Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 422

Thread: Wildrose

  1. #1
    C2E Super Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,036

    Default Wildrose

    I appears the Wildrose has shown their true colors. I wonder what the reaction would have been if they had made fun of Raj Panus accent. I personally haven't noticed any accent with Uncle Ed.

    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/...618/story.html

  2. #2
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,129

    Default

    this is old news.... does anyone actually care?

  3. #3

    Default

    I care... What happens when the wildrose has to go sell Alberta around the world.. Are they going to make fun of all the "funny" sounding people.

  4. #4
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,129

    Default

    It was just some lowly strategist... people make these stupid mistakes all the time. It's not a big deal. He was called on it, and he apologized. That's all there is to this story.

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    I care... What happens when the wildrose has to go sell Alberta around the world.. Are they going to make fun of all the "funny" sounding people.
    One staff member made a horrible mistake and they apologised. If Ms Smith did something like this, or one of the candidates, then yes it would be a big deal. That is not the case though. If you don't think staff members from other parties make poor taste jokes, you are in dreamland.

  6. #6

    Default

    At my place of employement.. the staffer likley would hae been fired.

  7. #7
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,129

    Default

    Yep... I agree with you fully moahunter. Don't turn this into something it's not.

  8. #8
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    At my place of employement.. the staffer likley would hae been fired.
    And where do you work?

  9. #9

  10. #10

    Default

    Poltics needs to get a grip.. Name calling is not the way to conduct buisness. The adversarial {sic} system makes parties look childish.

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    At my place of employement.. the staffer likley would hae been fired.
    Sounds like a fun place to work.


    About six years ago I was doing some work in an MLA's constituency office and there was a poem on a bulletin board that was basically about killing an opposing MLA. Laughing at someone's accent doesn't seem to bad in comparison.

    Everyone has there little inside jokes, who cares.

  12. #12
    C2E Super Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    1,036

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by etownboarder View Post
    Yep... I agree with you fully moahunter. Don't turn this into something it's not.

    It's racism! I can't believe that there are people on this forum who don't have an issue with just sloughing this off.

  13. #13

    Default

    ^ Thank you Wrecker

    And TD has been a VERY fun place to work.. and I take comfort in the fact that if anyone made fun of the fact that I was Gay, my company would let them go.

  14. #14
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    656

    Default

    Didn't the PC's make fun of Liberal Muriel Abdurham (sp?) and her Scottish Accent? Oh my God, the whining from the Liberals went on for weeks.
    BobinEdmonton

  15. #15

    Default

    The Feds making fun of Stronic was another one.

    Gender, race and ethnic themed sucker punches are not okay within the gov't. It's childish!

  16. #16
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,129

    Default

    It's in poor taste, yes... but I don't think it's something that anyone can hold against the Wild Rose or Danielle Smith. The guy got called on for his behaviour, and apologized. People screw up all the time.

  17. #17
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    3,800

    Default

    Imagine what a wonderful world it would be if uttering all jokes regarding ethnicity, gender, age, religion, personal appearance, physical handicaps, homophobia, bodily functions and sexual practices was punishable by death.


    Like living in Eden !

    Last edited by Top_Dawg; 24-11-2009 at 03:32 PM.

  18. #18

    Default

    Danielle Smith had a GOLDEN oppertunity to make a REAL statement of change... It's hard to convince me your diffrent when you act exactly the same.

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Top_Dawg View Post
    Imagine what a wonderful world it would be if uttering all jokes regarding ethnicity, gender, age, religion, personal appearance, physical handicaps, homophobia, bodily functions and sexual practices were punishable by death.


    Like living in Eden !

    No offence Top Dawg.. but a certain c2e hammer fell on you pretty hard a while back.. If I don't recall...I don't think ANYONE viewed that as fun.
    There are lines, and when your on the job certain topics such as the ones listed above are caustic/hateful and can lead to harasment suits.
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 24-11-2009 at 03:34 PM.

  20. #20
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    3,800

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    No offence Top Dawg.. but a certain c2e hammer fell on you pretty hard a while back.. If I don't recall...I don't think ANYONE viewed that as fun.
    There are lines, and when your on the job certain topics such as the ones listed above are caustic/hateful and can lead to harasment suits.

    Sure, one has to recognize the time and the place.

    But in general Top_Dawg thinks many today are way too anal.

    Top_Dawg's knickers never bunched up 'round his kuyons even when some posted snide and disparaging remarks about him.

  21. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Top_Dawg View Post
    Imagine what a wonderful world it would be if uttering all jokes regarding ethnicity, gender, age, religion, personal appearance, physical handicaps, homophobia, bodily functions and sexual practices was punishable by death.


    Like living in Eden !

    Haha Top_Dawg again with the post of reason

    best post in the thread!
    FREE THE LOOPING .GIF MEMES
    youtube.com/GrimEmpire

  22. #22
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    jasper east
    Posts
    1,489

    Default

    You have to be partially ******** to be any part of the alliance. Would you punish a ******** kid for saying something racist? Probably not. Just doesn't know any better. Would you vote for him? Probably not either.

  23. #23
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Bonnie Doon
    Posts
    5,184

    Default

    I imagine someone as media savvy as Danielle Smith would tell her party members to shut their racist and sexist hole after this incident. If she doesn't nip this at the bud and more dumb comments leak out from members then the Wildrose will lose all momentum. They will live up to the stereotype of the party.

    However, perhaps because the Tories have been around much longer, they have had their fair share of redneck attitudes over the years. MLA Ivan Strang telling Raj Pannu to "go back to India", a former Drayton Valley MLA saying Belinda Stronach is a whore, and the fact that Stockwell Day was in Klein's cabinet.

  24. #24

    Default

    Paula Simons wrote about this today in the journal.. It's worth a read.

  25. #25

    Default

    Wildrose is nothing but disenchanted conservatives.
    Worse, they hide their true face, which is pro industry, pro religion, and personally a step backwards to what we need.

  26. #26
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Bonnie Doon
    Posts
    5,184

    Default

    Wildrose strategist quits after Twitter misstep

    Last Updated: Tuesday, November 24, 2009
    4:27 PM MT

    A political adviser, who apologized last week for an online comment that mocked Alberta's premier, has quit his job with the Wildrose Alliance.

    Shawn Howard, a party spokesman, confirmed on Tuesday that Stephen Carter has left his strategist post with leader Danielle Smith. But Howard said the departure has nothing to do with the incident last week.
    http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/sto...e-twitter.html

    I think his departure is 100% related to last week's incident.

  27. #27
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    4,956

    Default

    Just curious - what do posters here think of Russell Peters' humour? He makes fun of Chinese accents, Indian accents, white people, etc. Or Eddie Murphy/Richard Prior/etc making fun of white people? The Borat guy, Ali G, or his newer gay persona?

    A lot of people laugh. I do. Even when the joke's on me. Am I a bad person? Why do I laugh?

    Should they be stopped? Censored? Or is it a time and place thing? Where, and how, do we draw the line. Is making fun of straight people ok, but not gay people? Ridiculing white people is ok, but not if they're from Eastern Europe? Is it a tone of voice thing?

