Kelly McParland: How decades of Liberal indifference created Danielle Smith

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
24,344
8,708
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Finally, some details on this “Just Transition” thing we’ve been hearing about for years as if it was real:

The plan released Friday is the first time the government has laid out in some detail what it proposes to do, including renaming the idea from the “just transition” plan — a concept that has been criticized for implying those working in oil and gas are in some way are unjust — to the “sustainable jobs plan.”

The term itself refers to the idea that governments guide workers displaced by environmental policies towards new jobs. It has, however, taken on a somewhat different meaning in Alberta, where politicians have suggested it’s a plan to shut down the oil and gas sector and impoverish Canada’s richest province.

At this point, the plan is a plan for more plans, better data collection and further engagement across various groups and regions in Canada. It establishes frameworks and councils to continue the discussions; it’s light on figures and timelines, includes no new funding and doesn’t put a specific figure on just how many jobs might be created.

The 32-page “Sustainable Jobs Plan” says if Canada plays its cards right, the clean energy economy will create so many jobs there may not be enough workers to fill them. But some of it will require the traditional oil and gas sectors to “aggressively” lower the greenhouse gas emissions produced as the fuels are extracted.

“Implementing a federal plan of this magnitude in areas of exclusive provincial jurisdiction doesn’t merely require piecemeal ‘discussions’ with the provinces, it requires outright provincial approval and cooperation,” Smith said in a statement. “Alberta has not been involved in any such approvals, nor included in the development of the plan published today.”

The plan, released Friday while the political world was paying attention to the report on the Liberals’ use of the Emergencies Act to quash the Freedom Convoy protests last year, is to guide the first two years of the transition — further plans will be released every five years after 2025.
Declaring his government’s intentions to plan for the future instead of “hoping for the best,” Prime Minister Justin Trudeau advanced the next steps toward transitioning Canada to a net-zero, low-carbon economy.

Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson, responding to fears from oil and gas workers that the new legislation would put their jobs at risk, said the plan relies upon “new opportunities” for workers — including critical minerals, biofuels and hydrogen — and “ensuring the relevance” of Canada’s conventional energy reserves.

Speaking to reporters Thursday morning outside of the House of Commons, Wilkinson said Canada’s economic future depends on the government making “smart choices” and positioning itself as a world leader in sustainable jobs.
The bill, called the Sustainable Jobs Act, will include measures that will establish a council to advise government on how best to encourage job creation, establish a sustainable jobs secretariat to ensure coherent and consistent policy, and publish action plans every five years, starting in 2025.

Liberal jobs programs, business investment pools and economic plans all have one thing in common: they are obsessed with the skin colour and sexuality of the workforce.

On Thursday, Minister of Natural Resources Jonathan Wilkinson tabled Bill C-50, or the Canadian Sustainable Jobs Act. The bill provides a legislative backdrop to the feds’ broader sustainable jobs plan, which (if not obvious from the name) is geared at boosting job growth in the low-carbon sector. If passed, Bill C-50 would require the Minister of Natural Resources to make five-year jobs plans, adhere to various reporting requirements and assemble an advisory council to guide the execution of the plan.

Between all the bill’s talk of net-zero nestles a hint that identity will be prioritized over merit when this thing finally gets off the ground.

Like many Liberal initiatives, this plan has to involve some identity politics. In this case, the proposed law also specifies the principles that should guide this transition to a net-zero economy. One of these principles involves placing an emphasis on “the creation of employment opportunities for groups underrepresented in the labour market, including women, persons with disabilities, Indigenous peoples, Black and other racialized individuals, 2SLGBTQI+ and other equity-seeking groups.”

Additionally, when appointing members to the advisory council for this net-zero jobs plan, the minister is supposed to consider “the importance of having members that reflect Canada’s diversity — including its regional diversity — and underrepresented groups.” It’s also supposed to consider Indigenous knowledge, the subjective cultural knowledge that the Canadian government cloaks with confidentiality and considers to be equal to science.
This jobs plan won’t be released until after the legislation passes, so it’s hard to talk about specifics. What we do know is that identity is baked into its core, and that the Minister of Natural Resources won’t be thinking about Canadians as a whole when he writes out his jobs plan — he’ll be thinking of the various identity blocs that regularly form the focus of federal policy.

If it’s anything like the jobs programs we have already, it’s likely that systemic discrimination will be a feature, not a bug. Oh well, the rest at the above links.
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
27,026
7,199
113
B.C.
Declaring his government’s intentions to plan for the future instead of “hoping for the best,” Prime Minister Justin Trudeau advanced the next steps toward transitioning Canada to a net-zero, low-carbon economy.

Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson, responding to fears from oil and gas workers that the new legislation would put their jobs at risk, said the plan relies upon “new opportunities” for workers — including critical minerals, biofuels and hydrogen — and “ensuring the relevance” of Canada’s conventional energy reserves.

Speaking to reporters Thursday morning outside of the House of Commons, Wilkinson said Canada’s economic future depends on the government making “smart choices” and positioning itself as a world leader in sustainable jobs.
The bill, called the Sustainable Jobs Act, will include measures that will establish a council to advise government on how best to encourage job creation, establish a sustainable jobs secretariat to ensure coherent and consistent policy, and publish action plans every five years, starting in 2025.

Liberal jobs programs, business investment pools and economic plans all have one thing in common: they are obsessed with the skin colour and sexuality of the workforce.

On Thursday, Minister of Natural Resources Jonathan Wilkinson tabled Bill C-50, or the Canadian Sustainable Jobs Act. The bill provides a legislative backdrop to the feds’ broader sustainable jobs plan, which (if not obvious from the name) is geared at boosting job growth in the low-carbon sector. If passed, Bill C-50 would require the Minister of Natural Resources to make five-year jobs plans, adhere to various reporting requirements and assemble an advisory council to guide the execution of the plan.

Between all the bill’s talk of net-zero nestles a hint that identity will be prioritized over merit when this thing finally gets off the ground.

Like many Liberal initiatives, this plan has to involve some identity politics. In this case, the proposed law also specifies the principles that should guide this transition to a net-zero economy. One of these principles involves placing an emphasis on “the creation of employment opportunities for groups underrepresented in the labour market, including women, persons with disabilities, Indigenous peoples, Black and other racialized individuals, 2SLGBTQI+ and other equity-seeking groups.”

Additionally, when appointing members to the advisory council for this net-zero jobs plan, the minister is supposed to consider “the importance of having members that reflect Canada’s diversity — including its regional diversity — and underrepresented groups.” It’s also supposed to consider Indigenous knowledge, the subjective cultural knowledge that the Canadian government cloaks with confidentiality and considers to be equal to science.
This jobs plan won’t be released until after the legislation passes, so it’s hard to talk about specifics. What we do know is that identity is baked into its core, and that the Minister of Natural Resources won’t be thinking about Canadians as a whole when he writes out his jobs plan — he’ll be thinking of the various identity blocs that regularly form the focus of federal policy.

If it’s anything like the jobs programs we have already, it’s likely that systemic discrimination will be a feature, not a bug. Oh well, the rest at the above links.
Sounds like the only jobs created will be liberal friendly members of the advisory council and the staffing they require .
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
24,344
8,708
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Sounds like the only jobs created will be liberal friendly members of the advisory council and the staffing they require .
I envision a nation of influencers from coast to coast. . .
Sounds fair, in a Liberal sort’a way I guess. Reminds me of job applications to Provincial Crown Corporations in the mid-80’s where you had to check off the box’s to identify your diversity for preference in hiring.

You want to be a Lineman climbing power poles? You better identify at female, handicapped, a visible minority, etc…weird.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
56,767
7,690
113
Washington DC
Sounds fair, in a Liberal sort’a way I guess. Reminds me of job applications to Provincial Crown Corporations in the mid-80’s where you had to check off the box’s to identify your diversity for preference in hiring.

You want to be a Lineman climbing power poles? You better identify at female, handicapped, a visible minority, etc…weird.
It was easier back in the day when people who weren't White male hetero Christians knew their place, and kept to it.

Or else.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
24,344
8,708
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
It was easier back in the day when people who weren't White male hetero Christians knew their place, and kept to it.

Or else.
Yep. I guess. Who, what demographic, would most the oil industry workers that are going to be ‘Just Transitioned’ away from their careers fit into? 😁
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
24,344
8,708
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
The jobs the Liberals want to kill are not in Ontario. They are not in Quebec. In fact — and I will get back to the particulars — they are not in Newfoundland. They are, of course — and how could it be otherwise? — in the one time province, now colony of the green Liberal-NDP government, known as Alberta.

The sustainable jobs act, and those backing it — like Labour Minister Seamus O’Regan — are full of misty, vague jabber about creating good jobs and setting up a panel to advise the government. In other words, they don’t have a clue yet themselves — but as everyone knows, panels set up by governments are teams of irreproachable geniuses, overloaded with insight and efficiency, and never yet in the history of all politics has a government panel ever failed to meet its objectives.

Irony aside, governments appoint panels in the same way they appoint “special rapporteurs” when they wish to duck responsibility, evade scrutiny and hide their own impotence and incompetence.

