EZRA LEVANT ｜ Alberta Premier Danielle Smith talks oil and gas with Rebel News
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
185.3816
Summary
In this episode, I sit down with Alberta Premier Danielle Smith to talk about her vision for the future of Alberta's oil and gas production. We talk about the importance of the oil sands, the need for more oil and natural gas production in the province, and the need to diversify our energy supply.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Oh, hi there. Big show today, a one-on-one interview with Danielle Smith, the Premier of
00:00:03.960
Alberta. You can hear the echoes around me. I'm in the Alberta legislature as I record this.
00:00:09.240
I'd love it if you got the video version of this interview. I think you'd find it more engaging.
00:00:14.100
Go to rebelnewsplus.com. Click subscribe. It's eight bucks a month. You get the video version
00:00:19.540
of my show, which is every weeknight. Plus, you get the moral satisfaction of knowing
00:00:24.260
that you're supporting Rebel News because we don't take a dime from Trudeau and it shows.
00:00:34.540
Tonight, a feature interview with Alberta Premier Danielle Smith.
00:00:38.380
It's March 22nd, and this is The Ezra LeVant Show.
00:00:47.780
Ezra LeVant here for Rebel News. Behind me, watching over me, is Ralph Klein, the late
00:01:02.040
great Premier of Alberta, the great conservative populist who I think had a grassroots touch,
00:01:09.100
and he also knew that quite often the opponent wasn't on the opposition aisles, but rather
00:01:13.680
the opponent was in Ottawa. Well, I'm back in the Alberta legislature, which can only mean
00:01:18.500
one thing, a sit-down interview with Alberta Premier Danielle Smith. I've talked to her a
00:01:23.640
few times about an assortment of issues. Today, I chose to focus on oil and gas. Here's how
00:01:40.320
Thanks for meeting with me. You're so busy. It's great to see you. I'd like to talk about oil and gas.
00:01:45.580
It's so important for Albertans. Some people, like Stephen Gilboa, would say that oil is an evil we
00:01:51.500
have to get rid of. Others would say, well, Alberta oil is the lesser evil. It's more ethical than other
00:01:58.640
countries. And some people, like Alex Epstein, would say, no, it's a moral good. It's a positive.
00:02:05.300
It lifts people out of poverty. It makes people happier, healthier. Where do you fit on the
00:02:10.300
spectrum? Is oil evil, a necessary evil, or is it positively good? Positively good. There's no
00:02:15.120
question about that. We have to address issues of emissions, but we have always had to, with
00:02:19.740
everything we produce, try to find ways to have less impact on the environment. This is just the
00:02:23.440
latest challenge. But I've often said that the issue is not transitioning away from oil and natural
00:02:28.780
gas production. The issue is transitioning away from emissions. And we can do that now. We have
00:02:35.060
all kinds of technology that allow for us to strip out the CO2, bury it, embed it into useful
00:02:39.840
products. And I believe because we have so many industries that have a strategy to be carbon neutral
00:02:47.220
by 2050, that innovation is going to solve this problem, which allows for us to get this essential
00:02:52.700
product to the world. One thing that I think people forget is that a barrel of oil isn't
00:02:58.480
just gasoline and diesel. You can make 6,000 products out of a barrel of oil. So it could
00:03:04.640
well be that there may be fewer combustion uses for it, but we still need asphalt for roads. We
00:03:09.800
still need petrochemicals. We still need lubricants. We still need so many of the things that come
00:03:14.360
from a barrel of oil. So I am more than happy to talk to the world about Alberta's story because
00:03:18.900
it's a really good one. No other industry that I can think of has an artificial cap
00:03:24.620
put on it. The airline industry, the tech industry, the auto industry. And yet it's become normalized
00:03:32.200
to talking about capping the Alberta oil sands. Should there be any artificial limit to production
00:03:41.500
in Alberta? We've got close to 200 billion barrels of oil in the oil sands that are proven reserves and
00:03:48.360
there's 10 times as much in place. Should there be any artificial limit to how much we produce?
00:03:54.160
I don't think so. I mean, I've said we can reduce emissions and double our production. And I think
00:03:58.480
we should do that because one of the things that I've learned is that our heavy crude actually is very
00:04:06.100
highly prized because it can make so many products. And there's a shortage of being able to provide
00:04:11.740
heavy crude to our refineries. And so, especially in the Gulf Coast, that's why you hear them saying,
00:04:17.000
maybe we should be looking at getting some oil from Iran. Maybe we should be looking at getting
00:04:21.320
it from Venezuela. And my solution is we're right here. We are your friend. We are your ally.
