Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken
Kenney is suggesting repealing notleys carbon tax and going back to stelmachs, but the major players in albertas energy economy, and thus Alberta seem to think notleys is preferable, and their removal seems to be contribute to a less stable and constructive business environment.
Notley may be less than ideal but Kenney would be a catastrophe.
|
You're letting your viewpoint frame your evidence as opposed to the other way around when you use the 4 CEO's standing behind Notley back in 2015 when the carbon tax was announced as evidence backing up the claim that the 'major players in Alberta's Energy economy seem to think Notley's is preferable.'
First of all those 4 companies do not represent all of Alberta's economy or even all of Alberta's oil patch (CAPP was actually opposed to a cap).
Second of all that was then, this is now. Since then Shell has pulled out of oil sands, Cenovus has a new CEO, Suncor's CEO is retiring, and CNRL's chairman left for England to avoid Alberta's taxes.
Thirdly, it could be argued that the carbon tax and cap was of self-interest to those 4 companies for competitive reasons discussed on other posts in this thread
Lastly, I honestly think those companies thought they were buying a 'social license' to build pipelines and operate. That's clearly subsequently been proven to be a mistake.
My stance on carbon taxes - It can't be argued that a carbon tax would be the most efficient market based solution to the carbon emissions problem (if right wing people need someone from their own tribe to say so before they accept this look no further than Preston Manning). That said this only applies in a closed system where every country is participating. Right now our biggest trading partners don't have a carbon tax, therefore ploughing ahead with one beforehand ensures that not only will our carbon taxes fail to reduce emissions globally, they will also hollow out our industries as they move investment to carbon-tax free jurisdictions. We can choose be be boy scouts on this issue and go ahead anyway, but it's at our own economic peril.