Official (Alberta) Oil Discussion Thread

[Bownesian]

I'm less encouraged.

When asked: "If the National Energy Board green-lights the Energy East pipeline, will your cabinet approve it?", he gave a word salad answer that when distilled down effectively said: maybe/maybe not.

[CaptainCrunch]

If he backed off on his statement about extending the time for the evaluations, i would feel more heartened.

Also if he would have said that pipelines are mandated by the federal government instead of his referee statement after Coderre shot his mouth off i would feel better about things.

Realistically he came and left the province and said very little that are actionable items.

Even the 700 million that he talked about being on the way was money promised in 2014 that hadn't been realeased, so its not a new liberal initiative.

Until he actually comes up with something concrete as a policy statement this visit was more about being seen as caring without action.

[burn_this_city]

He ran on supporting EE and TMPL, now he's waffling on both.

[nik-]

Well he is a Montrealer. Probably don't want to get the homefront all riled up.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

If he backed off on his statement about extending the time for the evaluations, i would feel more heartened.

Also if he would have said that pipelines are mandated by the federal government instead of his referee statement after Coderre shot his mouth off i would feel better about things.

Realistically he came and left the province and said very little that are actionable items.

Even the 700 million that he talked about being on the way was money promised in 2014 that hadn't been realeased, so its not a new liberal initiative.

Until he actually comes up with something concrete as a policy statement this visit was more about being seen as caring without action.

This will continue to be a trend for the next 4-5 years.

[Peanut]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

He ran on supporting EE and TMPL, now he's waffling on both.

And actively campaigned against Northern Gateway, the only pipeline out of the "big pipelines" group that actually has NEB approval.

The whole pipeline situation is a head scratcher. To put it mildly.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Bownesian

I'm less encouraged.

When asked: "If the National Energy Board green-lights the Energy East pipeline, will your cabinet approve it?", he gave a word salad answer that when distilled down effectively said: maybe/maybe not.

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

He ran on supporting EE and TMPL, now he's waffling on both.

Originally Posted by Peanut

And actively campaigned against Northern Gateway, the only pipeline out of the "big pipelines" group that actually has NEB approval.

The whole pipeline situation is a head scratcher. To put it mildly.

I watched the press conference and the first question (and a few others) were on pipelines and specifically on Energy East. I didn't think he waffled at all, and didn't give a maybe/maybe not either. I'm just going to paraphrase here, but he basically told Rick Bell point blank

"we had a government who tried all kinds of things for the past decade and despite all those efforts they weren't able to build a single pipeline. My strategy is totally different but I'm confident that it will work."

He also commented about the ERB approvals and said (again paraphrasing, so don't crucify me on semantics!) " I'm not going to pre-judge ERB and their processes. I'm not going to politicize this process."

Basically the ERB is non-partisan and they have to give their approval. Its not something that can be circumvented, so we'll have to wait and see. To me that doesn't sound like waffling at all though; that's a pretty clear indication that once the approvals are there he wants it built.

And frankly, why wouldn't he? Its a pretty big feather in his cap to say during the next campaign "we got this pipeline rolling despite our predecessors not being able to do it." Politically there are a lot of reasons why the federal government should be all over this.

[Bownesian]

He didn't answer the question, not even close. I hate quoting Rick Bell, but it was his question:

http://cnews.canoe.com/CNEWS/Canada/.../22600359.html

“We’re in a situation where we’re not going to predict or shortcut any of the processes going through,” Prime Minister Trudeau tells us. “One of the things Canadians understand is we need rigorous processes that actually evaluate and engage with concerned citizens, with scientists, with indigenous groups and that’s exactly what we’re empowering the NEB to do properly ...”
...
“And we look forward to the process and we will continue to live up to the responsibilities Canadians elected us to do, which is to grow the economy and protect the environment and understand that those two things do go together.”

At no time did he say "Yes, Cabinet will respect the process."

He said a bunch of crap instead of an answer to the question, which to me means "Maybe?"

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Bownesian

He didn't answer the question, not even close. I hate quoting Rick Bell, but it was his question:

http://cnews.canoe.com/CNEWS/Canada/.../22600359.html


At no time did he say "Yes, Cabinet will respect the process."

He said a bunch of crap instead of an answer to the question, which to me means "Maybe?"

Well I don't know. I watched his actual answers, and that's what I took from them. I certainly didn't find them fearful or like they were pushing to find a way to waffle or not answer. I got the exact opposite impression. You know what the problem could be though...my version of the answers sells way fewer papers or generates a lot fewer clicks than the other side.

Oh and that article is last nights, whereas I mean the press conference this afternoon.

[MelBridgeman]

"How to say No, various ways" -
Justin T.
Substitute Drama Teacher
White water rafting guide
Prime Minister

[Bownesian]

@Slava, obviously I hope I'm wrong, but fears are what they are. I have yet to hear anything but equivocation from Trudeau's government on this front, positioned as they are between national and political interests. The report from the industry folks in the room today was very cautious.

Further, I'm not convinced that the new process is designed to enable success as it seems to give a veto to industry-hostile Indigenous groups, and requires consideration of Direct and Upstream GHG emissions based on "science, traditional knowledge of Indigenous peoples and other relevant evidence".

To me, this is meant to be like the Mackenzie Valley pipeline process - eternally delayed and finally approved only once it was no longer needed.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Bownesian

@Slava, obviously I hope I'm wrong, but fears are what they are. I have yet to hear anything but equivocation from Trudeau's government on this front, positioned as they are between national and political interests. The report from the industry folks in the room today was very cautious.

Further, I'm not convinced that the new process is designed to enable success as it seems to give a veto to industry-hostile Indigenous groups, and requires consideration of Direct and Upstream GHG emissions based on "science, traditional knowledge of Indigenous peoples and other relevant evidence".

To me, this is meant to be like the Mackenzie Valley pipeline process - eternally delayed and finally approved only once it was no longer needed.

Yeah I know and maybe I'm the eternal optimist here. I just hope that the bridge-building with first nations and things like that is going to be effective in building a consensus. I might be wrong and maybe we will never get a pipeline to get the product to market. I hope that isn't the case, and I really do think that the federal government will try to get something done.

And yeah, not biting on the GHG portion. I've already been flamed on that topic in this thread and have no desire to hear about it again at this point.

[stampsx2]

Canada's unemployment rate 7.2
Alberta's unemployment rate 7.4
Calgary's unemployment rate 7.7

The last time Alberta's unemployment rate was worse than the Canadian average was 1988.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by stampsx2

Canada's unemployment rate 7.2
Alberta's unemployment rate 7.4
Calgary's unemployment rate 7.7

The last time Alberta's unemployment rate was worse than the Canadian average was 1988.

I imagine those numbers don't take into account the thousands of consultants that can't find work right now?

[OMG!WTF!]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...line/79835274/

I guess this is the kind of forward thinking you can get away with in the last months of your presidency.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

I imagine those numbers don't take into account the thousands of consultants that can't find work right now?

I don't think it includes people who's benefits have ended either, but I could be wrong on that.

[peter12]

The unemployment rate includes all people able to work, and looking for work - so it should include people on benefit and consultants. That said, it is a difficult thing for economists to measure.

[stampsx2]

If Trudeau doesn't approve the pipeline that's fine but as prime minister he will need to figure out a different way to stop the rising unemployment rate in our country and help Canada's weakening economy. It's his job as prime minister.

I'd like to ask Justin Trudeau, if not pipelines, what is it that you have in place to help reverse the downtrend in the Canadian economy because quite frankly funding infrastructure on the backs of the tax payers is not a solution.

[ranchlandsselling]

Originally Posted by peter12

The unemployment rate includes all people able to work, and looking for work - so it should include people on benefit and consultants. That said, it is a difficult thing for economists to measure.

Yeah, it's using EI to track unemployment that would exclude contractors.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by stampsx2

If Trudeau doesn't approve the pipeline that's fine but as prime minister he will need to figure out a different way to stop the rising unemployment rate in our country and help Canada's weakening economy. It's his job as prime minister.

I'd like to ask Justin Trudeau, if not pipelines, what is it that you have in place to help reverse the downtrend in the Canadian economy because quite frankly funding infrastructure on the backs of the tax payers is not a solution.

Alright but who says they won't be approved? At this point all they're saying is that the NEB has to approve them before they will wade into the matter. That seems like a rational way to move ahead to me?