Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I was surfing my TV universe earlier and paused on SunTv. Ezra Levant was on complaining about how some provinces, notably Quebec and New Brunswick, have such strong opposition to fracking. Quebec has actually put a moratorium on any exploration for fracking. Levant was complaining about how a lot of the money behind these protests are coming from outside Canada, but I had a different thought.

Quebec apparently could engage in fracking, but refuses, on environmental reasons. However, it has no issue taking money from Alberta and Saskatchewan, through federal transfer payments, which comes as a result of fracking. I think that a province which could develop its resources and make itself more self sufficient, but refuses, should not be able to do so without financial penalties.

I think that the scope of transfers to those provinces, like Quebec, should be recalculated, exempting whatever portion of that money derives from fracking, and the resulting amount they receive should be lowered commensurate with that new calculation. I think the same should be done with native bands which live entirely on federal transfers. Whatever portion of federal income comes as a result of fracking (royalties, taxes on the companies and employees, etc.) should be removed from the transfers for natives who vociferously oppose fracking.

It is unfair for governments to act self righteous in their opposition to fracking and oil development, yet happily hold out their hands for their share of the money which comes from it.

It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy

  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

...

It is unfair for governments to act self righteous in their opposition to fracking and oil development, yet happily hold out their hands for their share of the money which comes from it.

I think the priority of the Premier of any province is to get the best deal that it can get for the people in that province.

Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.

Posted (edited)

I think the priority of the Premier of any province is to get the best deal that it can get for the people in that province.

That does mean it's not loathsome and hypocritical, and also bad economic policy. Their real priority should be creating the best economy it can for the people of that province. Not securing better welfare.

Edited by Shady
Posted

I was surfing my TV universe earlier and paused on SunTv. Ezra Levant was on complaining about how some provinces, notably Quebec and New Brunswick, have such strong opposition to fracking.

Ezra knows nothing about New Brunswick. The Alward government has no opposition to tracking whatsoever. The public does and he should know that what the public wants doesn't matter at all in this province. What the Irvings want, the Irvings get. And if they'll get a piece of the tracking pie, then it will happen.
Posted

Ezra knows nothing about New Brunswick. The Alward government has no opposition to tracking whatsoever. The public does and he should know that what the public wants doesn't matter at all in this province. What the Irvings want, the Irvings get. And if they'll get a piece of the tracking pie, then it will happen.

I wonder what he knows about fracking.

Posted

I think that a province which could develop its resources and make itself more self sufficient, but refuses, should not be able to do so without financial penalties.

How about when a province or region is willing to do this but Ottawa says forget it?

That's been the history of BC's Ottawa's salmon enhancement program for the last 30 years...too much like playing God they told us.

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted

It takes a special kind of brain to equate fracking with the contractual and constitutional obligations of the federal govt relations with First Nations.

Science too hard for you? Try religion!

Posted

It takes a special kind of brain to equate fracking with the contractual and constitutional obligations of the federal govt relations with First Nations.

Well what would happen to equalization payments if Saskatchewan and Alberta stopped sending lots of money to the Feds like these anti oil and gas groups want?

It's hypocrisy. We see it in Ontario with the Enbridge Line 9 reversal. The Pipeline isn't new. It's been used to send Middle East oil outside for years. But now that they want to send dirty Right Wing Alberta oil to the east. The protests have been very contentious.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/enbridge-line-9-pipeline-reversal-approved-by-energy-board-1.2562169

Posted

It takes a special kind of brain to equate fracking with the contractual and constitutional obligations of the federal govt relations with First Nations.

That would, benefits for natives, but no responsiblities, right?

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted

That would, benefits for natives, but no responsiblities, right?

Maybe we should steal another couple of generations of their children, teach them some manners. right?

Science too hard for you? Try religion!

Posted

Maybe we should steal another couple of generations of their children, teach them some manners. right?

Maybe if we'd continued that program natives might have become integrated into society and wouldn't have hugely higher rates of drug addiction, alcoholism, poverty, unemployment, suicide, depression, teenage pregnancies and violence.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted

That's a pretty grotesque suggestion given that very program is what largely created the hugely higher rates of drug addiction, alcoholism, poverty, unemployment, suicide, depression, teenage pregnancies and violence in the first place.

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted (edited)

I think the priority of the Premier of any province is to get the best deal that it can get for the people in that province.

Zero-sum thinking. Big Guy, are you from the Maritimes?

