Harper, Prentice & Charest

[August1991]

Two heavyweight MSM commentators weighed in on Jim Prentice' recent speech in Calgary.

There is a perfect federal-provincial storm brewing on the climate-change horizon in Canada and it is bringing to the fore the very kind of irreconcilable regional differences that once doomed Brian Mulroney's Tory government.

For the second time in two decades, the capacity of a federal Conservative government to bridge the competing interests of Quebec and Alberta is being tested and found wanting.

Chantal Hebert

Jim Prentice didnt mince his words the other day when he spoke of the folly of attempting to go it alone by Quebec in its new auto emission standards, which the federal environment minister described as unique in North America.

The environment minister wasnt thinking out loud and he wasnt the victim of a media drive-by shooting. He was speaking from a text in a major address on climate change in Calgary, one approved by his own officials and in all likelihood cleared by the control freaks in the Prime Ministers Office.

L. Ian Macdonald

(You can read the Calgary Herald report of the speech here.)

----

Hebert and Macdonald have focussed on a phrase in Prentice's speech about Quebec adopting Californian emission standards. Here's the CBC report on the change:

Quebec is adopting California's stringent auto-emissions standards next month, in a move to tackle the province's polluting transport sector.

When the new emissions standards take effect Jan. 14, Quebec will become the first Canadian province to follow California's lead in reducing greenhouse gases with cleaner light vehicles.

The standards will impose increasingly strict limits on maximum greenhouse gas emissions for light vehicles manufactured between 2010 and 2016, and sold in Quebec.

By 2016, provincial standards will require light vehicles to produce no more than 127 grams of greenhouse gas per kilometre.

CBC

Note that these emissions standards only concern CO2, and they fix "light vehicle" "fleet" standards. IOW, the standards do not apply to individual vehicles/models but overall sales of vehicles in the market. Moreover, if it's not a "light vehicle", then the standard does not apply. (SUVs are not classified as "light vehicles".)

I'll add too that Quebec is not only meeting California emission standards. About 16 other American states have adopted similar standards - for example, Maine, New York and Vermont. These states, like Quebec, do not have automobile industries.

----

With these details aside, I have a broader point to make. And it occurred to me while riding Montreal's metro this morning(!)

Chantal Hebert argues that Prentice and Harper are adopting a losing proposition in Quebec. I think she's wrong. Why? Hebert has a Montreal (Plateau-centric) view of "Quebec". She views Quebec the way Radio-Canada presents it.

There is another Quebec, outside of the Plateau, outside of Radio-Canada, that presents another view. Here is one example.

But even more, I realized that Charest and Harper have set this up. Harper wants to move the federal political spectrum to the right. Charest wants to move to the national side of the Quebec political spectrum. What better way to achieve both than to have a federal-Quebec debate about meaningless CO2 "light vehicle" emission standards?

I'm no conspiracy theorist but I think that Charest is helping Harper, and Harper is helping Charest.

Edited February 6, 2010 by August1991

[Moonbox]

An interesting take on things. I never really thought of this myself. Having Quebec set its own standards in this regard is incredibly dumb but we'll see how it pans out.

[Argus]

An interesting take on things. I never really thought of this myself. Having Quebec set its own standards in this regard is incredibly dumb but we'll see how it pans out.

It's not dumb, it's pandering to dumb. Quebecers tend to have a smug sense of moral superiority to les Anglais, considering themselves to be more careing, less fixated on business and making money. This is because the rest of Canada makes money and ships it to Quebec to keep the noble Francophones from being bankrupted by the generous society and social programs they've built but can't pay for.

Quebec will crack down on vehicles not manufactured in Quebec. Will it crack down on pollution from aircraft manufactured in Quebec? Not a chance in hell. Quebec will bemoan the pollution of the oilsands to an international audience but will it foresake the money

it gets from Alberta? Unlikely in the extreme. Charest wants to play the noble green politician but only if there is no cost to his party or his province.

[Guy M]

It's not dumb, it's pandering to dumb. Quebecers tend to have a smug sense of moral superiority to les Anglais, considering themselves to be more careing, less fixated on business and making money. This is because the rest of Canada makes money and ships it to Quebec to keep the noble Francophones from being bankrupted by the generous society and social programs they've built but can't pay for.

Quebec will crack down on vehicles not manufactured in Quebec. Will it crack down on pollution from aircraft manufactured in Quebec? Not a chance in hell. Quebec will bemoan the pollution of the oilsands to an international audience but will it foresake the money

it gets from Alberta? Unlikely in the extreme. Charest wants to play the noble green politician but only if there is no cost to his party or his province.

How do you come up with theses opinions? I'm genuinely curious how you could come to think this? I don't think anyone in Quebec thinks themselves superior to 'les anglais'. It's very obvious that California for example is ahead of Quebec on the environment and has been for a long time. I think the overwhelming feeling in Quebec is not that we are that great, but that we should be doing more, and that the feds should be too.