    Not trying to make a point really. Just wondering if it's a more nuanced issue.
    aka Jim Good; "The sooner you fall behind, the more time you have to catch up." - Steven Wright

  28. #28
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Bonnie Doon
    Posts
    5,184

    Default

    ^ It's who you are representing. Russel Peters, Eddie Murphy, and Ali G. are only responsible for their own image. They know what they say and do is not going to be everyone's cup of tea.

    A political party strategist or insider has to be careful on what he says because it may reflect on the party. This is especially true when that party is trying to shed its redneck image.

    A political scientist said there are some subjects that are off-limits when insulting political rivals. Obviously race and sexists remarks are taboo. It is also in bad form to make fun of appearance (including speech) or involve spouses and kids.

    It's okay to say Ed Stelmach is an incompetent fool who doesn't know what he's talking about. But don't make fun on how he talks.

    Danielle Smith as leader = 2 steps forward for the Wildrose Party
    Party strategist making hurtful remarks = 1.5 steps backwards

  29. #29
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    4,956

    Default

    I agree. The staffer may have made what he considered an off-hand joke at the Premier's expense. Not the worst thing in the world. The kind of thing everybody might say over a few pops at the local watering hole, among friends. And I'm sure he was thinking it was among friends. But it was on Twitter. He put the Twit, in Twitter. The Premier brushed it off. I'm sure he's used to hearing a lot worse.

    There's no question in my mind that many are making far more of it than it really warrants. As they were bound to, given the party he represents. But it was really, really dumb. Especially for a new party already faced with being hung with an ultra right wing rep, that Ms Smith is trying hard to distance them from.

    I think he "got resigned" for being stupid, as much as for anything else. They had little choice but to get rid of him, to demonstrate they won't stand for that kind of thing.
    Last edited by Jimbo; 24-11-2009 at 10:00 PM.
    aka Jim Good; "The sooner you fall behind, the more time you have to catch up." - Steven Wright

  30. #30
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    5,423

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by etownboarder View Post
    It was just some lowly strategist... people make these stupid mistakes all the time. It's not a big deal. He was called on it, and he apologized. That's all there is to this story.
    Chief of Staff is a lowly strategist? It wasn't so much what he did, bad enough - it was the lame excuse - then the follow up - "but I got a lot of publicity."

    The kicker is he's gone and, according to Danielle Smith, "nothing to do with his tweet."

    uh huh.

  31. #31
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DTrobotnik View Post
    You have to be partially ******** to be any part of the alliance. Would you punish a ******** kid for saying something racist? Probably not. Just doesn't know any better. Would you vote for him? Probably not either.
    "********" is regarded as an insulting term for the mentally challenged. Just sayin'!
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  32. #32
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,516
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  33. #33
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,597

    Default Wildrose not the only stone agers

    http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/a...stards#article

    "Nova Scotia Conservative MP Gerald Keddy has apologized for describing unemployed Nova Scotians as "those no-good bastards sitting on the sidewalk in Halifax that can't get work."

    There has been no such apology from Saskatchewan MP Maurice Vellacott for his unflattering depiction of women seeking abortions, which also applauded Saskatoon doctors for restricting access to abortion services.
    "Pro-life feminists have ... come to see abortion as part of a male agenda to have women more sexually available," said the controversial MP in an anti-abortion news release sent out Nov. 20
    "

  34. #34

    Default

    The point thats missing in this is that the Wildrose party has no current credibility, platform, and is still in its infancy with most voters not knowing much about it.

    Making a dumb *** comment at this stage in the game is self destructing right from the start. Without the natural buffer of benefit of doubt that might be there if this party were an established entity.

    This is still first impressions territory and a bad one that results in me not wanting to see any more.

    The comment is offensive sure, but what really offends me is another party that wants to engage in lowest common denominator politics.

    Hasn't Alberta suffered enough of that?

    This is hardly the fresh face I'd want to see from a new party.

  35. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by North Guy66 View Post
    Wildrose strategist quits after Twitter misstep

    Last Updated: Tuesday, November 24, 2009
    4:27 PM MT

    A political adviser, who apologized last week for an online comment that mocked Alberta's premier, has quit his job with the Wildrose Alliance.

    Shawn Howard, a party spokesman, confirmed on Tuesday that Stephen Carter has left his strategist post with leader Danielle Smith. But Howard said the departure has nothing to do with the incident last week.
    http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/sto...e-twitter.html

    I think his departure is 100% related to last week's incident.
    ^ I agree 100% related.... Stop the political Nicey Nice and be honest!

  36. #36

    Default

    ^It is probably not as simple as that. If you fire somebody, it doesn't always pay to say the real reason, especially if an agreement has been reached to prevent some sort of unjustified dismisal charge or similar. The whole idea that the Wild Rose would want to offend what is a conservative bloc of the population, was always a bit silly - this was a dumb mistake by a staffer and they fixed it rapidly. Issue over.

  37. #37

    Default

    Don't lie then.. say it's for personal reasons, but to say it has nothing to do with the his faux pas is clearly false.

    He hung himself and we all know it.

  38. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^It is probably not as simple as that. If you fire somebody, it doesn't always pay to say the real reason, especially if an agreement has been reached to prevent some sort of unjustified dismisal charge or similar. The whole idea that the Wild Rose would want to offend what is a conservative bloc of the population, was always a bit silly - this was a dumb mistake by a staffer and they fixed it rapidly. Issue over.
    The issue is never over unless the public says it is.

    The Wildrose particularly need to tread carefully as a foundling party just finding its feet and with this event being an early unneeded controversy.

    Its always interesting as well to say something "Is a mistake" but it seems to me that this party views it only as "a mistake" subsequent to the public reaction to this.

    My own opinion would be that a statement like this is in keeping with the Wildrose wish to be combative but that it went into questionable grounds.

    Still, imo, the last thing needed in Alberta politics is another party that thinks mud flinging is the answer to capturing appeal.

  39. #39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    Don't lie then.. say it's for personal reasons, but to say it has nothing to do with the his faux pas is clearly false.

    He hung himself and we all know it.
    Exactly. Don't insult the public intelligence with this.

    Something like this can be an opportunity for a party to air some laundry and come clean.
    The reaction to it and chopping a head(resign or fired? Who ever knows?) does nothing to convince me the party is actually being open and honest about this.

    The bigger issue is we need a party in Alberta to coherently confront policy, not to publicly personally attack representatives.

    Throw any of the words out and its still the nature of action thats the biggest concern imo.

  40. #40
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,764

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Komrade View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Top_Dawg View Post
    Imagine what a wonderful world it would be if uttering all jokes regarding ethnicity, gender, age, religion, personal appearance, physical handicaps, homophobia, bodily functions and sexual practices was punishable by death.


    Like living in Eden !

    Haha Top_Dawg again with the post of reason

    best post in the thread!
    albeit a little - or perhaps more than a little - "do as i say, not as i do"???
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  41. #41
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,764

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimbo View Post
    Just curious - what do posters here think of Russell Peters' humour? He makes fun of Chinese accents, Indian accents, white people, etc. Or Eddie Murphy/Richard Prior/etc making fun of white people? The Borat guy, Ali G, or his newer gay persona?

