Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Mayo

I never mentioned that guy in my post except to say that he was wrong to do that. That is defending him?

I'm talking about the general discontent in Alberta and where that comes from, what the OP was talking about. OP asked why we people are mad in AB. I answered and said if the issues affected him more directly, he would be mad to, and might react differently (hopefully not to the extremes you obsess over). It's human nature, someone mentioned the lobster riots in NS. Perfect example of what happens when your livelihood is messed with.

Western alienation has a long history in Alberta, and this really isn't new. In the 80's we elected a couple of separatists to the Alberta Legislature, and there have been a number of issues that have stoked these fires through the years. Resource wealth and those associated issues are obviously a piece of this, but it goes back further. A lot of the discontent stems from the west largely being ignored and taken for granted. It's not even a purely Albertan issue, because you can include BC and Saskatchewan in there as well. And sure...the argument back is "well if you voted for other parties..." but that doesn't actually solve it either because of the seat distribution.

I'll say that when I was younger, I would think that Alberta and the west just had a persecution complex, but my view on that is changing. A lot of the decisions made in the name of the environment today are entirely mind-boggling. Everything from the decisions on resources and resource production to this latest scheme around fertilizer emissions. Its one attack after another on the main industries in the west.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

That theory is overwhelmingly provable in this very thread.

Are you saying the right people think their Center or the left people think they are center or both?

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Mayo

I never mentioned that guy in my post except to say that he was wrong to do that. That is defending him?

I'm talking about the general discontent in Alberta and where that comes from, what the OP was talking about. OP asked why we people are mad in AB. I answered and said if the issues affected him more directly, he would be mad to, and might react differently (hopefully not to the extremes you obsess over). It's human nature, someone mentioned the lobster riots in NS. Perfect example of what happens when your livelihood is messed with.

I think the average discontented Albertan wouldn't know anything about negative natural gas prices.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Slava

A lot of the decisions made in the name of the environment today are entirely mind-boggling.

Do you have a specific list of recent activities?

[Mayo]

Originally Posted by Cappy

I think the average discontented Albertan wouldn't know anything about negative natural gas prices.

In a specific instance like last week, probably not. I wasn't suggesting that specific pricing event triggered the Freeland incident, as mentioned to the reading impaired that incident was not the focus of my comment nor the focus of the comment I was replying to.

I think in general the discontent population is aware our pricing is poor and market access is an issue.

[Ozy_Flame]

Everyone is woke and I'll cry if I want to, cry if I want to, cry if I want to

https://twitter.com/user/status/1564279942028095494

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Do you have a specific list of recent activities?

Well the latest that catches my eye is the fertilizer emissions issue. I mean we're literally talking about food production here...it's kind of important to humans. I can't say whether these kinds of things are sheer incompetence or malice, but it really doesn't matter.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Everyone is woke and I'll cry if I want to, cry if I want to, cry if I want to

https://twitter.com/user/status/1564279942028095494

Jack Mintz, appointed under Kenney's watch the AHS board, and of the Frasier Institute, wrote an opinion piece for the Financial Post going to bat for our O&G companies, and Kenney amplified it? Well I never! Cats fornicating with dogs!

Also, claim your bingo spot for "wokeness". Hoping people who use that word will one day wake up to how stupid it makes them sound.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by GGG

Are you saying the right people think their Center or the left people think they are center or both?

Everyone I think. That said, center is a moving target so the distinction between centre vs left/right might not be that relevant. I think what I was trying to say was that most people think that they're ideology is neutral or natural as such they are prone to thinking that a noticeable presence of opposition to their ideology is unusual or somehow dangerous.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Also, claim your bingo spot for "wokeness". Hoping people who use that word will one day wake up to how stupid it makes them sound.

But if they wake up then they’ll technically be woke too by default.

Nice try Fuzz.

[Fuzz]

"Wake up sheeple!"

"OK, I'm awake, what's up?"

"You stupid woke fool!"

[Mayo]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Do you have a specific list of recent activities?

Bill C-69, replacing Bill C-38 added significant time and uncertainty to pipeline project approvals.

Example of the additional rigor required is an assessment on the climate impact of the project. At the surface, this sounds great (hence the support it will get from the general public our east).
In reality, it's an extremely subjective assessment that takes time, and being subjective, is open to repeated follow-up requests that also take months at a time. Subjective being, it depends what source the fuel is coming from, and what it's used for. If a natural gas line is being used to offset coal in Asia, it could benefit the environment. But this can't be proven.


Now it get's difficult because you will get right wing sources saying C-69 is the worst, and left wing critics saying it's actually not that bad. It's challenging to work through the details for yourself on these bills, they are a tough read. But to look at the big picture it's hard to believe that if it's all a false narrative, that these private, profit driven companies would just choose not to take advantage highly lucrative growth opportunities in Canada. They choose to get pounded every couple of years with price discount blowout. Instead, most of the investment has fled. That's the big picture reality.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by GGG

Are you saying the right people think their Center or the left people think they are center or both?

Both, but I am an actual Centrist and thus the only one fit to judge you all!

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Mayo

Bill C-69, replacing Bill C-38 added significant time and uncertainty to pipeline project approvals.

Example of the additional rigor required is an assessment on the climate impact of the project. At the surface, this sounds great (hence the support it will get from the general public our east).
In reality, it's an extremely subjective assessment that takes time, and being subjective, is open to repeated follow-up requests that also take months at a time. Subjective being, it depends what source the fuel is coming from, and what it's used for. If a natural gas line is being used to offset coal in Asia, it could benefit the environment. But this can't be proven.


