The Prince Rupert community financially benefits from all the mid-summer tourist traffic along with year-around service to their port. The historic friendship and good community relationships between Prince Rupert and Ketchikan include annual activities by the RCMP from Prince Rupert when the Mounties attend and march in the annual Fourth of July parade in Ketchikan and a host of other cooperative international exchanges. Overall, having a functioning Alaska Marine Highway System ferry facility in Prince Rupert has been a mutually beneficial relationship for both nations. For that matter, it was the United States that solely built and funded the Alaska-Canada Highway that Canadians enjoy today, and many tourists use to explore the countryside of British Columbia and Yukon Territory from Alaska.
Other issues to consider are international legal standards that apply to Alaska Marine Highway System vessels transiting international borders. All vessels engaged in international maritime trade and entering into Canadian ports must conform to the “Safety of Life at Sea” Convention adopted by the United States of American and Canada, among other maritime countries. These legal requirements are in addition to the typical legal statutes enforced by the United States Coast Guard that add a significant amount of cost to the procurement and maintenance of a vessel engaged in international trade. Under normal ferry operations, these additional international requirements could be reasonably argued as unnecessary. In order to operate to and from the Port of Prince Rupert, the Alaska Marine Highway System maintains three ships and crews with the international rating. They are the M/V, Kennicott, the M/V Taku, and the M/V Matanuska. All the other vessels in the fleet do not have these provisions and operate well without the additional international endorsement. Nor do the British Columbia ferries operate with the expensive international SOLAS amenities.
Given the gloomy financial prospects of the State of Alaska, and the sharp diminishment in oil revenues, all of the Alaska Marine Highway System operations need to be reexamined. All ideas should be reviewed including whether the long-term interests of Alaska would be best served by moving the Prince Rupert facility back to Hyder, Alaska. From that point, a smaller, cheaper, non-SOLAS ferry could permanently resolve this issue, effectively ending any future negative incursions of the Canadian authorities when it comes to how Alaska and the United States Government utilize their resources.
As it stands presently, if The Harper Administration along with B.C. Premier Christy Clark would like to dictate procurement policy to the Alaska Marine Highway System, they collectively are well within their means to allocate more than half the total cost, about 7.5 million US dollars, of the project to relieve the requirement of the “Buy American” provision. This would also end any need for future wasteful litigation costs. It was reported in CBC News that according to Edward Whalen, The President of the Canadian Institute of Steel Construction, that the local impact would be as follows, “American workers and materials to build the terminal in Prince Rupert could mean the potential loss of $80 million to the B.C. economy when taking into the ‘four-times multiplier’ into [sic] account.” If his posturing is correct and ignoring any potential conflicts of interest in his statement, Canada stands to gain almost ten times the economic benefit of contributing half the costs. The Canadian province would benefit by more than five times by building the facility solely utilizing Provincial funds.
Additionally, it is highly probable that Canadians will obtain and perform the work of rebuilding the terminal anyways. The Harper Administration’s selective enforcement of the “Foreign Extraterritorial Measures Act” will almost certainly only harm a Canadian contractor trying to make a living in tough economic times. A penalty that specifically calls for, according to Canadian sources, over a one hundred thousand dollar fine and five years of incarceration. The enforceability of Canadian demands under this act is also questionable, as this particular Canadian Law was not intended for use in this type of situation. This particular farcical policy embarked upon by the Prime Minister’s cabinet is as absolutely lopsided, and totally oblivious to the major financial contributions to Canada that not only come from the State of Alaska, but the United States as a whole.
On the balance, Prince Rupert gains substantially from Alaska Marine Highway System and associated transportation services. Prime Minister Harper would be well advised to find a mutually agreeable solution to this issue. In the end this is appears to be a very odd demonstration of force that is straining longstanding relations between two old allies over an issue that has nothing to do with genuine economics. We need to work together to resolve this issue or else Alaska should just get on with building a new ferry terminal in Hyder, Alaska as a substitute and as an alternative for Canadian intransigence. (To return to Page 1 of this story about the Prince Rupert Ferry Terminal, click HERE)