Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Azure

Yeah we know what they'd do now.

We're talking about how to restrict that from happening while at the same time not actually striping all the land rights away.

An energy corridor would be the easiest way to accomplish it. It can be accomplished by securing the land via eminent domain.

The Canadian government has used eminent domain to obtain land for building railroads, which in the end way a massive net benefit for all Canadians.

Ah, OK I see the problem. You don't actually know how our country works. You'd make a great Alberta leader using US terms that don't apply here.


Here's an explanation of how it works:
https://www.quora.com/In-Canada-in-B...e-First-Nation


So no, they can't just take it without compensation.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Ah, OK I see the problem. You don't actually know how our country works. You'd make a great Alberta leader using US terms that don't apply here.


Here's an explanation of how it works:
https://www.quora.com/In-Canada-in-B...e-First-Nation


So no, they can't just take it without compensation.

It seems like you don't actually understand how eminent domain works. The land owners are compensated, often for exactly or more than what the land is worth. The sale is just forced because it is deemed at being in the public interest.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by ThePrince

Ya, it's totally a free market situation when you look at the over-regulation, taxation, and political issues.

The lack of infrastructure in Canada actually literally is the free market speaking and saying "Canada is not investable, we can make a better return elsewhere and not have to deal with the issues listed above".

I've said this time and again on this board, but Canada has gotten to a point where there is no investment thesis anymore. So not sure where you're coming from.

As noted in my edit, i was only half (60%) being a jerk with my comment, because while i agree with you, that blame can only go so far.

Since the USFTA was signed, business has focused on cross-border trade and infrastructure to facilitate that trade. We are on the border of the world's largest market so it made business sense to do so - to both government and free market.

Until basically 2 months ago, this generally made sense for all products/services. You can argue that Oil and gas, it made sense until 2013? when the WTS price was steeply discounted.

But to many companies, it still made more financial sense to ride the US trade vs developing infrastructure for new markets. Yes, some of that is government policy and regulations; but some of that is pure dollars and cents from a company's perspective.

It could be argued that TMX is an example. A company that found the process of approving new infrastructure to be too expensive and too time consuming to pursue on economic grounds vs divesture and move to US markets. The Government stepped up to push that one over the line.

It's not just oil and gas, though either. All of our markets are geared towards the US; which typically made sense when one market dominates another in proximity and consumption - its not unlike many satellite states to Germany today.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/dail...01-png-eng.htm


It's not, you know, taking off, but it's not not happening. Haven't looked deeply, but sum links here might explain the story.


https://www.international.gc.ca/trad....aspx?lang=eng

Since COVID, the US has been hoovering so much foreign investment. Canada must be comparable to other EU nations, i would guess?

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Firebot

Free market is saying that is it cheaper to refine oil in the US in refineries located in Texas and export it back to Canada, than refining the oil in Canada.

Free market says that when oil crashed to negative pricing in 2020 and Irving finally bought Alberta oil as it was finally profitable for Irving to refine it at its refineries, it was cheaper to ship it across the fricking Panama Canal than it was for it to travel within the same country (which Energy East would have facilitated interprovincial trade and energy supply).

https://twitter.com/user/status/1257709178719633409

Free market dictates it made more economical sense for Onvitiv to relocate it's Calgary headquarters to the US.

Free market dictates that Shell divested its oil sands assets for more lucrative projects outside of Canada after significant political turmoil in Canada and new proposed regulations such as Bill C-69 showing worsening situation.

The free market will do what is most profitable. Canada is currently not very friendly to investments within Canada.

That Kenney tweet is hilarious to me.

If 15th century Europe had twitter, Ottoman sultans would be sharing the same graphics.

It has been cheaper to ship cargo over the ocean for centuries. It has largely been safer since the 19th century, and now its pretty much void of environmental regulations

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Azure

It seems like you don't actually understand how eminent domain works. The land owners are compensated, often for exactly or more than what the land is worth. The sale is just forced because it is deemed at being in the public interest.

Canada can't expropriate land subject to aboriginal title or treaty rights. Those are constitutionally protected.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Azure

It seems like you don't actually understand how eminent domain works. The land owners are compensated, often for exactly or more than what the land is worth. The sale is just forced because it is deemed at being in the public interest.

It seems that you continue to fail to understand that we don't have that legal process in Canada. You can attempt to use US laws in Canada, but you will receive the same response as Danielle Smith did. If you forget, it was "LOL, no."


What we do have is called "expropriation". And that does require compensation. I'm not saying an energy corridor can't be created, I'm saying the GoC can't just do it without a lot of work and payments/agreements. This is kinda like the mistake Harper made with TMX.

