Canadian Lawyer InHouse

MAY/JUNE 2018 48 INHOUSE proceed, according to media reports. Counsel to K ML, Osler Hoskin & Har- court LLP, declined comment, advising the firm had "checked in with the client and unfortunately is not in a position to com- ment." Several other firms declined com- ment, mostly due to conflicts. ALARM BELLS Other lawyers, however, have plenty to say — particularly when it comes to the impact the conflict will be having on how K ML executives are thinking and acting with regard to delays and other risks. Tony Cioni, an oil and gas lawyer and co-founder of Calgary boutique firm Cito Energy Law LLP, is blunt. "What would I be thinking if I were leading KML? I'd probably [be getting ready to] pull the project. The U.S had a wildcat discovery two years ago, adding billions of barrels. Plus, wouldn't you rather put your money into Venezuela — a country with reserves the size of Iran's — that's soon going to be welcom- ing your industry, because its government is broke? "For all industry play- ers, the alarm bells have been ringing for a long time already. This conflict is just another piece of BS on the pile. Kinder is owned by a very wealthy person, who may well get tired of this . . . Pipeline companies can go to China tomorrow and get a 22-per- cent return," says Cioni. Peter Bryan, a partner in Borden Lad- ner Gervais LLP's Calgary office, expects K ML's "extremely frustrated" executives are re-evaluating the project. "They're likely considering risk, eco- nomics and their actual appetite to contin- ue . . . What the project looks like in terms of how it's ultimately built — that will cer- tainly [currently] be in play." Adds Bryan's Calgary office colleague Randy Block: "Right now, there will be a battle within K ML as to capital alloca- tion . . . I'd be rather shocked if K ML isn't becoming increasingly frustrated with the entire Canadian system. They can be com- mended for sticking to it. But as to what the future holds?" Chidinma Thompson, another Calgary BLG partner, warns investors will be shak- ing their heads and looking at Canada, say- ing "they're not serious yet." IN THE PIPELINE The expansion is essentially a twinning of K ML's existing 1,150-kilometre pipeline between Edmonton and Burnaby, B.C., in use since 1953. The expansion, involving almost 1,000 km of new and mostly un- derground pipeline, will triple capacity to I n d u s t r y S p o t l i g h t Pipeline nightmares Can Kinder Morgan sway the political day? BY SCOTT NEILSON A range of looming legal, political and economic risks threaten to delay and possibly derail Kinder Morgan Canada's increasingly controversial interprovincial pipeline expansion project. The company's $7.4-billion Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC expansion hit the headlines yet again in early April when it announced it was suspending "non-essen- tial activities" and related spending for the project, citing ongoing opposition from the British Columbia government. The compa- ny said it would consult with stakeholders in an effort to reach agreements before the end of May that would allow the project to

• Cover