Official (Alberta) Oil Discussion Thread

[Zarley]

Originally Posted by Zethrynn

squandered the wealth giving albertans what they wanted. services without having to pay more in taxes for it.

I'd argue that the PCs squandered wealth by caving in to a bloated and inefficient bureaucracy. Contrary to what many would say, there is no revenue problem in Alberta. The problem is that Albertans are simply not getting enough value for operational government expenditures, which are among the highest per capita in the country.

It's absolutely the fault of the Progressive Conservatives and the date at which things turned for the worse is September 1, 2005: when Ralphbucks were announced.

[Red Potato Standing By]

aren't most governments kind of bloated and inefficient?

[CaptainCrunch]

Of course the Unions feel betrayed.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2016/01/30...royalty-u-turn

[Resolute 14]

Yeah, I laughed at that too. If the AFL is upset that the gravy train they hoped to ransack never made it to station, then I'm willing to give Notley a +1.

[Violator]

Originally Posted by Zethrynn

aren't most governments kind of bloated and inefficient?

After reading this thread it seems like energy companies when prices are good are even more bloated and inefficient than the government.

[MrMastodonFarm]

oops

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Violator

After reading this thread it seems like energy companies when prices are good are even more bloated and inefficient than the government.

It's kinda funny that people complain about bloat in government before their Christmas party at the Banff springs. Aside from pensions o+g is as bad or worse than government.

The difference though is every 10 years crisises hit the economy causing every position to be reevaluated for need and discretionary spending reigned in. The government doesn't have this natural renewal mechanism

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Violator

After reading this thread it seems like energy companies when prices are good are even more bloated and inefficient than the government.

Yup and when it becomes un-affordable or damaging to the companies bottom line they change the formula.

When the government faced with it, ignores it, or throws more money at it.

[Frequitude]

Waste of time argument aside, kudos to Notley for assembling an excellent panel and accepting their recommendation even though their decision clearly reflected poorly on her.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by SebC

http://business.financialpost.com/fp...s-is-that-fair

According to this article, the oil sands have not turned a net profit after royalties. That can't be right... can it?

Ya, this makes sense and shouldn't be concerning. So much investment has happened over the last 10 years which simply hasn't had a chance to pay out yet. These are multi decade projects, many of which only recently started producing.

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Of course the Unions feel betrayed.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2016/01/30...royalty-u-turn

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Yeah, I laughed at that too. If the AFL is upset that the gravy train they hoped to ransack never made it to station, then I'm willing to give Notley a +1.

What the flying frack does the Alberta Federation of Labour/Union bosses have anything to do with the oil and gas royalty review? Why is he even commenting?

Other than the obvious cash grab for the union, where the hell is the indignation from? And what is this supposed to mean?

“I have reasonably regular meetings with people in the premier’s office. This will be a subject for discussion at the next meeting.”

Wouldn't it be absolutely ridiculous to have executives at CAPP, Encana, Cenovus, or any oil and gas CEO's publicly upset at union negotiations and raises? Do they regularly meet with governments to object at public sector wage talks? Have I not noticed this in the past, what am I missing?

[LanceUppercut]

Originally Posted by chemgear

What the flying frack does the Alberta Federation of Labour/Union bosses have anything to do with the oil and gas royalty review? Why is he even commenting?

Other than the obvious cash grab for the union, where the hell is the indignation from? And what is this supposed to mean?

“I have reasonably regular meetings with people in the premier’s office. This will be a subject for discussion at the next meeting.”

Wouldn't it be absolutely ridiculous to have executives at CAPP, Encana, Cenovus, or any oil and gas CEO's publicly upset at union negotiations and raises? Do they regularly meet with governments to object at public sector wage talks? Have I not noticed this in the past, what am I missing?

The AFL is upset that they can't wring billions of dollars out of the oil companies to hand to their union membership (and leadership). If the AFL is mad, Notley must have actually done something right.

[heep223]

All this union talk scares me. Notley is a labour lawyer after all, she is probably extremely sympathetic to unions. It's her background.

I still can't believe she got elected in AB wow.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by chemgear

What the flying frack does the Alberta Federation of Labour/Union bosses have anything to do with the oil and gas royalty review? Why is he even commenting?

Other than the obvious cash grab for the union, where the hell is the indignation from? And what is this supposed to mean?

“I have reasonably regular meetings with people in the premier’s office. This will be a subject for discussion at the next meeting.”

Wouldn't it be absolutely ridiculous to have executives at CAPP, Encana, Cenovus, or any oil and gas CEO's publicly upset at union negotiations and raises? Do they regularly meet with governments to object at public sector wage talks? Have I not noticed this in the past, what am I missing?

To me the Unions are no better then the Lobby Groups out there on the other side of the coin. And we know that governments are unduley influenced by Lobby.

The fact that he's talking about discussing Royalties with the government is disturbing as it has nothing to do with the mandate of the union.

Notley is going to have to find the stones to stand up to the Union during the 170 different contract negotiations that are due up during her term in government.

I think that he let slip something that's pretty significant in terms of the unions being in bed with the government.

I think that she needs to let the public know what's being discussed in these meetings, or at the very least have the minutes from the meeting publicly available. Conversely I think it should be the same with lobby groups.

But this sounds suspiciously like over influence by a special interest group (AFL)

[Buster]

Unions are worse than corporate lobby groups.

The money spent on corporate lobbyists is relatively voluntary - shareholders all the way to the guy writing the cheque exist voluntarily.

Unions are worse because they are lobbying with money that they gained by coercion.

[northcrunk]

Originally Posted by heep223

All this union talk scares me. Notley is a labour lawyer after all, she is probably extremely sympathetic to unions. It's her background.

I still can't believe she got elected in AB wow.

And she is married to the head of the biggest public sector union.

[Weitz]

What exactly is the Labour Union looking for here? Do they get money from Royalties?

[Frequitude]

http://calgaryherald.com/business/en...s-to-head-west

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says his Liberal government has Alberta’s back as he prepares to visit the province this week.

Trudeau will meet with Premier Rachel Notley on Wednesday in Edmonton and is also expected to visit Calgary.

He told a CBC forum on Sunday he’s very aware of the “tough times” facing Alberta — as well as Saskatchewan and Newfoundland and Labrador — because of tanking oil prices.

“The country is going to be there for you,” said Trudeau in response to a question from a Albertan energy sector worker.

“The federal government is going to be a strong and active partner to help Alberta through this tough time.”

Federal Finance Minister Bill Morneau said last week that Alberta could be entitled to nearly $250-million from a fiscal stabilization program designed to help provinces that suffer a steep decline in revenue from one year to the next.

Ugh. I don't want your money, Feds. You can keep it. Seriously. Spare me the political capital. I want a pipeline. We need a pipeline. Spend your political capital there.

[nik-]

I think it's a little frustrating to see that guy's stance regarding want to take more royalties.

I believe in unions. I think they still serve a purpose. I don't want to go after them or think they should be destroyed or go after their benefits. It's pretty disheartening to see them wanting to go after the companies that supply my livelihood.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by nik-

I think it's a little frustrating to see that guy's stance regarding want to take more royalties.

I believe in unions. I think they still serve a purpose. I don't want to go after them or think they should be destroyed or go after their benefits. It's pretty disheartening to see them wanting to go after the companies that supply my livelihood.

Over the years its become an increasingly adversarial relationship and I'm not sure theres a way to fix that.

Both sides are replete with people of wildly different characters, interests and beliefs.