Alberta moves to export water!
- Thread starter cyberclark
- Start date
One last word on the subject of water export under NAFTA,
Because we cannot charge the Americans more than we pay ourselves under the agreement, it is the Conservative plan to drastically increase the price of water to the Canadian consumers thereby opening the door to greater profits on the export side of things.
This is why EPCOR is the highest priced water in the world! This is why municipalities are quickly upping their fees. The town of Devon as an example recently increased their water fees by 25% without so much as a nod to the citizens.
They plan on more increases.
How this moved so fast and far in Alberta:
The province invented a whole new level of indirect taxation in shelling off the power lines to Calgary and Edmonton and now, the water.
Much of the water allotments were given free to the cities and towns. In the Case of Calgary, both Coke and Calgary Brewing received their aquifer allotments free of charge and are now in the position of selling them to the city.
Much of the provincial expenditures were downloaded to the communities also.
It was an easy sale. Take the utilities and you have and endless amount of cash coming in. You will not have to go to the citizens for approval; just charge what you want! There will be no more going to the citizens for a mill rate increase fight.
This is coming to the rest of Canada. Your cost of living is going to increase dramatically if the Conservatives are allowed to maintain power.
Because we cannot charge the Americans more than we pay ourselves under the agreement, it is the Conservative plan to drastically increase the price of water to the Canadian consumers thereby opening the door to greater profits on the export side of things.
This is why EPCOR is the highest priced water in the world! This is why municipalities are quickly upping their fees. The town of Devon as an example recently increased their water fees by 25% without so much as a nod to the citizens.
They plan on more increases.
How this moved so fast and far in Alberta:
The province invented a whole new level of indirect taxation in shelling off the power lines to Calgary and Edmonton and now, the water.
Much of the water allotments were given free to the cities and towns. In the Case of Calgary, both Coke and Calgary Brewing received their aquifer allotments free of charge and are now in the position of selling them to the city.
Much of the provincial expenditures were downloaded to the communities also.
It was an easy sale. Take the utilities and you have and endless amount of cash coming in. You will not have to go to the citizens for approval; just charge what you want! There will be no more going to the citizens for a mill rate increase fight.
This is coming to the rest of Canada. Your cost of living is going to increase dramatically if the Conservatives are allowed to maintain power.
I did a bit more research on water exports. Thought I would share some of the articles with the forum.
Lawrence Cannon – Min of Foreign Affairs – Transboundary Waters Protection Act – May 13, 2010
“The new act strengthens existing protections by bringing waters within federal jurisdiction under a more comprehensive prohibition against bulk water removals. Rivers and streams that cross international borders will now receive the same protection already in place for waters, such as the Great Lakes, that straddle them.
The Act gives the federal government new powers of inspection and enforcement and introduces tough new penalties for violations, including fines of up to $6 million for corporate violations. The bill offers unprecedented federal protection against bulk water exports while respecting provincial constitutional jurisdiction.”
http://www.international.gc.ca/media/aff/news-communiques/2010/161.aspx?lang=eng
Bill C-26 – Summary of the bill can be found here.
http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca/can-am/bilat_can/bill-loi.aspx?lang=eng
An article on the pro side of the water sales debate.
“Fortunately, there is some hope that the wisdom of water sales may eventually triumph over emotionalism. Last spring the McCurdy Group, a Newfoundland company looking for permission to tanker 13 billion gallons a year from pristine Gisbourne Lake, received an unexpected endorsement from Newfoundland's Liberal Premier Roger Grimes. Mr. Grimes has promised to use the money the government gets from the deal to underwrite university tuitions in Canada's poorest province. A better plan would be to auction the rights and use the proceeds for much-needed tax cuts.
The McCurdy Group is still waiting for an official go-ahead but thanks to Canadian law, the federal government can't stop the province from granting the permit. "We don't want to sell water in bulk," says Mr. Chretien, "But at the same time, we have to realize that we don't have absolute control of the water. We have control of navigable waters, but we don't have control of other types of water that are under the provincial jurisdiction." Ontario and British Columbia have already said "no" to companies that want to sell water by tanker but if Newfoundland has success in water marketing that might change.”
http://www.fcpp.org/publication.php/220
The Green Party’s position on the SPP –Security and Prosperity Partnership as it applies to water exports.
11. Is the SPP a threat to Canada’s freshwater?
Yes. Among the SPP’s biggest threats are water exports and the damage that would result from diverting water from watersheds and basins to consumers south of the border. Persistent droughts on the prairies and low water levels in the Great Lakes are good arguments against water exports. Federal studies show that the Great Lakes could not sustain removal of large volumes of water, especially with the compounding effects of climate change. Using rivers that flow north, as most of our rivers do, to supply the US would require monumental feats of engineering and inevitably lead to ecological devastation by reversing the streams’ natural flow. And Canada would lose control over its water. Because NAFTA describes water as a "good" and stipulates that "no party may adopt or maintain any prohibition or restriction on the exportation or sale for export of any good destined for the territory of another party," it follows that once Canada starts exporting fresh water to the US, it would be impossible to turn off the tap. 12.How do we know water exports are being discussed? According to the leaked minutes of a 2004 meeting of the Task Force on the Future of North America, which led to the SPP: "No item, not Canadian water, not Mexican oil, not American anti-dumping laws, is off the table.” Since then , three key developments suggest that water has now been moved to the front burner:
This is a paper that goes into detail about the NAFTA and GATT agreements regarding water.
