Author Topic: Politics in 2018  (Read 178935 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 139,385
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,618
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1250 on: April 19, 2018, 11:00:41 »
There is monkey wrench that may be thrown into the equation today: The Supreme Court is supposed to release its ruling in the Gerard Comeau "taking Quebec bought beer into New Brunswick" inter provincial trade rules case.

If, as I suspect they will, the court's majority rules that Article 121 of the Constitution means what it plainly means, which is that provinces do not have the power to put up any barrier to inter provincial trade (which would fall squarely within exclusive federal power only), then Ms Notley's Act allegedly giving her the power to stop shipping of crude to any specific out of province location would clearly be unconstitutional.

Personally, I believe that it is unconstitutional even before such determination. Alberta allegedly bases its power to enact it on its power over their natural resources. That certainly gives them power over regulating who, where, when and how to extract the resource from the ground, and with what compensation or payment the province should get from the extractor for the resource. However, once extracted, it ceases to be a "natural resource" and becomes product that is subject to laws on transportation and trade. Both of these aspects, when inter-provincial, fall squarely within exclusive federal jurisdiction. So her Act, which delves into permitting transportation - or not - outside of the province fails that constitutional test.

If Trudeau had guts, he would tell Alberta that, should it try to enact that law, he would use the Federal disavowal power and make it known he will do this, followed in the same speech by announcing that he is actually going to introduce immediately a motion in Parliament to have the Kinder Morgan pipeline formally declared a "work for the general advantage of Canada or two or more provinces", which would take any aspect of it out of provincial jurisdiction. That would signal to both sides that recess is over and it's time to act like adults again.

Such actions could, and if he was politically savvy, would be followed by Mr. Hogan going to the Lt.-G. and asking for the assembly to be dissolved. He would explain himself as follows to the public: "As you all know, In order to form a stable government for this province after the last general election, I had to agree to a promise extracted from me by the Green party of B.-C. to do all I could to stop the Kinder Morgan pipeline. In view of the recent federal declaration that it is a work of national interest, we have now used every reasonable avenues to effect that aim but the Green party will not release me from doing more, even if of little use. Therefore, I have asked the Lt.G. to dissolve the assembly and call a general election. I did this so that you can relieve this government of its promise to the Green party and I ask that you return this government to power with a majority this time, so that we can move forward together and this government can go on to deal with more pressing matters of importance to all."

I bet you he would get a majority government if he acted in such a proper way showing respect for the electorate.

Offline Larry Strong

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 226,511
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,684
  • 546 days from 0 to being King of the Castle
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1251 on: April 19, 2018, 11:17:20 »
“......the Supreme Court of Canada ruled provincial trade barriers are constitutional as long as they’re aimed at a valid purpose within the province’s jurisdiction, with only an incidental effect on trade. Canada’s constitution simply “does not impose absolute free trade across Canada,” it declared.....”.      http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/free-the-beer-case-loses-at-supreme-court-as-provincial-trade-barriers-are-upheld-as-constitutional       
Proud sponsor of the Maple Leaf Legacy Project. http://www.mapleleaflegacy.ca

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 97,730
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,145
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1252 on: April 19, 2018, 11:22:00 »
Never expect that ruling.

NDP get a majority in the next BC election? Never.
Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 139,385
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,618
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1253 on: April 19, 2018, 11:27:13 »
Rifleman62, by dragging the damn Equalization Payments into the picture - without understanding how it works - you force me once again to trying explain it so this scarecrow gets put back in the closet where it belongs.

Let's see if I can make it simple:

The fact that a province gets equalization while another doesn't get any does not mean in any way form or shape that the province not getting equalization or its inhabitants are the ones paying for the "receiving" province.

Equalization is paid from the government of Canada's consolidated fund, into which every single Canadian or Canadian corporation pays in the same exact even and fair manner wherever they may live. In particular, and since the Federal government taxes natural resources fairly lightly (as they are a provincial resource), it means that taxing industry, commerce and individuals make up most of the federal revenues. This leads to something like the following, for instance: Since Ontario provides 45% of Federal revenues (though they are only 39% of population), the Ontarian tax base pays 45% of the equalization of each province that receives some gets. You can do the same for each province. So Albertans, for instance contribute 16% of Federal revenue from 12 % of the national population and thus the Alberta tax base pays 16% of equalization to the receiving provinces. Meanwhile, even PEI provides .2% of the national revenues of Canada, and thus the PEI tax base contributes .2% of the equalization payments made to each receiving province.