Interestingly, the attack on Alberta is auditioning for a new name. Up until the sustainable jobs act, it was all about a “just transition.” We have heard of, and been blasted with, the “just transition” tag for at least a couple of years. But now, the man of many ministries, Seamus O’Regan, cabinet minister from an oil-producing province, has told everyone he thinks the phrase is “toxic.” Wow — how bold.

Well, minister, it was your own guys — Jonathan Wilkinson, Justin Trudeau, Gerald Butts, Catherine McKenna and the always redoubtable, scaler of towers, orange-suited Greenpeace veteran Steven Guilbeault — who have mouthed the phrase tirelessly, and used it to sell their wild green dreams.

By the way, when is the “just transition” going to hit Newfoundland? My home of “pine clad hills” and “winter’s stern command” is the other oil-producing province.

Call it an irony if you will, but just a few weeks ago, when Newfoundland was having its annual oil and gas conference, Equinor, the company developing the multi-billion dollar offshore Bay Du Nord project, announced it was being postponed for three years.

The same O’Regan was merciless, calling the announcement “nothing short of sadistic.” What? How can this be? Surely Newfoundland is under the same axe as Alberta. Surely a delay in developing thousands of more pernicious, non-renewable, non-good jobs is a great thing for the new green future the Liberals are imposing by fiat. Not as good from their point of view as outright cancellation, but a welcome step in the “just transition” direction.

Anyway, this is just a snippet from the middle of the above link…
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
24,344
8,708
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Steven Guilbeault’s colonialist plan for Alberta’s energy grid is a desecration of Canada’s Constitution.

No sensible or humble politician would propose such offensive and illegal overreach. But Guilbeault and his boss Justin Trudeau are marked by ambition equal parts grandiose and blind.

They would be wise to accept the reasonable compromises offered by Alberta. Instead they’re doubling down, acting in plain violation of hard-won provincial rights won by Peter Lougheed for this and other Canadian provinces.

A panel of experts at Policy Options magazine in 2012 voted Lougheed the greatest Canadian premier of the past 40 years for a reason, because Lougheed saw Confederation as a win-win. The country was no longer to be Ontario/Quebec dominating all other regions, but a place where all had rights and could thrive.

Lougheed persuaded other Canadians of the proposition that a strong Western Canada makes for a stronger Canada. He bargained hard to win new constitutional rights for the provinces, all of it meant to secure Alberta’s ability to govern itself. In this way, Alberta would prosper and share its prosperity with the rest of Canada.

This is exactly what has happened, with net transfers from Alberta to the rest of Canada of more than $600 billion in the last seven decades.

Among his many victories, Lougheed fought for and won a new clause in the Constitution, Section 92A, in 1982. It spells out exclusive provincial rights when it comes to natural resources. “In each province, the legislature may exclusively make laws in relation to exploration for non-renewable natural resources in the province; development, conservation and management of non-renewable natural resources and forestry resources in the province, including laws in relation to the rate of primary production therefrom; and development, conservation and management of sites and facilities in the province for the generation and production of electrical energy.”

Ottawa has no legal right to put a chokehold on how Alberta (or any other province) manages its electrical grid, but that’s exactly what Guilbeault is doing with his plan to force a net-zero grid on Alberta and other provinces by 2035.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
24,344
8,708
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
The jobs the Liberals want to kill are not in Ontario. They are not in Quebec. In fact — and I will get back to the particulars — they are not in Newfoundland. They are, of course — and how could it be otherwise? — in the one time province, now colony of the green Liberal-NDP government, known as Alberta.
Was it a just a bad dream, or did federal Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault really make this absurd remark?

“How fair would it be for the rest of the federation if we started carving out exceptions for provinces?”

Guilbeault did say that. He was talking about his refusal to change the 2035 deadline for Alberta’s electricity grid to reach net-zero emissions.

At any distance from the federal towers of zealotry, Canada seems to be nothing but exceptions for provinces. Exceptions are how we stumble and bumble along as a nation.

Exceptions are often positive, most notably in Quebec and Ontario, or negative in provinces less politically important to the Liberals.

Guilbeault went on to say, regarding exceptions, “we didn’t do it for (carbon) pricing.

“We worked with all provinces to ensure that we had a fair and equitable system when it came to pricing, and we will do the same for the clean electricity regulations.”

That is false. Quebec’s cap-and-trade pricing system — an exception granted by Ottawa — guarantees that Quebecers pay less.

This has been known for years. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation recently said Ottawa “is forcing drivers in every other province and territory to pay 14 cents per litre of gas in carbon taxes, while Quebecers pay 10 cents per litre.”