Now it get's difficult because you will get right wing sources saying C-69 is the worst, and left wing critics saying it's actually not that bad. It's challenging to work through the details for yourself on these bills, they are a tough read. But to look at the big picture it's hard to believe that if it's all a false narrative, that these private, profit driven companies would just choose not to take advantage highly lucrative growth opportunities in Canada. They choose to get pounded every couple of years with price discount blowout. Instead, most of the investment has fled. That's the big picture reality.

I think 2 things need to happen:

- Defined timelines with criteria and decisions that are legally binding and enforceable.
If the Environmental Review Board levies a decision, there shouldn't be opportunity for secondary political review and approval. It should just be done. There are at least 3 projects I know about right now where this has occurred.

- There should be pre defined corridors for environmental approvals. One trasnational, one on each coast. These corridors would be preselected to reduce the impact as much as possible, then all review would be precompleted. Port locations selected could even include additional investment measures to reduce impact of potential failure.

Certainty is the number 1 reason we are failing. There's 0 certainty that even if you jump through the numerous hoops, your project and investment will see fruition.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Mayo

In a specific instance like last week, probably not. I wasn't suggesting that specific pricing event triggered the Freeland incident, as mentioned to the reading impaired that incident was not the focus of my comment nor the focus of the comment I was replying to.

I think in general the discontent population is aware our pricing is poor and market access is an issue.

Of course the corollary of that is cheap natural gas prices (and electricity) in Canada. If all of the sudden we had unlimited export capacity, we'd be paying a lot closer to the European price for gas than our current price.

Everyone talks about Australia as an LNG success story, but at the same time their energy is getting a lot more expensive (which can have economy-wide knock on effects) because they have to compete with buyers from Asia. And their LNG industry actually doesn't generate all that much public revenue from royalties and taxes (last I saw it was about $65B CAD total over the last 12-13 years, though that's weighted towards recent years). So while it's still a net benefit for them, there are some very real downsides for those that don't directly benefit from the industry.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Mayo

In a specific instance like last week, probably not. I wasn't suggesting that specific pricing event triggered the Freeland incident, as mentioned to the reading impaired that incident was not the focus of my comment nor the focus of the comment I was replying to.

I think in general the discontent population is aware our pricing is poor and market access is an issue.

Specifically to last week, its likely entirely born out of discontent of covid mandates.

General frustration to market access is there for sure, but I am not convinced that the outlet of that frustration is well placed at all.

Those on twitter talking about their discontentedness with dutch flags in their profile couldnt care less about market access.

[The Fisher Account]

Visible groans for any leader who seriously uses the word 'woke'. JFC

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by Mayo

Price of natural gas went negative in Alberta last week. The same product that sells for over $10CAD/GJ in the USA and over $50CAD/GJ in Europe.

That can be pretty frustrating if your livelihood depends on the value of that product. People get angry and need someone to blame.

Will they always or entirely blame the right person, no? Are they right to cuss Freeland out? No. But you put any industry or group of people under similar circumstances and you will get the same responses. It's human behavior, you might think if you were in their shoes you would have shaped differently. But that thought is entirely rooted in narcissism, a belief that you are a higher person incapable of any road but the high road.

I hope you enjoyed Nova Scotia, that was an extremely GHG intensive vacation and terrible for the environment.

Originally Posted by Mayo

In a specific instance like last week, probably not. I wasn't suggesting that specific pricing event triggered the Freeland incident, as mentioned to the reading impaired that incident was not the focus of my comment nor the focus of the comment I was replying to.

I think in general the discontent population is aware our pricing is poor and market access is an issue.

lol. You were the first and only poster to mention the negative gas pricing. In fact, you led with that little nugget. If not the trigger or the focus, why mention it?

I get the frustration, as I am employed in this business. C-69 is likely a far better example of the challenges. Having said that, the discussion started with the actions of a bozo. No amount of frustration warrants that sort of behaviour.

[Mayo]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

lol. You were the first and only poster to mention the negative gas pricing. In fact, you led with that little nugget. If not the trigger or the focus, why mention it?

I get the frustration, as I am employed in this business. C-69 is likely a far better example of the challenges. Having said that, the discussion started with the actions of a bozo. No amount of frustration warrants that sort of behaviour.

Who said that behaviour was warranted?

Reading impaired.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

lol. You were the first and only poster to mention the negative gas pricing. In fact, you led with that little nugget. If not the trigger or the focus, why mention it?

I get the frustration, as I am employed in this business. C-69 is likely a far better example of the challenges. Having said that, the discussion started with the actions of a bozo. No amount of frustration warrants that sort of behaviour.

Originally Posted by Mayo

Price of natural gas went negative in Alberta last week. The same product that sells for over $10CAD/GJ in the USA and over $50CAD/GJ in Europe.

That can be pretty frustrating if your livelihood depends on the value of that product. People get angry and need someone to blame.

Will they always or entirely blame the right person, no? Are they right to cuss Freeland out? No. But you put any industry or group of people under similar circumstances and you will get the same responses. It's human behavior, you might think if you were in their shoes you would have shaped differently. But that thought is entirely rooted in narcissism, a belief that you are a higher person incapable of any road but the high road.

I hope you enjoyed Nova Scotia, that was an extremely GHG intensive vacation and terrible for the environment.

Originally Posted by Mayo

Who said that behaviour was warranted?

Reading impaired.

You implied that with the bolded. If not warranted, then explained away/dismissed.