In the news today, March 10 2009, the CPC [Conservative Party of Canada] announced their economic protection package, in response to the recession. The first, and biggest part of the annoucement is tax reductions. There is nothing for renewable energy, which I think is a mistake. Canada exports a lot of energy, as oil, electricity, and natural gas, to the USA. It is our biggest export, and we have along history of government helping to get those industries started off on a good footing with tax breaks, research grants, and exploration money, and start-up money for infrastructure. If Canada is to remain an exporter of energy, we will have to change with the times. America is allready rumbling about "dirty energy", and so Canada would do well to have a lot more capacity in renewable energy. Clean sources of electricity could be, and are almost gauranteed to be, the most attractive export to an energy hungry United States market. At this time, March 2009, there is an economic recession, and the Conservative Party is spending money to prop up our economy. It is purely short-sighted, and a result of conservative values tied to oil and gas "as our ONLY source of energy", and a "culture of denial" of the problem of greenhouse gas emissions and other pollution, that is behind the CPC refusal to fund renewable energy projects. Taxes, by the way, are how government gets money to fund these so-called "private industry" start-ups. The Tar Sands was given it's start with tax money.
Links:
[1] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/economic-protection-package-announced-conservatives#comment-996477
[2] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/economic-protection-package-announced-conservatives#comment-996483
[3] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/economic-protection-package-announced-conservatives#comment-996517
[4] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/economic-protection-package-announced-conservatives#comment-996519
[5] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/economic-protection-package-announced-conservatives#comment-996931
[6] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/economic-protection-package-announced-conservatives#comment-997061
[7] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/economic-protection-package-announced-conservatives#comment-997116
[8] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/economic-protection-package-announced-conservatives#comment-997843
[9] http://rabble.ca/user
[10] http://rabble.ca/user/register
So thery are really protecting whom then?
It means the Yanks dont want our dirty oil, and so Canadian taxpayers will foot the bills for r&d to clean it up, "infrastructure" and "start-up money", whatever in heck that means. It's old world ecnonomy based on resource colonialism with FTA-NAFTA in the back pockets of maruading multinationals.
Economists will say that productivity and innovation are important to any modern economy. But dumb-dumb Harper doesnt want that for Canada, a northern colony and natural resource preserve for corporate America to raid at will.
Canada’s innovation woes
CANADA, of course, will emerge from the recession. But it will be a different Canada. The opportunity — and challenge — we have today is to use this time of transition to build innovative bridges for a better future Canada.
This is what many countries are doing in their stimulus budgets — investing in innovation, human skills and infrastructure to create more competitive industries and good jobs as we move into the next decade of the 21st century.
The decline of the automotive and forest products industries are just two examples of the adjustment process now underway. While these industries will continue to be important, provided they can become more innovative, their future role in the economy will be smaller.
Likewise, with new climate change policies and lower oil prices, Canada’s oilsands companies, which have shelved close to $50 billion in investment plans, are unlikely to return to the boom era of recent years.
The recent federal stimulus budget does a bit to help move to a new economy with new industries and jobs, but not nearly enough. More disturbingly, it points to cutbacks in spending on Canada’s knowledge base in the coming years.
Stupid is as stupid does, and the Harpers have cornered the market on stupidity.
Linda McQuaig has an excellent article about how the rich are freaking out because they're afraid they're going to be taxed - to the point where someone in the Financial Times is claiming to be a persecuted minority. Ha!
http://rabble.ca/columnists/those-poor-persecuted-rich-people
I'd love to see Canada tax the shit out of our rich people, because they're the ones with money, likely through a combination of tax dodges and exploitation of the poor, and other devious stuff. I doubt either Harper (or Iggy, if he ever became PM) would have the guts to do this, though. Bastards, both of them.
The government should be throwing all that deficit money at universities and colleges. People everywhere are predicting a sharp spike in enrollments in undergrad and grad studies as young people try to escape the effects of this mild depression.