Since all Canadians are taxed wherever they are on the same equal basis, the only thing you can say about provincial disparities between contributions to the Federal consolidated revenue in relation to their population is that in those provinces where there is a greater contribution than proportional population is made, the residents are either making more money or the province has a lower unemployment rate - in other words they are provinces where the economy is better - but its citizens are still treated equally to all Canadian in the same circumstances as they are. 

Offline Jed

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 47,830
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,101
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1254 on: April 19, 2018, 12:01:31 »
Did I miss something this morning OGBD? I thought the Supreme Court ruled exactly opposite of your expectations this morning.
As the old man used to say: " I used to be a coyote, but I'm alright nooooOOOOWWW!"

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 139,385
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,618
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1255 on: April 19, 2018, 12:12:37 »
You didn't miss anything, Jed. They ruled the opposite of my expectation. Haven't read the ruling yet, but from the tidbits reported on the news, it doesn't make much sense to me. It appears they would have simultaneously ruled that a province cannot impose a charge on goods coming from another province, but that they can create and impose monopolies within their own province for certain goods.

I am baffled, but maybe I won't be anymore after I read the whole thing.  :dunno:


BTW, that doesn't change my view that Notley's Act is still unconstitutional on other grounds.

Offline Larry Strong

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 226,511
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,684
  • 546 days from 0 to being King of the Castle
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1256 on: April 19, 2018, 12:28:27 »
BTW, that doesn't change my view that Notley's Act is still unconstitutional on other grounds.

I wish I could find the article I read where inside sources at the weekend meeting between the Drama teacher and the 2 Premiers stated Notley told Horgan to his face that she had no intentions of putting it into force.

She does not have the intestinal fortitude.

Cheers
Larry
Proud sponsor of the Maple Leaf Legacy Project. http://www.mapleleaflegacy.ca

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 46,789
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,010
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1257 on: April 19, 2018, 12:31:54 »
I wish I could find the article I read where inside sources at the weekend meeting between the Drama teacher and the 2 Premiers stated Notley told Horgan to his face that she had no intentions of putting it into force.

She does not have the intestinal fortitude.

Cheers
Larry
two words.

Jason.  Kenney.  If she isn't hard on BC and hogan Jason Kenney continues to rally albertans around hin saying that she isn't standing up for them,  and he will.

Notley is facing an election in not too long,  she cannot afford that. She would rather it be struck down by the courts.
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 46,789
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,010
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1258 on: April 19, 2018, 13:12:10 »
Also,  interestingly,  BC says that its unconstitutional for alberta to stop oil shipments to BC.

https://www.google.com/amp/business.financialpost.com/commodities/energy/alberta-should-cut-off-b-c-s-oil-supplies-as-a-form-of-protest-it-has-used-that-tactic-before-against-ontario/amp

Quote
Since at least the 1970s, the province has had authority to prohibit shipments of energy products outside the province.

Former PC premier Peter Lougheed once cut the volume of crude oil sent to eastern refineries, as part of his epic battle with Ottawa over control of the industry.

Energy Minister Don Getty, later the premier, stopped signing permits for natural gas going down the pipeline to Ontario refineries.

It was a protest against federal policy that discouraged refining in Alberta.

“What really bothered us were the petrochemical plants in Sarnia,” Getty told me in 2011, recalling the episode with delight.

“The government and the companies had decided that the future development of second stage industry was going to happen there, using our feedstock.

“So we just stopped sending it to them. I had authority to approve all shipments eastward, and all those documents just piled up on my desk, because I didn’t sign.

The next thing we knew, Bill Davis (the Ontario premier) was phoning Peter and saying, ‘Hey, we have to come and see you, because we’re out of gas here.’”

The Lougheed PCs also won a Supreme Court ruling against a federal export tax slapped on oil and gas shipped to the U.S.

Currently, the export permit system is handled by the Alberta Energy Regulator and applies to natural gas. The Notley government, never reluctant to change laws and regulations, could easily broaden that power and take it back into the energy minister’s office.

Not sure that would go their way in court.
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline Jed

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 47,830
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,101
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1259 on: April 19, 2018, 14:45:23 »
Also,  interestingly,  BC says that its unconstitutional for alberta to stop oil shipments to BC.

https://www.google.com/amp/business.financialpost.com/commodities/energy/alberta-should-cut-off-b-c-s-oil-supplies-as-a-form-of-protest-it-has-used-that-tactic-before-against-ontario/amp
 Not sure that would go their way in court.

Well, with the way the Supreme Court seems to be making decisions,you may be right.  I’m sure many people in Alberta and Saskatchewan will begin to think what is the point of being in a Canada that spends decades raping and pillaging these two provinces solely for the benefit of socialist minded larger provinces.  We see the law of the land continually being biasedly applied and the embarrassment of watching every Tom, Dick and Harry minor minority having their pet peeves being addressed all the while the people suffer at the hands of incompetent government.
As the old man used to say: " I used to be a coyote, but I'm alright nooooOOOOWWW!"

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 46,789
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,010
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1260 on: April 19, 2018, 14:52:11 »
Well, with the way the Supreme Court seems to be making decisions,you may be right.  I’m sure many people in Alberta and Saskatchewan will begin to think what is the point of being in a Canada that spends decades raping and pillaging these two provinces solely for the benefit of socialist minded larger provinces.  We see the law of the land continually being biasedly applied and the embarrassment of watching every Tom, Dick and Harry minor minority having their pet peeves being addressed all the while the people suffer at the hands of incompetent government.
And when the pipeline is built that will all go away?

Well,  that is good to know.
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline Jed

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 47,830
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,101
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1261 on: April 19, 2018, 15:04:01 »
And when the pipeline is built that will all go away?

Well,  that is good to know.

It will go away just like Quebec Separitism ideology will go away. (Never). However the sentiment is strong, stronger than after the reign of PET.  In my opinion this is really going to hit the fan, especially if Liberals go in Federally in 2019.
As the old man used to say: " I used to be a coyote, but I'm alright nooooOOOOWWW!"

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 46,789
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,010
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1262 on: April 19, 2018, 16:07:34 »
It will go away just like Quebec Separitism ideology will go away. (Never). However the sentiment is strong, stronger than after the reign of PET.  In my opinion this is really going to hit the fan, especially if Liberals go in Federally in 2019.
Those same liberals who are fighting for the pipeline to go through and have pretty much staked their term in government on it?

So odd. The federal liberals and alberta NDP are trying to make sure the pipeline that will help alberta and canada goes through,  while the BC NDP and the BC green party try to kill the project,  yet its the current head of the federal liberals who will cause western alienation to rise,  not BC?

Ok then.  I won't pretend to understand,  I'll just take your word for it.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2018, 16:22:20 by Altair »
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline Jed

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 47,830
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,101
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1263 on: April 19, 2018, 16:36:57 »
Those same liberals who are fighting for the pipeline to go through and have pretty much staked their term in government on it?

So odd. The federal liberals and alberta NDP are trying to make sure the pipeline that will help alberta and canada goes through,  while the BC NDP and the BC green party try to kill the project,  yet its the current head of the federal liberals who will cause western alienation to rise,  not BC?

Ok then.  I won't pretend to understand,  I'll just take your word for it.

OK. Glad you are taking my word for it. It is pretty obvious that the 'fight that the Liberals are taking' supporting the pipeline has been a charade until very recently.  This Liberal Majority government has been nothing but a clown show for the 2 1/2 years of their tenure.
 
As the old man used to say: " I used to be a coyote, but I'm alright nooooOOOOWWW!"

Offline dapaterson

    Mostly Harmless.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 448,190
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16,439
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1264 on: April 19, 2018, 16:46:50 »
To me, the SCC on R v Comeau suggests a court slightly ahead of the power curve on cannabis legalization.  I enjoyed Emmett MacFarlane's take in Maclean's.
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 46,789
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,010
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1265 on: April 19, 2018, 16:49:13 »
OK. Glad you are taking my word for it. It is pretty obvious that the 'fight that the Liberals are taking' supporting the pipeline has been a charade until very recently.  This Liberal Majority government has been nothing but a clown show for the 2 1/2 years of their tenure.
off the top of my head,  when he became liberal leader,  he went to alberta and spoke about the need for pipelines. 

He went to new york and spoke to Americans about balancing the environmental and pipelines. 

He's gone on a cross country speaking tour and reiterated how kinder Morgan was going to be built. He went to BC saying he's going to build the pipeline. He went to fort Mac to say he's going to build a pipeline.

The man has said his entire time as leader that there needs to be a balance between the economy and the the environment. It must have been a very long running charade.
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 139,735
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,340
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1266 on: April 19, 2018, 16:52:13 »
If Parkland decided the refinery here was no longer viable, then the lower mainland would be utterly screwed.