Atlantic provinces have just started paying carbon tax after Ottawa rejected their pricing plans.

The New Brunswick government, especially, is livid. It claims the provincial plan would have cut emissions by 40 to 45 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030. That would beat the federal target by 20 years.

Quebec makes similar claims for its dubious carbon trading scheme, but that’s Guilbeault’s home province. Exception approved.

In refusing to budge on his target date for electricity, Guilbeault is actually making Alberta an exception — the negative kind.

More than 60 per cent of Alberta’s electricity generation comes from natural gas. Smith claims that transition to other sources by 2035, including some use of “abated” natural gas, simply isn’t possible without severe economic harm.

Others disagree, including the provincial NDP, which supports net zero by 2035. Rachel Notley’s party wonders, as many others do, why the province put a hiatus on green energy projects.

But there’s little doubt that Alberta and Saskatchewan have very serious challenges in meeting net zero by 2035.

Guilbeault can get tough because most other provinces have no problem at all. They’re blessed with all those dams and rivers that produce hydroelectric power. By luck of geography, they’re already most of the way to net zero.

Quebec has by far the most hydroelectric power. It accounts for 94 per cent of the provincial grid. Wind produces five per cent. Natural gas and petroleum are trace amounts.

Ontario is 25 per cent powered by hydro. Fifty-one per cent is nuclear. Wind and natural gas totalled about 10 per cent each.

For the Liberals’ key province, eliminating natural gas in 12 years is no problem at all.

It’s pretty much the same in B.C. (87 per cent hydro), Manitoba (97 per cent), and Newfoundland and Labrador (96 per cent).

Little Prince Edward Island, bless its heart, is 99 per cent wind-powered.

New Brunswick has the most diverse generation, with about 60 per cent nuclear and hydro. Thirty per cent comes from coal.

Nova Scotia is the only province with a problem as serious as Alberta and Saskatchewan. In recent years, 74 per cent of its power has come from coal and natural gas.

A target delay of a few years is reasonable for Alberta, Saskatchewan and probably Nova Scotia. Other provinces would likely go along without complaint, although we could expect some preaching from the Bloc Quebecois.

But Steven Guilbeault seems blind to anything but his cause. His talk of treating provinces equally is both absurd and insulting.
 

Taxslave2

House Member
Aug 13, 2022
3,199
1,924
113
turdOWE will be remembered in the history books as the Prime Moron that destroyed confederation. Alberta can, and will separate if this keeps up. Only a new government with strong western representation will prevent it.
 

Serryah

Executive Branch Member
Dec 3, 2008
9,323
2,197
113
New Brunswick
turdOWE will be remembered in the history books as the Prime Moron that destroyed confederation. Alberta can, and will separate if this keeps up. Only a new government with strong western representation will prevent it.

You're giving Trudeau too much credit.

But sure, at this point, if Alberta leaves, it does so under the same conditions as Quebec leaving.

Sound fair 'nuff?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dixie Cup

Taxslave2

House Member
Aug 13, 2022
3,199
1,924
113
You're giving Trudeau too much credit.

But sure, at this point, if Alberta leaves, it does so under the same conditions as Quebec leaving.

Sound fair 'nuff?
If that was the case, Alberta would already be gone. Just as soon as the money they were forced to invest in CPP is returned. But, I think it would end up being far more than just Alberta. Yukon and Saskastuwan, and probably northern BC would potentially join in the exodus. Maybe more areas that are resource dependent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dixie Cup

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
24,344
8,708
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
A federal environmental law that regulates natural-resource projects in the provinces is unconstitutional, the Supreme Court ruled 5-2 on Friday.

The Impact Assessment Act took effect in August, 2019. It enables Ottawa to regulate energy, mining and other project proposals based on effects that fall into federal jurisdiction – such as on Indigenous peoples, birds, fish, and climate change.

(Alberta referred the question of the law’s constitutionality to the province’s Court of Appeal, which ruled 4-1 last year that the law violated provincial jurisdiction. The federal government appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court.)
 

Dixie Cup

Senate Member
Sep 16, 2006
5,829
3,669
113
Edmonton
If that was the case, Alberta would already be gone. Just as soon as the money they were forced to invest in CPP is returned. But, I think it would end up being far more than just Alberta. Yukon and Saskastuwan, and probably northern BC would potentially join in the exodus. Maybe more areas that are resource dependent.
I know northern B.C. at one time did really want to join Alberta because they didn't like the Liberals in power in B.C. at the time. I'm thinking they'd still likely want to join if Alberta did decide to separate. If only we weren't landlocked we'd be so much better off. Sigh..... Separation is beginning to look better & better all the time. The next election will be interesting, that's for sure.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
24,344
8,708
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Ottawa will press forward with a pair of contentious new regulations aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions, despite last Friday’s Supreme Court of Canada decision that the government overstepped its constitutional bounds with one of its existing environmental laws.