    A lot of people laugh. I do. Even when the joke's on me. Am I a bad person? Why do I laugh?

    Should they be stopped? Censored? Or is it a time and place thing? Where, and how, do we draw the line. Is making fun of straight people ok, but not gay people? Ridiculing white people is ok, but not if they're from Eastern Europe? Is it a tone of voice thing?

    Not trying to make a point really. Just wondering if it's a more nuanced issue.
    except i think that russell and eddie and richard and that borat guy are making fun of our attitudes regarding regarding chinese or indian accents or white people or gay personas etc. and their humour is intended not just to make us laugh but to overcome some of those attitudes. those that laugh recognize the humour and the intent. those that don't probably just take offence if they get it at all. this however was an instance of someone trying to take advantage of those kinds of attitudes which is much more serious than just being a nuanced issue.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  42. #42
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    2,469

    Default

    this comment reveals the true nature of wildrose alliance. I cant believe that calgary is dumb enough to support them.. thank god I live in Edmonton, a city with seemingly a bit more common sense.

  43. #43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimbo View Post
    Just curious - what do posters here think of Russell Peters' humour? He makes fun of Chinese accents, Indian accents, white people, etc. Or Eddie Murphy/Richard Prior/etc making fun of white people? The Borat guy, Ali G, or his newer gay persona?

    A lot of people laugh. I do. Even when the joke's on me. Am I a bad person? Why do I laugh?

    Should they be stopped? Censored? Or is it a time and place thing? Where, and how, do we draw the line. Is making fun of straight people ok, but not gay people? Ridiculing white people is ok, but not if they're from Eastern Europe? Is it a tone of voice thing?

    Not trying to make a point really. Just wondering if it's a more nuanced issue.
    except i think that russell and eddie and richard and that borat guy are making fun of our attitudes regarding regarding chinese or indian accents or white people or gay personas etc. and their humour is intended not just to make us laugh but to overcome some of those attitudes. those that laugh recognize the humour and the intent. those that don't probably just take offence if they get it at all. this however was an instance of someone trying to take advantage of those kinds of attitudes which is much more serious than just being a nuanced issue.
    As a member of "The Gays" I can tell you that Gay Borat (Ivan I think) caused a lot of waves. I personally did not see it nor did I watch more than 10 min of Borat. They are insulting and arn't much diffrent than if someone tried to revive black face.

    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 26-11-2009 at 02:01 PM.

  44. #44

    Default

    ^
    I'm not gay and Borat wasn't half as bad as his other movie which portrays homosexuals as annoying stereotypical eurotrash.

  45. #45
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by etownboarder View Post
    It was just some lowly strategist... people make these stupid mistakes all the time. It's not a big deal. He was called on it, and he apologized. That's all there is to this story.
    He was the party leader's interim chief of staff. That is not a "lowly strategist".

  46. #46
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,129

    Default

    Ummm, he works for the Wildrose... perhaps in their organization, he was the top of something. But in the grand scheme of things, he was a big nobody, and very few people cared what words of wisdom he had to share. Stop making a big deal over nothing.

  47. #47

    Default

    If it qwas nothing.. then why did he quit ?

  48. #48

    Default The Reason

    If you really want to know why he "resigned," read this: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle1376565/

    It had nothing to do with twitter...

  49. #49
    never answered e-mail
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Peachland
    Posts
    1,579

    Default

    ^wow, the yarn just keeps coming. This guy was the best thing to happen to the PC's.

  50. #50
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    3,800

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by glasshead View Post
    ^wow, the yarn just keeps coming. This guy was the best thing to happen to the PC's.



    Priceless glasshead !

  51. #51

    Default

    It's the Alberta version of Palin, as it were..

  52. #52
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    It's the Alberta version of Palin, as it were..
    How are the two even remotely comparable?

  53. #53

    Default

    All the fun juicy stuff comes out in the wash

  54. #54
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,516

    Default

    Article on Danielle Smith.
    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/...934/story.html

    I find this bit particularly disturbing:
    Smith is heavy on economic policy. The province's future lies in a vigorous oil-and-gas sector and a vigorous agriculture sector. Staking a future on nanotechnology or the knowledge economy is "silly" -- except when new technology can help the oil and gas industry, she says.
    She's so deep in oil pockets that she doesn't believe in diversifying the economy. That to me is an EPIC FAIL.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  55. #55
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,129

    Default

    Wow. Just wow.

  56. #56
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    if this describes her real beliefs--what an *****!

  57. #57
    never answered e-mail
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Peachland
    Posts
    1,579

    Default

    At least she's articulated her policies and direction for the WAP. Assuming this indeed is a snapshot of their high level policies I would never support this party. Can someone please let me know what any of the other parties' platforms are in Alberta?....didn't think so. Although I still believe WAP will be a "fringe" party along with the NDP and Liberals in the next election, it's a sad state in Alberta politics when 1920's-30's economic policies and failed unfettered "free market" ideals will be the major alternative to Albertans, accroding to the media. Scary.

  58. #58
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,129

    Default

    Apparently they've hired a very narrow-minded, stuck up, completely out of touch with reality, 22yo princess to write their education policy. I am waiting to get my hands on it because I know the girl, and if she really did write it, it's going to be a disaster.

  59. #59

    Default

    The fact that she supported Klein's 'third way' policies to health care scare the bejeesus out of me.

  60. #60

    Default

    ^So you prefer Stelmac's "no way" policies?

  61. #61
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    ^ are suggesting those are the only two types of policies?

  62. #62

    Default

    ^It seems they may be the only two with any prospect of happening in Alberta, so, yes.

  63. #63
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    very, very sad options.

  64. #64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    very, very sad options.
    http://rebootalberta.org/

  65. #65
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles; Athens
    Posts
    4,399

    Default

    Why did I just get a flashback to the show Reboot?
    LA today, Athens tomorrow. I miss E-town.

  66. #66

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    If the Wildrose can reboot us back to the late Klein era, when the oil and gas industry was huming (thanks in part to royalty rates being reasonable) with the money rolling in to be invested in the likes of UofA, health insitutes, and cheques in the mail (could do with one of those now), etc., I'll be happy.
    Last edited by moahunter; 23-12-2009 at 10:47 AM.

  67. #67
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter
    when the oil and gas industry was huming (thanks in part to royalty rates being reasonable)
    Perhaps your memory is off, but the oil and gas industry wasn't "huming" through most of the 90's. Perhaps on the natural gas side things were okay, but in terms of oil and specifically the oilsands, no major projects or expansions got underway in the time period because oil was fairly cheap ($20-30/barrel). It had little to do with royalty rates. Rapid expansion and new projects began to happen from 2002 onward because oil began to rapidly increase in price.

    Same goes for today. Oil has been around $75/barrel and the last round of expansions and new projects are either finishing up or continuing to be built, while the next round has mostly been deferred temporarily while costs come down and prices stabilize. Natural gas producers are hurting not because of royalty rates, but get this, because natural gas prices are at historic lows and have been for awhile due to increased supply from non-conventional sources in the US.

