Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolven
Based on what?
Are you saying we should continue our existing levels of subsidizing the industry? Or, should we be giving them even more money?
How much of that money should be tied to their local workforce? Oil companies are laying off people by the thousands to shift work to automation, AI, or offshore resources.
Apparently Alberta has lost 45,000 oil and gas jobs from 2014 to 2023 and we know there were more layoffs over the last two years. To put it another way, if O&G has laid off 26% of the Alberta O&G workforce in the last decade, shouldn't that be a sign that the industry is not a good partner to invest in?
Or on the flip side, if 45,000 have been laid off by that industry then shouldn't our priority be to invest the limited public dollars into other industries where employment will actually increase?
|
What do you consider subsidies?
We definitely should continue exploration tax credits and royalty holidays for capital investments. Those are the two most common ones brought up.
In the pipeline file we should underwrite regulatory approval risk for proponents as it was the conservative and liberal governments who have made the regulatory process no longer viable for private companies.
I like the concept of Carbon taxes spent by industries should be able to be be offset by capital investments into CO2 capture or emissions reductions.
Other than that I wouldn’t want the government to fund another pipeline as the constructor.
What specific subsidies would you like to see cut?