00:04:27.100
We already have the entraties. We've got the pipeline system. We have the ability to produce.
00:04:31.980
When I was just down in Houston at Cereal Week, to put it into context, as I said, we've got 170
00:04:38.400
billion barrels of proven reserves, maybe more than that, as technology keeps on improving.
00:04:44.140
That is five times the amount of proven reserves in America as a whole. And we are just north of the
00:04:50.140
border. So, I think in some ways we kind of get forgotten and it's up to us to be able to assert
00:04:55.780
ourselves. Now, I recall during the dark ages when you had both Justin Trudeau and Rachel Notley both
00:05:03.700
going to work on the oil industry at the same time, there was this phrase that without social license,
00:05:09.340
without paying the carbon tax, without all these regulations, people will, customers will not buy
00:05:15.660
Alberta oil. It was an absurd thing to say. And they talk about social license because these projects
00:05:22.980
already had real licenses, they had environmental licenses. Have you ever, in any of your travels,
00:05:30.740
come across some refinery that said, no, we won't take Alberta oil unless you jump through these
00:05:37.580
social license hoops of a carbon tax? Like, I can't imagine that the refineries that are buying
00:05:43.120
from Saudi and Venezuela and Iran would say, no, no, no, we're not going to get Alberta oil if it
00:05:47.980
doesn't pay the carbon tax. Was that whole thing just a ruse? Like, I've never heard any proof of that
00:05:52.740
theory. It's funny, because I just met with some of the principles with Reliance, which is the
00:05:58.640
largest refinery on the planet. It's in India. And when we're talking about, well, can you accept
00:06:04.940
our crude? Do you know that it's heavy? They said, the heavier, the better, because that allows them
00:06:09.360
to produce more products. So I think that we should stop apologizing, really, that there are other ways
00:06:15.580
that we can reduce emissions to be able to reach carbon neutrality. People need this product.
00:06:22.340
We are one of the only ones who can safely provide it. And we should be making sure that our friends
00:06:27.840
and allies have the product that they need. As you know, 10 years ago, I wrote a book called
00:06:32.720
Ethical Oil. And I tried to compare what I called ethical oil with conflict oil, because the world buys
00:06:39.380
over 100 million barrels a day. And if it's not going to get it from us, it's going to get it from someone
00:06:42.640
else. And most of the other someone else's are morally questionable regimes. And look at Russia,
00:06:48.760
which has been using its oil and gas to fund its war in Ukraine. Look at Qatar, which has been using
00:06:55.020
especially its natural gas to fund terrorist groups. I suppose my question is, why when the Chancellor of
00:07:06.400
Germany visited Trudeau, and when the Prime Minister of Japan visited Trudeau, both of them said,
00:07:13.520
please give us some of your ethical energy to displace Russian and Qatari energy? Like they were
00:07:20.920
both basically saying, give us the good stuff, please. Why did Trudeau say no to both of them
00:07:26.740
on behalf of the industry? Why do you say there's no business case? Why did he basically turn them
00:07:31.200
away the one thing they could have really used from Canada? It's a funny dynamic, because you
00:07:37.400
probably saw in the last couple of days, they've announced a deal with Germany to send green
00:07:41.920
hydrogen made from offshore wind. And if it comes to fruition, you know, bravo to Newfoundland and
00:07:48.900
Labrador, it'll be $200 billion in additional revenue for them. But the issue is that we just don't
00:07:55.320
have the efficient means of being able to get our product to the East Coast because Quebec has stood
00:08:01.040
in the way. Quebec has said that they don't want to develop their own resource. They pulled licenses.
