[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[viper37]

Steven Guilbeault resigns from Mark Carney's cabinet 

Danielle Smith is doing her happy dance right now.

[Grey Fox]

Meanwhile Nutrien is choosing to build a new potash export terminal in Washington state due to excessive regulations in Canada.  This is exactly the thing we're supposed to be avoiding right now. 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/nutrien-selects-u-s-port-to-build-new-potash-export-terminal-9.6992424

It goes both ways, though: https://seattlered.com/taxes/microsoft-business-taxes/4115276

Microsoft issues chilling warning: New WA taxes will drive companies out—Vancouver already winning

...

Vancouver already benefiting as Seattle stumbles
Microsoft has been quietly expanding its office in Vancouver, B.C., doubling its headcount there since before the pandemic.

No, you are making a false equivalency.  Nutrien is not moving its business. It is still extracting Potash from Saskatchewan. The problem they are facing is the lack of infrastructure on the West coast of Canada to move their product to market, and the regulatory hurdles (some would say nightmare) to get things built here.

Bauer is correct to point out this is the very thing Carney is trying to address.  And I would add, needs to get addressed quickly.  One way to think about it is that the announcement of special projects that get to avoid the regulatory tangle we have created is another way of saying that they are probably unnecessary brakes on much needed infrastructure development.

It's a gamble there too. We could disallow potash export to the US at any moment.

[viper37]

Canada rolls back climate rules in energy deal with Alberta

A huge win for Alberta, again.  No wonder Guilbeault ran away.

[Oexmelin]

Your dismissiveness is unwarranted.  This is a professor in the University of Saskatchewan's  Agricultural and Resource Economics department.  If he doesn't know what he is talking about in this area, then nobody does.

I wasn't dismissive of the issue. I was dismissive of its treatment here. Maybe Canada has an infrastructure problem, but I'd have little reason to subscribe to the argument from that example.

From the article:

« To put a billion-dollar investment in place is going to require rail capacity improvements, and by the sounds of what Nutrient is saying, things are easier to get done in the United States than they are in Canada," Smyth said last week in an interview with CBC's The 306 guest host Theresa Kliem. »

I am solicited by the media often. I know that their modus operandi is to ask for reactions very quickly, and it's up to the individual expert to determine whether or not they are sufficiently informed on the specifics. It does seem here that Smyth is nodding along/drawing from Nutrien's reasoning, rather than from his own analysis.

As for his expertise, a look at his publication history - basically, a pro GM crops outlook - suggests a rather dismissive view of the idea of political controls and regulation. A legitimate perspective, to be sure - not mine - but not one that would lead me to simply defer to his brief media point.

In short, my own perspective is that matters such as these are too serious to be treated mostly through self-serving industry arguments. Are there legitimate issues that require more time? Is this only red tape? What would these legitimate issues be? I'd rather have these questions considered beyond press releases.