XPost: can.politics, ab.politics, edm.general   
   XPost: calgary.general   
   From: doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca   
      
   In article ,   
   Barry Bruyea   wrote:   
   >On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 17:26:01 +0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca   
   >(The Doctor) wrote:   
   >   
   >>In article ,   
   >>Barry Bruyea   wrote:   
   >>>On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 13:41:38 +0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca   
   >>>(The Doctor) wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>In article ,   
   >>>>=?UTF-8?B?IijgsqBf4LKgKSAi?=   wrote:   
   >>>>>December 9, 2014 - Macleans   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>Harper and the oil patch: Honesty is the only policy   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>The prime minister explains crazy policy to us   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>Prime Minister Stephen Harper, today in the House of Commons:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>     “Frankly, Mr. Speaker, under the current circumstances of the oil   
   and gas   
   >>>>>sector, it would be crazy, it would be crazy economic policy to do   
   unilateral   
   >>>>>penalties on that sector. We’re clearly not going to do that,â€? Harper   
   told the   
   >>>>>House as Conservative MPs roared their approval.   
   >>>>>     “In fact, nobody in the world is regulating their oil and gas   
   sector. I’d   
   >>>>>be delighted if they did. Canada will be there with them.â€?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>Jim Prentice, then federal minister of the environment, not quite five   
   years ago:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>     “For those of you who doubt that the government of Canada lacks   
   either the   
   >>>>>willingness or the authority to protect our national interests as a   
   â€˜clean   
   >>>>>energy superpower,’ think again,â€? he warned darkly. “We do and we   
   will. And, in   
   >>>>>our efforts, we will expect and we will secure the co-operation of those   
   >>>>>private interests which are developing the oil sands. Consider it a   
   >>>>>responsibility that accompanies the right to develop these valuable   
   Canadian   
   >>>>>resources.â€?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>Back then, it was possible to believe the federal government would impose   
   >>>>>regulations on the oil and gas industries. The government certainly said   
   it   
   >>>>>would, often enough. (Peter Kent in February, 2013: “We are now well   
   into, and   
   >>>>>very close to finalizing, regulations for the oil and gas sector.â€?)   
   But, as   
   >>>>>Chris Turner reminds us in his book The War on Science, Prentice quit as   
   >>>>>environment minister in November 2010, and the Harper government’s   
   periodic   
   >>>>>attempts to demonstrate environmental virtue, even at some hypothetical   
   cost to   
   >>>>>the resource sector, pretty much came to an end.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>Of course, it can be hard to tell where the notion of oil and gas   
   regulations   
   >>>>>ended. Prentice himself has been sounding much like Harper since he became   
   >>>>>premier of Alberta:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>     “Environmental performance is important, but so, too, is our   
   industrial   
   >>>>>competitiveness . . . I think this low-price environment is a reminder .   
   . .   
   >>>>>that we have to be careful laying on costs, including regulatory costs,   
   on our   
   >>>>>industry, because we need to remain competitive.â€?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>But is even that new? From my 2010 article, linked above:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>     “We will only adopt a cap-and-trade regime if the United States   
   signals   
   >>>>>that it wants to do the same. Our position on harmonization applies   
   equally to   
   >>>>>regulation. Canada can go down either road—cap and trade or   
   regulation—but we   
   >>>>>will go down neither road alone.â€?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>So the paper trail on the government’s oil and gas policy is a bit of a   
   mess.   
   >>>>>The feds will only impose regulations in concert with the Americans? Well,   
   >>>>>there are two problems with that story. First, as Bruce Cheadle points   
   out:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>     An Environment Canada briefing memo revealed last month by the Globe   
   and   
   >>>>>Mail shows that the United States, in fact, placed what were called   
   >>>>>“significantâ€? limits on its oil and gas sector in 2012.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>     “For oil and gas, recent air pollution regulations are expected to   
   result   
   >>>>>in significant greenhouse-gas reduction co-benefits, comparable to the   
   >>>>>reductions that would result from the approach being developed for this   
   sector   
   >>>>>in Canada,â€? states the June 2013 memo obtained by Greenpeace under an   
   Access to   
   >>>>>Information request.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>Second, there is simply no record of a concerted Canadian effort to work   
   with   
   >>>>>the Americans on joint regulations. Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird   
   >>>>>mentions the Keystone pipeline to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry in   
   every   
   >>>>>meeting and at every phone call. There is literally no record of any   
   public   
   >>>>>proposal from Harper to U.S. President Barack Obama to work on the joint   
   >>>>>regulations that are now, the PM says, the necessary condition of any   
   Canadian   
   >>>>>regulations.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>In this light, I note with genuine surprise that the “U.S.-Canada clean   
   energy   
   >>>>>dialogueâ€? that was created when Obama visited Ottawa in 2009 is   
   actually still   
   >>>>>a thing. I also note with no surprise at all that the latest joint report,   
   >>>>>barely a month old, does not mention joint regulations on oil and gas   
   >>>>>industries anywhere in its 10 pages.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>So. The feds have been promising oil and gas regulations for seven years,   
   while   
   >>>>>periodically insisting they could produce no such regulations without U.S.   
   >>>>>co-operation. They have also refused to seek such co-operation, while   
   refusing   
   >>>>>to follow up on helpful U.S. unilateral action. (By “helpful,â€? of   
   course, I   
   >>>>>mean “action that would seem helpful if anyone felt like constraining   
   the   
   >>>>>carbon emissions of the oil and gas sector. Like, hypothetically.â€?)   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>One more thing. If the price of oil is too low for regulations, this   
   would be a   
   >>>>>big change from the last seven years, when the Harper government’s   
   argument was   
   >>>>>that the price of oil was too high for regulations. There is, in the   
   consistent   
   >>>>>messaging of this government, no time when government action to constrain   
   the   
   >>>>>carbon emissions of the oil sands is appropriate. When the price is high,   
   it’s   
   >>>>>too high. When it’s low, it’s too low. One can assume governments in   
   potential   
   >>>>>export markets have noted this message, and will act accordingly.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>Looks like shortsightedness strikes again!   
   >>>   
   >>>It's pathetic the way you liberals are worrying about the price of oil   
   >>>which Canada has no control while your idiotic liberals in Ontario   
   >>>piss away more billions, raise the debt and just stumble along and you   
   >>>clowns say nothing. But then, Hypocrisy is mandatory for most   
   >>>liberals.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >>Well what rosy glasses Conservatives!!   
   >   
   >   
   >Just another one of your posts that is meaningless and your typical   
   >approach of not facing the issue posted.   
   >   
      
   Well Tory tends to highball there budget ending up in the red.   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)