As for the rest of Canada outperforming Quebec and shipping us money, again I would say that the only sector that is significantly outperforming Quebec is oil. Alberta, NL and Saskatchewan are eclipsing the rest of the country, very little of this could arguably be related to language or culture. To insinuate that the rest of the country is outperforming Quebec because of it's work-centric values is ludicrous. Anglophones in BC, Manitoba or Nova-Scotia are not really generating anymore wealth per capita than Francophone Quebec, or contributing more to federal coffers.

[Wild Bill]

How do you come up with theses opinions? I'm genuinely curious how you could come to think this? I don't think anyone in Quebec thinks themselves superior to 'les anglais'. It's very obvious that California for example is ahead of Quebec on the environment and has been for a long time. I think the overwhelming feeling in Quebec is not that we are that great, but that we should be doing more, and that the feds should be too.

You may be right. Still, it seems to me that perhaps once again politicians like Charest have shown that they have little or no technical education. It's not easy to reach those California standards! It also drives up the cost. Already we have seen media reports of how many models are simply not available to Quebec dealerships or are being priced higher than Quebecers want to pay!

The auto companies need more costs and market restrictions right now like they need a hole in their heads! They have just come through facing financial armageddon! Over the past decade they have managed to adjust to service the California market and maybe a dozen other states with the same sort of standards. Now with no warning they have been told Presto! As of tomorrow you have to figure out how to service the Quebec market!

In the real world, designs have to be changed, parts sources have to be set up, manufacturing volumes and delivery schedules have to be adjusted. It takes time and money. What the hell did Charest think would be done? Someone in upper management in each car company would just wave a magic wand? It would have been far more practical if he had announced that he was giving them 2-3 years as a deadline and then phone them up and make sure they understood that Quebec intended to stick to it!

The only way the car companies can hope to meet the new Quebec standards is to abandon more gas models and try to sell more hybrids and/or electrics. This is not as easy as it sounds. First off, you've still got older models coming down the factory pipes. What do you do with them? Scrap them? Second, hybrids are still a bit pricier. What does a dealer do when not enough Quebecers are willing to pay the price?

A few government fleet orders of cleaner vehicles might have been a nice gesture to help with the situation. What do Quebec politicians drive? Are they setting a "green" example or do they have chauffeurs driving gas-guzzling limos?

I'd be interested in knowing.

[Keepitsimple]

The environment (Global Warming) is turning into a very powerful political issue. It may not happen....but can you imagine the swing in voting if in fact the mainstream media actually admit that the Science is not "settled". Can you imagine if the "go slow" approach is vindicated? As I said - it may not happen but you have to admit, a shift is happening.

[August1991]

What the hell did Charest think would be done? Someone in upper management in each car company would just wave a magic wand? It would have been far more practical if he had announced that he was giving them 2-3 years as a deadline and then phone them up and make sure they understood that Quebec intended to stick to it!

Wild Bill, Quebec has merely adopted standards that every US state touching Quebec has adopted (including New York) as well as California, some 17 states in total. Quebec is "not going alone".

For better or worse, it is obvious that all car companies around the world will have to produce cars to meet Californian standards which, de facto, are North American standards.

The point in my OP was to note that this dispute is about perceptions, not substance. It is to the advantage of both Charest and Harper if on occasion they appear to be on opposite sides of some issues.

The environment (Global Warming) is turning into a very powerful political issue. It may not happen....but can you imagine the swing in voting if in fact the mainstream media actually admit that the Science is not "settled". Can you imagine if the "go slow" approach is vindicated? As I said - it may not happen but you have to admit, a shift is happening.

This is an interesting point and one that increasingly intrigues me.

So far, the questioning of the standard climate/CO2 dogma is largely an anglophone issue, and largely isolated to the blogoshpere. I was recently at a public meeting in Montreal with several hundred people and no one voiced any question of the basic premise of AGW.

How do you come up with theses opinions?

If you go to the wikipedia article for "Quebec bashing", you'll find a photograph of Argus. Edited February 15, 2010 by August1991

[Smallc]

Wild Bill, Quebec has merely adopted standards that every US state touching Quebec has adopted (including New York) as well as California, some 17 states in total. Quebec is "not going alone".

Exactly. I don't know why so many people are getting their panties in a bunch. I wouldn't be at all surprised in BC and Manitoba followed Quebec's lead in adopting the California regulations.

[Wild Bill]

Wild Bill, Quebec has merely adopted standards that every US state touching Quebec has adopted (including New York) as well as California, some 17 states in total. Quebec is "not going alone".