Quebec apparently could engage in fracking, but refuses, on environmental reasons. However, it has no issue taking money from Alberta and Saskatchewan, through federal transfer payments, which comes as a result of fracking. I think that a province which could develop its resources and make itself more self sufficient, but refuses, should not be able to do so without financial penalties.

Let me set aside the issue of fracking.

Should Hydro-Quebec be subject to NEB hydro line regulations? What about the James Bay? Churchill Falls - what is the valuable resource (water or access to market)? Why did people in Quebec have to pay for nuclear energy? And, why do we have to pay to decommission Gentilly? Why did Harper subsidize Ontario's GM car manufacture?

=====

The perception in English-Canada is that there are two teams: Team A is English-Canada and Team B is Quebec. Team B is winning by cheating.

Scotty, if you view a country as a sports match, win-lose scenario, to pick a bad scenario that you've forced on me... Let me view a country as a family: it's a non-zero sum game. Happy families tend to be successful (positive sum) in their own way; unhappy families are zero-sum.

(BTW, a country is neither a sports match nor a family.)

Edited by August1991
Posted

Zero-sum thinking. Big Guy, are you from the Maritimes?

Why would anybody run for leadership of a province if their top priority in not for the best interests of the people he/she represents? Who would vote for someone who was not trying to get the beat deal for them?

Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.

Posted

Zero-sum thinking.

I guess it takes a zero-sum thinker to know one.

The perception in English-Canada is that there are two teams: Team A is English-Canada and Team B is Quebec. Team B is winning by cheating

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted (edited)

That's a pretty grotesque suggestion given that very program is what largely created the hugely higher rates of drug addiction, alcoholism, poverty, unemployment, suicide, depression, teenage pregnancies and violence in the first place.

How do you know this? How do you know it wouldn't be the same anyway? The rates of poverty, alcoholism and drug abuse, which, of course, leads to violence and family breakdowns, are FAR higher on reservations in the United States than in the general population, and they never had the same program you're referring to. And that's despite the fact their reservations are generally much bigger and more heavily populated than Canadian reservations.

Edited by Argus

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted

How do you know this? How do you know it wouldn't be the same anyway? The rates of poverty, alcoholism and drug abuse, which, of course, leads to violence and family breakdowns, are FAR higher on reservations in the United States than in the general population, and they never had the same program you're referring to. And that's despite the fact their reservations are generally much bigger and more heavily populated than Canadian reservations.

The 100+ years of forcibly taking children from their parents to enjoy several years of state sanctioned starvation, humilation, sexual abuse, religious brainwashing and a jolly introduction to tuberculosis could not possibly have any effect on past or current generations.

No way.

It must be something genetic in those dirty Indians that makes them want to die. If only they would accept that our way in not just the best way, it's the only way.

Science too hard for you? Try religion!

Posted

The 100+ years of forcibly taking children from their parents to enjoy several years of state sanctioned starvation, humilation, sexual abuse, religious brainwashing and a jolly introduction to tuberculosis could not possibly have any effect on past or current generations.

Sorry, OT, you may not be aware that we established on another thread that colonialism only impacted Africans.

Posted

Sorry, OT, you may not be aware that we established on another thread that colonialism only impacted Africans.

It's true, I was unaware of the facts on colonialism.

Back to school for me! But perhaps not a residential school.

Science too hard for you? Try religion!

Posted

The 100+ years of forcibly taking children from their parents to enjoy several years of state sanctioned starvation, humilation, sexual abuse, religious brainwashing and a jolly introduction to tuberculosis could not possibly have any effect on past or current generations.

No way.

It must be something genetic in those dirty Indians that makes them want to die. If only they would accept that our way in not just the best way, it's the only way.

Apparently, you have difficulties comprehending clearly written English. If you would be so kind as to get someone to read you the post to which you are responding and point out you completely ignored the point of that post, it might be helpful to any intelligent conversation.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted (edited)

Sorry, OT, you may not be aware that we established on another thread that colonialism only impacted Africans.

Sulking doesn't look good on a good Christian.

Edited by Argus

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted

Apparently, you have difficulties comprehending clearly written English. If you would be so kind as to get someone to read you the post to which you are responding and point out you completely ignored the point of that post, it might be helpful to any intelligent conversation.

It is always instructional to realize that some people think cause and effect have no connection whatsoever.

Science too hard for you? Try religion!

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,923
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Jordan Parish
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • MDP earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • MDP earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • LinkSoul60 went up a rank
      Enthusiast
    • Matthew earned a badge
      One Year In
    • TheUnrelentingPopulous earned a badge
      First Post
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...