Canada Election: 2019

[Steve]

I guess the big question now is how strong/formal will an alliance be. Will they go all the way and have NDP members appointed to Cabinet? (Rare in this type of parliamentary system, but possible.) Some sort of formal agreement? Or just ad hoc support on an issue by issue basis?

Remains to be seen. Singh seemed to be talking about some sort of formal agreement but it was political speak so hard to interpret.

 

[qayak]

Now we've got the Looney Toons from Alberta crawling out from under their rocks and threatening to separate because Scheer wasn't elected PM.

 

[Segnosaur]

Now we've got the Looney Toons from Alberta crawling out from under their rocks and threatening to separate because Scheer wasn't elected PM.

While I am sure that there are some supporters of western separation who are lunatics, I do think people in the western provinces do have legitimate reasons to complain.

Over the past few decades, Alberta has contributed significantly more into the country (in terms of tax revenue) than it has received (from transfer payments, social programs, etc.) Now, obviously there are some parts of the country which are at an economic disadvantage (such as the maritime provinces), but seeing Quebec receive transfer payments year after year (and seeing the federal government adjust the rules specifically to benefit them) would be a source of frustration.

Even when they have a supposedly friendly conservative party in power, very little actually changes.

Is it a good idea to separate? Probably not. But I also don't think its a good idea to dismiss their complaints as just a bunch of "Looney toons".

 

[Steve]

While I am sure that there are some supporters of western separation who are lunatics, I do think people in the western provinces do have legitimate reasons to complain.

Over the past few decades, Alberta has contributed significantly more into the country (in terms of tax revenue) than it has received (from transfer payments, social programs, etc.) Now, obviously there are some parts of the country which are at an economic disadvantage (such as the maritime provinces), but seeing Quebec receive transfer payments year after year (and seeing the federal government adjust the rules specifically to benefit them) would be a source of frustration.

Even when they have a supposedly friendly conservative party in power, very little actually changes.

Is it a good idea to separate? Probably not. But I also don't think its a good idea to dismiss their complaints as just a bunch of "Looney toons".

A land-locked country of >4.5 million people with no way to transport their only commodity of marginally valuable heavy oil, and a resource based economy that is quite depressed. Seems like a poorly considered knee-jerk reaction by loonies to me.

 

[Belz...]

Is it a good idea to separate? Probably not. But I also don't think its a good idea to dismiss their complaints as just a bunch of "Looney toons".

Well they can't go anywhere. They're landlocked! Dismiss away!

 

[Segnosaur]

A land-locked country of >4.5 million people with no way to transport their only commodity of marginally valuable heavy oil, and a resource based economy that is quite depressed.

Well, lets see:

- They may be landlocked, but other countries are land locked as well

- Not sure why you suggest there is 'no way' to transport their oil. After all, other countries have worked out agreements to transport oil and other commodities through foreign territory. Heck, a separated Alberta may actually have more opportunity to transport oil since they could ship it straight to the United States without having to worry about a Canadian government interfering

Seems like a poorly considered knee-jerk reaction by loonies to me.

While the support for separation increased due to the election, the complaints about poor treatment of western provinces goes back decades, long before Trudeau was a young blackfaced boy.

 

[Blue Mountain]

What I find interesting is Trudeau seems prepared to govern without a formal alliance with the NDP. I suspect there will be some back and forth with Singh and maybe even Blanchet, though. There's no way he can get a budget passed without support from one of them and their party.

I was very pleased to see the thorough rejection of the Trump-wannabe People's Party. It appears not even the conservative voters liked them,

 

[JDC]

...
While the support for separation increased due to the election, the complaints about poor treatment of western provinces goes back decades, long before Trudeau was a young blackfaced boy.

Indeed, in fact it was daddy Trudeau that pissed the west off with his National Energy Program back in the 80's!