00:08:06.100
They were obstructionists when it came to any discussion of pipelines. And so maybe there isn't
00:08:11.340
a business case if you're not prepared to work with Quebec to get the pipeline infrastructure that
00:08:18.220
you need to. But there absolutely is a business case off the West Coast. And that's where we're going
00:08:21.880
to be focused. When you've got LNG Canada, that really is months away from being able to be up in
00:08:27.860
operation. They also need to make a final business investment decision next year on whether or not to
00:08:33.820
expand that. Right now they have two trains. They could double the size of their project. If they can
00:08:38.420
get the certainty, they'll be allowed to go ahead. There are at least two or three other projects that
00:08:43.500
are getting to final investment decision. There's the potential for us to export hydrogen and ammonia
00:08:49.660
using our existing rail lines going to Port-au-Prince-Rupert. So I feel like whatever
00:08:54.840
conversation the federal prime minister has had when looking on the other side of the country,
00:09:01.400
it doesn't apply on our side of the country. But it's also our job. It's the job of us in British
00:09:06.820
Columbia to be making that case and to be finding our markets. I understand that the Trans Mountain
00:09:12.280
pipeline is getting close to operational. That's such a crazy story because Trudeau did everything he
00:09:18.320
could to block it. And then when it looked like he would kill it, he bought it, basically quadrupled
00:09:24.400
the cost of it, like it's some arrive can app or something. But it looks like it might actually be
00:09:30.280
ready for operation. But do you actually think that the environmental extremists will let it operate?
00:09:36.600
Do you actually think oil will flow from Alberta through British Columbia to a port in BC?
00:09:42.420
Yes, I do. And I know it's been a big challenge all the way along. But and I'm grateful that they
00:09:48.560
finally did end up putting it to getting it to the finish line pretty close anyway. I'm grateful that
00:09:53.900
they were willing to pay all of the cost over runs and take on some of the political heat for that.
00:09:58.780
But it wouldn't have been necessary if they hadn't created the environment in the first place,
00:10:02.140
because it could be that Northern Gateway was the better project or Keystone XL was the better
00:10:08.020
project or Energy East was the bigger project. Or all of the above, let the market decide.
00:10:11.080
Completely. And the only ones that managed to get done is the Line 3 expansion on an existing
00:10:16.120
right-of-way and the Trans Mountain expansion on an existing right-of-way. But I do believe that it
00:10:20.940
will get to market. But we should have had all of them. It should have been all of the above. And
00:10:24.780
they wouldn't have had to step in to de-risk that project if they hadn't created the political
00:10:29.500
uncertainty in the first place. Yeah, they provided both the problem and the solution.
00:10:32.740
How about the Premier of British Columbia? Has he expressed a view on Trans Mountain? You know,
00:10:41.020
I see they're talking about the tankers again. Are you worried that there will be some provincial
00:10:46.900
pushback or is he in sync with this? I would say, I mean, look, he's in a certain stage in his
00:10:52.300
election cycle. And so you know how when you get pretty close to election, they tend to focus more
00:10:58.180
on the domestic issues. When I work with Premier Eby, we try to find the areas of common ground.
00:11:04.620
And there are many, many areas of common ground. I hope it doesn't become a political issue because
00:11:09.000
it shouldn't. It really shouldn't. They export. I think Vancouver is our busiest port in Canada.
00:11:15.900
I think it has 170 million tons that get exported in and out of there every day. And so to have a few
00:11:22.080
of those tankers or a few of those ships be tankers, it really shouldn't have that kind of that kind of
00:11:28.200
focus. There's a there's a lot of activity that happens in that port. And it's great for the entire
00:11:31.880
country that it that it has that activity. Yeah. You know, there's different reasons to be against
00:11:37.120
oil. I don't think any of them are valid. But when I listen to Stephen Gilboa, sometimes it sounds
00:11:42.400
ideological. Sometimes it sounds like a regional bias, like an anti-Alberta animus. I note that both
00:11:49.440
Gilboa and Trudeau are avid jet setters. I mean, they never stop traveling around.
00:11:54.920
Gilboa sometimes says weird things. And then he pulls back. He says, I don't want to invest in
00:11:59.100
roads anymore, which I think betrays an ideology. But I've never heard either Gilboa or Trudeau
00:12:05.960
criticize oil from other jurisdictions. They always seem to either ignore conflict oil from OPEC or even
00:12:13.860
favorite. For example, they don't put the carbon tax on imports from OPEC. What's going on with
00:12:20.000
those two? Is it some legacy from Pierre Trudeau sort of hate the West? Is it like a liberal tradition
00:12:24.700
to hate oil and gas? Is it ideology? Is it tax greed? What's going on? All I can think of is when
00:12:31.940
when Trudeau got elected, he said Canada is back. He thought that was very important that the UN knew
00:12:37.360
that a particular ideology had returned to Canada. And I think it goes back to Maurice Strong, who was
00:12:42.420
one of the first proponents of shutting down the fossil fuel industry and having Canada take the lead
00:12:48.860
with the approach that this country took on Kyoto and all of the subsequent UN conventions on climate
00:12:56.920
change. And so I think that there really is an ideology, and we saw it when what was called the
00:13:02.480
Tar Sands campaign started up in 2008. One of the issues behind that was the environmentalists
00:13:09.920
thought, well, we've effectively managed to demonize coal. And they were happy with the
00:13:14.060
progress they were making in phasing that out. But then they said, well, what's the next big problem?
