Harper touts Canada’s mining industry

[Locutus]

On Saturday morning, the prime minister delivered a speech to a gathering of chief executive officers who had gathered for their own meeting just before the launch of the politicians’ summit.

Harper has been promoting Canada’s plans to break through into Latin America with more trade and investment. Already, in recent years, Canadian mining companies have established many operations in the region, and Harper devoted much of his speech to promoting the industry.

He said a strong mining sector — assisted with a low-tax regime and environmental regulation without excessive delays — can help the Canadian economy and provide a lesson to the countries of Latin America.

“Resource development has vast power to change the way a nation lives,” he said.
“It is also something which is tremendously responsive to the actions of government.”
Harper said there are many ways a government can “maximize the value of this great industry for a country and its people.”

He painted a picture of how important resource industries are in Canada: Mining contributed $50 billion to the country’s GDP in 2011, he said, and provides “well paying” jobs for more than 300,000 Canadians.

“We are already the world’s No. 1 potash producer, second for uranium and a major global producer of most mineral and energy products.”

Mining accounts for more than one-fifth of Canada’s exports and has close to $200 billion in assets throughout the world, he said.
Sixty per cent of the world’s exploration and mining companies are listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange.
“In other words, in Canada, we know this industry well.


more


Summit of the Americas: Stephen Harper touts Canada

 

[Kakato]

one thing we are good at is mining,I worked at a few exploration camps that are now full blown mines,the others I worked at last year will also be huge mines,as soon as the govt. kicks in for a deep sea port and all season road to Bathurst inlet.
Goose lake,george lake(where they are filming ice pilots)and a handfull of other properties will all be producing hopefully in a few years.Heres my head geoligist with the first gold bar poured from Agnico Eagles Meadowbank mine,where I first cut my teeth in the arctic.The inukshuk is solid gold and worth 1.7 million.

 

[bill barilko]

one thing we are good at is polluting other countries and giving Canada one of if not the worst reputation imaginable for being a stupid greedy bunch of thugs

Fixed that for you.

 

[Machjo]

I just hope Canada does not become the next Spanish Empire.

At one point Spain was the wealthiest European country because of all the gold it was exploiting from the Americas, while the British and the French were establishing agriculture (not nearly as profitable in the short term). Once Spain ran out of gold, however, the British and the French still had their agriculture in the colonies which continued to produce moderate wealth year after year.

I just hope we don't have to relearn the lesson of the Spanish Empire. Let's focus on sustainable industries, not get-rich-quick schemes like Spain did.

 

[petros]

Oooooh I'm going to enjoy reading the comments on this one......

 

[Machjo]

It may be that Harper has done his research and has introduced measures to ensure that resource exploitation in Canada is slow enough to maintain its stability in the long-term. I don't know. But I would like to see a nonpartisan study confirming how many resources we really have and how long they're expected to last at the current rate. That would help to determine how long it can be sustained.

Does anyone know where we could find such a study? And if none exist, then definitely we ought to tread with caution.

 

[Kakato]

The whole Canadian shield is full of minerals,not many have any idea how much exploration has been going on the last 30 years.You explore,drill,hope some bigger company buys you out eventually,most full produceing mines have changed owners at least a dozen times before they even dig the first load of muck out.

Fixed that for you.

Please dont change my text or I will start doing the same to you and trust me it wont be pretty.

It may be that Harper has done his research and has introduced measures to ensure that resource exploitation in Canada is slow enough to maintain its stability in the long-term. I don't know. But I would like to see a nonpartisan study confirming how many resources we really have and how long they're expected to last at the current rate. That would help to determine how long it can be sustained.

Does anyone know where we could find such a study? And if none exist, then definitely we ought to tread with caution.

There isnt enough mining machinery in the whole world to ever deplete our resources.They laughed at Canada for claiming the arctic as her own,now we are laughing,all the way to the bank.

 

[eh1eh]

Don't we already have a South American company here raping our land and screwing us out of jobs?

 

[Machjo]

Just because it's full of minerals does not mean we want to expoit to the maximum possible, otherwise the average Canadian would be a millionaraire 70 years from now but Canada would be bust 70 years after that.

We just don't want to be that greedy and exploit slowly enough to ensure that it lasts at many, many generations.

 

[petros]

Don't we already have a South American company here raping our land and screwing us out of jobs?

Raping AND screwing? Jesus!