"
National Post journalist Jen Gerson would state that "the NEP was considered by Albertans to be among the most unfair federal policies ever implemented. Scholars calculated the program cost Alberta between $50 and $100 billion."
"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Energy_Program#Reaction_in_Alberta

Cheers,
Jeff

 

[Horatius]

Heck, a separated Alberta may actually have more opportunity to transport oil since they could ship it straight to the United States without having to worry about a Canadian government interfering

Isn't the fact that they can only really ship oil to the US one of their big complaints? The whole pipeline business is about accessing world markets. Leaving Canada would pretty much kill any pipeline proposal for at least a generation.

 

[Segnosaur]

What I find interesting is Trudeau seems prepared to govern without a formal alliance with the NDP. I suspect there will be some back and forth with Singh and maybe even Blanchet, though. There's no way he can get a budget passed without support from one of them and their party.

I think it kind of makes sense. If Trudeau enters a formal agreement with the NDP he may get accused of being too much under their control. Instead, he can claim "I am still in complete control" with a certain amount of plausible deniability.

I was very pleased to see the thorough rejection of the Trump-wannabe People's Party. It appears not even the conservative voters liked them,

Maybe the majority of conservatives in Canada are not the knuckle-dragging troglodytes they are often portrayed as.

 

[Segnosaur]

Heck, a separated Alberta may actually have more opportunity to transport oil since they could ship it straight to the United States without having to worry about a Canadian government interfering

Isn't the fact that they can only really ship oil to the US one of their big complaints? The whole pipeline business is about accessing world markets. Leaving Canada would pretty much kill any pipeline proposal for at least a generation.

As opposed to now, when there is already all sorts of opposition to pipelines in places like Quebec?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_East

So an Albertan may see a choice:

- Leave confederation... ship your oil through the U.S. and/or come to agreements with Canada when possible, but you keep all your oil revenue

- Stay in confederation... you still can't ship your oil east because Quebec keeps complaining, but you now lose a huge chunk of your oil revenue to the rest of Canada.

And I'm not really sure why people think a separated Alberta would be unable to ship oil or other products. Other countries ship oil through foreign territories. Its been done in the past.

(For the record, I think Separation would be a bad idea, because oil is a resource with a finite usage; eventually it will either run out, or we will convert to greener energy.)

 

[Horatius]

As opposed to now, when there is already all sorts of opposition to pipelines in places like Quebec?

But now they also have this:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-western-canada-trans-mountain-1.5332365

Trudeau extends olive branch to Western Canada, vows to build Trans Mountain despite opposition

Why would he bother taking the political risk of standing up for Alberta against Quebec and BC if Alberta decides to take their ball and go home?

I know the majority of Albertans give him no credit for what he's already done to salvage this pipeline, but that's part of what's pissing me off. They really don't give a **** what he does, they just hate him.

 

[Segnosaur]

But now they also have this:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-western-canada-trans-mountain-1.5332365

Trudeau extends olive branch to Western Canada, vows to build Trans Mountain despite opposition

Its a promise. It doesn't necessarily mean that it will actually happen.

Of course, keep in mind that this promise came after the election.

And remember, part of this discussion was the claim about how a Separate Alberta would not be able to ship its oil... It doesn't matter of opposition to pipelines comes from the Canadian government itself or other provinces.

Why would he bother taking the political risk of standing up for Alberta against Quebec and BC if Alberta decides to take their ball and go home?

Maybe (unlike some people) he recognizes that western alienation is partly justifiable and wants to address it. Good for him.

Maybe he thinks that an actual attempt at separation is unlikely, but also thinks the pipeline it will be good for Canada as a whole.

Maybe he thinks that it is a promise that will soon be forgotten.

I know the majority of Albertans give him no credit for what he's already done to salvage this pipeline, but that's part of what's pissing me off. They really don't give a **** what he does, they just hate him.

Well pushing an environmental policy that threatens your province's economy (e.g. carbon taxes) might be enough to make people overlook attempts to build pipelines.

(Note: I am not necessarily saying Trudeau's environmental policy is bad. Global warming needs to be addressed. I'm just saying that an Alberta resident might be concerned about its economic impact.)