    What exactly are you basing your contention that our royalties after the review are no longer "reasonable?" I'd love to ask that question of the WA and Smith as well. Because last I checked, they haven't done a detailed indepth analysis of our "take" compared with other jurisdictions around the world. And again, last I checked, the review that WAS conducted made the conclusion our royalties were quite low compared to most other countries, hence the recommendation to raise them by X. And lastly, last I checked the raises actually implemented fell short of those recommendations.

    So please, I'd love to hear from yourself, the Wildrose Alliance, or Danielle Smith what analysis any of them have used to conclude that the current downturn in our oilpatch is directly caused by (and not just correlated with) the recently adopted royalty scheme and not because of the much more obvious fact that oil and gas prices are barely half of what they were a year or two ago.

    Further, I'd like to have them explain why we need to be in a huge rush to extract our resource wealth as quickly as possible while returning as little as possible of the revenues to Albertans and causing irreparable damage to our environment and water sources when the reality is that such resources are only to get more expensive over time due to dwindling global supplies, and we'd be much better off extracting them at a reasonable pace while technology catches up and makes it more responsible while prices also rise leaving Albertans not only with a bigger piece of the pie, but a bigger piece of a bigger pie.

    No, the break neck, runaway, overheated economy of the past 5 years is exactly what the WA is after and exactly what we'll get if they get to implement their policies and resource prices rise again.
    Last edited by Marcel Petrin; 23-12-2009 at 12:34 PM.

  68. #68

    Default

    ^It was predicted before the royalties changed that it would lower government revenues, and that is exactly what has happened:

    http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/...b-586d031829aa

    Here is a more recent quote. Right now, European and other investors are choosing not to risk money to invest here, because of the greedy decision to try and take a bigger clip:

    John Langille, CNR's vice-chairman of the board, said although the natural gas reserves in northwest Alberta have great potential for the company, it won't make much economic sense to exploit them unless Edmonton changes the royalty regime that came into effect Jan. 1 this year.

    "We have tremendous abilities for reserves there," he said in his pitch to investors.

    "Unfortunately, the Alberta government has still not changed their royalty structure. And until they do, that northwest Alberta area basically cannot generate the same returns as our oil projects. As a result, we're not allocating much capital to that part of the world."
    http://www.calgarysun.com/money/2009...04221-sun.html
    Last edited by moahunter; 23-12-2009 at 01:03 PM.

  69. #69
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,764

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    ...

    What exactly are you basing your contention that our royalties after the review are no longer "reasonable?"

    ...

    No, the break neck, runaway, overheated economy of the past 5 years is exactly what the WA is after and exactly what we'll get if they get to implement their policies and resource prices rise again.
    most of wa's contentions and much of the "gut reaction" support they get have no basis in reality or in reasonableness. i think most of it comes from the fact it is simply easier to be "against" than it is to put forward what you are for and specifically how you you will accomplish that. the liberal and ndp party's inability to recognize and address that is a big reason why their support languishes where it does. and i would agree with your assessment that wa is likely to move us backwards and not forwards when it comes to resource management when resources is used in the broader sense of including human and financial resources and not just the actual oil and gas. in the same vein that had groucho marx say that refused to join any club that would have him as a member, despite the work they have cut out for them the pc's can probably take at least some solace from the fact they are under fire from both sides of the spectrum equally.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  70. #70
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles; Athens
    Posts
    4,399

    Default

    Funny those Calgary Sun articles, aren't they? Much like the WA the CNR rep is very able to just complain and whine yet not offer any real objectivity or solution.

    When it comes down to it, all the oil and gas companies will complain and use every "We're going to BC/Sask" threat they can since they aren't getting the best deal in the world anymore.

    Same goes for the WA. Just as the NDPs and Liberals have bashed the PCs for everything they rarely put forward a workable alternative.
    LA today, Athens tomorrow. I miss E-town.

  71. #71
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter
    ^It was predicted before the royalties changed that it would lower government revenues, and that is exactly what has happened:
    Well lets take a look at your contention and that article.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sub-title of linked article
    The Stelmach government's contentious new royalty framework--implemented to secure a larger share of resource riches for Albertans--is garnering fewer royalties from many oil and gas wells than the old system due to today's low-price environment.
    Quote Originally Posted by Further down the body
    The new royalty framework is extremely price and production sensitive, meaning the government will charge a higher rate and collect more income at times of loftier prices, and far less when prices sink to levels such as those of today.
    So let me get this straight, the government is currently collecting LESS royalties because the new structure is more price sensitive. And somehow that is a BAD thing for more investment or profits for the oil patch?

    Wait, what? How does that make any sense? It takes more royalties than the old structure when prices are high, and that's a bad thing. It takes less royalties than the old structure when prices are low. How is that a bad thing?

    What that tells me is that if we had retained the old structure, things would actually be worse for oil and gas producers right now and over the past 18 months because they'd have been paying MORE royalties.

    At what point does the cognitive dissonance become so blatantly obvious that people clue in to the BS they're being fed?

    Quote Originally Posted by From the second article, the Vice-Chairman of CNRL's board
    Langille conceded the main factor depressing drilling is the low price of natural gas in North America. And prices are likely to stay low into 2010.

    "We don't see that there's going to be a big dramatic change in gas prices over the short term and short term meaning anywhere between 12 to 18 months," he said. "I think 2010 is going to be a trying time for those that are doing just natural gas."
    But wait, aren't the WA and some political commentators claiming that the problem is the royalty regime? Why should we be dropping our shorts to subsidize an industry that is currently suffering from depressed prices?

    Margins in the construction industry have evaporated over the past 18 months. I don't see the government scrambling to give us tax breaks or subsidize make work projects. Why should the oil and gas industry be given a break when it was quite apparent that in the boom they were not paying nearly enough in royalties?

    And the ridiculous part is that right now, THEY ARE ACTUALLY PAYING LESS. So even if we went back to the "old" regime, THEY WOULD BE WORSE OFF. Yet they're trying to blame the "new" regime for the slow down right now. How does that make any sense whatsoever? The answer is that it absolutely does not. They're opportunistically trying to scuttle the "new" regime now hiding behind the smoke and mirrors of the recession, knowing full well it will pay off for them handsomely the next time prices rise again, even though in the short term it will actually cost them money were Alberta to revert to the "old" regime.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vice-Chairman of CNRL
    "Everybody gets all excited when commodity prices go up and down," Langille said. "But commodity prices have always gone up and down. That's part of this business."
    Wow, what a fresh breath of honesty and candor. I guess that means that the government didn't single handedly destroy the oil and gas sector then?

  72. #72
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    4,956

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    ...What that tells me is that if we had retained the old structure, things would actually be worse for oil and gas producers right now and over the past 18 months because they'd have been paying MORE royalties.

    At what point does the cognitive dissonance become so blatantly obvious that people clue in to the BS they're being fed?...
    BS?