00:13:18.860
What's transportation fuel? And so they said, where does America get its product from? And it was
00:13:23.760
Saudi Arabia and Canada. And it's probably not very safe to go and campaign and protest in Saudi Arabia.
00:13:29.260
So the whole strategy came, shut down the access from Canada into the United States. Now, in the
00:13:34.860
meantime, the Americans have dramatically increased their own production. And good for them. I'm
00:13:40.400
jealous. And yet the strategy has still been isolate Canada, stop them from being a world player,
00:13:45.200
which is so defeatist. I mean, that's just not why you elect a federal government. You don't elect a
00:13:49.200
federal government to shut down industries, to interfere with resource development, to interfere with
00:13:52.920
wealth creation, to cripple an economy. And yet that the only way that I can describe the last two
00:13:59.080
years of what we've seen under Stephen Gibault has been precisely that. Because everywhere you turn,
00:14:04.240
there is a new targeted policy aimed at phasing out fossil fuels, whether it's the emissions cap on
00:14:10.020
oil and gas, the methane cap, whether it's the new plan for net zero cars being the only kind of car
00:14:15.880
we can buy by 2035, whether it's the promotion of green hydrogen and the reluctance to talk about
00:14:23.520
blue hydrogen, whether it's the tanker ban that they had off the West Coast, whether it's the
00:14:29.860
lack of enthusiasm that they've had to promote pipeline development. You see one thing after
00:14:35.480
another all leading to, if you can take Canada out of the mix, maybe we'll be able to tell our
00:14:42.000
friends in the international community that we're one of them. And that is not our job. Our job is,
00:14:47.180
and the job of a federal government, is to make sure we get our products to market,
00:14:50.420
is to make sure that every region is able to develop to its full benefit, and to make sure
00:14:55.160
that we are a reliable friend and ally to our partners. We can be a central role in addressing
00:15:03.280
issues of energy security, energy affordability, reliability, and we can reduce emissions. It's
00:15:09.040
such a good story to tell. But I think we've seen a real turn in the last couple of years with this
00:15:13.740
particular environment minister. And the reason I say that is I was reminded at CERA week that
00:15:19.740
Justin Trudeau did speak there in 2016, and he got a standing ovation four times. And the memory of
00:15:26.280
his message was no one would ever look at all of this incredible resource wealth and just say,
00:15:31.660
let's leave it in the ground. So something's happened in the last couple of years. Maybe it's
00:15:35.260
because he's longer into his mandate. He thinks he can get away with more aggressive action against
00:15:40.240
our industry. But I'll just put it out there. They do not have the authority to shut down our energy
00:15:46.340
industry. They do not have the authority to curtail our production. And we'll be fighting
00:15:49.800
them every step of the way. Sometimes I think Stephen Guilbeau just does things for theatrics.
00:15:55.220
I mean, Trudeau himself is a former drama teacher. When Guilbeau broke into the CN Tower, when he
00:16:01.380
climbed on the roof of Ralph Klein's home, when Ralph Klein wasn't there, but his wife was just terrified
00:16:06.940
of her. Those are actually criminal acts. If you tried doing that in Russia or an OPEC country,
00:16:11.520
you'd be in prison. Those are both much larger producers than Canada's. I think maybe he's sort
00:16:18.560
of cosplaying some ideological here. I'm just trying to understand, do you think he really
00:16:24.980
believes it? Do you think Stephen Guilbeau is a true believer?
00:16:27.680
I think he is. I think there is an ideology out there. We've seen it expressed for many years in
00:16:34.620
our country. But even in the more extreme environmental movement, they have this vision
00:16:39.260
that you can power an industrialized economy off solar and wind and battery power, and that
00:16:46.120
everything is supposed to then be on the grid, including all of your home heating and all of
00:16:50.860
your transportation. And then it's all supposed to be free energy because the sun is free and the wind
00:16:56.480
is free. But there's some problems with that proposal, is that the infrastructure isn't free.
00:17:01.200
And the infrastructure takes a lot of energy to build. There's also another problem that you
00:17:06.660
can't create a solar panel with a solar panel or a wind turbine with a wind turbine.