 

[Machjo]

There isnt enough mining machinery in the whole world to ever deplete our resources.They laughed at Canada for claiming the arctic as her own,now we are laughing,all the way to the bank.

Any formal study on this? I'm not disputing your claim, but would like to have some facts on teh subject. Harper may be right, but he is still a politician and not a researcher.

 

[petros]

Just because it's full of minerals does not mean we want to expoit to the maximum possible, otherwise the average Canadian would be a millionaraire 70 years from now but Canada would be bust 70 years after that.

We just don't want to be that greedy and exploit slowly enough to ensure that it lasts at many, many generations.

You are a millionaire.

 

[eh1eh]

Raping AND screwing? Jesus!

Don't bring him into this.

 

[Machjo]

You are a millionaire.

????

What I meant was in theory if we could suck all the minerals out of the ground fast enough we could make every Canadian rich, but of course we'd crash big time once we ran out of resources, which would not be the case if we exploit our resources slowly enough. We may in fact be exploiting them slowly enough, but I'd like to see a scientific basis for this and not just anectdotal evidence or presumptions.

 

[Kakato]

Just because it's full of minerals does not mean we want to expoit to the maximum possible, otherwise the average Canadian would be a millionaraire 70 years from now but Canada would be bust 70 years after that.

We just don't want to be that greedy and exploit slowly enough to ensure that it lasts at many, many generations.

Like I said,there is not enough machinery in the world to even put a dent in our res.
When the deep sea port is built you will see a dozen mines open within a few years.

Any formal study on this? I'm not disputing your claim, but would like to have some facts on teh subject. Harper may be right, but he is still a politician and not a researcher.

Yes,the studys are called drill core and there is at least 50 years worth of core samples all over the arctic.

 

[Machjo]

Like I said,there is not enough machinery in the world to even put a dent in our res.
When the deep sea port is built you will see a dozen mines open within a few years.


Yes,the studys are called drill core and there is at least 50 years worth of core samples all over the arctic.

When talking about the long-term viability of an industry, 50 years is nothing. What is Canada going to do 50 years from now once those resources are gone? The industry goes bust.

One would think that any responsible national planner would insist that the industry could remain viable for at least 70 years minimum.

To think 50 years is a long time is pretty short-term thinking when we're talking about national policy.

 

[petros]

????

What I meant was in theory if we could suck all the minerals out of the ground fast enough we could make every Canadian rich, but of course we'd crash big time once we ran out of resources, which would not be the case if we exploit our resources slowly enough. We may in fact be exploiting them slowly enough, but I'd like to see a scientific basis for this and not just anectdotal evidence or presumptions.

Every Canadian is rich.

 

[Kakato]

When talking about the long-term viability of an industry, 50 years is nothing. What is Canada going to do 50 years from now once those resources are gone? The industry goes bust.

One would think that any responsible national planner would insist that the industry could remain viable for at least 70 years minimum.

To think 50 years is a long time is pretty short-term thinking when we're talking about national policy.

Once again,there is not enough mining machinery in the world to deplete our resources in the next couple 10,000 years.
You can find all the mineral claims on the internet if your curious,you may be surprised at how many there is.
Before a mine ever gets to the production stage there has been at least 30 years of exploration,when they can come up with a mine plan for at least ten years then it will be a go.
The majority of properties in the arctic that are or will be juinors some day are mainly owned by folks from B.C.

 

[Machjo]

Once again,there is not enough mining machinery in the world to deplete our resources in the next couple 10,000 years.
You can find all the mineral claims on the internet if your curious,you may be surprised at how many there is.
Before a mine ever gets to the production stage there has been at least 30 years of exploration,when they can come up with a mine plan for at least ten years then it will be a go.

If there are enough resources for the next 10,000 years (and I'm taking your word for this), then I'm fine with our current rate of exploration.

But there is another issue. Do we have access to all those minerals? For instance, tar sands and oil rigs in the ocean are not the most efficient source of petroleum. All those minerals, are they easily accessible or are we talking about having to dig quite deep with much expense to get at them?

 

[petros]

If there are enough resources for the next 10,000 years (and I'm taking your word for this), then I'm fine with our current rate of exploration.

But there is another issue. Do we have access to all those minerals? For instance, tar sands and oil rigs in the ocean are not the most efficient source of petroleum. All those minerals, are they easily accessible or are we talking about having to dig quite deep with much expense to get at them?

Every day that passes we learn how to dig deeper and more efficiently. We will NEVER run out of minerals.