    I've talked to quite a few people in the oil & gas industry over the last few months. People who've lost their jobs. The jobs are starting to come back, but not in Alberta. In BC. Because of the royalty structure. According to them - not me.

    It's a fact. Just passing along what I'm hearing from people directly affected. I'm not trying to spin, because I have nothing to gain either way. And I don't really understand the business. Neither do you, apparently.

    Whether the royalty structure is actually good or bad, overall, for Alberta is for another discussion. To suggest things would be worse for the industry if the royalty rate was lower is ridiculous.
    aka Jim Good; "The sooner you fall behind, the more time you have to catch up." - Steven Wright

  73. #73
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimbo
    Whether the royalty structure is actually good or bad, overall, for Alberta is for another discussion. To suggest things would be worse for the industry if the royalty rate was lower is ridiculous.
    The royalty rate is lower right now. The new scheme is more price sensitive, resulting in lower royalty rates when the price is lower, in comparison to the old regime. That's pretty clearly stated in both articles and throughout my post.

    So are you suggesting that even though studies clearly showed our "take" was on the very low side of things compared to other countries with the "old" regime, that we should lower it even further?

    Maybe we should just eliminate royalties altogether and be thrilled about the sudden influx of investment, and then scratch our heads in 20 years when our province looks like Mordor and we have no resources worth extracting any more.

  74. #74
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    4,956

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    ... So are you suggesting that even though studies clearly showed our "take" was on the very low side of things compared to other countries with the "old" regime, that we should lower it even further?

    Maybe we should just eliminate royalties altogether and be thrilled about the sudden influx of investment, and then scratch our heads in 20 years when our province looks like Mordor and we have no resources worth extracting any more.
    No, I'm not suggesting anything. And I'm not interested in an argument. I'm pointing out the fact that the current royalty scheme is having a negative impact on hiring. It is.
    aka Jim Good; "The sooner you fall behind, the more time you have to catch up." - Steven Wright

  75. #75
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    i don't care about hiring in the oil and gas industry for the sake of hiring in the oil and gas industry. Oil and gas is not the only way a human can make a living, nor is it the only industry in alberta. Oil and gas is an industry that was developed and many people in alberta have profited from it. that's fine, but it is not the reason to continue to hold on to it just because it was profitable at one point.

    I get that albertans need to have access to jobs. What we need is some imagination and investment in various industries. I also get that it is easier to support the industries that already exist over new ones. Keeping that in mind, what does alberta have to offer to the world?

    Keeping to Edmonton, we have a very strong university and education in general, health care, arts scene, skilled people in trades and white collar professionals, nature, farming, and natural resources. We need to provide for employment of the people in such a way that it supports that which we have. That is, specifically in edmonotn it would be employment in the education and health care system, in the arts, in farming, in manufacturing, in white collar creative and technical jobs, and in tourism.

    Only one part of this is oil and gas–a part of manufacturing and technical white collar. The rest is something else from newest nanotechnology (or other technology) to new explorations in the arts, to raising cattle and crops.

    As for oil and gas–we should tax it, and tax it well because the resourse is called non-renewable for a reason. The only way we could make it "renewable" to some degree is to raise as much funds from it as possible to remedy environmental impact and to create/ support other more renewable industries and activities.

    Babies in Alberta are not born with a hard hat and oil-soaked boots. Lets remember that.

  76. #76

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    ]The answer is that it absolutely does not. They're opportunistically trying to scuttle the "new" regime now hiding behind the smoke and mirrors of the recession, knowing full well it will pay off for them handsomely the next time prices rise again, even though in the short term it will actually cost them money were Alberta to revert to the "old" regime.
    For years, when prices weren't that great, people were investing in oil and gas here, in the prospect that if prices picked up, the handsome profits you despise would pay back and then reward those investment losses. The royalty regime used to encourage that - the upside was there "one day". But the upside isn't there one-day now, we have basically thumbed our nose at the oil and gas industry, changing the formula because of our greed in a boom year. That greed is now contributing to the destruction of jobs and livelihoods for many small business owners and workers throughout this province, while areas like B.C. and Colorado continue to grow. Why risk hard cash to invest here, when you know the government will just change the formulas to take your profits once you have recouped your costs?

    I honestly think it will take a new government now to rebuild the trust that has been blown, without that, our wealth is going to decline, especially for skilled tradespeople, many of whom may be forced to move elsewhere (for like it or not, most oilfield workers aren't going to retrain to become Phd scientists, or computer game writers). It is actually certain unions that are being hardest hit.
    Last edited by moahunter; 23-12-2009 at 05:43 PM.

  77. #77
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    I honestly think it will take a new government now to rebuild the trust that has been blown, without that, our wealth is going to decline, especially for skilled tradespeople, many of whom may be forced to move elsewhere (for like it or not, most oilfield workers aren't going to retrain to become Phd scientists, or computer game writers). It is actually certain unions that are being hardest hit.
    really? these people would not be able to find employment in engine servicing and rebuilding or other type of mining or carpentry or road and bridge construction or general construction or forestry or agriculture or drilling for water or any other large industrial operations? and the younger workers would not be able to go to school to get a degree or even a phd in anything from mechanical engineering to some sort of social science or the arts?

    you have a very narrow view of what people can do in alberta.

    we need to have conditions for other industries to develop so that working people have a choice of employment. Oil and gas is not the only employer in town and it should not be promoted as such.

  78. #78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    you have a very narrow view of what people can do in alberta.
    there are already people doing those jobs you mention - there is no way Alberta could support the number of skilled tradespeople it has, certainly not at the types of income they earn, without the oil and gas industry. No oil and gas industry (and our's is the highest tech in the world) - far fewer tradespeople, and those who remain, earning far less (which is the case in places that don't have energy). We would basically be empty like Montana is beneath us without energy. If you think that's a good model, that's fine, but for somebody layed off and unable to obtain work in the profession they are skilled at, it is cold comfort to take a lower income job just because we got greedy in a boom year (to pay for that big MLA cabinet / pay rise).
    Last edited by moahunter; 23-12-2009 at 06:15 PM.

  79. #79
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    you keep missing the part where we use oil royalties to develop other industries and other forms of employments. also, with no "high paying jobs" the overall cost of living is going to be lower making a "lower paying job" sufficient to maintain similar lifestyle.

    Oil and gas is not the only way to make a living.

  80. #80

    Default

    ^you miss that by overtaxing it, we don't get any royalties, because nobody invests here, for they know their profits will be stolen. By taxing it more, government revenues go down, not up. That means less to invest in the UofA or other "diversified" industries, we are decimating one of the highest tech sectors we have, which is the oil and gas industry. People are losing real jobs, that pay well, because of it. You may not care about them, but those of us who work with these companies that are having to lay off staff, do.
    Last edited by moahunter; 23-12-2009 at 07:51 PM.

  81. #81
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles; Athens
    Posts
    4,399

    Default

    But the good times came and many oil companies made profits much greater than they could ever have elsewhere in the world. We're hardly stealing from the companies considering the royalty review looked at pretty much every other major oil producing region in the world.

    Remember, also, that royalties vary greatly between oil, gas, and the oilsands. Where many of the tweaks were made to the royalty structures are areas which were generating very little income for the government since we were basically giving the oil away.