[CliffFletcher]

The problem with indigenous consultation is it’s such a fuzzy requirement. Does it mean meeting with every band council and getting agreement from all of them? What about when some band members disagree with their council? Or when a different council takes power than the one that agreed to the deal? Or a band changes its mind and wants to renegotiate? Or they drag out the process for years and years in the hopes of securing a better deal?

We’ve seen in city politics how you’ll never get local consensus on green-lighting a development. And a lot of folks get frustrated when that means infrastructure like condo developments and c-train lines get scrapped. There are obviously different legal considerations dealing with First Nations. But like municipal politics, if 100 per cent consensus is the threshold for approval, we should resign ourselves to nothing ever being built.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Then they'd do what they do now, which is block it. They'd go to the courts, and win.


I'm really sorry to throw reality around so casually, but we do actually have laws government must conform to, unless you also want to be ruled by a Trump-like entity?

I don't, but sometimes wonder if you do.
Because it's the inevitable outcome if we keep on this road to blocking everything and expecting voters to not care.

At some point you need to wake up that this is resulting in people shifting to the right wing politics you don't want.
You are your own worst enemy; sorry if that's throwing reality around too casually.

All parties involved in these projects need to start figuring things out or Canadians will vote for people who force the way through.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The problem with indigenous consultation is it’s such a fuzzy requirement. Does it mean meeting with every band council and getting agreement from all of them? What about when some band members disagree with their council? Or when a different council takes power than the one that agreed to the deal? Or a band changes its mind and wants to renegotiate? Or they drag out the process for years and years in the hopes of securing a better deal?

We’ve seen in city politics how you’ll never get local consensus on green-lighting a development. And a lot of folks here seem unhappy when that means infrastructure like condo developments and c-train lines get scrapped. There are obviously different legal considerations dealing with First Nations. But like municipal politics, if 100 per cent consensus is the threshold for approval, we should resign ourselves to nothing ever being built.

But it's not, and we've seen how the process works with TMX. If you follow the process from the start, it seems to work, and allows stuff to get built. Once the Liberals followed the proper processes they had court approval.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Azure

You are incredibly (to say the frickin' least) understating the market barriers in Canada that prohibit inter provincial trade.

There is a reason why economists are saying reducing these barriers could increase our GDP by up to 4%.

As someone who ships to the US on a daily basis, shipping the same goods in Canada is far more cost effective from every perspective possible.

Shipping the same pallet of goods from Winnipeg to Vancouver costs 40% less LTL, and 60% less inter modal than shipping from Winnipeg to any state that isn't North or South Dakota.

There are also less cross docking needs, no customs, export duties, other ridiculous Canada to US regulations, quicker transport, etc.

Growing interprovincial trade as much as possible in every sector in Canada would be a massive benefit for all Canadians. But yeah, there are obviously huge benefits to trading with the US. The exchange rate makes our products very appealing for starters.

So shipping within Canada is more cost effective and incurs far less red tape than exporting to the US despite inter-provincial trade barriers. But you're blaming inter-provincial trade barriers for Canadians not buying these goods? Do you see how that doesn't make any sense?

Sure, things like alcohol have weird rules around them that should be fixed. But for most goods or raw materials, there are far more barriers to international trade than there are to inter-provincial (as you have highlighted). That doesn't mean lessening those barriers isn't a good idea, but it obviously doesn't explain the balance of internal vs. international trade.

And geography isn't just a question of shipping cost. The logistics, reliability, and transit time for shorter supply chains is superior to longer ones.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

But it's not, and we've seen how the process works with TMX. If you follow the process from the start, it seems to work, and allows stuff to get built. Once the Liberals followed the proper processes they had court approval.

Your definition of what works is so screwed up its not surprising that you don't get the issue here.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Azure

The free market is now saying that Trans Mountain is a massive net positive for Canada, and even at the $30b cost the government might actually get some decent ROI for its investment.

But to tell that to anyone over the past 10 years they'd think your crazy, and no private company would have paid even half the $30b to build that pipeline.

Why? Its already going to increase revenues $7-8b PER YEAR, and they're really only getting started.

Fact is that Canada is showing over and over again that we are a terrible place to build these mega projects. So why will any private company go for it when there is a damn good chance that their money will be lost and in the end they'll have nothing to show for.

Trans Mountain pretty much proved that.

So TMX has proven to be a boon to the Canadian economy and well worth the investment that the government may even come out ahead; but, it also proves that the private sector can't build anything here?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

It seems that you continue to fail to understand that we don't have that legal process in Canada. You can attempt to use US laws in Canada, but you will receive the same response as Danielle Smith did. If you forget, it was "LOL, no."