WATER AS A COMMODITY
By
Dr. Isabel Al-Assar, LLM
Oxford University
Brookes College
Oxford, England
http://www.waterbank.com/Newsletters/nws18.html
This last article is the NAFTA agreement regarding water.
WATER EXPORTS AND THE NAFTA
http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/Collection-R/LoPBdP/EB/prb995-e.htm
We in Canada sometimes forget how very fortunate we are to be blessed with a richness of resources. Of them all, water is the most important and I would argue the most precious. Water is life.
Canada is currently a signatory to several agreements that have the potential to adversely affect our sovereign rights over water.
The pressure to sell bulk exports of water is only going to increase in the future as water sources dry up around the world.
Protecting our water is of premier importance and any move to bulk sales should be met with opposition.
Lawrence Cannon – Min of Foreign Affairs – Transboundary Waters Protection Act – May 13, 2010
“The new act strengthens existing protections by bringing waters within federal jurisdiction under a more comprehensive prohibition against bulk water removals. Rivers and streams that cross international borders will now receive the same protection already in place for waters, such as the Great Lakes, that straddle them.
The Act gives the federal government new powers of inspection and enforcement and introduces tough new penalties for violations, including fines of up to $6 million for corporate violations. The bill offers unprecedented federal protection against bulk water exports while respecting provincial constitutional jurisdiction.”
http://www.international.gc.ca/media/aff/news-communiques/2010/161.aspx?lang=eng
Bill C-26 – Summary of the bill can be found here.
http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca/can-am/bilat_can/bill-loi.aspx?lang=eng
An article on the pro side of the water sales debate.
“Fortunately, there is some hope that the wisdom of water sales may eventually triumph over emotionalism. Last spring the McCurdy Group, a Newfoundland company looking for permission to tanker 13 billion gallons a year from pristine Gisbourne Lake, received an unexpected endorsement from Newfoundland's Liberal Premier Roger Grimes. Mr. Grimes has promised to use the money the government gets from the deal to underwrite university tuitions in Canada's poorest province. A better plan would be to auction the rights and use the proceeds for much-needed tax cuts.
The McCurdy Group is still waiting for an official go-ahead but thanks to Canadian law, the federal government can't stop the province from granting the permit. "We don't want to sell water in bulk," says Mr. Chretien, "But at the same time, we have to realize that we don't have absolute control of the water. We have control of navigable waters, but we don't have control of other types of water that are under the provincial jurisdiction." Ontario and British Columbia have already said "no" to companies that want to sell water by tanker but if Newfoundland has success in water marketing that might change.”
http://www.fcpp.org/publication.php/220
The Green Party’s position on the SPP –Security and Prosperity Partnership as it applies to water exports.
11. Is the SPP a threat to Canada’s freshwater?
Yes. Among the SPP’s biggest threats are water exports and the damage that would result from diverting water from watersheds and basins to consumers south of the border. Persistent droughts on the prairies and low water levels in the Great Lakes are good arguments against water exports. Federal studies show that the Great Lakes could not sustain removal of large volumes of water, especially with the compounding effects of climate change. Using rivers that flow north, as most of our rivers do, to supply the US would require monumental feats of engineering and inevitably lead to ecological devastation by reversing the streams’ natural flow. And Canada would lose control over its water. Because NAFTA describes water as a "good" and stipulates that "no party may adopt or maintain any prohibition or restriction on the exportation or sale for export of any good destined for the territory of another party," it follows that once Canada starts exporting fresh water to the US, it would be impossible to turn off the tap. 12.How do we know water exports are being discussed? According to the leaked minutes of a 2004 meeting of the Task Force on the Future of North America, which led to the SPP: "No item, not Canadian water, not Mexican oil, not American anti-dumping laws, is off the table.” Since then , three key developments suggest that water has now been moved to the front burner:
- The case for selling Canadian water is being presented more forcefully in the media by SPP proponents, journalists, business strategists and investors seeking profits in this potentially lucrative market.
- Massive NAFTA Super-Corridors, complete with plans for water pipelines, are in the works.
- Bulk water exports were the focus of meetings of the North American Future 2025 Project. According to documents leaked by a Washington-based think tank, SPP meetings in Calgary on April 28, 2007 were to discuss "water consumption, water transfers and artificial diversions of bulk water" with the aim of "maximizing the policy impact.”
This is a paper that goes into detail about the NAFTA and GATT agreements regarding water.
WATER AS A COMMODITY
By
Dr. Isabel Al-Assar, LLM
Oxford University
Brookes College
Oxford, England
http://www.waterbank.com/Newsletters/nws18.html
This last article is the NAFTA agreement regarding water.
WATER EXPORTS AND THE NAFTA
http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/Collection-R/LoPBdP/EB/prb995-e.htm
We in Canada sometimes forget how very fortunate we are to be blessed with a richness of resources. Of them all, water is the most important and I would argue the most precious. Water is life.
Canada is currently a signatory to several agreements that have the potential to adversely affect our sovereign rights over water.
The pressure to sell bulk exports of water is only going to increase in the future as water sources dry up around the world.
Protecting our water is of premier importance and any move to bulk sales should be met with opposition.
Thanks for some really great research. I know how much time it takes to dig!
Loose lips Liepert told the world on TV that Alberta would privatize medicine. If need be there would be changes made to the Canada Health Act..
When one draws the same strident Conservative dogma onto water, it is a sure thing that Harper is going to okay it.
I traced the adds "water is precious; it must be shared" as produced by the Conservative run Department of Environment.
We are on the knife's edge. If Harper reigns, the water is gone! Meanwhile Alberta is jacking up the price of water so the importers can get more when the export starts.
They are treating it as a sure thing.
Loose lips Liepert told the world on TV that Alberta would privatize medicine. If need be there would be changes made to the Canada Health Act..
When one draws the same strident Conservative dogma onto water, it is a sure thing that Harper is going to okay it.
I traced the adds "water is precious; it must be shared" as produced by the Conservative run Department of Environment.
We are on the knife's edge. If Harper reigns, the water is gone! Meanwhile Alberta is jacking up the price of water so the importers can get more when the export starts.
They are treating it as a sure thing.
You are most welcome, CC. You know how it goes, one things leads to another and another. I enjoy research.
I am a Conservative CC, never made any bones about it. I hope you are wrong about Harper but then he has made mistakes in the past.
However, this issue goes way beyond politics, IMHO. Water is a necessity of all life. People have to wake up realize that we need to conserve our water as much as possible. We need to clean up our waterways. We need to take steps to ensure that all water is treated as it should be - with care.
I have a shallow well that has a tendency to get very low in mid-summer. Since I bought my place, I have collected rain water which I use for everything from laundry to gardening and personal cleansing. Most of the summer I use rain water for all my cleansing. My gray water goes on my plants. When I see people in the city watering their lawns in the heat of a summer`s day - all that moisture evaporating before it even hits the ground - or washing their cars, or driveways - I just feel sick.
If, indeed, Canada decides to move to bulk water exports, people will be in for the shock of their lives as the price of water sky rockets and something as simple as flushing a toliet becomes a serious economic decision.
Likewise I was a Conservative riding secretary for a number of years and worked very hard to get these guys elected. Then along came Klein and I worked very hard since trying to unseat them.
You mention highest prices - Indeed. The way it is going they are pushing water prices to be the highest in the world so that when they enter NAFTA they will be rolling in the gold on exports.
You mention highest prices - Indeed. The way it is going they are pushing water prices to be the highest in the world so that when they enter NAFTA they will be rolling in the gold on exports.
On June 16the the Western Premiers met in Vancouver. Their agenda primary was environment, energy and the economy. Campbell also said "There will also be a focus on water and how to manage and conserve what Campbell called a "critical component of all activities" in Canada. Campbell also said "There will also be a focus on water and hot to manage an conserve what Campbell called a "critical component of all activities in Canada"
Read more: Western premiers meet in B.C.
After this meeting BC announced building a new dam on the Peace River.
It is my thought that BC is going to build the dam, Alberta is going to build the pipeline and Saskatchewan, and the NWT are going to split the profits.
If this goes through it means Alberta will further reduce the oil royalty close to zero and Albertans will be paying 30 to 50 times more for their water based on California prices.
Remember the higher they can push your water utility prices the more the exporters can collect from the US.
Read more: Western premiers meet in B.C.
After this meeting BC announced building a new dam on the Peace River.
It is my thought that BC is going to build the dam, Alberta is going to build the pipeline and Saskatchewan, and the NWT are going to split the profits.
If this goes through it means Alberta will further reduce the oil royalty close to zero and Albertans will be paying 30 to 50 times more for their water based on California prices.
Remember the higher they can push your water utility prices the more the exporters can collect from the US.
I'll call bull**** on this,in cold lake they drill for non potable water for steam injection to extract bitumen from oilsand deposits,allmost 1 in every 4 pipelines running down the right of ways is for water from this source and it's called brackish water.
Sounds like someone with an agenda is pushing bad information once again.
As for irrigating Montana,you leave out the part where we use their water in dry times,this is such old news that I dont know why it's even posted as it was all public many many years ago
Funny why I dont see any links with some facts posted here,just an opinion piece or what?
Ok,I see your agenda now.Yawn,you know nothing of what the royalties did do you?
Got any experience in the energy industry?
Funny how Alberta now has the biggest gains in new jobs created with all these doom and gloom predictions that came out when the royalties were cut.
