Alberta Election 2019

15 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport
Alberta Election 2019

 Just listened to Rachel's Presser. Compared to so many of our political leaders, she is such a class act it would be a shame if she were not re-elected.

https://twitter.com/RachelNotley?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%...

NorthReport

Maybe BCers better ensure their bicycles are in good working order to get around with when Alberta cuts off our oil supplies. If that happens Gregor Robertson will become a BC hero.

 

http://edmontonjournal.com/news/politics/graham-thomson-premier-rachel-n...

NorthReport
voice of the damned

NorthReport wrote:

Maybe BCers better ensure their bicycles are in good working order to get around with when Alberta cuts off our oil supplies. If that happens Gregor Robertson will become a BC hero.

 

http://edmontonjournal.com/news/politics/graham-thomson-premier-rachel-n...

Well, at the moment, cutting off oil supplies is just advice from Kenney(who of course doesn't actually have to make these decisions), with Thomson speculating that Notley might act on it. No evidence has so far been offered that she's seriously going to do it. I think I read somewhere that the damage to Alberta's economy from pursuing that strategy would be significant, but I don't know all the details. 

 

Pondering

NorthReport wrote:

Maybe BCers better ensure their bicycles are in good working order to get around with when Alberta cuts off our oil supplies. If that happens Gregor Robertson will become a BC hero.

http://edmontonjournal.com/news/politics/graham-thomson-premier-rachel-n...

That would hurt Alberta more than BC. BC can buy fuel elsewhere and can retaliate in a multitude of ways. Oil is not the only product on its way to BC ports from Alberta or vice versa. 

This is happening because of Alberta's choices. Alberta decided to worship the gods of the free market, low regulation  and low taxes.

Embrace social democracy. Built refineries. The only reason Alberta isn't building refineries and hasn't nationalized the oil industry is political. Alberta doesn't need Trans mountain expansion or Keystone XL. US corporations want those things to feed their refineries. One good thing about Quebec nationalism is that it led to and protects Hydro Quebec. Time to create Alberta Energy or petition Ottawa to create Canada Energy. 

Why should BC or any other part of Canada pay for Alberta's political choices? Why should the BC environment be threatened because Alberta is dedicated to free market economics and low taxes? Build state of the art refineries. Problem solved. 

I have no problem with the federal government financing such a project in part or in whole. A nationalized refinery is a great idea. 

NorthReport

The more I see of Rachel Notley the more impressed I am. She is one class act and may well prove the right-wing pundits and media wrong by winning a second term as Premier of Alberta.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/pipelines-and-politics-notley-is...

NorthReport

The more I see of Rachel Notley the more impressed I am. She is one class act and may well prove the right-wing pundits and media wrong by winning a second term as Premier of Alberta.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/pipelines-and-politics-notley-is...

josh

NorthReport wrote:

The more I see of Rachel Notley the more impressed I am. She is one class act and may well prove the right-wing pundits and media wrong by winning a second term as Premier of Alberta.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/pipelines-and-politics-notley-is...

"tree huggers "?  Into the garbage bin.

 

Pogo Pogo's picture

Pondering wrote:
The only reason Alberta isn't building refineries and hasn't nationalized the oil industry is political. 

The only reason? I only did a little research into refineries, but the more I read the more complex it became. Where will the byproducts (stuff like asphalt) go and how will it get there? How much capacity is there already and in a era of declining demand is adding capacity the smart choice? 

I don't know the answer to this, but to me the question is about the carbon footprint. If Alberta oil is sent to market in the most energy efficient manner (which would likely coincide with economical considerations) what oil would it replace and what is the carbon footprint comparison?

6079_Smith_W

josh wrote:

"tree huggers "?  Into the garbage bin.

Considering what he is saying - that Horgan is playing similar political games, and this likely is connected to his decision on Site C - I'd say it is fair comment. If he was serious about environmental concerns, why did he bow to financial pressure in that other case? Clearly some are just tree huggers to him.

He did so because restricting Alberta oil is a decision that isn't going to hurt him at home, like Site C would. It is someone else's problem, so he can afford to act "on principle".

voice of the damned

^ But I didn't get the impression he was using "tree huggers" to describe Horgan's disparaging view of environmentalists; I think he was just using it as a dismissive term for environmentalists, full stop.

That said, I regard the environmental movement as something akin to movements to preserve old buildings, ie. I accept that there are varying opinions about just how far we can take it, and if someone wants to attach a disparaging label to people that he thinks are taking it too far, that's basically okay with me. I don't think it's like making fun of feminists as "bra burners", for example.

voice of the damned

As for the general thrust of Mason's piece, I think it's correct insofar as the short-term consequences go, ie. Notley is probably enjoying a surge in support, Kenney is sidelined etc. But I'm not sure that that translates into long-term benefit for the Alberta NDP.

This might end up being something like GHW Bush winning the Gulf War in '91. Americans were ecstatic, his popularity skyrocketed, but at the end of the day, Americans still wanted someone else as president.

Pogo Pogo's picture

Most environmentalists that I know have no issue with the name, depending on the context. Obviously the author was using it to lump this demographic into a simplistic save everything green everywhere category. Throwing out the argument because he used this term is pretty dumb in my view. Horgan's platform and Green Party agreement has anti-pipeline action as central features. There should be no surprises here. The end game is that Notley gets to defend Alberta, and Horgan gets to defend BC while Trudeau will have to try and bridge the growing chasm. In the end it will be a question of time.  Can BC put enough hurdles in place that the money people walk away.

When I see a big beautiful tree, I do sometimes like to put my hand on it, but that is where I draw the line. 

NorthReport
NorthReport