Obstacles hit Canada-China energy investment, study says

dumpthemonarchy

House Member
Jan 18, 2005
4,235
14
38
Vancouver
www.cynicsunlimited.com
Why we let an equivalent of a Chinese Crown corporation buy into the Canadian oil sands is lunacy. We've already sent our factories to Asia, and now we want an agent of the Commuist govt in Peking to buy our oil-which a crucial stratefigc resource in the 21st century. Tell CNOOC to buy some energy assets in Venzuela or Russia, oops they can't, they might be nationalised. Agents of the commies should only be allowed small mnority shares in companies. And they'll still buy because we have what they want.

Plus, there is no reciprocity, Canadian oil companies cannot buy Chinese energy assets in China. This deal is for the China suckers. It should not be allowed. You can't buy majority corporate assets in China. Screw'em.


http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/energy-resources/Obstacles+Canada+China+energy+investment+study/7098664/story.html


Obstacles hit Canada-China energy investment, study says



Regulatory clarity will boost trade



By David Ljunggren, Reuters August 16, 2012





.sharebar .recomm {float:left;width:120px;}.sharebar .tweet {float:left;width:100px;}.sharebar .plusone {float:left;width:80px;}.sharebar .comment {float:left;width:120px;}.sharebar .pinitbutton {float:left;width:80px;}


Comment

2




  • Story
  • Photos ( 1 )




The integrated Long Lake oilsands facility south of Fort McMurray is one of the assets CNOOC Ltd. will pick up if its $15.1-billion deal to buy Nexen Inc. is concluded.

Photograph by: Ed Kaiser , Ed Kaiser




Unclear investment rules are hampering trade between Canada and China, a study by officials from both countries said on Wednesday, just three weeks after CNOOC Ltd. offered $15.1 billion for Canada's Nexen Inc.

The bid from China's state-owned CNOOC - politically sensitive for Canada's Conservative government - is seen as a key test of whether Canada is open to foreign in-vestment as it seeks both to tap foreign funds to develop the Alberta tarsands, and to sell oil to China and elsewhere in Asia.

The government study of the economic interests and requirements of both countries said "certain obstacles" limited the ability of China and Canada to reap the full benefits of trade and investment in natural resources.
"Canadian and Chinese stakeholders have highlighted the need for increased regulatory clarity, efficiency and predictability in the context of direct investments in each other's countries," said the report.

"Resolution of these obstacles will be essential to improving market access and facilitating two-way trade and investment in the natural re-sources sector."

Critics have long complained that the rules Canada uses to determine whether to approve foreign takeovers are too opaque and the process is too secretive. Ottawa says Canadian resource firms are being unfairly restricted in China.
But the two countries also want to cooperate. Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper visited China in February and said the two nations would launch talks on further deepening trade ties.

China is Canada's second largest trading partner, albeit far behind the United States, while Canada is China's 13th most important trading partner.

"It is clear that there is huge untapped potential to increase trade between China and Canada," said the report.
Chinese energy firms are particularly interested in the Canadian oil and gas sector and have invested more than $7 billion in the last year alone. Alberta's oilsands are the world's third largest proven reserve of crude, and the Nexen bid is China's richest takeover to date.

"Over the coming decades, massive investments will be required to further develop Canada's natural resources potential. China's growing in-vestment interest in Canada's natural resources is adding to the diversity of domestic and foreign funding sources avail-able," said the report.

Ottawa says foreign investment in the energy patch could hit $500 billion over the next decade.
Ottawa must now decide whether CNOOC's bid for Nexen is of net benefit to Canada, the yardstick it used when it rejected BHP Billiton's bid for Potash Corp. in 2010.





 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
Why not? We've sold the other 90% of our natural resources to foreign interests. Why should the Chinese be excluded? After all they can't take any more of our natural wealth than the Americans, Australians, and Japanese do.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
108,907
11,188
113
Low Earth Orbit
Now you know what it feels like to be an Arab, African, S. American, etc etc when resources are sold off to foreign interests.
 

dumpthemonarchy

House Member
Jan 18, 2005
4,235
14
38
Vancouver
www.cynicsunlimited.com
The world, it is a changing. We don't even get the world price for oil, or rather the Euro/Asian/African price. A little bit of economic resource nationalism is required here. Most of the world does it already. Laissez-faire is now for chumps, what the 1% would like to force down our throats.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
108,907
11,188
113
Low Earth Orbit
The world, it is a changing. We don't even get the world price for oil, or rather the Euro/Asian/African price. A little bit of economic resource nationalism is required here. Most of the world does it already. Laissez-faire is now for chumps, what the 1% would like to force down our throats.
All oil is priced differently.

Get used to this, everybody has had to live with it for their entire lives and even existance of their nations.
 

dumpthemonarchy

House Member
Jan 18, 2005
4,235
14
38
Vancouver
www.cynicsunlimited.com
All oil is priced differently.

Get used to this, everybody has had to live with it for their entire lives and even existance of their nations.

Different, hmm. Sounds like less and whaddaya know, it is. Crude is crude.

If we don't stand up for our resources, no one else will. Just because we have done things one way in the past doesn't mean we have to continue the same ways in the future. Asia wasn't energy hungry twenty years ago, we can make a better bargain. Since we have the resources they want. And they will only go up in value as time passes.