 

[dudalb]

A land-locked country of >4.5 million people with no way to transport their only commodity of marginally valuable heavy oil, and a resource based economy that is quite depressed. Seems like a poorly considered knee-jerk reaction by loonies to me.

The idea of separation is loony, but some of the complaints that the Prarie Provinces have that are fueling the separation rhetoric are legitimate.
Is that hard to understand?
Or are you having a sort of Canadian version of the US "Flyover country" problem?

 

[blutoski]

What I find interesting is Trudeau seems prepared to govern without a formal alliance with the NDP. I suspect there will be some back and forth with Singh and maybe even Blanchet, though. There's no way he can get a budget passed without support from one of them and their party.

I was very pleased to see the thorough rejection of the Trump-wannabe People's Party. It appears not even the conservative voters liked them,

I found CPP completely confusing, and I expect reactionaries felt the same way.

Just as an example, the CPP candidate in North Vancouver is a Tanzania Canadian running on the platform that antisemites shouldn't be hushed by politically correct millennials, and that a non-progressive flat tax rate is fairer than progressive tax rates, and some other vague promises like "restore Canada".

 

[Steve]

The idea of separation is loony, but some of the complaints that the Prarie Provinces have that are fueling the separation rhetoric are legitimate.
Is that hard to understand?
Or are you having a sort of Canadian version of the US "Flyover country" problem?

Parts of the populations of every province has issues with the federal govt. Alberta is unique in the west in having people moan about separation every time a federal Liberal govt is elected. They go curiously quiet when the Conservatives are in power.

The other prairie provinces are on the receiving end of the equalization payments. They have a good thing going and will not mess it up by moving to separate.

 

[dudalb]

Parts of the populations of every province has issues with the federal govt. Alberta is unique in the west in having people moan about separation every time a federal Liberal govt is elected. They go curiously quiet when the Conservatives are in power.

The other prairie provinces are on the receiving end of the equalization payments. They have a good thing going and will not mess it up by moving to separate.

Albeta is unique? I think that Quebec is the champion of using the threat of separation to get concessions and favors from the federal Government. Alberta just does not seem to be very good at it.

And I note you seem to have issues with the Prairie Provinces.
Seems to me that if enviormental policies are going to hurt a province disproprotinaly, they have a right to expect the government to compensate in some way.

 

[qayak]

While I am sure that there are some supporters of western separation who are lunatics, I do think people in the western provinces do have legitimate reasons to complain.

Over the past few decades, Alberta has contributed significantly more into the country (in terms of tax revenue) than it has received (from transfer payments, social programs, etc.) Now, obviously there are some parts of the country which are at an economic disadvantage (such as the maritime provinces), but seeing Quebec receive transfer payments year after year (and seeing the federal government adjust the rules specifically to benefit them) would be a source of frustration.

Even when they have a supposedly friendly conservative party in power, very little actually changes.

Is it a good idea to separate? Probably not. But I also don't think its a good idea to dismiss their complaints as just a bunch of "Looney toons".

Your facts are a little off. Jason Kenney was a part of the Harper government when they made changes to the transfer payment system and the biggest benefactor of those changes is Alberta.

http://www.formac.ca/starrspoint/20...on-history-that-jason-kenney-likes-to-forget/

I have posted on this topic a few times, most recently here, pointing out that not only was Jason Kenney part of the government that crafted the equalization formula that he now suggests favors Quebec, but also that changes to the overall federal transfer system brought in by the Harper government and continued under the Liberals have in fact benefitted Alberta more than any other province.

That’s because the new equalization formula was only part of a package of changes to the transfer system that included equal per-capita cash transfers for health and social programs. Although equalization gets more attention, it represents just over 25 per cent of the $75 billion in major federal transfers to the provinces, while health and social transfers will total $55 billion in 2019.