Offline Cloud Cover

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 37,030
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,025
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1267 on: April 19, 2018, 17:02:42 »
Well lets all be clear about something. It is not the Alberta government that currently ships oil to BC, it is private companies that do this through a privately owned but heavily regulated pipeline system. (although Notley has offered to become some sort of business partner with KM).  The companies can simply let their contacts run out and ship oil south or east. What the Alberta government is attempting to do is create and then revoke licenses or limit licenses to ship quantities of oil to a particular province. Even if the BC Court of Appeal make a reference decision about this,  Alberta can just seek its own decision with their own court of appeal. Legal deadlock.

As OGBD says, the feds need to step into this is solid way which they do not appear to have the stones to do. I think Trudeau screwed himself here (again) by not putting his foot down on every entity opposing this pipeline and just ram it through, or alternately making a hard decision to nix the project altogether and maintaining the status quo of shipments. In doing the latter he loses a lot of votes in Alberta, but he didn't have that many anyway but Im not sure he gains much from BC either.   A third option, and its not a good one, is to nationalize the energy industry and have the feds take all of the responsibility away from the provinces for the transportation and distribution of  oil products and coerce companies to comply.  Would Notley oppose????
In any eventuality, this appears to be the end of the days of confidence in the federal government for the left half of the country for decades to come. People that are so deeply divided and firmly entrenched on this issue are not going to back down one way or the other, it has been allowed to go too far.
Living the lean life.

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 46,789
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,010
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1268 on: April 19, 2018, 17:13:29 »
Well lets all be clear about something. It is not the Alberta government that currently ships oil to BC, it is private companies that do this through a privately owned but heavily regulated pipeline system. (although Notley has offered to become some sort of business partner with KM).  The companies can simply let their contacts run out and ship oil south or east. What the Alberta government is attempting to do is create and then revoke licenses or limit licenses to ship quantities of oil to a particular province. Even if the BC Court of Appeal make a reference decision about this,  Alberta can just seek its own decision with their own court of appeal. Legal deadlock.

As OGBD says, the feds need to step into this is solid way which they do not appear to have the stones to do. I think Trudeau screwed himself here (again) by not putting his foot down on every entity opposing this pipeline and just ram it through, or alternately making a hard decision to nix the project altogether and maintaining the status quo of shipments. In doing the latter he loses a lot of votes in Alberta, but he didn't have that many anyway but Im not sure he gains much from BC either.   A third option, and its not a good one, is to nationalize the energy industry and have the feds take all of the responsibility away from the provinces for the transportation and distribution of  oil products and coerce companies to comply.  Would Notley oppose????
In any eventuality, this appears to be the end of the days of confidence in the federal government for the left half of the country for decades to come. People that are so deeply divided and firmly entrenched on this issue are not going to back down one way or the other, it has been allowed to go too far.
That isn't the way to do it,  not at all.

Most people in BC support the pipeline. Its a very vocal minority and very motivated activists who are providing this opposition.

If trudeau and the feds come down here on BC with heavy action,  it becomes a case of the feds versus every British Columbian. It makes Hogan into a martyr,  captain BC. A balanced approach of stick and carrot is the best way to erode opposition to the pipeline.  If the polls are to be believed,  support for the pipeline in BC is up. The BC liberals aren't banging the drum for the pipeline right now,  Notley isn't out to make friends across the border,  a case can be made that its the feds trying to sell this project to BC residents that is pushing that support higher.

I think things hinge on this pipeline. If the rule of law prevails,  the pipeline is built,  federal jurisdiction is respected and natural resources get to market while respecting the environment we all come out of this better. If it dies and a minority government in BC is allowed to challenge and defeat the federal government in their jurisdiction,  giving the shaft to the energy exporting provinces,  ya,  alberta can be justified asking what good they get out of confederation.  But that talk now is very premature. This is just the messy process in action.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2018, 17:19:23 by Altair »
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline Jed

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 47,830
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,101
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1269 on: April 19, 2018, 18:04:27 »
Well lets all be clear about something. It is not the Alberta government that currently ships oil to BC, it is private companies that do this through a privately owned but heavily regulated pipeline system. (although Notley has offered to become some sort of business partner with KM).  The companies can simply let their contacts run out and ship oil south or east. What the Alberta government is attempting to do is create and then revoke licenses or limit licenses to ship quantities of oil to a particular province. Even if the BC Court of Appeal make a reference decision about this,  Alberta can just seek its own decision with their own court of appeal. Legal deadlock.

As OGBD says, the feds need to step into this is solid way which they do not appear to have the stones to do. I think Trudeau screwed himself here (again) by not putting his foot down on every entity opposing this pipeline and just ram it through, or alternately making a hard decision to nix the project altogether and maintaining the status quo of shipments. In doing the latter he loses a lot of votes in Alberta, but he didn't have that many anyway but Im not sure he gains much from BC either.   A third option, and its not a good one, is to nationalize the energy industry and have the feds take all of the responsibility away from the provinces for the transportation and distribution of  oil products and coerce companies to comply.  Would Notley oppose????
In any eventuality, this appears to be the end of the days of confidence in the federal government for the left half of the country for decades to come. People that are so deeply divided and firmly entrenched on this issue are not going to back down one way or the other, it has been allowed to go too far.
Everything you say here rings true.  The cancelled pipeline going East and also kiboshing the Keystone also enter in to this discussion. Meanwhile agriculture is screwed because the railways are shipping oil and not grain, is causing issues there.  All in all, Alberta and Saskatchewan are more than mad. Being as this is round two for Trudeau Liberals, it is not going to end pretty or anytime soon.
As the old man used to say: " I used to be a coyote, but I'm alright nooooOOOOWWW!"

Offline Cloud Cover

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 37,030
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,025
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1270 on: April 19, 2018, 18:49:03 »
I think things hinge on this pipeline. If the rule of law prevails,  the pipeline is built,  federal jurisdiction is respected and natural resources get to market while respecting the environment we all come out of this better. If it dies and a minority government in BC is allowed to challenge and defeat the federal government in their jurisdiction,  giving the shaft to the energy exporting provinces,  ya,  alberta can be justified asking what good they get out of confederation.  But that talk now is very premature. This is just the messy process in action.

Hmmm, I agree with you to a certain point- for example, that a majority of people in BC might support the pipeline. For example, Kelowna and the central Okanagon appear to be the summer capital region of Alberta, and many, many people who live in BC work in northern Alberta.
Since when does the majority matter for anything in this country anymore, especially when it comes to litigation and the rule of law where the good of the majority seems to be a bad, bad thing. 
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Interestingly, (and I think this only by happenstance), at paragraphs 91 and 92 of the Comeau decision touch upon the federal and provincial division of powers, and the Court wrote:

 [91] For the reasons that follow, we do not see these lines of authority to be in conflict. Properly understood, they represent a single, progressive understanding of the purpose and function of s. 121 in the broader constitutional scheme. This understanding is entirely consistent with our earlier conclusion that s. 121 — understood through the lens of its text, its historical and legislative contexts and the principle of federalism — is best conceived as preventing provinces from passing laws aimed at impeding trade by setting up barriers at boundaries, while allowing them to legislate to achieve goals within their jurisdiction even where such laws may incidentally limit the passage of goods over provincial borders.
[92]                          Gold Seal, decided in 1921, was the first case to interpret s. 121 of the Constitution Act, 1867. It concerned a federal statute that prohibited the importation of liquor into any dry province. The federal law was complementary to provincial prohibition laws, passed because the provinces were not competent under the division of powers to regulate interprovincial trade — an early example of cooperative federalism. The Gold Seal liquor company argued that the trade barrier installed by the federal law violated s. 121. The Court’s discussion of s. 121 in Gold Seal was cursory. Duff and Mignault JJ., in the majority, each held that the law at issue was not caught by s. 121 because it was not a tariff on goods crossing provincial borders. Mignault J. added that this was consistent with a similar provision in the United States Constitution addressing the same concerns: Gold Seal, at p. 470. Anglin J. agreed, but offered no analysis: Gold Seal, at p. 466.
+++++++++++++++++++

Arguably, Alberta is NOT proposing a tariff or a barrier on oil. It is the government of British Columbia that is seeking to impose a barrier by preventing the pipeline work which is in turn intruding on the concept of cooperative federalism- a federal responsibility which the court may have now forced Trudeau to live up to. This in turn is causing Alberta to propose a licensing scheme to protect local matters for the good of the province because if they do not, they may find themselves in the position of having to defend against an argument of not living up to its own constitutional responsibilities.
Living the lean life.