Such Asiatic fatalism, some people out there must be Buddhists or something.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
108,907
11,188
113
Low Earth Orbit
Different, hmm. Sounds like less and whaddaya know, it is. Crude is crude.

If we don't stand up for our resources, no one else will. Just because we have done things one way in the past doesn't mean we have to continue the same ways in the future. Asia wasn't energy hungry twenty years ago, we can make a better bargain. Since we have the resources they want. And they will only go up in value as time passes.

Such Asiatic fatalism, some people out there must be Buddhists or something.
Crude isn't crude. Different grades fetch different prices.

What are you so upset about? We make MORE money by selling off rights to resources than extracting and selling ourselves.
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
Now you know what it feels like to be an Arab, African, S. American, etc etc when resources are sold off to foreign interests.

Did you say now? In Canada this has been happening for decades. The selling off of resources to foreigners goes back to the 19th century, so we have many African nations beaten.
 

damngrumpy

Executive Branch Member
Mar 16, 2005
9,949
21
38
kelowna bc
Oh my god, I have something in common with dumpthemonarchy.
I agree on this one. We should not allow off shore interests to own
majority shares in any natural resource venture especially if we can't
buy the same kind of interests in their country.
We have to start thinking in terms of Canadian interests and this is
more than about oil or trees. We need to protect a supply for us and
to hell with the world as it were that would include any and all water,
fertilizer metals and so on.
We must ensure a supply for us for the long term and anything sold for
export would be finished product and rationed to ensure our interests
come first.
In the next decade oil water and food will be the new currency as the
present system is not sustainable. If it is under the ground Canadians
should own it within our boarders.
Oh I hear the comeback free enterprise and all, well those days are going
to end as the biggest wave of protectionism will strangle most of these
free trade deals. Harper is signing them and we will be undoing them in
the future.
The world economic ship is slowly sinking and it will be every country for
them self soon enough.
 

dumpthemonarchy

House Member
Jan 18, 2005
4,235
14
38
Vancouver
www.cynicsunlimited.com
What China should is buy Home Depot in Quebec, that would be fun.

Some people are beginning to see the light, its every country for itself now, and Canada is very slow to this game. Our politcians are too busy pandering to every minority group that organises a few votes so they can say they are "global". Gosh, aren't they sophisticated.

Not to long ago Harper was religiously against China, now he can't sell the country's resources fast enough to them. Only a small minority stake.
 

damngrumpy

Executive Branch Member
Mar 16, 2005
9,949
21
38
kelowna bc
The problem for Harper is he has been out foxed by some very nasty people.
He went to make trade deals to further Canadian interests and make inroads
into China instead China is about to make inroads into Canada in more ways
than one.
They are trying to buy a Canadian headquartered company to given them the
instant access to world resources. In addition they are trying to economically
invade the oil sands and have the raw product shipped to China. They have
been exploring buying farmland in North America and some wine interests in
the Okanagan giving them instant access for food.
Here Harper thought he was working for Canadian interests when he was in
fact opening the door to a Chines takeover of some of our fundamental interests.
Its time we said enough and start looking out for Canada's National interest.
It is time to cut back on those free trade deals, and remember Canada should be
for Canadians first including all our resource assets.
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,336
113
Vancouver Island
The world, it is a changing. We don't even get the world price for oil, or rather the Euro/Asian/African price. A little bit of economic resource nationalism is required here. Most of the world does it already. Laissez-faire is now for chumps, what the 1% would like to force down our throats.

Wouldn't have anything to do with NOT having a pipeline to the west coast would it? We are dependent on a fickle US market because of a few eco terrorists.
 

beaker

Electoral Member
Jun 11, 2012
508
0
16
thepeacecountry
Wouldn't have anything to do with NOT having a pipeline to the west coast would it? We are dependent on a fickle US market because of a few eco terrorists.

Eco terrorists, :):) That is just funny, It has been a long time since most Canadians have recognized the multinational and corporate nature of eco terrorism.

Aside from that, have you seen a signed long term committment from China to pay a premium for tar sands production? and if you had, would you trust it?
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
108,907
11,188
113
Low Earth Orbit
Eco terrorists, :):) That is just funny, It has been a long time since most Canadians have recognized the multinational and corporate nature of eco terrorism.

Aside from that, have you seen a signed long term committment from China to pay a premium for tar sands production? and if you had, would you trust it?
Can I have the shares of the Evil Corporations the GofC bought in your name? You apparently don't want any of the benefits.
 

beaker

Electoral Member
Jun 11, 2012
508
0
16
thepeacecountry
Can I have the shares of the Evil Corporations the GofC bought in your name? You apparently don't want any of the benefits.

On the contrary, what I don't want is the benefits being touted without having the costs recognized. Our Conservative government, supposedly a fiscally conservative government is trying to hide behind the benefits and trying to keep the costs in the dark. I have to ask why a Canadian government would act that way,. and the only reason I can come up with is that they are looking to post parliamentary income sources. All at our expense, because since they are the government and we are paying their current wages they should be doing the honourable thing but they ain't.