It was acknowledged at the time that the move to per-capita funding for health and social transfers would benefit the wealthier provinces, but the enriched equalization was supposed to compensate the less wealthy ones for those losses. Unfortunately that has not happened, for several reasons. To recap:

- In 2008 the government Kenny was part of deemed that the sudden rise in oil prices and royalties made it too expensive to fully equalize provinces’ fiscal capacity, and so put a ceiling on equalization, limiting increases to GDP growth;

- In 2011 the Conservatives announced that the six per cent a year increases in health transfers would end in 2017, to be replaced by increases tied to the rise in the GDP;

- In 2013, the Conservatives decided that an extra $800 million in health cash to bring Alberta to the same per-capita cash amount as the other provinces would come from the overall health transfer allotment, reducing increases to the other nine provinces from the usual 6 per cent range to anywhere from 0 (Newfoundland) to 4.3 per cent (Saskatchewan);

- Making matters worse, future increases to CHT would be calculated on the diminished 2014-5 base.

As a result, with the exception of Quebec, equalization-receiving provinces (ERPs) like Nova Scotia received lower than average increases in total federal transfers – that’s equalization, CHT and CST – over the last 12 years.

Trudeau has been the one politician able to make the Transmountain Pipeline a reality. It's a done deal. What is stopping the pipeline now are two simple facts. First, oil prices are down which has nothing to do with any government in Canada. Second, oil is a long term investment and investors are shying away from long term investments in favour of short term investments.

Kenney and Scheer like to claim that Alberta is losing oil investment to the U.S. but like most things they say, it is a lie. Investment in oil in Canada has be relatively stable while it has actually dropped in the U.S. So any investment leaving Canada definitely isn't going to the U.S.

But the thing that is completely absurd to me is that Canada has free elections. Everyone gets to vote for who they feel will benefit them. Alberta and Saskatchewan don't feel that way though. You either vote for who they want or they will take their ball and bat and go home. Those are the Looney Toons I am talking about and both Alberta and Saskatchewan have one at the helm.

 

[qayak]

The idea of separation is loony, but some of the complaints that the Prarie Provinces have that are fueling the separation rhetoric are legitimate.
Is that hard to understand?

Yes, it is hard to understand because the complaints are not legitimate. The complaints amount to a childish sense of entitlement that is rampant in Alberta and has been for years. Anything bad that happens in Alberta is blamed on other people in Canada. Trudeau is a favourite target which is weird because he got them their pipeline. Many Albertans feel that it is Trudeau/BC's fault that Red Robin Restaurants are closing in Edmonton. It's Trudeau's/Notley's/Horgan's fault that employment is down in the oil patch. Gee, couldn't possibly be the price of oil could it?

 

[Steve]

Albeta is unique? I think that Quebec is the champion of using the threat of separation to get concessions and favors from the federal Government. Alberta just does not seem to be very good at it.

And I note you seem to have issues with the Prairie Provinces.
Seems to me that if enviormental policies are going to hurt a province disproprotinaly, they have a right to expect the government to compensate in some way.

Alberta is unique in the west. Read what I wrote.

I really don’t need a lecture on Canadian politics from an American. I have followed Canadian politics for the best part of 50 years and am quite familiar with the various separation arguments in Quebec, in Alberta, and in my own province of BC.

Whatever makes you say that I have “issues” with Prairie provinces? What do you imagine those “issues” are? Saskatchewan, and Manitoba are very much on the periphery regarding any separation issues. It is a fact that they are both on the receiving end of equalization payments. I don’t begrudge them that. It is simply the way things work in this country.

It is a fact that separation noise increases in Alberta every time a fed election doesn’t go their way. This has been the case since long before the current pipeline fuss blew up. You may not realize that the Liberal government was and is supportive of Alberta on the pipeline issue and is actively working for and financing the support of Alberta’ position. Environmental issues are just not affecting Alberta disproportionally.

The whole issue of “western separation” is not a recent concept as is not primarily an environmental issue. It has been going on for many years. It ebbs and flows in publicity and it is something the news media thinks will make a good story when an election doesn’t go their way. It is not well supported. Support in Alberta is nowhere near the strength and intensity that is seen in Quebec. The noise will blow over in a few weeks and fade into the background until the next election.