The energy guys were right,the cuts created more jobs and kept the industry from slumping longer then it could have,we recovered nicely party in fact to the royalty cuts.
Alberta's economy feeds much of Canada,more then anyone not in the industry would ever know.
I know a great deal about the subject. The conservatives have stripped the heritage trust fund of 70 billion dollars to augment still lower royalties!
In the Conservative world, including people like yourself, the only thing this province is entitled to is wages and income tax derived from those wages and industry.
When you consider the advanced charges we pay for everything because of this lowball return industry, Albertans are paying the resource companies for taking the product out of province.
Jobs; Jobs. The biggest is the snow job they have managed to promote and it is only part time these days.
If you are unsure what political filth and grafting is; look to Alberta.
In the Conservative world, including people like yourself, the only thing this province is entitled to is wages and income tax derived from those wages and industry.
When you consider the advanced charges we pay for everything because of this lowball return industry, Albertans are paying the resource companies for taking the product out of province.
Jobs; Jobs. The biggest is the snow job they have managed to promote and it is only part time these days.
If you are unsure what political filth and grafting is; look to Alberta.
Nantons been exporting water for years and years,why no outcry about that?
Albertas also leading the country in jobs,cut them and all the east will be relying on govt. money again,if a royalty cut provides jobs then im all for it,maybe you just have a hate on for Alberta?????
Sure looks like it.
Anyone wants to see the jobs created by the energy industry for eastern Canadians only has to spend 1 hour in fort mc murray.
They should have sent all the Newfs over to Iraq as they took over fort Mac without firing a shot.
.. Just to subsidize royalties, eh? Really?
Can you provide any details or proof, or is this partisan rhetoric that has no basis in reality?
Advanced charges like what and more importantly compared to what other province?.. AB is one of 2 or 3 jurisdictions in North America that has NO DEBT, and for the first time in nearly 2 decades, has an operating deficit. As far as transporting SOME of the product out of the province, blame that on NIMBYism and not the Conservatives.
Clearly you're upset because you aren't getting some kind of personal, individual benefits and therefore it's the system's fault... Here's a wee hint for you: maybe it's you.
Look at little harder (and I mean just a little) and you'll find reams of full time work - like I suggested earlier, maybe it's you.
they have not been exporting Bulk water! Only packaged. Alberta has been able to spin the Jobs; Jobs and more Jobs to the public in a feel good program where in fact we have been the only thing that kept Canada alive in this recession.
Having said that, I will say Albertans have every right to expect more than jobs out of an industry. Resource is provincial and a good portion of the money should be taken off the top for the province.
This has not happened! They took drained the heritage trust fund into General Revenues and used it for day to day expenditures. General Revenues captures all the money from taxes and incomes of all kinds. If there is money left over it is attributed to resource revenue and, this is used as an excuse to further reduce the royalty.
The Education system has been changed. They dummed down the high school to point kids at the trade schools; NAIT Sait etc. They increased spending to the Trade Schools and froze spending to the universities since 1986. Universities are dying.
There is no reason for this at all! It is possible to fund both the trades and the universities. Now, if a kid has ideas they will do the eduction for a professional life they will find themselves ill prepared for university and more probably than not, fail at the attempt. Not because they are not suited but because their Government failed to prepare them for the path.
This Government make make work programs cementing old oil wells. Old well cement was found to be deteriorating and this put the water aquifers at risk. Multi millions was pumped into the oil industry. This makes jobs specific to an industry but there is no word back about what they did with the money. So; another subsidy.
The latest double talk by Liepert was designed in two parts. Firstly to distance themselves from the document called "new royalty regime" that they produced at the last election for election purpose. No truth to the document and no money was ever collected on it.
As the companion part to his BS he introduced still another subsidy to the oil companies. Drill a deep hole and we pay you by the meter drilled regardless of whether you produce anything or not. Oil companies are making a million profit on a well; paid out of tax dollars.
While I would like to support the industry I cannot help but think of the many thousands of people out there whose EI has run out; cannot get any more help are loosing their homes because there is no help from a Government who will support no one other than resource.
There is lots to talk about; I would rather do it on another blog and not detract from the Cross Canada press on exporting Bulk water which will cost every home in Canada any where from twice as much to 150 times as much for their water service.
Why Albertans are stuck on Conservative is beyond me. They are the worst possible thing that could have happened to this province. No other Political Party would shut down or hurt the oil business by unreasonable taxation except perhaps the NDP.
At best they would bring our royalty in line with that of BC and Saskatchewan while cleaning up the Government accounting system and possibly bringing in a Federal Security officer to keep oversight in honest which is sadly lacking.
Our present 12 to 16 billion dollar heritage trust was limited to 4% profits after stripping the original gains from it. Figure given by Iris Evans to stated 3 years ago our Heritage trust is showing a strong 4% growth.
$97.9 billion- If the government had allowed the Heritage Fund to reinvest its profits, rather than using them to cut the deficit, pay off its debt and otherwise help with general government expenses
$57.2 billion- If the government had diverted a mere 1% of revenue to the fund starting in 1987, and had allowed profits to be reinvested
$164.5 billion - If the government had never taken a penny from the fund, and had continued to seed it with 30% of resource revenues from 1982 onward
$55.6 billion - If the government had kept adding 15% of resource revenues per year after 1987
$65.8 billion - If the government had treated the Heritage Fund like an endowment, letting the fund reinvest its profits and drawing out a fixed amount every year-say 4.5% of assets-and topping up the fund to account for inflation (as it eventually started to do in 2005), with no further royalty contributions after 1987 (figures as of march 2008 - Globe and Mail)
Having said that, I will say Albertans have every right to expect more than jobs out of an industry. Resource is provincial and a good portion of the money should be taken off the top for the province.
This has not happened! They took drained the heritage trust fund into General Revenues and used it for day to day expenditures. General Revenues captures all the money from taxes and incomes of all kinds. If there is money left over it is attributed to resource revenue and, this is used as an excuse to further reduce the royalty.
The Education system has been changed. They dummed down the high school to point kids at the trade schools; NAIT Sait etc. They increased spending to the Trade Schools and froze spending to the universities since 1986. Universities are dying.
There is no reason for this at all! It is possible to fund both the trades and the universities. Now, if a kid has ideas they will do the eduction for a professional life they will find themselves ill prepared for university and more probably than not, fail at the attempt. Not because they are not suited but because their Government failed to prepare them for the path.
This Government make make work programs cementing old oil wells. Old well cement was found to be deteriorating and this put the water aquifers at risk. Multi millions was pumped into the oil industry. This makes jobs specific to an industry but there is no word back about what they did with the money. So; another subsidy.
The latest double talk by Liepert was designed in two parts. Firstly to distance themselves from the document called "new royalty regime" that they produced at the last election for election purpose. No truth to the document and no money was ever collected on it.
As the companion part to his BS he introduced still another subsidy to the oil companies. Drill a deep hole and we pay you by the meter drilled regardless of whether you produce anything or not. Oil companies are making a million profit on a well; paid out of tax dollars.
While I would like to support the industry I cannot help but think of the many thousands of people out there whose EI has run out; cannot get any more help are loosing their homes because there is no help from a Government who will support no one other than resource.
There is lots to talk about; I would rather do it on another blog and not detract from the Cross Canada press on exporting Bulk water which will cost every home in Canada any where from twice as much to 150 times as much for their water service.
Why Albertans are stuck on Conservative is beyond me. They are the worst possible thing that could have happened to this province. No other Political Party would shut down or hurt the oil business by unreasonable taxation except perhaps the NDP.
At best they would bring our royalty in line with that of BC and Saskatchewan while cleaning up the Government accounting system and possibly bringing in a Federal Security officer to keep oversight in honest which is sadly lacking.
Our present 12 to 16 billion dollar heritage trust was limited to 4% profits after stripping the original gains from it. Figure given by Iris Evans to stated 3 years ago our Heritage trust is showing a strong 4% growth.
$97.9 billion- If the government had allowed the Heritage Fund to reinvest its profits, rather than using them to cut the deficit, pay off its debt and otherwise help with general government expenses
$57.2 billion- If the government had diverted a mere 1% of revenue to the fund starting in 1987, and had allowed profits to be reinvested
$164.5 billion - If the government had never taken a penny from the fund, and had continued to seed it with 30% of resource revenues from 1982 onward
$55.6 billion - If the government had kept adding 15% of resource revenues per year after 1987
$65.8 billion - If the government had treated the Heritage Fund like an endowment, letting the fund reinvest its profits and drawing out a fixed amount every year-say 4.5% of assets-and topping up the fund to account for inflation (as it eventually started to do in 2005), with no further royalty contributions after 1987 (figures as of march 2008 - Globe and Mail)
What's your point? You named this thread in a manner that insinuated that AB was getting into the business of bulk exports, now you make a big flap about it being packaged water. How is this any different from the grain or beef exports that the province does?
You are so full of it... Instead of spewing this baseless propaganda, take a look at these links and perhaps you'll generate an understanding based on fact ratehr than this BS your pushing.
Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund 2009-10 Annual Report
Detailed List of Investments at March 31, 2010
A new University was opened in Calgary last year.
... I now understand where you're coming from.... You're one of those people that believe it's the job of government to wake you up in the morning, tuck you in at night and everything else in between... This way, there's no need for any personal responsibility or individual interest in determining your own path in life.
Sounds like Utopia
Those monies were charged to the industry in advance (directly and indirectly). All the gvt is doing is spending that cash in the area that they said they would.
You answered the question yourself - the cash was spent on dealing with orphan wells and environmental issues... Again, the money was collected from the industry itself for that specific purpose and was spent accordingly... The only "subsidy" that exists in this case is exclusively in your mind.
The gvt observed the decline in the industry that was directly related to those retarded increases in royalties... They did exactly what the needed to do and scrap the program before it did more damage.
One of the reasons that they reversed their course was to preserve jobs - you know, the jobsthat you're bitching about not being up to your high standards?
Learn a little about the actual program and finance before you paint yourself into a corner... That program exists as a tax deduction and NOT a direct cash infusion. That said, in order for the corp entity to get that benefit, they have to have revenues (profits) against which that tax benefit is balanced.
Just because an incentive is offered by gvt doesn't automatically qualify it as a subsidy.
And who is to blame for this? Hell, you're the guy that wants to drive out more oil/gas investment by upping royalty rates - exactly what do you think that will do to AB employment?
Really man, give your head a shake
But, but, but... I thought you said is was not bulk water earlier?
Which is it to be?
Include yourself with the NDP - are you not making an argument for higher royalties?
Time to connect the dots cyberclark... One of the big reasons that oil/gas investment/activity moved to Sask and BC was because of teh higher royaties being (proposed) by Stelmach.
Quote captainmorgan What's your point? You named this thread in a manner that insinuated that AB was getting into the business of bulk exports, now you make a big flap about it being packaged water. How is this any different from the grain or beef exports that the province does?
Any amount of water in a container above 1 cu meter is said to be bulk and it is prohibited from moving under NAFTA or for export by any other means; until Harper and the Conservatives get their hands on it.
We are talking of rivers being tapped and lakes being drained. Hardly bottled water.
Quote captmorgan on heritage links. You are so full of it... Instead of spewing this baseless propaganda, take a look at these links and perhaps you'll generate an understanding based on fact ratehr than this BS your pushing.
Your link shows that in 1009 2010 there were 2 billion dollars transferred out of the Heritage Trust fund into General Revenues. If the original plan had been followed rather than the fund drained of everything the people of this province would be 63 billion dollars richer by way of the heritage trust.
Quote Capt Morgan; A new University was opened in Calgary last year.
Alberta has been moving towards the US private school system for the past dozen years. Calling a trade school a university does not make it worth anything more than a trade school. How employable is the degree from this new "U"? Our public system is dam near out the door!
Quote Captain Morgan You answered the question yourself - the cash was spent on dealing with orphan wells and environmental issues... Again, the money was collected from the industry itself for that specific purpose and was spent accordingly... The only "subsidy" that exists in this case is exclusively in your mind.
I have seen no record of where oil companies were charged in advance by the Government for cleaning up their mess in cementing. I did however see the Government create the make work program using money from Government.
Such a fund does not show up in the Government accounts and there is no mention of it in General revenues.
Quote captain Morgan ... I now understand where you're coming from.... You're one of those people that believe it's the job of government to wake you up in the morning, tuck you in at night and everything else in between... This way, there's no need for any personal responsibility or individual interest in determining your own path in life.
Tit for tat; I now understand where you are coming from a Conservative trying desperately to defend what is nothing more or less than a pack of robber barons called the Alberta Conservatives. Obviously one of the minority who has his hand in the pot happily coasting thinking that industry keeps everything and all the people of this province is entitled to is wages.
qUOTING captainmorgan The gvt observed the decline in the industry that was directly related to those retarded increases in royalties... They did exactly what the needed to do and scrap the program before it did more damage.
One of the reasons that they reversed their course was to preserve jobs - you know, the jobsthat you're bitching about not being up to your high standards?
The price of oil had tanked the Conservatives were under the gun on the lowest royalty take in the world. Facing a scary election they produced a piece of paper that was to represent their big move to increase royalty. Because it was produced for the electorate, not the industry who were idle anyway, impossibly high numbers were put in place.
Our original deal was 25% producing and only 1% in start up until all bills were paid. The oil people pocketed the other 24% until they said their bills (entire start up costs which were never audited) were cleared. Fred Dunn AG bounced them for not having sufficient staff to do the work.
The new regime you speak of opened up at 25% at 50.00 per barrel which, was the original deal we had until these crooks reduced it to below 16% while talking a 19% target figure.
This same regime changed the royalty take from US$ to Can$ a loss at that time of 18%. By what stretch of your imagination do you see this as being reasonable?
As I said before Jobs Jobs Jobs. The biggest job being the snow job they have fed Albertans.
Now, oil is back drilling wells that don't produce and get a million bucks of taxpayer money to do it.
Quote Capt morgan Learn a little about the actual program and finance before you paint yourself into a corner... That program exists as a tax deduction and NOT a direct cash infusion. That said, in order for the corp entity to get that benefit, they have to have revenues (profits) against which that tax benefit is balanced.
Just because an incentive is offered by gvt doesn't automatically qualify it as a subsidy.
I can sense your frustration. When deductions are given to the oil industry and the revenues lost by those deduction are made up by the other taxes in Alberta it is a subsidy; no matter how you try to spin it.
This is beyond incentives. It is following a Conservative program that the corporate taxes must be kept as low as possible and any money left in Government and not in industry is a waste. This is the same all Conservatives. But, Alberta makes no distinction between profits from investment on trust accounts and investments made by Government for the benefit of that Governments finance.
