Only one country is contemplating destroying its own resource sector: Canada

Trudeau has got to go.  Let's see what Canadian voters do in their Federal elections in October.

Jack Mintz: Only one country is contemplating destroying its own resource sector: Canada

The long saga of the Liberal government’s Bill C-48, the West Coast oil tanker ban, and Bill C-69, the new project-approval regime, may be coming to an end this month. It will not go well.

The Senate will likely pass Bill C-48 against the recommendations of its own committee that studied the bill. And on Wednesday, the Trudeau government said it is only willing to accept a minority of the more than 180 amendments proposed by the Senate to C-69, euphemistically called the “No Pipelines” Bill by Alberta’s Premier Jason Kenney. That is, it will accept only those changes proposed by senators aligned with the Liberal party, while rejecting any suggested amendments backed by the industry and provinces who rely on oil and gas.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government has said it wants to “develop our resources responsibly.” Both these bills will almost certainly make resource development more difficult, if not impossible. Add to these Trudeau’s carbon taxes aimed at curbing fossil fuels and regulations such as the new clean fuel standard, and it raises a serious question: What is Canada’s actual resource plan for the future?

According to polls, most Canadians want mining and fossil fuel development to take place with proper environmental safeguards. But numerous politicians have expressed their desire to stop resource development altogether. Their plan is for no more oilsands projects. No more pipelines. No more natural gas fracking. And no more coal. Some politicians are even going so far as considering putting an end to mining. In other words, no more responsible resource development. No resource development at all.

Quebec’s premier wants to reduce his province’s oil consumption by 40 per cent by 2030. Elizabeth May, head of the Green party, wants to ban the importation of foreign oil and ban all new development of fossil fuels here in Canada. Plenty of NDPers oppose all fossil fuel development, including LNG plants.

While Canada debates whether to stop using our resources, most countries are eagerly making more use of theirs. Even as the Obama administration in the U.S. tried getting coal-fired electricity replaced by natural gas and renewables, it was not afraid to let U.S. oil production double and even eliminated the ban on U.S. oil exports to enable production growth.

Norway, considered a climate leader par excellence, has been busily developing its offshore oil and gas reserves. Whether it is Guyanese, African or Middle Eastern oil, Chinese coal or Australian LNG, resource development is proceeding apace everywhere except in Canada.

...

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

don't discard Australia... Although recent electoral defeat served to Labor may somewhat cool their determination to de-industrialize

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny thing. Australia was by some accounts at it's maximum population density before the Brits arrived. The native peoples truly lived harmonious with nature, but unless we want a planet with a fraction of the population, the notion of not having technology and engineered agriculture is naive.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beginning to look like 1984, where Big Brother knows what’s best for you

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, WCS said:

Beginning to look like 1984, where Big Brother knows what’s best for you

Edmonton Journal:  Trudeau regulatory plan is 'government by Greenpeace,' says legal expert

Will the Trudeau Liberals’ new industrial assessment policy, Bill C-69, be the end of pipeline projects? Or will it be a useful tool for projects to proceed, doing so in an environmentally friendly manner?

 

...  “C-69 is still, I think, a no-pipelines law, even with these amendments,” he said.

“On pipeline issues we seem to have ‘government by Greenpeace.’ …  I don’t see any responsible corporate board of a pipeline company agreeing to devote $1 billion and 8-10 years to this process, with its many new litigation triggers.”  ...

 

...  This isn’t likely to end well when it comes to jobs and prosperity. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau speaks of wanting to partner with Indigenous groups on major industrial projects as part of reconciliation, but his own assessment process will prevent that.

As Andrew Roman asks, “How do you partner with people if there are no more projects?”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites