Who should own Alberta's oil?

[maplesyrup]

I think 100 feet down should be the cutoff point. Anything within 100 feet of the surface the land operator controls, and anything more than 100 feet below the surface belongs to all Canadians.

Seriously the one and only reason I can see for not abolishing the provinces altogether, is because of Quebec's need to protect the French language and culture.

Look at the system on the our coastlines. Doesn't Canada own or control up to 200 miles offshore?

[August1991]

The farmer owns the land (at least the surface)

How far down? What has the farmer done to 'own the surface' that he did not do to own what is underneath?

Well, you'd have to look at his deed. What did he buy exactly? What does he own? Typically, he doesn't own the "mineral" rights. Nor does he own the overflight rights.

And even if someone owns the mineral rights, they will have to pay special taxes once anything is extracted and possibly sold. It depends. The "sovereign" had different ways of collecting these "royalties".

These roylaties are designed to collect "rent" on the use of a resource.

[maplesyrup]

MS are you for real LOL.  Sometimes I wonder if you're just a troller trying to inspire us rightists to fire back at your insanity.  I wish there were more like you in the public spouting off these kind of comments.  It would truly give us separatists enough power to follow through.

This is your logic at work:

Let's go and prop the world up with dictatorships across the world so that it will be very easy to access foreign resources. Oh, and if these dictators don't toe the transnational line close enough, we will just kill them, and replace them with somebody else who will be more obedient.

Eventually the citizens of these foreign countries wake up and realize they are being ripped off. When they complain to their own governments, they are thrown in jail.

The system is so unfair, so stacked against them that eventually they resort to violence, like leveling the world trade centre, these terrible people, these terrorists, who just want their national governments to control their own resources on behalf of their citizens.

Sounds almost like Albertans doesn't it?

Spare us the company line - we have all heard it before!

The only thing that is going on, and that has been going on since the beginning, is class warfare. The rich against the poor. You can try to disguise it up any way you want, different religion, different language, different colour skin, different race, but those are all smokescreens. It is always the rich against the poor, it always has been, and it always will be. Don't worry the greed factor is alive and well throughout the land. :angry:

A lot of people here would not know an original thought if it hit them smack in their face.

[Stoker]

Well, you'd have to look at his deed. What did he buy exactly? What does he own? Typically, he doesn't own the "mineral" rights. Nor does he own the overflight rights.

And what of the private companies like Syncrude or Suncor that do own the mineral rights? Do you propose to nationalize private companies? Whats next? Farms and ranches? BC's forest industry?

Are you looking for a civil war?

Eventually the citizens of these foreign countries wake up and realize they are being ripped off. When they complain to their own governments, they are thrown in jail.

Couldn't that paragraph be almost interpreted as how the West feels it's being treated by the east?

The system is so unfair, so stacked against them that eventually they resort to violence, like leveling the world trade centre, these terrible people, these terrorists, who just want their national governments to control their own resources on behalf of their citizens.

This also, sounds like a paragrapgh that could describe the mood of the next generation of Westerners. Though I hope it never happens, I would never rule out the West (or Quebec) having to use violence to gain independence from the ROC.

[August1991]

And what of the private companies like Syncrude or Suncor that do own the mineral rights? Do you propose to nationalize private companies? Whats next? Farms and ranches? BC's forest industry?

Nationalization? WTF?

Stoker, at present, the Albertan government imposes a special sliding tax (a royalty) on oil pumped out of the ground.

Most governments in oil producing countries impose such taxes. In Canada, this tax is collected by the provincial government.

I am asking why this should be? Why not the federal government?

Nobody has yet given me a good argument except to say "well, that's the way we've always done it".

----

But you are right, Stoker, why not let the owner of the mineral rights keep all the profits from the sale of the oil? Indeed, why not?

Well, this is Canada where governments get to impose taxes. And in the case of Canada, it seems only the Albertan government gets to win in this chance gift of geology.