Robbing the heritage trust like they have done can only be a betrayal.
I support oil and argue vehemently for them when the press runs wild with accuations that are unfounded. I am a friend of the oil industry but I say to you, either Alberta gets a reasonable deal or we shut down the dam industry and leave it until there is more money.
Saskatchewan was at 30% royalty. BC was a 30% royalty both in US dollars and the exchange was at 18%. Alberta was at 16% royalty and it was taken in Canadian dollars which means, we were going into the hole; paying oil to take the resource from the province!
Any amount of water in a container above 1 cu meter is said to be bulk and it is prohibited from moving under NAFTA or for export by any other means; until Harper and the Conservatives get their hands on it.
We are talking of rivers being tapped and lakes being drained. Hardly bottled water.
Quote captmorgan on heritage links. You are so full of it... Instead of spewing this baseless propaganda, take a look at these links and perhaps you'll generate an understanding based on fact ratehr than this BS your pushing.
Your link shows that in 1009 2010 there were 2 billion dollars transferred out of the Heritage Trust fund into General Revenues. If the original plan had been followed rather than the fund drained of everything the people of this province would be 63 billion dollars richer by way of the heritage trust.
Quote Capt Morgan; A new University was opened in Calgary last year.
Alberta has been moving towards the US private school system for the past dozen years. Calling a trade school a university does not make it worth anything more than a trade school. How employable is the degree from this new "U"? Our public system is dam near out the door!
Quote Captain Morgan You answered the question yourself - the cash was spent on dealing with orphan wells and environmental issues... Again, the money was collected from the industry itself for that specific purpose and was spent accordingly... The only "subsidy" that exists in this case is exclusively in your mind.
I have seen no record of where oil companies were charged in advance by the Government for cleaning up their mess in cementing. I did however see the Government create the make work program using money from Government.
Such a fund does not show up in the Government accounts and there is no mention of it in General revenues.
Quote captain Morgan ... I now understand where you're coming from.... You're one of those people that believe it's the job of government to wake you up in the morning, tuck you in at night and everything else in between... This way, there's no need for any personal responsibility or individual interest in determining your own path in life.
Tit for tat; I now understand where you are coming from a Conservative trying desperately to defend what is nothing more or less than a pack of robber barons called the Alberta Conservatives. Obviously one of the minority who has his hand in the pot happily coasting thinking that industry keeps everything and all the people of this province is entitled to is wages.
qUOTING captainmorgan The gvt observed the decline in the industry that was directly related to those retarded increases in royalties... They did exactly what the needed to do and scrap the program before it did more damage.
One of the reasons that they reversed their course was to preserve jobs - you know, the jobsthat you're bitching about not being up to your high standards?
The price of oil had tanked the Conservatives were under the gun on the lowest royalty take in the world. Facing a scary election they produced a piece of paper that was to represent their big move to increase royalty. Because it was produced for the electorate, not the industry who were idle anyway, impossibly high numbers were put in place.
Our original deal was 25% producing and only 1% in start up until all bills were paid. The oil people pocketed the other 24% until they said their bills (entire start up costs which were never audited) were cleared. Fred Dunn AG bounced them for not having sufficient staff to do the work.
The new regime you speak of opened up at 25% at 50.00 per barrel which, was the original deal we had until these crooks reduced it to below 16% while talking a 19% target figure.
This same regime changed the royalty take from US$ to Can$ a loss at that time of 18%. By what stretch of your imagination do you see this as being reasonable?
As I said before Jobs Jobs Jobs. The biggest job being the snow job they have fed Albertans.
Now, oil is back drilling wells that don't produce and get a million bucks of taxpayer money to do it.
Quote Capt morgan Learn a little about the actual program and finance before you paint yourself into a corner... That program exists as a tax deduction and NOT a direct cash infusion. That said, in order for the corp entity to get that benefit, they have to have revenues (profits) against which that tax benefit is balanced.
Just because an incentive is offered by gvt doesn't automatically qualify it as a subsidy.
I can sense your frustration. When deductions are given to the oil industry and the revenues lost by those deduction are made up by the other taxes in Alberta it is a subsidy; no matter how you try to spin it.
This is beyond incentives. It is following a Conservative program that the corporate taxes must be kept as low as possible and any money left in Government and not in industry is a waste. This is the same all Conservatives. But, Alberta makes no distinction between profits from investment on trust accounts and investments made by Government for the benefit of that Governments finance.
Robbing the heritage trust like they have done can only be a betrayal.
I support oil and argue vehemently for them when the press runs wild with accuations that are unfounded. I am a friend of the oil industry but I say to you, either Alberta gets a reasonable deal or we shut down the dam industry and leave it until there is more money.
Saskatchewan was at 30% royalty. BC was a 30% royalty both in US dollars and the exchange was at 18%. Alberta was at 16% royalty and it was taken in Canadian dollars which means, we were going into the hole; paying oil to take the resource from the province!
Wonder who robbed the heritage trust fund,dude,you should go back 30 years and see where all the low interst loans from it went.
Then you can talk about it but you dont have a clue about it as far as I can see.Alberta should have just kept it for herself.
Too funny,trying to blame the cons on robbing the heritage trust fund.
Do your research before you post about it again.
Then you can talk about it but you dont have a clue about it as far as I can see.Alberta should have just kept it for herself.
Too funny,trying to blame the cons on robbing the heritage trust fund.
Do your research before you post about it again.
The heritage trust fund was set up by Peter Lauheed's Government. Yes it was used to try to kick start business. It was growing great until this crew got a hold if it. and it was initially drawn down into general revenues, then profits pegged at 4% by this same Government. Anything above 4% was scooted into General Revenues and as a final result, used to bring down the royalty to the lowest in the world while goods and services were cut in Alberta.
Recently Mr Laugheed went to the media saying he disapproved of the way the Heritage trust was being treated.
This has been in the press for the last 15 years! My research is very solid, thank you.
And, one more point:
The electrical deregulation; turning the utility over to cities to charge what ever they want for it and giving them license to gouge for still more drove away much of Alberta's start up industry and killed any chance for new starts.
They did this on purpose. They want to industry other than resource in this province.
And a segway from Heritage trust to CPP which Alberta is against. Ted Morton our American finance minister is on record of saying he wants an Alberta Pension Fund to take the place of any CPP additions.
I say he wants an Alberta version of CPP in Alberta so he has still another trough to draw from. He would treat an Alberta Pension just like he treated the Heritage trust fund. Milk it dry!
Alaska moves to export bulk water! Two things; They are exporting to Africa where they do not have to deal in NAFTA and, they are not sending it to California. Why should we?
A friend said yesterday that we should export the Athabasca water. Why not? We can't use it.
Lakes being drained, eh?.. No doubt that your argument incorporates elements of fear-based logic in order to get some attention. So, you'd be OK if one were to package .99999 cubic metres of water into flimsy packaging and mass transport it across the border? How about train-loads of 500ml bottles that cross daily?
Where did the 2 billion go?
On the point of the wealth that "could have been"... Had AB not transferred billions annually to Quebec through the feds, that fund would be many times bigger, however, that's an aside. Have you noticed the infrastructure development throughout the entire province in the last 10 years?
Those roads and hospitals don't build themselves.
The private system?.. Really.. can you prove this?
As for the schools, the Calgary institution is Mount Royal University... Clearly you are not familiar with these advances as you rely on off-handed comments that are without a basis in fact.
Look harder and while you're at it, look at the industry developed funds that deal with these associated issues.
Again, you rely on partisan rhetoric and spin to exaggerate a point... Anyone that moves forward and advances must be on the take with the gvt.. That's nothing but rubbish and conspiracy theory.
Fact is, AB is the most business friendly jurisdiction in the country and it shows.... No provincial (long-term) debt, a GDP that is floating the rest of the nation and a provincial tax structure that attracts the H.O.'s of national entities... There is a reason why other provinces have been emulating the AB model cyberclark, it's because it is effective, it works and it is the antithesis of teh Taft mentality.
Where can I get my million bucks cyberclark?... I'm working with a group that is posied to drill over 100 shallow and mid wells.. $100 million will from the gvt will liminate the need to raise money or go public, hell, maybe we ought to drill 500 wells and make a 100 million in profit, eh?
I'm guessing that you won't be able to tell me where to get the million per well right?... No link either, eh?
Wrong. A tax incentive is not a subsidy, tax-based breaks apply:
- only after the money is spent
- are assessed against revenues/profits
- are in no way an actual cash infusion
Revenues are made up through increased spending, employment and activity - all of which are taxable components... The gvt makes more money in the long and short run by having more transactions occurring throughout the equation.
Taft's pathetic little plan would hammer the people/companies spending/investing which would result in fewer expenditures that would reduce the number of transactions in the system which would minimize the potential taxes collected... Ofcourse, liberal logic will respond by raising the taxes on the remaining players in order to maintain the tax base. Of course, that will restrict transactions further and perpetuate the downward spiral.
BC and Sask are no where near those original royalty rates for a reason cyberclark and the reason is that they pussy-footed around for decades holding-out for a deal.. That deal never came and now they are decades behind in their provincial infrastructure that supports the industry.
they've seen the light and are getting smart.
bottled water is not bulk water, and therefore not a commodity. it is a good. read nafta. no go on the water sale boys, get over it.
not if you're talking about newfoundland and labrador. we got lots of 'em, and we plan on keepin' em.
brrr. dude. that gives me chills. too bad for them the jig is almost up. people are awakening to the mess we're in.
easy there hot shot. newfoundland has given more to this country than workers in fort mac. we let em take our fish for ontario factory workers, iror ore for quebec to process and our hydro for quebec to subsidize its aerospace industry etc.
its give and take. and we've given alot.