00:17:12.480
You do. And you need all kinds of resources in order to be able to put the batteries together.
00:17:17.780
So I think that there is a bit of a blind spot about the kind of environmental harms caused by
00:17:23.480
certain types of energy production. And then on the other hand, all they talk about is the
00:17:28.900
purported environmental harms of oil and natural gas. So the solution is get rid of oil and natural
00:17:36.220
gas in the minds of those extreme environmentalists. And I have no doubt in my mind that that is the
00:17:42.160
ideology of our current environment minister. I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt.
00:17:46.200
People do change. But I can tell you, when I began in this job, I was told by some of my fellow
00:17:51.460
premiers, you know, good luck to you. But he's an ideologue. You're not going to get anywhere.
00:17:56.360
And that's what I discovered is that we were having these constructive tables talking about
00:18:00.680
things that we were where I think we really can work together, creating a regulatory framework
00:18:04.560
for small modular reactors, our hydrogen economy. We a lot, a number of our net zero projects have
00:18:10.500
gotten federal support from Francois-Philippe Champagne in particular. And so there are some
00:18:15.500
areas that we can work together. But I think the problem is the foundational philosophy coming out of
00:18:20.640
the environment department, which appears to have free reign, is doing everything they can to
00:18:25.000
interfere with our ability to produce our resources. And that is absolutely obvious.
00:18:29.480
I want to be respectful of your time. I really appreciate you fitting me in. I just have two
00:18:33.200
more quick questions. One is a counter-thesis. You said that the eco-dream, the green dream,
00:18:41.000
is that we all have plentiful energy on the grid and solar and wind. But sometimes if you listen to
00:18:46.340
Gilboa and Trudeau, they don't talk about plenty. They talk about nudging people, making it too costly
00:18:54.100
to burn carbon dioxide, that they're penalizing what they call pollution. And I think energy poverty,
00:19:02.960
which is what a lot of Canadians are experiencing, that's not a bug. That's the feature. That's the
00:19:07.760
designed outcome. They want people to drive less, heat their home less. I actually think that
00:19:13.860
their ideology is not one of plenty and prosperity. It's one of poverty and a reduced footprint,
00:19:20.240
reduced reuse, recycle. But in some ways, it's sort of anti-humanist. What are your thoughts on that?
00:19:25.220
Well, Canada is a big country and we all can't take public transit.
00:19:31.080
It's a cold country. And it's spoken, that kind of framework for what the future should look like
00:19:37.940
is spoken like somebody who's never left Montreal, never left downtown Montreal, doesn't understand.
00:19:44.600
And it's impossible. And so, especially if you want to produce all the things that we need,
00:19:48.920
whether it's energy or whether it's food, that happens out in our rural areas. So I think that
00:19:56.440
there is an ideology there that is just incompatible with a flourishing economy and maybe human
00:20:02.200
flourishment. And so the solution shouldn't be, how do we stop living? How do we stop doing the things we
00:20:09.000
want to do because we want to protect the planet? It's how do we keep doing the things we want to do
00:20:14.520
and protect the planet? That is, I think, the framework we have. We have a framework of abundance
00:20:18.440
that we can produce more energy. We can reduce the impact from emissions or waste. And that is
00:20:25.240
indeed the story of the oil and gas sector. I remember when a professor, who I saw years and
00:20:32.200
years ago at a Liberty conference, talking about the story of oil. And it was that we wanted to use
00:20:37.640
kerosene. And so we started off taking kerosene out and there was all this sludge and muck. They said,
00:20:42.840
what are we going to do with this? And some brilliant entrepreneur came along and said, well,
00:20:45.960
let's turn it into this product or that product. And that's why we have 6,000 different things that come
00:20:50.120
from a barrel of oil now. CO2 is really just the latest waste stream that I believe they're going
00:20:56.440
to find some useful purpose for. They already have. Heidelberg is going to embed that CO2 into
00:21:02.600
their cement to make a stronger concrete. The energy sector has already taken that CO2 and injected it
00:21:08.440
underground to be able to produce more oil. They will find uses to CO2. We just have to trust in the
00:21:14.200
entrepreneurs, which I do. And then we can have an attitude of abundance and still feel good about the
00:21:18.600
impact that we're having on the planet. Last question. There was a terrible dark time in Alberta when
00:21:26.200
companies who had permission to develop, who had huge proposals or applications, looked around and
00:21:33.480
said, there's too much political risk here. We're out. And they took billions, they took tens of billions
00:21:39.240
of dollars, mines, oil sands. And they actually moved to places that I would think were much riskier.