[Stoker]

Nobody has yet given me a good argument except to say "well, that's the way we've always done it".

Who, in your opinion, who will be hurt and who will benifit from this tax? There is your argument.

Well, this is Canada where governments get to impose taxes. And in the case of Canada, it seems only the Albertan government gets to win in this chance gift of geology.

Do you honestly think it prudent to do such a thing?

[Guest eureka]

Alberta's transfer payments are not reduced because of its serendipitous wealth. It contributes to equalizarion payments according to a formula based on the wealth of provinces.

Before oil, Alberta was a net recipient of largesse from Ontario and Quebec mostly. From its foundation as a province, until that time it received monies to support its governance. Now, some Albertans seem to hold the belief that the oil came to them because they are a "God fearing" hard working, superior brand of human. They little know that it was brought to light by American, British and Ontarian money and know how.

The NEP was a consequence of world conditions at the time. There appeared to be a world shortage of supply through political conditions. The NEP was a response to ensure Canadian supplies. It did have an economic impact on Alberta but the whole of Canada was also in the grip of a deep recession - worsened by Thatcherism and Reaganism.

At that time, I lived in Calgary and was in a business that had a heavy dependence on the oil patch. I don't recall the more intelligent of my contacts spitting venom at Trudeau. That is something that has been fostered by Alberta politicians - and the morons at the Alberta Report - subsequent to the recession. They do it for their own selfish political purposes.

I think August may be understating the case when he says that few jurisdictions other than central governments receive royalties from oil. I may be wrong, but I think that Alberta may be the only such local jurisdiction - not counting the smaller benefits to Saskatchewan and B.C.

We can't change that in Canada at this time although it is an injustice to Canadians. We can't do so because, Constitutionally, Canada has the weakest central government in the world. Everything would have to be opened up to do so.

[Stoker]

We can't change that in Canada at this time although it is an injustice to Canadians. We can't do so because, Constitutionally, Canada has the weakest central government in the world. Everything would have to be opened up to do so.

.......thus the end of Confederation.

[kimmy]

Why isn't "that's the way we've always done it" a good reason? Why isn't "that's the way it's laid out in the Constitution" the only answer required?

Jurisdictions outside Canada don't get to collect revenue from their resources? Well, uh, so? Aren't we always hearing about the many unique wonders of Canada's federal system? Why is "we're the only ones who do this" suddenly a bad thing?

Since you guys are the ones who want to alter the very rules that this country was built on, maybe you guys are the ones who should offer some compelling reason for changing the basis of federal/provincial relations.

And I suppose that maintaining some fairness within Canada would be a compelling reason, except that we already have Equalization for that purpose. If fairness is the objective here, then isn't that end being addressed by equalization? If fairness is the objective here, then why are we limiting the scope of this discussion to oil? Seems like a very arbitrary choice.

As for the theory that oh, Albertans are just selfish selfish people... well, maybe. However... within our lifetimes (or mine, at least ) we will see Quebec's huge capacity for generating green electricity become Canada's energy bonanza... and we'll see how willing they are to share.

-kimmy

[playfullfellow]

August, Alberta already pays to the ROC. Alberta is a net contributor to transfer payments. Albertans and many companies have invested their lives and many millions of dollars into the exploration and extraction of our resources. Aside from PetroCan and the Syncrude investments, there has not been much help from the ROC getting the oil industry to where it is now. I can remember reading somewhere that they figured that the world would not be dependant on oil as much as we are now. Alberta invested and so did many Albertans. Why should the ROC of Canada wreap the benefits from the sweat of so many others?

As for the NEP, who benefitted the most? That would be Ontario and Quebec. Yeah, the early 80's sucked economically for everyone but Trudeau siphoned money from an area he did not get votes and injected it into an area he did get votes. This is what Albertans are pissed about. This will just happen again and you know it. Sure, take money from one area so you can buy votes in another area. Or, it will just go into some other bullcrap program that has to be run by some beauracracy.