I never said that! I mentioned those other states! My comment was on the cavalier attitude of Charest to expect auto companies to instantly be able to adjust, since the new rules were immediate.

You have not addressed my actual post in any way.

[Argus]

How do you come up with theses opinions?

I used to live in Quebec. I've worked around Francophones all my life. I've had long political and social discussions with Francophones, both "federalists" and sovereigntists. I can tell you that the feeling that the English are inferior in terms of not being as caring as Francophones, being far more concerned about business and money and profits, and less inclined to have fun seems to be a nearly unanimous belief. The cliche'd image of the Anglo as the glowering, money pinching bussinesman (against the more happy go lucky Francophone) seems prevelent

As for the rest of Canada outperforming Quebec and shipping us money, again I would say that the only sector that is significantly outperforming Quebec is oil. Alberta, NL and Saskatchewan are eclipsing the rest of the country, very little of this could arguably be related to language or culture.

Quebec is blessed with resources, as well. So why has Quebec been a have-not province all my life while Ontario, until recently, has been a powerhouse up until the idiot voters put that idiot Dalton McIdiot into the premier's office. Whether it's culture, or a series of poor governments and an unstable political situation (which, btw, you could blame on culture) Quebec never seems able to pay its own bills, and consumes many billions every year produced in the same provinces by the same means (oil) which it goes abroad to bemoan.

[ironstone]

How do you come up with theses opinions? I'm genuinely curious how you could come to think this? I don't think anyone in Quebec thinks themselves superior to 'les anglais'. It's very obvious that California for example is ahead of Quebec on the environment and has been for a long time. I think the overwhelming feeling in Quebec is not that we are that great, but that we should be doing more, and that the feds should be too.

As for the rest of Canada outperforming Quebec and shipping us money, again I would say that the only sector that is significantly outperforming Quebec is oil. Alberta, NL and Saskatchewan are eclipsing the rest of the country, very little of this could arguably be related to language or culture. To insinuate that the rest of the country is outperforming Quebec because of it's work-centric values is ludicrous. Anglophones in BC, Manitoba or Nova-Scotia are not really generating anymore wealth per capita than Francophone Quebec, or contributing more to federal coffers.

In terms of equalization payments in Canada,Quebec has been a big winner for many years.Why is it that Quebec,being rather well off in terms of natural resources and an educated workforce is so heavily dependant on equalizaton payments,primarily from Alberta?I believe they recieve something in the neighborhood of $8BILLION a year.Don't most Quebecers believe the province pays more out than they recieve and they never get "their fair share"?

[Argus]

If you go to the wikipedia article for "Quebec bashing", you'll find a photograph of Argus.

Because I note the hypocrisy of Quebec? How is that Quebec bashing? I've noted your hypocisy many times before, an open, obvious hypocrisy you've never even attempted to deny. Quebec goes abroad and snivels about the oil sands then comes home and gleefully stuffs petro dollars into its pockets. You don't think that's hypocritical? You come on here and talk blissfully about the joys of immigration, and how Canada should open its doors wide to the world, but when I ask about Quebec's restrictive immigration rules, and the fact it takes in far, far fewer immigrants than the rest of Canada, you go instantly mute.

I'm not Quebec bashing. I'm hypocrite bashing.

[Guy M]

In terms of equalization payments in Canada,Quebec has been a big winner for many years.Why is it that Quebec,being rather well off in terms of natural resources and an educated workforce is so heavily dependant on equalizaton payments,primarily from Alberta?I believe they receive something in the neighborhood of $8BILLION a year. Don't most Quebecers believe the province pays more out than they receive and they never get "their fair share"?

I don't think equalization payments come primarily from Alberta, they come from federal taxes same as any other program. If you look at the 14BN dollars equalization program as a whole, Alberta probably pays ~14% of it (1.96BN, Alberta is 14% of Canada's economy) and Quebec pays around 21% (2.94BN, Quebec is 21% of Canada's GDP). The crucial difference is of course that Alberta won't receive equalization, while Quebec is the largest recipient, but also the second largest contributor of taxes to the feds, amounting to roughly 45BN a year. Every province sends more in taxes than they receive back in transfers/equalization, if you think about it equalization at 14BN/year is only about 5% of an overall federal budget that's in the 250BN dollar range.

As for being heavily dependant, that's a mixed bag. Per Capita Quebec receives more than Ontario, but less than Manitoba, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and PEI. Looks like BC may be joining us all next year too. Being a 'have not' in Canada circa 2010 simply means having no oil in your backyard. The other sectors, manufacturing, research, high tech, mining, fisheries, pulp & paper ect that are the mainstay of our economy are not doing that great in the rest of the country either...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Canadian_provinces_and_territories_by_gross_domestic_product

http://www.fin.gc.ca/fedprov/eqp-eng.asp

Edited February 16, 2010 by Guy M