More Criticism from Atlantic Canada

[NovaScotian]

If Nova Scotia gets more under this deal then the Atlantic Accord (which it does IMO), it's time they shut up.

I don't see the point in bitching when you get more. Spoiled brats. If they are that ungrateful for the last 20 years of handouts then I think it's about time we cut them off. Enough is enough. If they don't want our money, then let's stop giving it to them.

Woah woah Cowboy!

We never asked for MORE equalization. We asked for the Atlantic accord so that we could rely on oil and gas more and equalization less. It was the Prime Minister that keeps showering us with equalization, but we have to give up some oil & gas revenue.

Here is an quick overview from CBC news

* The old equalization formula, along with the benefits from the Atlantic Accord, which allowed the provinces to profit from their offshore oil and gas resources without fear of losing equalization money.

* A new, enriched equalization formula that includes a cap on the amount of offshore oil and gas revenues the provinces can keep.

[jdobbin]

I'll believe it when I see it. Rodney is the worst premier Nova Scotia has had in some time, no comparison to Dr. John Hamm who did a nice job for the people.

So Hamm would have been able to keep the Atlantic Accord?

[Argus]

Here is an quick overview from CBC news

* The old equalization formula, along with the benefits from the Atlantic Accord, which allowed the provinces to profit from their offshore oil and gas resources without fear of losing equalization money.

* A new, enriched equalization formula that includes a cap on the amount of offshore oil and gas revenues the provinces can keep.

Perhaps you'd care to comment on this summary from CTV news

During the 2006 federal election, Williams wrote the leaders of the three major parties, asking for their positions on a variety of federal-provincial issues. This was Harper's reply on equalization: "We will remove non-renewable natural resource revenues from the equalization formula to encourage the development of economic growth in the non-renewable resource sectors across Canada."

What the Conservatives delivered in the federal budget was more complex than that. After months of talks the premiers had failed to reach a consensus on equalization, so Ottawa gave them a choice.

In the case of Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador, they could stick with their Atlantic Accords, with 100 per cent of oil and gas revenues sheltered from equalization clawback and no cap on payments once they reach Ontario's fiscal capacity. Or they could opt for the new formula with 50 per cent of all non-renewable resource revenues sheltered, but with a cap.

In the words of Harper, "promise made, promise kept."

Williams disagrees.

"That's the spin that the federal governments are going to put on it," he says. "The status quo is fine and that's the Atlantic Accord and that's what you've got. But that's not what we were promised."

The premier says a literal application of Harper's promise would have excluded all non-renewable resource revenues from the equalization calculations, and that would have done two things,

One, on top of the protection for oil and gas in the Atlantic Accord, nickel revenues from Voisey's Bay and iron ore revenues from Labrador West would also have been sheltered from equalization clawback.

Two, those revenues would have been sheltered forever, not just until the accord expires in 2012 or 2020.

CTV News

[Argus]

Another explanation of the Atlantic Accord dispute once again seems to clearly state that the Atlantic Accord, as it was signed, is fully protected. The provinces are bitching over it not being improved, not that it's not being honoured.

: The provinces say the March 19 budget undermines the accords in that it requires them to give up their full protection against equalization clawbacks in order to participate in a new, richer equalization formula. That formula includes non-renewable resource revenues in equalization calculations, as well as a fiscal cap.

Both provinces say despite the larger equalization payments, the new arrangement could hurt them in the long run because the clawbacks are back and the fiscal cap puts a limit on what the provinces can receive from Ottawa.

But the federal government says the budget doesn't affect the accords because it offers each province a choice: either stick with the original agreement or opt into an enriched equalization formula.

The provinces say the federal government had pledged an improved equalization formula, so offering the status quo is far less than what was promised.

Atlantic Accord Dispute Explained

[normanchateau]

It was the Prime Minister that keeps showering us with equalization, but we have to give up some oil & gas revenue.

It would be interesting to see how Harper would have handled this if Quebec had an oil and gas industry. One of the reasons why the Maritimes, British Columbia and other provinces were screwed by the new equalization formulas was so that Harper could crow about giving Quebec another 4 billion. No wonder Duceppe voted for the budget. No wonder Charest could give Quebecers tax cuts.

[jdobbin]

In the case of Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador, they could stick with their Atlantic Accords, with 100 per cent of oil and gas revenues sheltered from equalization clawback and no cap on payments once they reach Ontario's fiscal capacity. Or they could opt for the new formula with 50 per cent of all non-renewable resource revenues sheltered, but with a cap.

In the words of Harper, "promise made, promise kept."

From your own link, Wade Locke said he would have to crunch the numbers to reveal how good the deal was.

This is what he found.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/newfoundland-labr...d-williams.html

Williams has frequently pointed to an analysis by Memorial University economist Wade Locke, who found the new formula will cost Newfoundland and Labrador's treasury about $1 billion in equalization. If Harper had stuck with a written 2006 election campaign pledge, Locke found, Newfoundland and Labrador would have received about $11 billion more.

[Argus]

In the case of Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador, they could stick with their Atlantic Accords, with 100 per cent of oil and gas revenues sheltered from equalization clawback and no cap on payments once they reach Ontario's fiscal capacity. Or they could opt for the new formula with 50 per cent of all non-renewable resource revenues sheltered, but with a cap.

In the words of Harper, "promise made, promise kept."

From your own link, Wade Locke said he would have to crunch the numbers to reveal how good the deal was.

This is what he found.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/newfoundland-labr...d-williams.html

Williams has frequently pointed to an analysis by Memorial University economist Wade Locke, who found the new formula will cost Newfoundland and Labrador's treasury about $1 billion in equalization. If Harper had stuck with a written 2006 election campaign pledge, Locke found, Newfoundland and Labrador would have received about $11 billion more.

He is parsing his sentence. He did not say "If Harper had stuck with the signed Atlantic Accord.... "

So this does nothing to disagree with what the CTV and Gazette are saying - that the Atlantic Accord is perfectly fine and in place, and Harper's government has done nothing to break it. The Atlantic provinces want an even better deal, and want all resources covered, not just oil and gas revenues, and want them covered forever.

[nbguyca]

Another explanation of the Atlantic Accord dispute once again seems to clearly state that the Atlantic Accord, as it was signed, is fully protected. The provinces are bitching over it not being improved, not that it's not being honoured.

: The provinces say the March 19 budget undermines the accords in that it requires them to give up their full protection against equalization clawbacks in order to participate in a new, richer equalization formula. That formula includes non-renewable resource revenues in equalization calculations, as well as a fiscal cap.

Both provinces say despite the larger equalization payments, the new arrangement could hurt them in the long run because the clawbacks are back and the fiscal cap puts a limit on what the provinces can receive from Ottawa.

But the federal government says the budget doesn't affect the accords because it offers each province a choice: either stick with the original agreement or opt into an enriched equalization formula.

The provinces say the federal government had pledged an improved equalization formula, so offering the status quo is far less than what was promised.

Atlantic Accord Dispute Explained

Exactly what position do you hold in the PMO's office?

[jdobbin]

He is parsing his sentence. He did not say "If Harper had stuck with the signed Atlantic Accord.... "

So this does nothing to disagree with what the CTV and Gazette are saying - that the Atlantic Accord is perfectly fine and in place, and Harper's government has done nothing to break it. The Atlantic provinces want an even better deal, and want all resources covered, not just oil and gas revenues, and want them covered forever.

You can read the Locke report unparsed if you'd like. They won't have all resources covered forever because they are finite in Newfoundland and Nova Scotia's case.

It certainly isn't what Harper promised in the election.

[Argus]

Another explanation of the Atlantic Accord dispute once again seems to clearly state that the Atlantic Accord, as it was signed, is fully protected. The provinces are bitching over it not being improved, not that it's not being honoured.

: The provinces say the March 19 budget undermines the accords in that it requires them to give up their full protection against equalization clawbacks in order to participate in a new, richer equalization formula. That formula includes non-renewable resource revenues in equalization calculations, as well as a fiscal cap.

Both provinces say despite the larger equalization payments, the new arrangement could hurt them in the long run because the clawbacks are back and the fiscal cap puts a limit on what the provinces can receive from Ottawa.

But the federal government says the budget doesn't affect the accords because it offers each province a choice: either stick with the original agreement or opt into an enriched equalization formula.

The provinces say the federal government had pledged an improved equalization formula, so offering the status quo is far less than what was promised.

Atlantic Accord Dispute Explained

Exactly what position do you hold in the PMO's office?

I'm in charge of giving the bums rush to morons. Welcome in. I'm guessing your stay will be brief.

[runningdog]

Another explanation of the Atlantic Accord dispute once again seems to clearly state that the Atlantic Accord, as it was signed, is fully protected. The provinces are bitching over it not being improved, not that it's not being honoured.

: The provinces say the March 19 budget undermines the accords in that it requires them to give up their full protection against equalization clawbacks in order to participate in a new, richer equalization formula. That formula includes non-renewable resource revenues in equalization calculations, as well as a fiscal cap.

Both provinces say despite the larger equalization payments, the new arrangement could hurt them in the long run because the clawbacks are back and the fiscal cap puts a limit on what the provinces can receive from Ottawa.

But the federal government says the budget doesn't affect the accords because it offers each province a choice: either stick with the original agreement or opt into an enriched equalization formula.

The provinces say the federal government had pledged an improved equalization formula, so offering the status quo is far less than what was promised.

Atlantic Accord Dispute Explained

Exactly what position do you hold in the PMO's office?

I'm in charge of giving the bums rush to morons. Welcome in. I'm guessing your stay will be brief.

ha ha ha argus, you are so funny and clever......

[Argus]

He is parsing his sentence. He did not say "If Harper had stuck with the signed Atlantic Accord.... "

So this does nothing to disagree with what the CTV and Gazette are saying - that the Atlantic Accord is perfectly fine and in place, and Harper's government has done nothing to break it. The Atlantic provinces want an even better deal, and want all resources covered, not just oil and gas revenues, and want them covered forever.

You can read the Locke report unparsed if you'd like. They won't have all resources covered forever because they are finite in Newfoundland and Nova Scotia's case.

It certainly isn't what Harper promised in the election.

I'm glad you're acknowledging that the Harper government has done nothing whatsoever to alter the Atlantic Accord. Now that as to the promise.

What Harper promised was to renegotiate resource sharing with the provinces to exempt resources. However, the negoations proved futile. The provinces could not agree on a new formula. So Harper gave them a choice. You can opt into this new one, or you can keep that old one. Seems fair to me.

Ruling a nation is a matter of compromise. This is such a compromise. I think it's lamentable that certain Atlantic politicians have so little dignity and integrity they're lying about things. Basically, this harkens to the thread on agressive street bums. Danny Williams is not merely a beggar thrusting his hands out for my money, he's an agressive beggar spitting and cursing me and demanding I give him more money or else.

Screw him.

[Argus]

Another explanation of the Atlantic Accord dispute once again seems to clearly state that the Atlantic Accord, as it was signed, is fully protected. The provinces are bitching over it not being improved, not that it's not being honoured.

: The provinces say the March 19 budget undermines the accords in that it requires them to give up their full protection against equalization clawbacks in order to participate in a new, richer equalization formula. That formula includes non-renewable resource revenues in equalization calculations, as well as a fiscal cap.

Both provinces say despite the larger equalization payments, the new arrangement could hurt them in the long run because the clawbacks are back and the fiscal cap puts a limit on what the provinces can receive from Ottawa.

But the federal government says the budget doesn't affect the accords because it offers each province a choice: either stick with the original agreement or opt into an enriched equalization formula.

The provinces say the federal government had pledged an improved equalization formula, so offering the status quo is far less than what was promised.

Atlantic Accord Dispute Explained

Exactly what position do you hold in the PMO's office?

I'm in charge of giving the bums rush to morons. Welcome in. I'm guessing your stay will be brief.

ha ha ha argus, you are so funny and clever......

Bet you wish you were.

[nbguyca]

Another explanation of the Atlantic Accord dispute once again seems to clearly state that the Atlantic Accord, as it was signed, is fully protected. The provinces are bitching over it not being improved, not that it's not being honoured.

: The provinces say the March 19 budget undermines the accords in that it requires them to give up their full protection against equalization clawbacks in order to participate in a new, richer equalization formula. That formula includes non-renewable resource revenues in equalization calculations, as well as a fiscal cap.

Both provinces say despite the larger equalization payments, the new arrangement could hurt them in the long run because the clawbacks are back and the fiscal cap puts a limit on what the provinces can receive from Ottawa.

But the federal government says the budget doesn't affect the accords because it offers each province a choice: either stick with the original agreement or opt into an enriched equalization formula.

The provinces say the federal government had pledged an improved equalization formula, so offering the status quo is far less than what was promised.

Atlantic Accord Dispute Explained

Exactly what position do you hold in the PMO's office?

I'm in charge of giving the bums rush to morons. Welcome in. I'm guessing your stay will be brief.

Wow, witty.

I thought you must work in the office since all you do is give the same old explanations that the PMO's office does.

Wait...Steven, is that you?

[Argus]

Exactly what position do you hold in the PMO's office?

I'm in charge of giving the bums rush to morons. Welcome in. I'm guessing your stay will be brief.

Wow, witty.

I thought you must work in the office since all you do is give the same old explanations that the PMO's office does.

That would tend to happen when there is only one set of facts and the government and I are both using them. I merely quoted the statements from the Montreal Gazette and CTV News. Are they working for the federal government too? Or maybe clicking on the links was too complicated for you. Too many of those... word things, eh?

[Topaz]

I would hope that ALL the Premiers, especially, the ones who are happy with what they got would come out and support the Atlantic provinces over this broken promise! The Atlantic Provinces haven't had much in the past and I support them and the rest of Canada should also, because it could be THEIR province that is getting screwed by Harper! He has lost his trustworthyness IF he ever had any! Bring down the budget and this government, I'm ready for a new government!

[Michael Bluth]

I would hope that ALL the Premiers, especially, the ones who are happy with what they got would come out and support the Atlantic provinces over this broken promise! The Atlantic Provinces haven't had much in the past and I support them and the rest of Canada should also, because it could be THEIR province that is getting screwed by Harper! He has lost his trustworthyness IF he ever had any! Bring down the budget and this government, I'm ready for a new government!

The Atlantic Accord is still there.

The Atlantic provinces were given an option.

They can keep the Atlantic Accord as is OR they can opt for more funding via equalization.

Seems like a case of wanting both...

[nbguyca]

Exactly what position do you hold in the PMO's office?

I'm in charge of giving the bums rush to morons. Welcome in. I'm guessing your stay will be brief.

Wow, witty.

I thought you must work in the office since all you do is give the same old explanations that the PMO's office does.

That would tend to happen when there is only one set of facts and the government and I are both using them. I merely quoted the statements from the Montreal Gazette and CTV News. Are they working for the federal government too? Or maybe clicking on the links was too complicated for you. Too many of those... word things, eh?

Oh I see, everyone else just makes things up and passes them along as facts. Sorry for bothering you, I'm just a backwards, hick from the Maritimes so I don't always see what is best for me. I guess I'll just shut up and let you central Canadians tell me how things work.

[Michael Bluth]

Oh I see, everyone else just makes things up and passes them along as facts. Sorry for bothering you, I'm just a backwards, hick from the Maritimes so I don't always see what is best for me. I guess I'll just shut up and let you central Canadians tell me how things work.

A thank you for the cash would be nice too.

[noahbody]

Both provinces say despite the larger equalization payments, the new arrangement could hurt them in the long run because the clawbacks are back and the fiscal cap puts a limit on what the provinces can receive from Ottawa.

If this is the beef, I'd say include a mulligan clause whereby if the province begins to regret its choice, it has the one-time option to switch. That should at least give them peace of mind.

[Fat Freddie]

Once again we have more fall out from the Liberal contracts. Its easy to sign away a crap load of money when you know your days in government are numbered. Here in BC we are still suffering through NDP "Gold Rush" contracts worth millions more than they should have been. The entire accord program was a waste as it has done nothing to make anyone happy in either the provinces, or the federal government. Which is what the Liberals are best at...besides stealing money from the taxpayers...But I digress.

Having lived in both the East and West coasts, I think I can say from experience that the people in both provinces are nice folks, but I will add that the folks in the east coast are as lazy as the day is long. They are always open to taking welfare and creating jobs that just meet the EI requirements so that everyone gets that full year of benefits. I even had one guy in Greenwood brag to me that he built his entire house on funding from welfare. The land was in his kids name and he collected cheques claiming he couldn't work due to a bad back caused by a fishing accident. Everywhere I went I saw someone doing some scam or another. This behavior is born from generations of government coddling. No one knows why, but for some reason the Feds babied the folks on the east coast, while ignoring the West...thus is life I guess.

By the way, the people in the West also have a scam. We grow BC Bud and ship it to the east coast...It's obvious Danny Williams just might be a user as you'd have to smoke BC Bud to think the rest of Canada actually gives a crap about the East Coast. You're as foreign to the people here as the people in Spain are. So in reality we care more about quebec than we do you...and the majority really don't care about quebec so just imagine where you fall in our world of concerns! LOL

So carry on whinning about how bad the East Coasters have it...Only thing happenings is the votes for the Coservatives increase when the rest of Canada think the conservatives are putting the east coasters in their place for once. Sad isn't it!

I'll be gone for the next four weeks. Must get back to Thailand for business. Looks to be the economy being hot here, and the cheap labour and cost of product in Thailand means I make $$$$$. <WINK> Life truly is a bitch isn't it!

[Mad_Michael]

Criticism from Altantic Canada?

Hey, that seems refreshing! Sure beats the usual whinging with their hands out to Ottawa (read Ontario and Alberta taxpayers).

[gc1765]

"The Opposition has raucously attacked the federal budget bill just hours before the crucial final vote, but neither the Prime Minister, nor the Ministers for Finance and Foreign Affairs were there to hear it.

Stephen Harper, Jim Flaherty and Peter MacKay were conspicuously absent from Question Period on Tuesday, as were two Conservative MPs, prompting speculation of closed-doors meetings to heal a deepening Tory rift.

And while Nova Scotia Premier Rodney MacDonald is in Ottawa, he was not present in the public gallery as the House of Commons traded verbal thrusts and parries over resource revenue distribution in the budget equalization formula."

Link

Looks like there could be more negotiations going on...

[Argus]

Exactly what position do you hold in the PMO's office?

I'm in charge of giving the bums rush to morons. Welcome in. I'm guessing your stay will be brief.

Wow, witty.

I thought you must work in the office since all you do is give the same old explanations that the PMO's office does.

That would tend to happen when there is only one set of facts and the government and I are both using them. I merely quoted the statements from the Montreal Gazette and CTV News. Are they working for the federal government too? Or maybe clicking on the links was too complicated for you. Too many of those... word things, eh?

Oh I see, everyone else just makes things up and passes them along as facts. Sorry for bothering you, I'm just a backwards, hick from the Maritimes so I don't always see what is best for me. I guess I'll just shut up and let you central Canadians tell me how things work.

Good.

[NovaScotian]

The Atlantic Accord is still there.

The Atlantic provinces were given an option.

They can keep the Atlantic Accord as is OR they can opt for more funding via equalization.

Seems like a case of wanting both...

This is interesting....from the Atlantic Accord itself.

"The amount of additional offset payment for a year shall be calculated as the difference between the Equalization payment that would be received by the province under the Equalization formula as it exists at the time if the province received no offshore petroleum resource revenues in that year, and the Equalization payment for the province in that year under the Equalization formula as it exists at the time, net of any payments made with respect to the existing Atlantic Accord or Equalization offset provisions."

The equalization formula was changed, there is no "choosing a formula" in the agreement. The agreement is for equalization that exists at the present time.