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 139,385
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,618
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1271 on: April 19, 2018, 18:52:00 »
I am not going to go into a big discussion of the Energy East pipeline because, regardless of the apparent opposition from Quebec's Liberal government and the ex-Federal Liberal imbecile then mayor of Montreal (I mean Coderre), the Quebec business community and the more right wing C.A.Q. party - now leading in the polls - were in favour of it. It was the actual consortium wishing to build it that withdrew its proposal after the N.E.B. asked for more detailed information on environmental protection of the River crossings of the St Lawrence that ended the process. The fact that the consortium failed to provide proper information to the Federal board has more to do with the fact that they thought they could just ram the thing through under the Conservative rule without satisfying the need to demonstrate what they proposed to do to protect the safe drinking water of 20% of Canada's population. Had they done so and revised their information package, who knows what would have happened!

But Jed is on to something important here: All this screwing around with not expanding the pipeline system is NOT resulting into a reduction in oil export from the prairies, its actually having a domino effect in causing serious harm to the agricultural exports of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba and to container traffic of Quebec, Ontario and Nova Scotia because the trains are now being  monopolized (almost) by the need to ship oil one way or another. And in a lot less safe way than pipeline, I may add.

That's the real  tragedy: A government who wishes to reduce Canada's green house gas emission is actually forcing everyone to use more trains and a lot more trucks on the road - big green house gas emitters - instead of relying on a system - pipelines - that produce very little such emission.

The whole thing is crazy as far as I am concerned.
 

Offline Cloud Cover

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 37,030
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,025
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1272 on: April 19, 2018, 18:57:02 »
those are two very important policy arguments that I would hope the feds are alive to and sympathetic with.
Living the lean life.

Offline Larry Strong

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 226,511
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,684
  • 546 days from 0 to being King of the Castle
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1273 on: April 19, 2018, 19:10:38 »
two words.

Jason.  Kenney.  If she isn't hard on BC and hogan Jason Kenney continues to rally albertans around hin saying that she isn't standing up for them,  and he will.

Notley is facing an election in not too long,  she cannot afford that. She would rather it be struck down by the courts.

Notley and her gang of clowns are having their one and only kick at the can that they will get in Ab, at least within my life time if not for ever.....They only really won cause the vote on the right was split between the PC's and the WR...post election navel-gazing showed the combined "conservative" side lost around 800K votes which ironically coincided with the +/- 800K votes Redfraud brought to the PC party with her........



Cheers
Larry
« Last Edit: April 19, 2018, 20:16:08 by Larry Strong »
Proud sponsor of the Maple Leaf Legacy Project. http://www.mapleleaflegacy.ca

Offline Target Up

    ........pull, patch, and score.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 222,320
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,819
  • that's how we roll in redneck land
Re: Politics in 2018
« Reply #1274 on: April 19, 2018, 19:47:12 »
While she may be applauded for "bold leadership" against this "monumental challenge"...<cough>... I think Notley lost a lot of votes over how she conducted herself in this situation as a whole, specifically targeting the 'civilian population' if you will in order to ensure her own political goals are met.

I'm not debating whether the pipeline needs to be expanded or not.


But instead of keeping this a 'government to government' issue...she continues to target the lower to middle class residents of BC.  First, she limited the amount of wine that BC could export to Alberta.  This had a very real affect on small, family owned businesses including wineries, liquor stores, transport businesses, etc.

Now she wants to make gas so unbelievably expensive, that the residents of BC will FORCE their government to concede if for no other reason than people are going broke over just trying to drive to work, drive their kids around, and live normal lives.


I'm all for tough measures if governments disagree and, for some reason, can't come up with a solution that both parties can accept.  But deliberately making the lives of fellow Canadians difficult, and making them suffer financially - especially when it's the lower to middle class that will be affected the most - isn't very noble, honourable, or Canadian.

Canadian provincial governments should not be deliberately targeting & financially hurting other Canadians, just because they happen to reside in a different province.

As someone who lives in Alberta, I have absolutely zero motivation to see average people in BC suffering due to a political dispute.  It's one of the most un-Canadian things I can think of, and I know from discussing this around the water cooler, I'm not the only one that feels that way.

So, what’s your take on economic sanctions against rogue nations like N Korea, Iran, and all the rest? Are they okay? Plenty of po’ folks suffer there, don’t they? Sanctions are used because they (sometimes) work.
Apparently, a "USUAL SUSPECT"

“In peace there's nothing so becomes a man as modest stillness and humility; but when the blast of war blows in our ears, then imitate the action of the tiger; stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood, disguise fair nature with hard-favor'd rage.”

 Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and start slitting throats