The message from federal officials on Monday was that they believe neither their plan to cap greenhouse gas emissions from the oil and gas sector, nor their proposed Clean Electricity Regulations to restrict emissions from power generation, will be significantly affected by the court’s finding that the 2019 Impact Assessment Act (which enables Ottawa to review whether major projects meet environmental standards) violates provincial jurisdiction.

“The opinion of the court does not call into question other regulatory initiatives under development, and we are confident that they are within the purview of the federal government,” Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault said in a statement provided to The Globe and Mail.

That response could further inflame tensions with Alberta’s government, which was behind the legal challenge to the Impasse Impact Assessment Act, and is widely expected to test the electricity rules and emissions cap in the same way. Premier Danielle Smith has already seized on last week’s ruling to call on Ottawa to drop its other plans, which she predicted would meet a similar fate.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
110,742
11,982
113
Low Earth Orbit
“The opinion of the court does not call into question other regulatory initiatives under development, and we are confident that they are within the purview of the federal government,” Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault said in a statement provided to The Globe and Mail.
Translation= "Were arent done with our ideology regardless of what the law and people demand."

Tyranny.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
56,767
7,690
113
Washington DC
Ottawa will press forward with a pair of contentious new regulations aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions, despite last Friday’s Supreme Court of Canada decision that the government overstepped its constitutional bounds with one of its existing environmental laws.

The message from federal officials on Monday was that they believe neither their plan to cap greenhouse gas emissions from the oil and gas sector, nor their proposed Clean Electricity Regulations to restrict emissions from power generation, will be significantly affected by the court’s finding that the 2019 Impact Assessment Act (which enables Ottawa to review whether major projects meet environmental standards) violates provincial jurisdiction.

“The opinion of the court does not call into question other regulatory initiatives under development, and we are confident that they are within the purview of the federal government,” Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault said in a statement provided to The Globe and Mail.

That response could further inflame tensions with Alberta’s government, which was behind the legal challenge to the Impasse Impact Assessment Act, and is widely expected to test the electricity rules and emissions cap in the same way. Premier Danielle Smith has already seized on last week’s ruling to call on Ottawa to drop its other plans, which she predicted would meet a similar fate.
Wow. You finally did something right.

See, that's what the law is supposed to be about. In a roughly-democratic system, the people elect whom they choose. The various parties have ideologies and agendae, and the winners of those elections pass laws and make regulations to implement those. The courts say either that a given law or regulation is within their power, or it's not. The courts do not rule on the rectitude, accuracy, or propriety of the ideologies or agendae. They simply say "you may do this, you may not do that." So when the ruling party or coalition is told "you may not do that," they seek another way to implement all or part of their agenda. If enough of the people decide the ideologies or agendae have gone too far, they replace the ruling party or coalition with another that has different ideologies and agendae.

Along the way, there are plenty of lies, self-dealing, skullduggery, hugger-muggery, and jiggery-pokery.

Anyone who says they don't like this process is essentially saying what they really want is an absolute dictatorship. I disagree.

"democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time"
--Winston Churchill, 1947
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
24,344
8,708
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
The Supreme Court of Canada has rejected the Trudeau Liberals’ bullying Impact Assessment Act, a law that essentially sacrificed on the altar of climate alarmism many thousands of jobs and billions in private investment in Canadian industry.

The court’s decision is a colossal win for Canadians who hope for better days and a thriving economy, in large part because the court’s decision is part of a trend where world leaders in business, politics and the law, credible climate scientists and regular citizens are rejecting the darkest and dumbest excesses of climate policy.

It’s evident that the majority of judges in last Friday’s 5-2 decision were concerned about just how far the Trudeau Liberals had gone in bulldozing provincial constitutional rights, including in the name of the Liberals’ preferred climate policy.

In the court’s previous ruling upholding the carbon tax, Chief Justice Richard Wagner had focused on climate being an existential threat to humanity. Not this time. Only the two dissenting judges brought up that notion.

In this ruling Wagner focused on how the federal government had “plainly overstepped the mark” in terms of invading provincial jurisdiction, including on emissions.

Canadians are now rejecting what the Trudeau Liberals are selling. The Supreme Court just did so as well.
Perhaps, after all, there is hope for a smarter and richer Canada, one with effective and non-alarmist climate policy.