    Also, how much of this horror of horros industry crash was due to the royalty change or this little thing called 'global recession'?

    Now, why don't use the opportunity and, as Grish has stated, figure out what future industries we can develop in order to build a province for the future?

    Or shall we just continue to do things like shut down the Alberta Research Council? It's ok. The oil will get us through.
    LA today, Athens tomorrow. I miss E-town.

  82. #82

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MylesC View Post
    But the good times came and many oil companies made profits much greater than they could ever have elsewhere in the world.
    After years of mediocre profits or even losses. We get greedy in the good years, and then wonder why nobody wants to invest when times are tough. What's the point? Struggle for 5 years or so, then the next time a boom happens when some money can be made, the royalties will probably go up again.

    What is often missed is that Oil and Gas is a high technology sector. Alberta companies lead the world, but many of them can't do squat if nobody is investing here anymore.

  83. #83
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles; Athens
    Posts
    4,399

    Default

    The point is that the government under Klein never developed any sustainable system, let the oil and gas sector have it the best in the world and thus the minute any hiccup in the economy happens it's naturally because of the royalty adjustments.

    Or could the breakneck runaway speed of the economy have been something that could have (or even should have) been maintained?

    Mediocre profits? To whom's budget sheets are you referring - and that's a genuine question. I'd like to take a look at the quarterly reports to see what unacceptable profits look like.

    So, if the WA et al. would like to continue to bash the PC's every policy perhaps they should suggest fully developed alternatives instead of glossies. I'm by no means saying that the PCs are perfect, but it seems that their opponents are just latching onto the right words to inspire fear tactics in Albertans as opposed to actually providing an alternative government. Indeed, the current tangent on royalties comes from when a Calgary Exec gets flustered over Edmonton (did you note how the article didn't say gov't....just Edmonton?)
    Last edited by MylesC; 23-12-2009 at 08:09 PM.
    LA today, Athens tomorrow. I miss E-town.

  84. #84
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Holyrood
    Posts
    4,846

    Default

    I think it's important to remember that royalties are not a tax, like you seem to be making them out to be. They are the price at which we Albertans are selling our natural resources to those who can extract them.

    It's also important to note that those resources will still be there when the markets make it worthwhile to extract them, regardless of our royalty rates today. While booms are nice and all, I don't see what the rush is to undersell our resources and hope for another boom, rather than set our price (that is, the royalties) in a way that will help even out our economic ups and downs, even the tiniest bit (I have no illusions that our current resource-based economy will ever completely flatten out from the boom-bust cycle, though).
    Strathcona City Separatist

  85. #85

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MylesC View Post
    Mediocre profits? To whom's budget sheets are you referring - and that's a genuine question. I'd like to take a look at the quarterly reports to see what unacceptable profits look like.
    It is a trend I have seen with various small companies in the sector (private results). 2009 was horirble. 2008 was a great year. 2007 was good. Before that, was mediocre for some time.

    Right now I see even Edmonton companies investing heavily outside Alberta. Why do you think that is happening? The royalty mix is not right at the moment, the PC's changed it at the wost possible time, international trust in this province has been lost, and our government revenues are going down the toilet with that. Once our small companies are lost, they won't come back, and the technology they have, will be lost. All we can do now is hope enough of them invest outside Alberta quickly enough, to survive. For without overseas investment in the industry in Alberta, there is minimal work here.
    Last edited by moahunter; 23-12-2009 at 08:15 PM.

  86. #86
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^you miss that by overtaxing it, we don't get any royalties, because nobody invests here, for they know their profits will be stolen. By taxing it more, government revenues go down, not up. That means less to invest in the UofA or other "diversified" industries, we are decimating one of the highest tech sectors we have, which is the oil and gas industry. People are losing real jobs, that pay well, because of it. You may not care about them, but those of us who work with these companies that are having to lay off staff, do.
    you miss that the oil and gas is in our ground and that when we, Alberta, profit from it we do not steal, we tax. Stealing is when royalties are set artificially low. There is always a Crown Corporation option to keep people employed, resource developed and money reinvested in the province and the people living and working here.

    And someone will invest with any royalty rates. Unless they are set to 100% of profits. If a business still makes a, say, 10 or 15% on the initial investment there is a business to be made.

    Oile and gas is just one option for an industry. there are many more others. The point is not to keep oil and gas jobs, the point is to promote employment. period.

  87. #87

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grish View Post
    And someone will invest with any royalty rates. Unless they are set to 100% of profits. If a business still makes a, say, 10 or 15% on the initial investment there is a business to be made.
    No grish, it doesn't work that way.

    It is what it is, I'm just a bit worried at the moment that we aren't a desirable place to invest in anymore. A year ago I thought we were going to get through these economic times ok, I'm not so sure now. I've just seen too many organizations struggling of late, and those struggles are reflected in the revenues our government will earn. This will impact a lot more than just the oil and gas sector, and it won't be to the benefit of other sectors. It will hit government and university workers soon, perhaps even the academics who thought up the "brilliant" royalty rise. Anyway, I'll have a rest, we won't agree.

  88. #88
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    2,469

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    After years of mediocre profits or even losses. We get greedy in the good years, and then wonder why nobody wants to invest when times are tough. What's the point? Struggle for 5 years or so, then the next time a boom happens when some money can be made, the royalties will probably go up again.

    What is often missed is that Oil and Gas is a high technology sector. Alberta companies lead the world, but many of them can't do squat if nobody is investing here anymore.
    ATTENTION: There was recently a global recession. And a MARGINAL change in royalty rates did not cause the global recession.

    But setting that small fact aside, oil will get us nowhere in the long run - even those with only basic knowledge of the world economy can see that in the future oil will become less and less accepted. Perhaps you and Danielle smith will just have to learn that the hard way.

    I just pray that the whole province does not end up paying the price for Danielle Smith's education.

  89. #89
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter
    the handsome profits you despise
    Let me put something in perspective here, first. I am not anti-business or anti-oil industry. I own a construction company, although we aren't directly involved in oil and gas we're very much affected by the ebbs and flows of the oil economy in Alberta. A large condo development up in Fort Mac we had been working on for the past 4 years had as one it's partners one of the major oilsands players, and it's ground to a halt because they're tightening their purse strings. That has directly affected my business to the tune of millions of dollars of deferred work, no exaggeration.

    So please don't try to toss me in with those who feel that no one's entitled to make money. That's certainly not my viewpoint. However there is little question in my mind that Alberta has been guided by nothing but short term thinking since the days of Lougheed, and it's absolutely disgusting to think of how much potential wealth has been squandered by not having a long term vision for how we want to develop our resources and invest the returns of said development.

    The current state of our Heritage Fund is absolutely laughable, for example. Inflation adjusted, it's worth about the same today as it was in the early 90's. Go look it up if you don't believe me. So after a massive 5 year boom, all we managed to do was keep level on the Heritage Fund and build up a "sustainability fund" that we'll have ****** away half of it in two years of deficits.

