Stephen Harper had plan to unite Alberta’s right as Conservative Party
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
Sure, and the oil crash and associated layoffs were already well underway. People were afraid for their jobs and Prentice had the gall to suggest that those individuals who had enjoyed the big bucks for all those years should actually help the province through the lean times by way of paying higher taxes. Now that the NDP is in power it's all their fault, because they've got the gall to suggest that the citizens and the oil companies should actually help the province through the lean times by way of paying higher taxes. I wonder who the whipping boy will be after the next election? It doesn't really matter, they're all cut from the same cloth anyways.
Back to Harper's plan to unite the right. He may just get away with it if oil prices have recovered somewhat come next election, but it will be more a matter of timing that any concrete action of the part of the government. Seriously, it the right were still in power what would they be doing differently?
Probably has to do with degrees of right. At the extreme are the religious wingnuts that are not concerned with reality but only what their mythology tells them. From there things go leftish to the fiscal conservative/libertarian side. Pretty much all political parties are coalitions of some kind.
I am a fiscal conservative with a strong personal liberty streak. I don't like groupthink or special deals for identifiable groups.
Not true. Many of what would be considered right give substantial donations to charities. Most of them just object to government deciding for them and squandering 60% in administration.
The right would have helped businesses, make it threw this hard time. Instead we got 7 billion dollars of investments Leaving Alberta, and businesses abandoning 300 billion+ worth of stranded infrastructure investments that is no longer profitable.
Do you know anyone who has 300+ billion dollars invested in infrastructure in Alberta, who basically gambled and got burnt? Let's ask him to pay more taxes.
can you imagine the government revenue generated by 300+ billion dollars of investments? You don't need to tax companies, The risky investments they make already boost government revenues galore.
Or you can tax them and watch them take their investments elsewhere.
Everything produced is taxed 5-6 times Diffrently. Companies boost government revenues big time, even when we don't tax companies directly.
Ivison is a gooey Clingon.You are shooting the messenger.
This story was brought to you by John Ivison of the Nat/Sun Media.
And in this CBC report, it says Harper could indeed still step in......
If Alberta's unite the right movement doesn't get its act together, Ottawa Conservatives, including former prime minister Stephen Harper, could well step in, says Ian Brodie.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/stephen-harper-alberta-unite-the-right-1.3582342
Government tax revenue from the oil & gas sector is at $2.5B for the last fiscal year, down from the $9B range for each of the previous two years. How is the gov't going to cover that revenue loss? The conservative government started dropping the corporate tax rate in 2001, going from 15.5% at that time to 10% when the NDP took over. They put it up to 12%. How much did that 2% hike cost the oil industry? Still, despite their whining about being so hard done by, the big tarsand producers are enjoying rising stock prices and record cash reserves. Aside from the blip in the curve from the fire, expansion and new projects that were underway when the oil price tank are back underway. The ones that were still in the planning stages have been shelved waiting for the oil price to recover. I'm not sure what context to take your $7B investment loss in, is that a stock sell off or drop in stock prices? And how much of that is attributable to the drop in oil prices? I can't see it as being any fault of either government, as the rout started a year before the NDP took control, so it's hardly fair to blame it on them any more than you can say they're responsible for the recovery in oil prices over the past few months. The oil crash is a global issue, out of reach of the provincial government. The big difference between the NDP and the Conservatives is that the NDP were looking to the high wage earners and the oil corporations to help make up some of the revenue shortfall, while the Conservatives were looking to tax citizens of all income classes and continue to let the corporations slide. And the voters made their feelings clear on that one.
Yes, and in doing so they have created the opposite of a labour strike.
It's called a capital strike. It's when all the wealthy people decide to pull out all their invested money.
That's where the 7 billion I mentioned comes in. It's gone.
Wealthy people invested billions, In infrastructure in Alberta. Those investments create hundreds of thousands of jobs, whitch are all taxed. And creates high revenues for people who buy things whitch is taxed, whitch employ other people whitch are taxed, who also buy things. Etc...
The problem is, if you invest billions of dollars in infrastructure, it's risky. Especially when the market can do what it did.
To add to it, the NDP stated they wanted to change the rules of the oil industry right at the wrong time. Investors said, look at oil prices, do we stick it out? And then said why would we risk it? We don't even know what the new rules are going to be. (/pull out all investments)
So yes , the NDP is not at fault for oil prices, but they have a Capital strike in their hands.
And this is why Alberta is in what some are calling a depression, rather then a recession, something the NDP could have prevented with good governance.
No need to try and force the issue. Nothing wrong with a minority government - either the PCs or the Wild Rose gain the most seats with the other supporting most of the agenda. A tiny gamble that the NDP could sneak up the middle but I doubt it - I think Alberta has already seen enough of the Left ideology. After working together in a minority government, cooler heads could constructively discuss a merger in the background. Personally, I like the potential effectiveness of a PC/Wild Rose or Wild Rose/PC minority government.
"Good governance" is a little vague. Can you be more specific? What moves have the NDP made that qualify as bad governance and how would another government have done it differently?
I'm of the mind that no matter who was or is in power it would have played out the same. The voters were/are looking for someone to blame and since the whole oil price thing is out of reach they have chosen to dump it at the doorstep of the government in power.
Increasing corp and personal taxes during a recession and at a low point in the commodity cycle, and yes, a more economically focused gvt not driven by ideological reasons would have at very least deferred those changes until such time that the economy could absorb it.
Fact is, the timing of when the conservatives reduced taxes directly coincides with the volume of investment (foreign and domestic) began flowing into the province.
Good governance as in, leave the oil royalties as is, and not argue in favor of changing them in a strategic weak time when investors must decide to renew or withdrawal their investment.
The threat of oil royalty rules being changed by the NDP, added with the commodity crash combined to make the situation worst. The NDP rocked the boat, and many investors decided to take their money elsewhere.
Creating a capital strike.
Good governing, as in, Stabilize the situation rather then add oil to the fire.
If at this point , you still don't understand then, it's as simple as this stuff is to complicated for your small brain.
Well, my small brain does understand that the royalty review is over and done with and very few changes have been recommended, but we are still hearing political opponents of the NDP harp on it because it is really the only ammo against the NDP that they have. So they're happy to be firing blanks as long as they can keep firing.
I maintain that the capital strike you talk of is fueled by the drop in oil prices and nothing more. Unless you can bring something concrete to the table as to actual strategies that would offer Albertans some way out of their predicament my small brain is going to assume that your arguments are fueled by partisan loyalty and not facts.
To bring this back to the original topic, what possible strategies could Mr. Harper, or any conservatives for that matter, employ to win the voters back in Alberta, other than to criticize every move the NDP makes without offering any alternative strategies of their own? Lower taxes? Let's not lose sight of the $7B/yr shortfall in gov't revenue due to the oil crash. Maybe they could close a few schools or hospitals?
I maintain that the capital strike you talk of is fueled by the drop in oil prices and nothing more. Unless you can bring something concrete to the table as to actual strategies that would offer Albertans some way out of their predicament my small brain is going to assume that your arguments are fueled by partisan loyalty and not facts.
To bring this back to the original topic, what possible strategies could Mr. Harper, or any conservatives for that matter, employ to win the voters back in Alberta, other than to criticize every move the NDP makes without offering any alternative strategies of their own? Lower taxes? Let's not lose sight of the $7B/yr shortfall in gov't revenue due to the oil crash. Maybe they could close a few schools or hospitals?
Industry understands that it's not a question of if, but a question of when royalties will be changed by Notley.
Sask isn't rattling their sabre over royalties, so which jurisdiction would you (as an oil co) invest your next $100 million?
Investment money is being deployed in other places despite the low commodity prices ~ how do you explain this considering they are saddled with the same low commodity prices?
Make it investment friendly just like Klein did that resuletd in CP Rail moving HQ to Calgary along with the 2500 high paying executive jobs... Allow the pileplines to get the product to markets other than exclusively the USA.
The Dippers deserve all the criticism they are getting and more. No one but themselves can be to blame for the piss-poor policies that they enacted, so, blaming Harper is really beyond disingenuous
Or wait, better yet. Let me explain it for a leftist can understand. Lets Imagine the oil investors are the teachers union. And the government give the teachers a pay cut at the same time that they give them added work loads.
What are the teachers unions going to do?
It's the timing, The NDP had plans to change the royalties. Investors had to decide to renew or pull out. The fiscal year was before the royalties got changed. The simple fact the idea was even possible that the royalties could be changed, added risk to the investment.
Investment is basically risk/reward calculating.
The thing that should have been done is clearly communicate royalties would not be changed. And if they were changed, they would be in favor of industry to get threw this hard time. That's what the NDP should have done. But didn't.
And now they have a huge capital strike on their hands.
Because the fiscal year was before any of the royalties changes. Investors had to make decisions based on what they thought could happen.
So you hire risk analyst to break it all down and have a meeting over it, and decide from that.
What are the teachers unions going to do?
It's the timing, The NDP had plans to change the royalties. Investors had to decide to renew or pull out. The fiscal year was before the royalties got changed. The simple fact the idea was even possible that the royalties could be changed, added risk to the investment.
Investment is basically risk/reward calculating.
The thing that should have been done is clearly communicate royalties would not be changed. And if they were changed, they would be in favor of industry to get threw this hard time. That's what the NDP should have done. But didn't.
And now they have a huge capital strike on their hands.
Because the fiscal year was before any of the royalties changes. Investors had to make decisions based on what they thought could happen.
So you hire risk analyst to break it all down and have a meeting over it, and decide from that.
Notely understand as well as anyone the tenuous relationship between all the players in this show. I expect that's why they softened their stance on the royalty review. She does however, have a responsibility to get the best possible deal for Albertans on what is in fact, an Albertan resource. The former government was happy to reduce taxes as oil profits soared, trading off the tax rate for the tax volume as production and profits increased. Conditions have changed. An adjustment is required to maintain gov't revenues. It doens't take a crystal ball to see that, and any responsibly run oil company should expect and plan for it.
Oilsands operations are continuing their expansion as we speak. Projects that were already underway when the oil price tanked still moving towards completion, projects like Suncor's Fort Hills plant and a major expansion at CNRL. Projects that were in the early stages, still on the drawing board so to speak, have been suspended because the construction costs must be factored into their cost per barrel to produce, and likely won't be considered again until we see prices above $60/barrel.[/QUOTE]
How?
The NDP are blocking those efforts?
Please be specific on "piss-poor policies".
Just the idea the NDP wants to abandone oil is a huge risk factor for a industry who has invested trillions in infrastructure.
The idea of a carbon tax is a huge risk factor for investors
Imagine all the stranded investment that can't be recovered if the NDP ban oil production.
You don't think companies pay attention to risks of losing all their money to a bunch of dimwits?
That's their job, they get payed to assess risks
Just the idea the NDP won probably added to the risk factor calculation :lol:
The idea of a carbon tax is a huge risk factor for investors
Imagine all the stranded investment that can't be recovered if the NDP ban oil production.
You don't think companies pay attention to risks of losing all their money to a bunch of dimwits?
That's their job, they get payed to assess risks
Just the idea the NDP won probably added to the risk factor calculation :lol:
They backed down on the royalty review.
The industry's "hard times" have been dealt with successfully through some tough but necessary business decisions on the part of the companies themselves. Most of them remain profitable at this point. Share prices have rebounded since the beginning of the year which is a good reflection on investor confidence.
I still maintain that the crap being piled at the NDP's doorstep would be piled at the door of the Alberta legislature no matter who was inside. That goes back to your contention that people in general are evil and greedy, which, in the case of the Alberta oil industry, may be truer than I care to admit right now.