The whole "build" agenda is just a way for the Liberals to claim they are building while creating the opportunity for corrupt carve-outs from existing (unchanged) rules should they arbitrarily decide so. With the actual process being interminably long, these carve-outs create opportunities for corruption at earlier steps than actual construction.
Every urbanist in Canada: "infill projects are the best - let's build up not out - but they must be affordable"
Developer: "we'd like to build this 8 story apartment complex in your leafy neighbourhood and we'll set aside half the units for currently unhoused people"
Urbanists: "are you insane I didn't mean you should build in my area - you'll kill my property value"
A couple of points, the consumer carbon tax has NOT been eliminated. It has been set to zero. Not the same thing. That will take legislation. Which, given the propensity of the Liberals to spend is not likely.
Secondly you point to Ontario and state "if they have to spend". A trite point, governments have NO money, they take from their citizens and, in the case of the Liberals, take from citizens that don't yet exist, as in borrowing from the future. Finally, Alberta and Saskatchewan have been carrying most provinces since the time transfer payments were introduced. So it is about time other provinces and Canadians stop with their "not good enough" attitude and started thinking about their children's children's future.
Good thoughts David but I’d like to offer some counter points. Not fully counter really - maybe just dig a bit deeper and try for objectivity.
- All governments spend so it’s not a Liberal propensity. Government’s are a vehicle through which we collectively spend. They are not nobles that own us, they work for us.
- Saskatchewan has been a receiver of equalization payments for 65% of the time that they have existed. Alberta accounts for 15% of Canada’s GDP, BC is about the same, Ontario is 39%, Quebec is 20%. Alberta does not “carry” most provinces. Also, this is a current measure. Historically Alberta has been less than 10%.
- All governments borrow and, good point, it is always taking from the future. Canada’s net debt to GDP is better than most, which is why we are one of the few countries on earth with the highest possible credit rating (and thus lowest possible bowing cost).
- Provinces don’t “say” anything in this regard really but the disrespect that Albertan’s feel from other parts of the country can be seen as largely fabricated grievance - or at least unnecessarily amplified and made personal. It’s an arguable point but I think you’ll find, if you take a non-partisan objective look at the arguments, and data, they are reasonable.
I think as a mature robust real contributor to Canada that Albertans are it’s time to stand up and feel your worth. Let go of the perceived slights, and look to the future with optimism.
I can see the benefits of pipelines. High speed rail? The only place in the world that has profitable high speed rail is Japan, and they don't make money off of the trains, they make it off of the real estate around train stations. What we will get is California's train to nowhere, at a cost of billions of dollars paid to consulting and construction companies that are close friends of the liberal government. Assuming they ever actually start building anything.
Canadians are insisting on finding out the hard way all over again that Liberals are only good at messaging and running election campaigns. And wasting/stealing money.
So from my post here in NW British Columbia, there have been several major projects approved that are attracting little opposition that in the past would have had protests in the streets. Red Chris Mine expansion (3 billion), Eskay creek (1 billion), LNG Canada Phase 2 (33 billion) all are approved and have FID. Cedar LNG is nearly complete (5.5 billion). Ksi Lisims LNG is approved by both governments awaiting FID (33 Billion). PRGT pipeline approved and awaiting FID (12 billion). North Coast Transmission Line partially approved and underway (6 billion). Most of these projects have agreements with First Nations. Opposition does exist but it is isolated to a smaller cohort of core environmental advocates. If anyone who is curious about how to get projects approved and under construction are interested, with local public acceptance, come to Terrace, Prince Rupert or Smithers and see for yourselves. There are two decades of work by First Nations and governments that has changed the paradigm of development from pure conflict to partnership.
Canadians are happy to back Carney because right now they think it’s more important to “stick it” to big bad orange man than ensuring prosperity for this country. The proverbial excrement will eventually hit the fan at some point and then what? We don’t have an economy, food banks are the most active sector in the land and more and more people are faced with having to decide between food and rent. Graduates are leaving in droves, so are businesses. The population is aging and fewer and fewer people contribute to the economy. You can’t put a speech on the dinner table, you can’t pay the rent with yet another broken promise but hey, elbows up Canada, Carney is getting accolades around the world as our country falls apart and that’s not nothin’.
Great article,thank you. Same as what is happening in Edmonton with Infill building. Homeowners have reason to be upset. I can guarantee that these units are not being proposed in the Mayors neighbour ‘hood’!
This isn’t the real challenge. The real challenge is going to be paying for it. That means more taxes and likely OAS cutbacks. Let’s see how that goes over.
The whole point of industrial development is that is shouldn't cost tax money to do it. A project is supposed to be attractive to private investors who hope to make a profit on it, and will then pay taxes to the government on that profit (and their employees will pay income tax on their wages and salaries.) The role of government is to permit the project, not finance it. If a project (such as high-speed rail to Quebec, or a pipeline that will be bitterly and violently contested by environmentalists and aboriginal groups) is attractive only to government because the private sector doesn't see any prospect of profit, then yes, paying for both the "investment" and financing its on-going operating losses will be our problem as taxpayers and there will be no taxes coming in to compensate.
Canadians are prone to say, "We need more pipelines or passenger trains" and then assume that it is up to the government to build them. That's the wrong mindset. If there is a reasonable chance of profit that exceeds the cost of capital, the private sector will invest its own money and get it done. If not, there had better be some overwhelming national purpose to public financing, like, um, the CBC and Via Rail?
Infrastructure projects that cross provincial borders not only require leadership and courage and marketing from Ottawa but especially from the Premiers and their governments.
When all politics is local, it doesn't help when a Provincial government is leading the charge of opposition (see: NDP governments in BC, or environmentally friendly governments in Quebec) to consolidate their own power with the electorate.
This is why the BC election is of national significance at this time. The Eby government is no friend of any pipeline operation that originates in Alberta and therefore a stronger majority mandate from the current election campaign or an electoral defeat becomes a wildcard for an ambitious Prime Minister who needs local support.
These are good points. Carney and his team apparently know this and have spoken of it. There are the real costs that haven’t been felt and the sporadic talent of the opposition CPC to create destructive narratives - such as with the carbon tax. We have yet to see how well the Carney government is going to do at that point. Stakeholder consultations and a robust very proactive communication strategy will be needed. We’ve seen foreshadowing that this could be a potential weak point so - we shall see the future when it gets here.
The elephant in the room on "acceptance" is the identities of the people who hold the cards on withholding acceptance for (i.e. vetoing) projects that most Canadians support. The "disruption" that will result from starting to build a pipeline is not the temporary local disruption we all put up with when a new subdivision or road is being built in our corner of the woods. No, this is the kind of disruption that can tie up the whole country by entrenched opponents of building anything.
This is not a case of "support" by ~80% eroding away from the necessary "acceptance". Rather, it is some fraction of the 20% who don't "support" building hardening their opposition into disruption in order to intimidate the country into giving them concessions on something else they want, which may not even be in Canada's national interest.
Don't worry, nothing will actually be built.
The whole "build" agenda is just a way for the Liberals to claim they are building while creating the opportunity for corrupt carve-outs from existing (unchanged) rules should they arbitrarily decide so. With the actual process being interminably long, these carve-outs create opportunities for corruption at earlier steps than actual construction.
Every urbanist in Canada: "infill projects are the best - let's build up not out - but they must be affordable"
Developer: "we'd like to build this 8 story apartment complex in your leafy neighbourhood and we'll set aside half the units for currently unhoused people"
Urbanists: "are you insane I didn't mean you should build in my area - you'll kill my property value"
A couple of points, the consumer carbon tax has NOT been eliminated. It has been set to zero. Not the same thing. That will take legislation. Which, given the propensity of the Liberals to spend is not likely.
Secondly you point to Ontario and state "if they have to spend". A trite point, governments have NO money, they take from their citizens and, in the case of the Liberals, take from citizens that don't yet exist, as in borrowing from the future. Finally, Alberta and Saskatchewan have been carrying most provinces since the time transfer payments were introduced. So it is about time other provinces and Canadians stop with their "not good enough" attitude and started thinking about their children's children's future.
Good thoughts David but I’d like to offer some counter points. Not fully counter really - maybe just dig a bit deeper and try for objectivity.
- All governments spend so it’s not a Liberal propensity. Government’s are a vehicle through which we collectively spend. They are not nobles that own us, they work for us.
- Saskatchewan has been a receiver of equalization payments for 65% of the time that they have existed. Alberta accounts for 15% of Canada’s GDP, BC is about the same, Ontario is 39%, Quebec is 20%. Alberta does not “carry” most provinces. Also, this is a current measure. Historically Alberta has been less than 10%.
- All governments borrow and, good point, it is always taking from the future. Canada’s net debt to GDP is better than most, which is why we are one of the few countries on earth with the highest possible credit rating (and thus lowest possible bowing cost).
- Provinces don’t “say” anything in this regard really but the disrespect that Albertan’s feel from other parts of the country can be seen as largely fabricated grievance - or at least unnecessarily amplified and made personal. It’s an arguable point but I think you’ll find, if you take a non-partisan objective look at the arguments, and data, they are reasonable.
I think as a mature robust real contributor to Canada that Albertans are it’s time to stand up and feel your worth. Let go of the perceived slights, and look to the future with optimism.
I can see the benefits of pipelines. High speed rail? The only place in the world that has profitable high speed rail is Japan, and they don't make money off of the trains, they make it off of the real estate around train stations. What we will get is California's train to nowhere, at a cost of billions of dollars paid to consulting and construction companies that are close friends of the liberal government. Assuming they ever actually start building anything.
Canadians are insisting on finding out the hard way all over again that Liberals are only good at messaging and running election campaigns. And wasting/stealing money.
So from my post here in NW British Columbia, there have been several major projects approved that are attracting little opposition that in the past would have had protests in the streets. Red Chris Mine expansion (3 billion), Eskay creek (1 billion), LNG Canada Phase 2 (33 billion) all are approved and have FID. Cedar LNG is nearly complete (5.5 billion). Ksi Lisims LNG is approved by both governments awaiting FID (33 Billion). PRGT pipeline approved and awaiting FID (12 billion). North Coast Transmission Line partially approved and underway (6 billion). Most of these projects have agreements with First Nations. Opposition does exist but it is isolated to a smaller cohort of core environmental advocates. If anyone who is curious about how to get projects approved and under construction are interested, with local public acceptance, come to Terrace, Prince Rupert or Smithers and see for yourselves. There are two decades of work by First Nations and governments that has changed the paradigm of development from pure conflict to partnership.
Canadians are happy to back Carney because right now they think it’s more important to “stick it” to big bad orange man than ensuring prosperity for this country. The proverbial excrement will eventually hit the fan at some point and then what? We don’t have an economy, food banks are the most active sector in the land and more and more people are faced with having to decide between food and rent. Graduates are leaving in droves, so are businesses. The population is aging and fewer and fewer people contribute to the economy. You can’t put a speech on the dinner table, you can’t pay the rent with yet another broken promise but hey, elbows up Canada, Carney is getting accolades around the world as our country falls apart and that’s not nothin’.
Great article,thank you. Same as what is happening in Edmonton with Infill building. Homeowners have reason to be upset. I can guarantee that these units are not being proposed in the Mayors neighbour ‘hood’!
This isn’t the real challenge. The real challenge is going to be paying for it. That means more taxes and likely OAS cutbacks. Let’s see how that goes over.
The whole point of industrial development is that is shouldn't cost tax money to do it. A project is supposed to be attractive to private investors who hope to make a profit on it, and will then pay taxes to the government on that profit (and their employees will pay income tax on their wages and salaries.) The role of government is to permit the project, not finance it. If a project (such as high-speed rail to Quebec, or a pipeline that will be bitterly and violently contested by environmentalists and aboriginal groups) is attractive only to government because the private sector doesn't see any prospect of profit, then yes, paying for both the "investment" and financing its on-going operating losses will be our problem as taxpayers and there will be no taxes coming in to compensate.
Canadians are prone to say, "We need more pipelines or passenger trains" and then assume that it is up to the government to build them. That's the wrong mindset. If there is a reasonable chance of profit that exceeds the cost of capital, the private sector will invest its own money and get it done. If not, there had better be some overwhelming national purpose to public financing, like, um, the CBC and Via Rail?
Infrastructure projects that cross provincial borders not only require leadership and courage and marketing from Ottawa but especially from the Premiers and their governments.
When all politics is local, it doesn't help when a Provincial government is leading the charge of opposition (see: NDP governments in BC, or environmentally friendly governments in Quebec) to consolidate their own power with the electorate.
This is why the BC election is of national significance at this time. The Eby government is no friend of any pipeline operation that originates in Alberta and therefore a stronger majority mandate from the current election campaign or an electoral defeat becomes a wildcard for an ambitious Prime Minister who needs local support.
These are good points. Carney and his team apparently know this and have spoken of it. There are the real costs that haven’t been felt and the sporadic talent of the opposition CPC to create destructive narratives - such as with the carbon tax. We have yet to see how well the Carney government is going to do at that point. Stakeholder consultations and a robust very proactive communication strategy will be needed. We’ve seen foreshadowing that this could be a potential weak point so - we shall see the future when it gets here.
The elephant in the room on "acceptance" is the identities of the people who hold the cards on withholding acceptance for (i.e. vetoing) projects that most Canadians support. The "disruption" that will result from starting to build a pipeline is not the temporary local disruption we all put up with when a new subdivision or road is being built in our corner of the woods. No, this is the kind of disruption that can tie up the whole country by entrenched opponents of building anything.
This is not a case of "support" by ~80% eroding away from the necessary "acceptance". Rather, it is some fraction of the 20% who don't "support" building hardening their opposition into disruption in order to intimidate the country into giving them concessions on something else they want, which may not even be in Canada's national interest.