Alberta has worked bloody hard to get their crap together while we watch the rest of the country keep pissing money away like it is 5 cent beer. Alberta is not perfect by any means but there are a lot of people in this province with a lot of initiative and guts to put their backs into hard work to make a living. Show me some figures on how you figure this whole scheme will benefit Canada as a whole? Show me the facts as you see them and I may change my mind, everyone here knows I am very centrist.

[theloniusfleabag]

I suppose it could be argued that the NEP, and transfer payments, are a case of "From each according to his (it's) ability(resources), to each according to it's need".

[playfullfellow]

I suppose it could be argued that the NEP, and transfer payments, are a case of "From each according to his (it's) ability(resources), to each according to it's need".

That would be fine with me but there are too many BS programs across this country and the money just gets pissed away. You keep giving someone charity and they will have their hand out everytime you open your wallet. Look at the kids everytime Grandma comes to the door for a visit and gives the kiddies a dollar, do this a few times and the kiddies will have the hands out before Grandma even gets her coat of. If you can get something for nothing, why work for it. Where is the incentive to improve if you know you have money coming like clockwork to pay for your spending? If the money actually went to things besides feel good programs that do nothing but give short term benefit, then I would say so what, the pay off will come when these investments start making a return. But in all reality, how many governement sponsored industries actually make it? Saskatchewan has some very fine examples of money getting pissed out the window. Just think potash or potatos. Ask any Newfoundlander how moeny is wasted out there on feel good programs. All of these programs are there to buy votes, they only have a 4 year foresight, nothing else. If in the overall picture, the money from royalties would make Canada financially stronger as a whole, then go for it. But I do not see this happening. The money will just go to waste so why shouldn't it benefit Albertans? If it was up to the ROC, Alberta would be in debt up to their eyeballs too.

[takeanumber]

Confederation does not revolve around the needs of Ontario, although considerable (too much) energy has been spent on Quebec.

The Constitution says that the provinces have control over the natural resources.

You can't change the Constitution without Alberta's consent.

The entire arguement becomes moot.

Moan and groan about oil prices all you want. If it wasn't for the high world market price, a lot of the oil currently being pumped wouldn't be pumped, so there's no such thing as a 'made in Canada' price.

[maplesyrup]

Confederation actually does revolve around the needs of Ontario.

Britiain had its colonies, Canada, Australia, etc., and Ontario has its as well - BC, AB, etc.

Tough, eh!

Them's the breaks.

[Stoker]

Confederation actually does revolve around the needs of Ontario.

Britiain had its colonies, Canada, Australia, etc., and Ontario has its as well - BC, AB, etc.

Tough, eh! 

Them's the breaks.

Great example!!! And as I'm sure you know, the colonies left eventually...........

[playfullfellow]

MS, it must really get your goat then that Ontario, all wise and inteligent, gave up its rights to control all the provinces and wealth of this country by itself? Where was Ontario when the whole country was in economic chaos in the early 80's? They were eyeing the provinces that had resource rich economies and figuring ways to take that money and then spending it in Quebec and Ontario. Now, through the all wise decisions of Ontario, we have a severe split in this country between the provinces that have money and the provinces that do not. The economy as a whole is doing pretty good right now so the whole country as a whole should be doing quite well. Why is this not the case? Well, a lot of provinces have become so enthralled with buying votes with money they don't have so now they are in debt up to their eyeballs. Alberta has been deligent, paid off its debts sreamlined a lot of programs and stayed within their spending limits so now the ROC is looking and saying, hmmmmmmmm, they have a few billion bucks that we could use and we dont even have to do anything for it. MS, your posts are very evident that you would gladly sit back and let other people do all the hard work to make a company wealthy and then turn around and take that wealth so that you do not have to work hard for a living and get more days off. Here in Alberta we call that being lazy and someone having no initiative. So instead of looking for ways to take easy money off of the hard working of this country, get off your butt and do something original with your ideas and work hard for your money.