00:21:46.040
Kazakhstan, Iraq. Imagine thinking it's less risk to operate an oil and gas project in Iraq or
00:21:53.240
Kazakhstan than Alberta. Have those companies looking at Trudeau and looking at Gilbo said,
00:22:00.920
it's still too risky? Or have some of those companies said, you know what, the grownups are in charge now,
00:22:06.840
the radicals are outside the gates. We can put our money back in Alberta. What's it like
00:22:14.120
in terms of investment? Still too risky. Yeah, I'm afraid to say. I've talked to
00:22:20.840
those who may want to do, for instance, a natural gas power plant, even with carbon sequestration,
00:22:26.120
and having gone to three different banks being told by all three, sorry, your asset might be shut in,
00:22:31.000
or you might be out of compliance with the federal rules by 2035. So it's Trudeau that's the risk.
00:22:35.320
Yep, that's right. And so, but they'll say, but we will fund you if you want to do a solar project
00:22:40.200
or a wind project, even though we need baseload natural gas. It's part of the reason, and it's
00:22:44.200
going to be challenging, I know, because we've always prided ourselves on free enterprise and
00:22:49.000
letting the private sector take the lead. But what are we supposed to do when the private sector says,
00:22:53.160
because of federal interference, we're not prepared to deploy our capital? It's part of the reason why,
00:22:58.280
when we invoked the Sovereignty Act for the first time, it was, we don't want to do it,
00:23:02.040
but if we have to set up a crown corporation in order to de-risk these projects so that we can build
00:23:07.240
natural gas plants and have that baseload so the lights don't go out, we're prepared to do that.
00:23:11.320
And we're hoping by demonstrating our confidence that we'll be able to have a private sector partner
00:23:16.120
work with us. But I'm telling you, we have to be bold when it comes to our production as well.
00:23:21.880
We have to produce our bitumen, we have to produce our conventional oil,
00:23:25.480
we have to produce our conventional natural gas as well, because America is going to need our product,
00:23:30.680
the world is going to need our product, and we have to find a way to de-risk that too.
00:23:35.320
Maybe it'll take a change in government, but barring that, it's going to take a heck of a lot of
00:23:39.240
legal challenges. And we've won at least a couple of those, so I think that the courts are heading in
00:23:44.760
I can't resist asking one last silly question. Do you think that when the cameras aren't on him,
00:23:52.200
that Stephen Gilboa actually uses a paper straw? Or do you think he uses a plastic straw like the
00:23:57.320
I have to tell you, the paper straws are terrible! Try drinking a root beer float for those paper straws!
00:24:03.320
I don't think anyone likes him, and I don't think Stephen Gilboa himself, I think he looks around,
00:24:08.280
and if no one's in the room, I think he uses a plastic straw.
00:24:10.600
Well, it's true, and the war on plastics is sort of the next thing that we're fighting.
00:24:15.080
The idea that plastics are toxic, when you think about all of the food security that we have now,
00:24:21.080
and the decrease in foodborne illness because we have packaging, plastics and packaging that
00:24:26.280
allows us to keep that food safe. When you look at, we went through the COVID crisis for two years,
00:24:31.000
with masks and gloves and syringes that are all made out of plastic. Our medical community wouldn't
00:24:36.360
be able to have the sanitary conditions without plastic, so it's absurd that they would call it
00:24:41.400
toxic. And that's another example, again, of the war on our petrochemical industry because of
00:24:48.440
hydrocarbon fuels. When you look at all of the policies that they've taken, all roads lead back to,
00:24:54.440
they just want to reduce production, and we're just not going to let them do that.
00:24:57.800
It's great to catch up with you. Thanks for so much time.
00:25:09.320
Well, that's my interview with Danielle Smith. What do you think? I think she's dead right
00:25:13.800
about plastic and paper straws, don't you? That was just a fun question I threw in at the end,
00:25:19.000
but I think she had a lot of serious things to say. I think she realizes that she's up against
00:25:24.040
people who want to destroy the oil and gas industry, and I think she realizes it's important to fight
00:25:29.880
back using the Sovereignty Act, if necessary, and finding other provincial allies. For example,
00:25:36.120
the one that she has in Scott Moe in Saskatchewan. Let me know what you think of the interview. Send me
00:25:40.840
an email to ezra at rebelnews.com. From the Alberta legislature in Edmonton, this is Ezra Levant from