Quote:
Originally Posted by DiracSpike
Maybe. I think there was already a court ruling where some court body said it was valid but that's not to say a higher court doesn't disagree. There's an avenue where Alberta can argue it's protecting its self interest by trying to export more down the tube and increase the ratio of raw bitumen for export vs refined product for domestic use. That's not the entire truth obviously but if everyone else is going to enact disingenuous legislation we might as well also.
The good news for you and every other BCer is that Weaver and Horgan are 100% in control of the situation.
|
I mean if we're talking about me personally, the odds of any of that affecting me are pretty slim. Single guy, no kids, no car, bachelor apartment in the downtown core of a city with a mild climate, and a 6 minute walk to work. The majority of my friends and social activities are also within walking distance of me. I'm pretty insulated against any major energy crisis.
I'm in favour of Alberta using any and all levers at its disposal, but I'm not so sure they're going to be as effective as people think they are. The majority of BCers who turning off the taps would hurt aren't living in ridings that went NDP and Green in the last election. You also probably end up with a bit of collateral damage to Albertans with vacation homes in BC (obviously not a massive segment of the population but they're there).
If the goal is trying to convince BC to turf Weaver and Horgan, you need to hurt them in ridings they can't afford to lose (Vancouver and the island) and I'm not sure what strategy would be most effective in doing so but at the same time doesn't create some sort of NIMBY blowback that strengthens Horgan's approval in those areas.
Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