[August1991]

Why isn't "that's the way we've always done it" a good reason? Why isn't "that's the way it's laid out in the Constitution" the only answer required?

Let's say I'm thinking outside the box.

And I suppose that maintaining some fairness within Canada would be a compelling reason, except that we already have Equalization for that purpose. If fairness is the objective here, then isn't that end being addressed by equalization? If fairness is the objective here, then why are we limiting the scope of this discussion to oil? Seems like a very arbitrary choice.

Kimmy, I'd say fine: Let the federal government tax all resource rents and share those revenues with all Canadians. (Oil and natural gas are the big ticket items right now.)

But here's my main point, Kimmy:

Albertans have the mistaken impression that they are paying for the rest of the country. For example, Albertans seem to feel they pay for the lazy folly of all those French bast**ds in Quebec.

In fact though, the constitution by chance confers on the Albertan government the right to tax what is purely a chance gift of geology. And then Albertans turn around and complain that Canada is unfair to them!

The Constitution says that the provinces have control over the natural resources.

You can't change the Constitution without Alberta's consent.

The Constitution also gives the federal government the right to impose any tax it wants.

Confederation actually does revolve around the needs of Ontario.

Britiain had its colonies, Canada, Australia, etc., and Ontario has its as well - BC, AB, etc.

Completely off topic. The idea indicates however the resentment below the surface in Canada. The CBC/Liberal Party prefers, Soviet style, to believe we are one big happy family.

[Guest eureka]

In the heady exploration days of the 60's and 70's, the money to float and grow all those exploration companies was coming from Ontario. In those days, the people and expertise came from Ontario and overseas - not Alberta.

It is really amusing to hear the defensiveness of Albertans over this. "Methinks they do protest too much." Can they be reacting through some sense of guilt. It certainly is not because they are justified in claiming that they worked harder than everybody else or that they have been wiser. Klein will go down in history woth Harris as the most brutal premiers we have known. In spite of the money from oil, Klein robbed the poor to pay the rich; gutted the education and health systems.

One idea to find out how superior Alberta is without the fortune of oil, might be to ban royalties altogether and, like a manufacturer, let the industry price its product accordingly.

Same profit with cheaper gas for all. Alberta to find out what it is like to live within its actual means and still make the provisions that the rest of us make.

Actually, we will not be having this discussion in ten or fifteen years when the tap runs dry. Then, we will be discussing the merits as energy sources of Alberta's hot air and Nova Scotia's wind turbines.

[The Terrible Sweal]

You have no such power. Alberta can't separate

Why?

Stoker: Because the territory that comprises Alberta is only a province pursuant to the constitution. Absent the constitutional status as a Province, the territory simply belongs outright to the Crown in Right of Canada.

IMR: No, it has nothing to do with any deficiencies of Albertans, real or imaginged.

[The Terrible Sweal]

Dear Agust1991,

The farmer owns the land (at least the surface)

How far down? What has the farmer done to 'own the surface' that he did not do to own what is underneath?

You guys are confusing different concepts.

Individuals' property rights are held 'of the crown'. Crown property rights are hled pursuant to constitutional and international conventions of sovereignty. They are therefor not comparable, as the former depends entirely upon the latter.

[The Terrible Sweal]

Alberta's transfer payments are not reduced because of its serendipitous wealth. It contributes to equalizarion payments according to a formula based on the wealth of provinces.

Incorrect. "Alberta" does not contribute equalization payments.

Regular federal taxes collected everywhere in Canada are partly distributed based on provincial neediness based on the equalization formula.

[The Terrible Sweal]

The Constitution says that the provinces have control over the natural resources.

You can't change the Constitution without Alberta's consent.

The entire arguement becomes moot.

Several points, for precision's sake:

1. Provinces are designated the 'administrators' of the natural resources within their borders.

2. Administration is not legally identical with 'ownership', nor 'sovereign title'.

3. Provincial administration authority does not preclude the legitimate exercise of federal constitutional powers (e.g. the NEP).

[ticker]

Since MS & August think it would be a great idea to rob Alberta to subsidize socialism would they still agree if things were switched? If the oil came from Ontario or Quebec I can just imagine them saying take as much as you want we don't care. Quebec would scream bloody murder if the feds even thought of running an NEP on them and the separatists would win in a heartbeat if they did go through an NEP attack on Quebec.

Or if Quebec hydro "energy" fell under the definition of "NEP" but Alberta’s oil was left out of the equation resulting in Quebec’s economy being hit hard and Alberta going through a mild recession... MS would love it if Trudeau left Alberta alone and demolished the Quebec economy under that scenario. But that would never happen to Quebec just like Ontario’s auto industry got an exemption from Kyoto. If oil was clean and hydro was pollution would Quebec still think a Kyoto plan would be a good idea if their hydro industry were going to be the economic target?

We all know how much Quebec objects to Trudeau changing the constitution without their blessing but they think it should be changed to take Alberta’s oil revenue away. And before you say they did it to us so why not you... 2 wrongs don't make a right.

That old argument it was the big bad recession caused by the evil right that caused hundreds of Alberta businesses to go under and not the wholesome NEP...

That would explain why the Maritimes recovered ahead of Alberta.

Yeh right; just keep telling yourself that.

MS & august say Albertan’s are just whining... if you loose your business, house and life savings and have to start over again just because of a commie PM wants to practice socialism and bad economic policies you would be angry too.

And before anyone says well you should of been diversified just incase there is a socialist discrimination policy that you would only expect to find in a dictatorship country in another continent...

But Albertan’s know what to expect the next time around.

In the 7 years prior to 61 Alberta received nowhere near the 250 billion that has gone out since. When equalization was set up it was designed to help other provinces but that has changed into a socialism subsidy program after Trudeau started messing around with it and changing its original intent. Ontario is just above the threshold of a have province. Would equalization be a socialism subsidy program if Ontario were the only have province.

[I miss Reagan]

MS are you for real LOL.  Sometimes I wonder if you're just a troller trying to inspire us rightists to fire back at your insanity.  I wish there were more like you in the public spouting off these kind of comments.  It would truly give us separatists enough power to follow through.

This is your logic at work:

Let's go and prop the world up with dictatorships across the world so that it will be very easy to access foreign resources. Oh, and if these dictators don't toe the transnational line close enough, we will just kill them, and replace them with somebody else who will be more obedient.

Eventually the citizens of these foreign countries wake up and realize they are being ripped off. When they complain to their own governments, they are thrown in jail.

The system is so unfair, so stacked against them that eventually they resort to violence, like leveling the world trade centre, these terrible people, these terrorists, who just want their national governments to control their own resources on behalf of their citizens.

Sounds almost like Albertans doesn't it?

Spare us the company line - we have all heard it before!

The only thing that is going on, and that has been going on since the beginning, is class warfare. The rich against the poor. You can try to disguise it up any way you want, different religion, different language, different colour skin, different race, but those are all smokescreens. It is always the rich against the poor, it always has been, and it always will be. Don't worry the greed factor is alive and well throughout the land. :angry:

A lot of people here would not know an original thought if it hit them smack in their face.

Where in the hell did that come from, and what does it have to do with the price of beans in Seattle?

[I miss Reagan]

I've said this before but I think it needs to be said again. Us Albertans take care of our poor better than anyone. We volunteer more than anyone else in Canada and give more in charity per capita. On a local level we vote very liberal. What we don't like are you out East taking OUR money and squandering it away on programs like the gun registry, wheat board, and Kyoto that oppress us. But keep up the talk about us "spoiled Albertans" it only works to our advantage.