Here is the link to a supportive article by the Canadian Wind Energy Association:
http://www.canwea.ca/media/release/release_e.php?newsId=54
QuotedFederal Budget Fails to Capitalize on Canada's Green Energy Opportunity
Ottawa, ONTARIO-JANUARY 27, 2009 -- The Canadian Wind Energy Association (CanWEA) today reacted with disappointment to the federal government's failure to expand and extend its very successful ecoENERGY for Renewable Power Program (eRPP) in the 2009 federal budget. The absence of such action in the federal budget means that federal production incentives for the deployment of wind and other forms of renewable energy will run out of funding to support new projects before the end of the next fiscal year.
"Our ability to compete with the United States for investment in wind energy projects and manufacturing opportunities will decline as a result of this budget. At a time when the United States has made measures to support renewable energy deployment a key component of its plans to stimulate the US economy, Canada is moving in the opposite direction," said Robert Hornung, President of CanWEA. "While we are extremely disappointed, we remain committed to working with the federal government to ensure that they see the value of investing in the world's most rapidly growing source of electricity and will explore what opportunities may exist in the budget to enhance wind energy deployment in Canada.
Over the next 5 years, CanWEA's proposal for an eRPP expansion and extension would have cost the federal treasury $600 million and leveraged over $6 billion in new private sector investment into the Canadian economy - and created 8,000 new jobs - while helping the federal government achieve its Throne Speech commitment to provide 90% of the country's electricity needs from non-emitting power sources by the year 2020.
"Between now and 2020, it is projected that $1 trillion will be invested in wind energy globally, creating more than 1.75 million jobs. If Canada wishes to capture a growing portion of this rapidly expanding global economic opportunity, and is seeking to maximize the economic and environmental benefits of wind energy development, Parliament will need to take actions well beyond anything included in today's federal budget," Hornung said.
The federal government announced the eRPP in January 2007 to support the deployment of approximately 4,000MW of new low-impact, renewable electricity projects by March 31, 2011. The program was so successful that all funds were allocated almost two years ahead of schedule.
The Canadian Wind Energy Association (CanWEA) is a non-profit industry association representing more than 400 members in the wind energy industry. CanWEA promotes the responsible development and application of all aspects of wind energy in Canada, including the creation of a suitable policy environment.
CanWEA President Robert Hornung is available for interviews.
For more information, contact:
Ulrike Kucera
Media Relations Officer
613-234-8716, ext. 228
Mobile: 613 867-4433
My disappointment with Colleges and Universities occurred when during a recent seminar on Government funding of Colleges and Universities, it became very apparent to me that these entities were more interested in feathering their nests then they were in the students. Infact I was downright sickened by the whole experience. The Belly up to the trough mentality is no more pleasant when it is a University.
I have no respect left for these people. There arrogances and entitlement appeared to have no bounds.
And yet, I believe that these facilities need more money to do their good work, I just wish I had a broom to deal to clean house with.
If the Government hadn't stolen the EI, a large portion of retraining for College or Universities could have come from the EI surplus, instead of this "Deficit" spending you highlighted. This money could be used by the individuals to go to College or University.
Then, in order to provide the best education and facilities, the Government should be doing its duty in funding the Universities and colleges directly as well as providing loans and grants for Students entering post 2ndary ed.
We all know that people benefit from a good education. Part of a good education is identifying who benefits, and I want to see the Individual benefit, and not just the University. From their point of view, I couldn't tell if these elitists gave a tinkers damn about the Students or the quality of the courses they were running. They just want money.
Layton warns of 'brown and polluted' economic recovery
excerpt:
EDMONTON — Federal NDP Leader Jack Layton says the Harper government is fighting the recession on the back of the environment.
A leaked document that shows Ottawa doesn't want to do as many environmental impact reviews doesn't bode well for the protection of Canada's land, air and water, Mr. Layton said Saturday.
The New Democrats first got wind of the government's plan in January through a Freedom of Information request, and raised the issue in the House of Commons at that time.
excerpt:
But Mr. Layton said he fears what will happen if the federal government doesn't act as an environmental watchdog – as it is legally required to do.
“The consequences of doing the cleanup later and the health consequences are ones that are going to come back and bite us or our children – and none of us wants that to happen.”