    Quote Originally Posted by grish
    you have a very narrow view of what people can do in alberta.
    Grish has a very good point. moahunter's populist post attempted to make it sound like he's incredibly knowledgeable about the plight of skilled tradespeople and blue collar workers, but the reality was that during the boom the oil and gas industry was crowding out virtually all other forms of work in this province. Look no further than all the over budget public infrastructure. That isn't a sign of a healthy economy. That is the sign of a mismanaged economy where the government let a global industry more or less walk in and eat up a significant portion of the available manpower and building materials, causing those who don't work within the oil and gas industry to have their cost of living significantly increase while their salaries did not.

    Sure things were awesome if you were working 80 hours a week in a camp up North. God help you if you worked for private industry unrelated to the oil and gas industry when the cost of living was rising by 5-10% a year.

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter
    there are already people doing those jobs you mention - there is no way Alberta could support the number of skilled tradespeople it has, certainly not at the types of income they earn, without the oil and gas industry. No oil and gas industry (and our's is the highest tech in the world) - far fewer tradespeople, and those who remain, earning far less (which is the case in places that don't have energy). We would basically be empty like Montana is beneath us without energy. If you think that's a good model, that's fine, but for somebody layed off and unable to obtain work in the profession they are skilled at, it is cold comfort to take a lower income job just because we got greedy in a boom year (to pay for that big MLA cabinet / pay rise)
    No one is asking to shut down the industry. Stop using ridiculous strawman arguments. What is being said is that royalties were undoubtedly too low during the boom, which caused the people of Alberta to miss out on royalties that were rightfully theirs while simultaneously kicking off a stampede of investment and construction that mostly benefited a subset of the population, and not everyone equally.

    The cause of the downturn right now IS NOT THE ROYALTY RATES. The CNRL vice-chairman admitted as much in a story you yourself linked. The cause of the downturn is near record low prices for natural gas and oil prices returning to some semblance of sanity. So again, why should the people of Alberta subsidize the oil and gas industry in times of low prices, and then spread our butt cheeks when prices go up?

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter
    ^you miss that by overtaxing it, we don't get any royalties, because nobody invests here, for they know their profits will be stolen
    Stolen? STOLEN? Are you for real? The profits they are making are derived from the extraction of resources that belong to Albertans, and not the oil companies. We are permitting them to develop and extract them, in return for a share of the revenues. That's theft to you? Really?

    Quote Originally Posted by MylesC
    Indeed, the current tangent on royalties comes from when a Calgary Exec gets flustered over Edmonton (did you note how the article didn't say gov't....just Edmonton?
    It was extremely noticeable. Then again, newspaper articles in Alberta often refer to evil "Ottawa" so I guess it's just more of the same. "They took our jerbs!" as Southpark would say.

  90. #90

    Default

    I quoted it ealier, and it matches what I am seeing, people are not investing in Alberta today (they are investing elsewhere), and the impact of that isn't just going to be the next year or two. Over the life of long term projects now, the econoimcs has changed, you can make a few more % investing in other locations thanks to the royalty change, and accordingly, the money is no longer coming here:
    "Unfortunately, the Alberta government has still not changed their royalty structure. And until they do, that northwest Alberta area basically cannot generate the same returns as our oil projects. As a result, we're not allocating much capital to that part of the world.
    http://www.calgarysun.com/money/2009...04221-sun.html

    As to the Hertiage fund, I would like it to grow, but it will always be limited thanks to equalization in Canada. No Federal government will ever allow Alberta to turn into a Norway (there is a reason Norway did not join the EU - and this is it, they knew it would result in their wealth being redistributed, like happens in Canada). If you took the money transferred from Alberta to Quebec and added that to the Hertiage fund, it wouldn't just match inflation growth.
    Last edited by moahunter; 26-12-2009 at 10:56 AM.

  91. #91
    grish
    Guest

    Default

    When in doubt, blame the Feds,
    That's the Alberta way..

    When we squander the royalties
    on oil and gas
    and heritage fund shrinks
    Equalization is our pain in the ars.

    when in doubt, blame the Feds,
    That's the Alberta way..

    When snow falls high
    And winds are strong
    Blame the Feds
    You can't go wrong!

    when in doubt, blame the Feds,
    That's the Alberta way..

    When revenue is low
    And expenses high
    Equalization!
    And that's no lie!

    when in doubt, blame the Feds,
    That's the Alberta way..

    When oil's price is high
    And gas price is higher
    Yet no plan is in sight
    From almighty governing liar
    Warn the masses
    To keep the feds' hands
    Out of the pockets of our lads and our laces.

    when in doubt, blame the Feds,
    That's the Alberta way..

  92. #92

    Default

    ^Well, the good news Grish, is we should be in for a change for the better soon, if the Wildrose take power. With a business friendly government, the economy can grow again, and we will live a bit more within our means (starting at the top, with a cabinet shrink).

    Most countries don't have 39 fat cats running things let alone 24 in cabinet (Australia, a country of 21 million has a cabinet of 20). Our province is only really responsible for a few things (the big ones being energy/environment, health, and education), but have a look at the titles on this site:

    http://www.premier.alberta.ca/team/

    How many PC MLA's does it take to install a light-bulb?

    "Environment", and "Sustainable Resource Development" and "Energy" (three MLA's for two jobs?), or
    "Advanced Education and Technology", and "Education" (two MLA's for one job?) or
    "Minister of Culture and Community Spirit" - is that a joke - an MLA to keep our spirits up?

    Then, because it seems these 24 cabinet ministers aren't that hard working, they have 10 parliamentary assistants to share the load. Plus, perhaps as they and their party isn't bright enough to come up with policy, another 5 Cabinet Policy Committee Chairs to do that.

    All bankrolled by me and you. And we aren't even scratching the surface of the other cushy patronage appointments MLA's receive. This old boys/girls network needs to be cleaned out ASAP.
    Last edited by moahunter; 26-12-2009 at 12:12 PM.

  93. #93

    Default

    Moah, the reason why the government is so big is because they got sedentary and let industry rule unhindered. You're totally right that we need to change them but the idea that Wildrose would run more efficiently is just laughable. They're the PC's in a new outfit. Same guys different wrapper, and they helped run this province ragged by propping oil and gas over every other industry.

    It's unbalanced and Marcel was completely right. When you've got 18 year olds making 30$ an hour, you're going to have to boost your wages or lose your employees. In industries like construction, you can only afford the higher pay scale by charging the developers more who recoup it by higher costs of units or properties.

    Besides, we could have made more if we didn't give it all away for next to nothing.

  94. #94

    Default

    I thought this thread was about the Wildrose not royalties.

