Well, it certainly didn't take long for overheated rhetoric and base hypocrisy to colour the assessment hearing for the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline project.
Federal Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver, echoing the prime minister, accused pipeline opponents of being funded by "foreign interests" whose aim is to "undermine Canada's national economic interest."
Premier Christy Clark, whose government has yet to take an official position on the pipeline, also voiced fears about foreign interests trying to influence the debate.
Freelance researcher Vivian Krause has certainly shown through her work a considerable amount of American dollars have made their way into the budgets of environmental groups.
But if the presence of foreign money and interests is such a problem, it's best to look at the pro-pipeline side if you want to see some eye-popping numbers.
In fact, the mere presence of China alone in this issue dwarfs whatever relatively meager resources the environmentalists bring to the table. That country's state-owned companies have spent more than $60 billion buying all or parts of the companies busy extracting the crude oil product from Alberta's tar sands, and of course they desperately want and need the Enbridge pipeline to go ahead.
So if Oliver wants to wring his hands over foreign involvement in the Enbridge pipeline debate, he should perhaps start looking at a country that appears to be almost taking over an extremely valuable part of this country's natural resource sector.
There are also some ethical concerns involved here. China is notorious for its pollution and has shown no interest in environmental protection.
As well, the country has a notoriously dubious track record when it comes to human rights.
It has a much greater impact on the same "national economic interest" that Ottawa professes to put at paramount importance.
Now, the environmentalist side of this issue isn't immune to criticism either.
Opponents of the pipeline are trying to demonize companies like Enbridge and some want to shut down the Alberta tar sands altogether.
But really, how realistic is it to expect Alberta or the federal government (even if the NDP were in power) to close an industry that is providing enormous amounts of money into our economy - money that funds the health and education systems, among other things?
And the environmental movement hasn't explained an alternative to replace a product that plays such a huge role in how the entire world functions.
Some environmentalists decry everything to do with oil, and then climb into their cars, purchase manufactured goods or fly in planes to attend conferences on the environment.
But in the end, the odds of this project going ahead appear to be somewhat remote to me.
The main obstacle to the pipeline's approval is not the environmental movement, but rather the considerable opposition of First Nations.
Without First Nations support, large industrial projects have little chance of proceeding on land they claim as their hereditary territory. It's likely the Northern Gateway project will ultimately be determined by the Supreme Court of Canada, several years from now.
And by then, it will be interesting to see how much China has increased its financial stake in our country and what that impact will be on our "national economic interest."
I'm betting it's going to be a lot more substantive than the American money flowing to Canadian environmental groups.
Keith Baldrey is chief political reporter for Global BC.
