Pipelines, energy and natural resources

[Kirkhill]

at 2,173 round trip from Toronto I don't see much reduction. The residents were pretty much stranded until they got the tracks repaired. And shipping things in via air is prohibitive and the ship only sails once or twice a year so you better know how to plan your Christmas presents a long time in advance and hop that the kids don't lose interest. But for all that, the few that I know who have moved up to Churchill and beyond (a couple ended up in Rankin Inlet) don't even like coming south for a holiday.

The government can subsidize a railway or it can subsidize air fares....just the way they did in the days of Trans Canada Airways.

 

[lenaitch]

If you want people and their families to move to places like Churchill, people will need proper incentives, i.e. pay and benies, there needs to be proper amenities and recreational outlets for them to want to stay, and access needs to improve so they can buy goods at the store for a reasonable price and get away for a break. And polar bears are a live issue there.

Also, while I think the community is looking forward to the development, I don’t think they would be excited if it just ended up living next to a work camp for temporary workers.

A company owned and operated camp, with amenities, can be a safe and effective environment because the company can exercise behavioral controls that the government cannot. Having one next to an existing community makes things a little more difficult, but not impossible.

Thinks of the old Pinetree Line bases near existing small communities.

The government can subsidize a railway or it can subsidize air fares....just the way they did in the days of Trans Canada Airways.

Pay the non-residents enough and the government doesn't have to. Remember the heydays of the 'tar sands' before Fort Mac became built out and there were regular direct flights between there and Toronto, St. John's and Deer Lake.

 

[brihard]

 

[foresterab]

A company owned and operated camp, with amenities, can be a safe and effective environment because the company can exercise behavioral controls that the government cannot. Having one next to an existing community makes things a little more difficult, but not impossible.

Thinks of the old Pinetree Line bases near existing small communities.


Pay the non-residents enough and the government doesn't have to. Remember the heydays of the 'tar sands' before Fort Mac became built out and there were regular direct flights between there and Toronto, St. John's and Deer Lake.

Throwing money at workers is a good way to get remote sites up and running...the question is are you okay with it remaining a "temporary" location that will open and then close and disappear...Diavik diamond mines come to mind....or is it a location that is worth investing into as a multi-generation community.

That's always been the challange of places like Fort Mac where huge numbers of workers flew in and out...but then put pressure on the local economy distorting pricing for the local inhabitants. Likewise what degree of locals can be hired - not all are suitable - and provide that longer term community aspect.

There was an earlier post about "robot" factories and I think of it as a fly-in situation is a good way to set up a site...but you need the community to maintain it long term.

For the record I grew up in sight of a Pinetree CFB base and while much of the base was off limits it was also a local driver especially from the families who moved nearby as dependents. The loss of those families when the base closed hurt the local economy but by that time - 45 years from construction - the local economy and population had grown enough to be able to sustain things and new opportunities occurred for employment.

 

[Kirkhill]

Pay the non-residents enough and the government doesn't have to. Remember the heydays of the 'tar sands' before Fort Mac became built out and there were regular direct flights between there and Toronto, St. John's and Deer Lake.

A lot of those flights were chartered with the companies picking up the cost, and controlling personnnel movements.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Interesting dynamics...

COMMENTARY: Fix This Rule That Blocks Genuine Equalization Reform – Fraser Institute​

Canada’s equalization program is heading for its comprehensive mandatory review by March 2029, and Finance Canada is already making preparations. Officials should not treat the review as a routine exercise. Big changes should be on the table. But if Ottawa wants the next round of equalization reform to be meaningful, it first needs to fix one rule that requires equalization to continue growing no matter what other changes are made.

---

The rule in question is known as the “fixed growth rate” requirement. In 2009, the Harper government changed the formula so the overall size of the equalization envelope would keep growing roughly in line with nominal GDP. The original rationale was valid. Equalization costs had been rising quickly, and Ottawa wanted a safeguard against unsustainable growth. However, since 2018/19 this rule has not acted as a safeguard but rather it has pushed costs up.

As we approach a comprehensive review of equalization, we could spend years considering regional concerns and grievances about the formula but the effort would be in many respects futile given that none of the changes could touch the overall size of the program. The fix is straightforward: replace the fixed growth rate requirement with a true cap that acts only as a ceiling, preventing unsustainable growth while allowing payments to fluctuate underneath that cap in response to changing economic circumstances. If Ottawa is serious about modernizing equalization, that’s where it must begin.

COMMENTARY: Fix This Rule That Blocks Genuine Equalization Reform - Fraser Institute - Canadian Energy News, Top Headlines, Commentaries, Features & Events - EnergyNow

By Ben Eisen Canada's equalization program is heading for its comprehensive mandatory review by March 2029, and Finance Canada is already making preparations. Officials should not treat the review as a routine exercise. Big changes should be on the table. But if Ottawa wants the next round of...

energynow.ca