  95. #95
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    I quoted it ealier, and it matches what I am seeing, people are not investing in Alberta today (they are investing elsewhere), and the impact of that isn't just going to be the next year or two. Over the life of long term projects now, the econoimcs has changed, you can make a few more % investing in other locations thanks to the royalty change, and accordingly, the money is no longer coming here:
    "Unfortunately, the Alberta government has still not changed their royalty structure. And until they do, that northwest Alberta area basically cannot generate the same returns as our oil projects. As a result, we're not allocating much capital to that part of the world.
    http://www.calgarysun.com/money/2009...04221-sun.html

    As to the Hertiage fund, I would like it to grow, but it will always be limited thanks to equalization in Canada. No Federal government will ever allow Alberta to turn into a Norway (there is a reason Norway did not join the EU - and this is it, they knew it would result in their wealth being redistributed, like happens in Canada). If you took the money transferred from Alberta to Quebec and added that to the Hertiage fund, it wouldn't just match inflation growth.
    Investment in oil and gas production dropped off precipitiously EVERYWHERE IN THE WORLD in the past year and a half. Alberta is not unique in that respect. And yes, there's new investment in BC right now because there's been a bunch of new finds (or plays) that are relatively easy to exploit. NE BC was one of the hottest "plays" over the past couple years in North America. The fact remains that once prices recover, we'll see plenty of new investment in Alberta and the primary reason for the downturn is the price of oil, and not the royalty structure. Again, even the vice-chair of CNRL admits as much. The timing was poor, no question. Royalties should have been raised a decade ago. The previous structure was not even set up to increase royalties past something like $50 a barrel. Anything past that went completely in to the pockets of producers, which is absolutely mind boggling.

    As far as the Heritage fund goes, yes it's all well and good to whine about equalization, but Alberta was once a have-not province as well. We may be again in the future. Consider it a cost of being Canadian, I guess.

    The government of Alberta could have a Heritage fund worth double or triple what is currently is by having made the decision in the early 90's to not strip investment returns from the fund and place them in general revenue to be spent. It's like having a "savings" account where you automatically transfer your interest income in to another account for spending. In fact, it's worse, because when the investments go down the government does not top them back up. So in reality, with the ups and downs of the market, unless the government occasionally puts more money in to the Heritage fund, it will actually shrink over time both due to inflation and downs in the markets.

    How incredibly short sighted is that?
    Last edited by Marcel Petrin; 27-12-2009 at 10:27 AM.

  96. #96

    Default

    I don't know... this was a pretty huge Investment in Alberta, and it happened in 2009, you would be luck if BC's investments even come close to 1.9B



    China's $1.9B Alberta oilsands deal



    PetroChina partners with Athabasca Oil Sands



    By Dina O'Meara, With Files From Canwest News ServiceSeptember 1, 2009Comments (6)

    CALGARY - In a blockbuster deal, privately owned Athabasca Oil Sands Corp. said PetroChina International Investment Co. Ltd. will buy a majority stake in its operations for $1.9 billion, marking the largest venture by China in the Canadian oilsands to date.

    http://www.calgaryherald.com/busines...010/story.html

    More Investment

    Suncor to Spend C$5.5 Billion in 2010 to Boost Output (Update3) By Sonja Franklin


    Nov. 13 (Bloomberg) -- Suncor Energy Inc., which bought rival Petro-Canada in August, will spend C$5.5 billion ($5.2 billion) next year, partly to boost production from oil-sands projects such as Firebag.
    About C$1.5 billion will be directed toward funding for growth projects such as Firebag, while C$4 billion is targeted at sustaining existing operations, Calgary-based Suncor, Canada’s largest energy company, said today in a statement.\

    YET even more growth

    Energy Quest to Begin Construction of Its Oil Upgrader

    Scientist Visits Edmonton to Begin Construction of a 5000 Barrel per Day Heavy Crude Oil Upgrader Processing Plant in Alberta




    EDMONTON, AB--(Marketwire - June 8, 2009) - Energy Quest, Inc. ("EQI") (OTCBB: EQST), an emerging leader in alternative energy, announced today that its wholly owned subsidiary, WaveChem, Inc. continues its plans on the development and construction of its Heavy Crude Oil Upgrader located in Alberta. The scientist from Nexgen E2 Ltd responsible for the research and development and detailed engineering of EQI's Ultra Sound cavitation technology came to Edmonton for a meeting the week of May 26, 2009 for seven days to provide a comprehensive technical review to Energy Quest and Northern Alberta Oil & Gas, a wholly owned subsidiary of Deep Well Oil and Gas. The meeting was necessary to resolve engineering, drawings and physical design of the 5000 barrel per day upgrader.
    EQI's wholly owned subsidiary WaveChem, Inc., an Alberta company, has signed an agreement with Northern Alberta Oil and Gas to provide up to 5000 barrel per day of upgraded oil. EQI will also provide other technologies to complete the plant, such as its novel PyStR hydrogen generation process and electrical power generation. EQI's strategy is to make available its developed technologies to smaller oil producers to increase oil production and provide clean and renewable energy projects in the Alberta area. The heavy crude oil upgrading plant will commence construction immediately and cost approximately 23.5 Million US dollars for the 5000 barrel per day plant.

    Just because things aren't mirroring the "boom" years, doesn't mean we are dead in the water!
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 27-12-2009 at 10:49 AM.

  97. #97
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,981

    Default

    I thought this thread was about the Wildrose not royalties
    The leader of the WRA made public statements that Alberta needs to reduce royalties. I don't see why the discussion cannot be allowed to revolve around those comments, especially considering there is literally nothing else to talk about regarding the WRA since they still do not have any official policies or platform.

    Look at the world's top oil producers: http://topforeignstocks.com/2009/08/...st-oil-fields/

    It's impossible to prove causation and it may well simply be correlation, but most of the world's largest oil producing countries outside of the US and Canada are complete basketcases of corruption, poor management, and unbalanced economies that are wholly dependent on a single industry. This is another reason why Alberta needs to carefully and thoughtfully develop it's resources, and not end up like most of the other large oil producing countries.

  98. #98

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    I thought this thread was about the Wildrose not royalties
    The leader of the WRA made public statements that Alberta needs to reduce royalties.
    I agree, it is one of the few policy planks they have (another is a smaller cabinet), so is very much fair game for discussion on this thread.

  99. #99
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    teh city of gold
    Posts
    1,062

    Default

    I called this damn it! Wildrose is just a bunch of right wing clowns with different face paint!

    Meet the new boss, same as the old boss!


    A vote for wildrose is a waste! KICK out ALL these conservative %$#@@!!!!!!!!

  100. #100

    Default

    Interesting speach at the convention, a few choice commets I enjoyed, and that will be worying the PC's (as this directly hits their base):

    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/...872/story.html

    "We've had enough of socialists and liberals masquerading as conservatives, we've had enough of central planners making all the decisions from the legislature," Smith said. "We've had enough of a government that doesn't listen to Albertans, doesn't reflect our values and doesn't even seem to care."
    Smith also took a swipe at public-health delivery, saying Albertans want health-care policy focused on results, not ideology. She pointed to Europe, where many countries have a blend of public and private health care, as a model.

    Current policy "makes people wait, leaves them in pain and causes people to die."
    "Albertans weren't asking the government to give $2 billion to big corporations so they could learn how to pump air into a hole in the ground," she said, referring to the government's carbon capture and storage policy.
    Energy, is what that is, and it must have Ed shaking in his boots right now. I think we are going to see a number of PC defections to WildRose before the next election.

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •