Corporations with their political hacks. Need I say more; that’s why our Crown Coporations are so fukked-up. If Horgan assigns a special prosecuter to investigate our Corporations maybe he/she should check out the various Board members? I wonder how many of them could be charged with a lack of fiduciary responsibility or at least breach of trust?


  6. I remember Gordo railing against government “interfering” with Crown Corps. But I’d known that lying was bad before I made kindergarten.

    Uninformed citizens? Not if they were reading this site!

    I’ll cite one leader of a dying empire: “We will never surrender!”


  7. Thank goodness you’ve a nose for corruption. People know what corruption is but the politic confuses. You ought to send a copy to Island Tides online newspaper as an article. Shine the light upon this dark moment for democracy. Hugh M


  8. “BC Hydro suffers a lack of managerial competence, contempt for fiduciary responsibilities, a disregard for present day energy realities and, perhaps most important, a failure of vision.”

    In addition to those assessments,which are supported by much of the readily available evidence, BC’s Auditor General recently reported that almost all expectations for a robust enforcement and compliance regime within the Ministry of Energy and Mines were not met.

    The major share of blame for these situations lies with the most recent incumbent Energy and Mines ministers. Yet despite these serious resume blemishes, the past two ministers were immediately recruited by the mining industry.

    Lack of skill sets necessary for administration in the public interest obviously doesn’t trouble the mining industry.


    • How is it going to (survive) if it doesn’t? Can you imagine another decade of (Chrispy’s) ‘balanced budgets’? Doesn’t that debt have to be repaid? Along with all the ICBC and IPP stuff.
      I’m sure glad we have capable economists to answer those questions. And I’m sure glad that I’m not John Horgan. He not only has to provide solutions but also fight of the MSM flack that is bound to arise because ‘the NDP couldn’t run a two hole outhouse”.


  9. Let’s all remember to say “LFG” instead of “LNG” as there is no longer anything “natural” about liquefied gas — it’s FRACKED, all of it. Changing the label can be a successful game changer if we are trying to reduce the number of LFG projects. LFG! LFG! LFG! rolls off the tongue, right?


Leave a reply but be on topic and civil.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s