What we do have is called "expropriation". And that does require compensation. I'm not saying an energy corridor can't be created, I'm saying the GoC can't just do it without a lot of work and payments/agreements. This is kinda like the mistake Harper made with TMX.

lol, yes we do have that legal process. You can call it whatever you want.

We just need a government that has the balls to go do it.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Cappy

So TMX has proven to be a boon to the Canadian economy and well worth the investment that the government may even come out ahead; but, it also proves that the private sector can't build anything here?

Exactly.

The boon is after the fact to a certain degree.

But no private sector company is going to go through that regulatory or and cost over run nightmare to build a project like that. End of the day the government basically had to force it through, and the government has tools & resources private companies don't have.

[fotze2]

Amazing how “environmental concerns” can evaporate with a payment.

We could add a bunch more ESDs and higher inspection frequency for $5MM . Nah write a cheque for $4MM. I do appreciate the hustle.

Wanna become brutally cynical. Try acquiring land access.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The problem with indigenous consultation is it’s such a fuzzy requirement. Does it mean meeting with every band council and getting agreement from all of them? What about when some band members disagree with their council? Or when a different council takes power than the one that agreed to the deal? Or a band changes its mind and wants to renegotiate? Or they drag out the process for years and years in the hopes of securing a better deal?

We’ve seen in city politics how you’ll never get local consensus on green-lighting a development. And a lot of folks get frustrated when that means infrastructure like condo developments and c-train lines get scrapped. There are obviously different legal considerations dealing with First Nations. But like municipal politics, if 100 per cent consensus is the threshold for approval, we should resign ourselves to nothing ever being built.

Bingo. Also in BC, because development requires BC gov and they’re idiots, it’s started to slide into approval not consultation.

People here wouldn’t believe what industry is dealing with right now in NEBC. Total gong show and has blown the doors off the arguments being made in this thread.

Where’s the future of Montney development in Canada? Moreso in Alberta or BC? And we have a band of 200 people up there causing a mass clusterF of epic proportions and then people in this thread scrambling all over themselves to argue our way into why that’s right and justified and makes sense. Classically Canadian, in spite of geopolitical strategy that could improve the lives of >35 million people. But no please do tell us how all this makes sense and we should stick with how it’s all working.

Constitutions can be amended and deals can be negotiated with FN groups too, this isn’t some impossible task. Difficult? Yes. Needed? Yes.

LNG Canada phase 2 is literally at risk but we have people arguing the dumbest ####.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by opendoor

So shipping within Canada is more cost effective and incurs far less red tape than exporting to the US despite inter-provincial trade barriers. But you're blaming inter-provincial trade barriers for Canadians not buying these goods? Do you see how that doesn't make any sense?

Sure, things like alcohol have weird rules around them that should be fixed. But for most goods or raw materials, there are far more barriers to international trade than there are to inter-provincial (as you have highlighted). That doesn't mean lessening those barriers isn't a good idea, but it obviously doesn't explain the balance of internal vs. international trade.

And geography isn't just a question of shipping cost. The logistics, reliability, and transit time for shorter supply chains is superior to longer ones.

Within my industry. That doesn't mean other industries are the same. I know for sure that the food industry has a lot of issues because of how stuff is regulated.

Inter provincial shipping is one of the biggest issues when it comes to the trade barriers. Maybe go read up on that because its clear you don't have much of a clue about it.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by fotze2

Amazing how “environmental concerns” can evaporate with a payment.

We could add a bunch more ESDs and higher inspection frequency for $5MM . Nah write a cheque for $4MM. I do appreciate the hustle.

Wanna become brutally cynical. Try acquiring land access.

To say the least.

"We are concerned about long-term environmental affects on our land."

"Here is another $10m payment."

"We have studied the long-term affects and feel that the risks have been mitigated."

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Bingo. Also in BC, because development requires BC gov and they’re idiots, it’s started to slide into approval not consultation.

People here wouldn’t believe what industry is dealing with right now in NEBC. Total gong show and has blown the doors off the arguments being made in this thread.

Where’s the future of Montney development in Canada? Moreso in Alberta or BC? And we have a band of 200 people up there causing a mass clusterF of epic proportions and then people in this thread scrambling all over themselves to argue our way into why that’s right and justified and makes sense. Classically Canadian, in spite of geopolitical strategy that could improve the lives of >35 million people. But no please do tell us how all this makes sense and we should stick with how it’s all working.

Constitutions can be amended and deals can be negotiated with FN groups too, this isn’t some impossible task. Difficult? Yes. Needed? Yes.

LNG Canada phase 2 is literally at risk but we have people arguing the dumbest ####.

Its the classic keyboard warrior Canadian approach.

Sit here and tell everyone about how we can't do this, can't do that, how this is not like that and that is not like this. All while literally not having a frickin' clue what is actually going on.