Why Kinder Morgan and Russian interference in elections are more closely related than you think

Jason Kenney isn't saying the Russian government is influencing the conversation over the Kinder Morgan pipeline by indirectly funding environmental groups opposed to it.

He's justasking the question.

"In whose interest is it that Canadian oil and gas does not get to global markets?Wellobviously, it's in the interest of Russia, with the fourth largest reserves on earth," said Kenney, the leader of Alberta's United Conservative Party.

He was in Vancouver Monday to discuss how he'd handle the dispute over Kinder Morgan with the B.C. government, should he becomes premier following Alberta's provincial election in 2019.

• Kenney threatens to stop flow of oil to B.C., put toll on natural gas
• Provincial power plays: B.C. and Alberta test the boundaries in pipeline debate

But he was happy to discuss an argumentthat has been gaining steam with pipeline supporters in recent weeks the idea that opposition is being fomented by professional protesters whose funding is reliant on sources outside Canada.

It's not a new argument, and it's not the central question in the pipeline debate. But it is certainly indicative of the times we live in.

"I think we have legitimatequestions to ask about the ultimate source of some of the funds that are being spent in Canadian politics to bottleneck our resources," he said.

"If the Russian governmentdecided to deploy an organized social media campaign to attack U.S. energy, so there's less American energy exports, it's entirely reasonable to assume they might have tried to do the same thing in Canada. I have no evidence of that, but it's a reasonable question."

Some protesters are more equal than others

Some might ask how the discourse over a proposed pipeline one that has constantly been in the news for the last five years could be subject to international manipulation, in a province well-versed in environmental movements.

For Vivian Krause though, this moment couldn't come soon enough.

"Having spent my entire life savings and 10 years trying to bring this issue to the fore, yes, I am pleased. It's been an enormous amount of hard work," said Krause, whose blog Fair Questions has documented either diligently or obsessively, depending who you talk towhere environmental groups and environmentally-focused politicians have gotten their money from.

Her work is receiving a new look by some, after the B.C. Liberals released a memo written by an environmental campaigner who works for 350.org, an American environmental organization with campaigns in Vancouver. The memo lists how the group could help organize large protests against Kinder Morgan and trainsothers to do the same.

Which, to someone like former Dragons' Den panellist Brett Wilson, is tantamount to treason.

"That was simply not happening in the days of the War of the Woods. Activism isn't what it used to be," said Krause.

"The individual Canadians who sign online petitions or show up at protest, they're as Canadian as anybody ...but we cannot allow activism to be hijacked, as part of political interference from outside interests."

Conspiracies everywhere

The debate around environmental groups getting money from outside Canada isn't new. But the political culture is different than when Krause first started her work.

"It taps into a broader anger over globalization and anxiety about international trade," said Kai Nagata, a spokesperson for the Dogwood Initiative, which is campaigning against the pipeline.

"It's a simple story to say people from far away want to hurt you and your economic chances, so let's kill them."

Dogwood is fully based in B.C., but Nagataadmits about 20 per cent of itsfunding comes from American foundations, and individual donors are not disclosed.

• Environmental group still being investigated by Revenue Canada
• Sierra Club latest environmental charity hit by Revenue Canada audits

"If it would increase public trustto have more intervenors subject to the same kind of rules as political parties in disclosure, we should have that debate," he said. "But in the meantime, we go above and beyond what's required of any non-profit."

And two can play the international game: in our interview, Nagatamade reference to the fact that Kinder Morgan is ultimately a Texas-based company, and that Kenneybegan his public career with the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, which doesn't disclose its donors.

Thatshows why the rhetorical attack is so potent: it's easy and emotionally effectiveto attack the motivations in a policy argument, rather than debate the policy itself.

Which is why Nagataprefers to focus on the merits of the pipeline and is betting it's what will ultimately matter to those who live here.

"The reality is there are thousands and thousands of British Columbians, who independent of any environmental campaign, feel strongly about the place where they live and are going to speak up and put pressure on their lawmakers," he said.

"You could cut off all sources of out-of-province funding for environmental campaigns, and that wouldn't change the scale of public opposition to Kinder Morgan."