Quote:
Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz
Why/do you actually think that?
It's one thing to say the clause should have been written that way, it's another entirely to say "I know how the clause was written, but it's dumb and shouldn't apply".
If you're saying the former, that's a stance I can understand, if it's the latter, that's a pretty unreasonable stance.
The fact of the matter is the government should have know companies cancelling their PPAs was a possibility/likelihood due to the carbon tax.
So they either didn't know these clauses existed, didn't understand them, or didn't have a plan in place to deal with the fallout.
That being said, most of the actually day to day work is being done by bureaucrats who do understand these things, so I have a hard time that they wouldn't bring this up which means they either weren't consulted, or were ignored.
That's a whole lot of "eithers", but none of them paint a picture of a qualified/reasonable government.
The fact that they are now suing these companies and using language like "Secret clause" and "Enron clause", is an ugly attempt to blame their failure on companies that have to this point acted in good faith.
|
And further, they keep bringing up the fact that companies made $10B over the last 15 years but now all of a sudden the heartless bastards are being little crybabies because they dont want to swallow $2B in losses.
Do these people understand anything about businesses or basic economics?
Its just astounding to me trying to understand how the NDP think.
"You werent complaining when you were generating steady revenues for the past decade and a half but oh no! Now that we've come in and unilaterally changed the rules and you're looking at losses for the forseeable future all of sudden you're complaining."
Just...actually mind boggling.