[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Bauer]

There will be divestiture of US assets soon with these policies stacking up.  Carney needs to make it more attractive to invest in Canada.  I know the maple 8 want to own more Canadian infrastructure but aren't allowed.  Taking that debt off government balance sheets frees them up to use it elsewhere.

[HVC]

There will be divestiture of US assets soon with these policies stacking up.  Carney needs to make it more attractive to invest in Canada.  I know the maple 8 want to own more Canadian infrastructure but aren't allowed.  Taking that debt off government balance sheets frees them up to use it elsewhere.

More likely is greater Euro investment for our sweet sweet natural resources. Still take decades.

[Valmy]

On the plus side if the GOP ends up letting the Democrats run again* and they win** reversing these idiotic moves will lead to an economic boon. I mean full trust, however unlikely, will take a generation or more.

* only partially joking
** still shockingly low probability.

More likely the horrible impacts of these policies will not fully hit until the Democrats are back in office and they get blamed for all of it. 

[HVC]

On the plus side if the GOP ends up letting the Democrats run again* and they win** reversing these idiotic moves will lead to an economic boon. I mean full trust, however unlikely, will take a generation or more.

* only partially joking
** still shockingly low probability.

More likely the horrible impacts of these policies will not fully hit until the Democrats are back in office and they get blamed for all of it. 

That's possible too. I'm also assuming that the GOP will get the next president for two terms as well.

[crazy canuck]

It's one more reason to sell off positions in American equities for everyone outside the US.

[viper37]

One thing that is likely to throw a wrench in Carney's policies are the First Nation.

Carney wants to move fast on everything.  That is the antithesis of our First Nations.

There is a constitutional obligation to consult them, they don't have a veto, but rushing them through a project that goes through any of a nation's territory is going to end in disaster.

Even if some leaders are... accomodated, there will be opposition, as we've seen before.

They don't want to be rushed, they don't want to feel pressure, they don't want to be told it's good for the country they live in, for some reason...

The only way to get approval is to get each community involved in each project.  This takes a while, legally.  And even then, there's still a lot of local opposition remaining.  For one project, it's still local.  For many large projects, it can easily transform into a national opposition movement.

[Jacob]

Yeah that's a good point, Viper.

[Bauer]

Yep I agree completely, the First Nations in general are not ready for it although many are.  Good example of that is the Nisga who were actively involved in planning that natural gas pipeline but other First Nations oppose it on their territory.

There's also conflicts internally in First Nations between elected and hereditary chiefs.

At some point the First Nations also need to be held accountable - is there a reason 2 years is insufficient time to be consulted? What do they need for it to be sufficient? Consultation needs an end date and partnerships require concessions else they aren't really partnerships.

But the commitment to actually respecting their rights is a pretty new thing so forcing the agenda and surfacing its pain points isn't necessarily a bad thing in the long run.

[Bauer]

On another note as much as I'm not a fan of Danielle Smith raging and complaining I'm also not a fan of Ebys unilateral pipeline opposition.  Horgan part 2?

[HVC]

At some point the First Nations also need to be held accountable - is there a reason 2 years is insufficient time to be consulted? What do they need for it to be sufficient? Consultation needs an end date and partnerships require concessions else they aren't really partnerships.

The longer they can drag it out and threaten to drag it out further the more concessions they can get.

[viper37]

On another note as much as I'm not a fan of Danielle Smith raging and complaining I'm also not a fan of Ebys unilateral pipeline opposition.  Horgan part 2?

I only saw a snippet of this in a political show.

It didn't seem as bad at it sound though.  I gathered he was against a new pipeline in a specific area where oil tankers are now banned but agreed to expand the volume going through trans-mountain?

Is there a link you can share?

In any case, any amount of oil or gas must be sold first, before a pipeline is built.  China is buying now.  But they're quickly reducing their demand.  They may not be buying as much oil in 10 years.  It's too early to tell, but oil demand has slowed down in 2024, compared to a steady rise in the previous years.

And there's the GHG problem.  If oil companies can't respect any emission cap, it's a dead end.  Alberta must do its share for climate change fight.  We don't have to support Alberta every year on and on.

[Bauer]

He said he doesn't support a new pipeline through his province or the reversal of the northern coast tanker ban

In principle I don't disagree with your comments, but I think the economical viability of any new pipeline should be determined by the private sector that should build it.  It shouldnt be a unilateral government decision.  In all likelihood I doubt the private sector would actually build it as I understand there's been zero interest — but a lot of that has to do with the government environment.

It also does make logical sense to maximize the value of the tmx pipeline and that involves dredging (which typical Vancouverites oppose) to allow larger tankers, and upgrading the pipelines pumping stations.

[crazy canuck]

Yep I agree completely, the First Nations in general are not ready for it although many are.  Good example of that is the Nisga who were actively involved in planning that natural gas pipeline but other First Nations oppose it on their territory.

There's also conflicts internally in First Nations between elected and hereditary chiefs.

At some point the First Nations also need to be held accountable - is there a reason 2 years is insufficient time to be consulted? What do they need for it to be sufficient? Consultation needs an end date and partnerships require concessions else they aren't really partnerships.

But the commitment to actually respecting their rights is a pretty new thing so forcing the agenda and surfacing its pain points isn't necessarily a bad thing in the long run.

I was litigating what consultation meant 25 years ago; the question of what it meant and how businesses could adopt and incorporate indigenous interests into their projects has been well understood for at least the last 15 years.

And in that time, a number of projects have been developed in BC with that model.

[Valmy]

Well then I hope Carney well understands it.

[crazy canuck]

I am going to assume he has an understanding of how businesses has operated in Canada over the last 15 years.