Usted necesita una cuenta a fin de usar esta opción.
| Page: 1 | Rating: Unrated [0] |
Alberta Doesn'T Wanna Share
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» moondancer replied on Thu May 25, 2006 @ 12:49pm |
 Coolness: 92330 | Klein threatens to pull out of equalization deal
[ CTV.ca ] News Staff Alberta Premier Ralph Klein is threatening to drop out of the federal government's equalization deal with the provinces -- if energy income is included in the program's formula. Klein says Alberta has "control" and "authorization" over its resources under the Constitution, and he's seeking a legal opinion to see if there's a way he can pull his province out of the revenue-sharing deal. Klein is promising a fight unless the federal Conservatives live up to their election promise to not include resource revenues in the equalization formula. "They made a campaign promise, the federal Conservatives, that they wouldn't include resource revenues in the equalization formula," Klein told reporters in Edmonton Wednesday. "And I would hope they live up to that, because otherwise they're going to have a battle on their hands." Klein said as far as equalization goes, he would participate if the federal government and all provinces agree upon a nationwide standard. "We will participate along with the 10 provinces, but we won't participate if resource revenues are included." Saskatchewan Premier Lorne Calvert made a similar threat earlier this month in the form a letter delivered after the Tories' inaugural federal budget. Calvert reminded Prime Minister Stephen Harper of his campaign pledge during last winter's election to exclude non-renewable resource revenue from the formula for calculating equalization payments to the "have-not" provinces. Calvert was disappointed the promise wasn't reaffirmed in the budget. And he warned Harper there'll be a price to pay for reneging. Klein's comment comes amid increasing tension between Ontario and Quebec over how best to wrest more money out of the federal government. The always outspoken Klein said Wednesday that he's getting ready for what he calls a political showdown with Quebec and Ontario at a special leaders meeting next week, following what will be his last western premiers conference in Gimli, Manitoba. "(Ontario Premier Dalton) McGuinty is on a different wavelength, so is Quebec," he said. "Quebec wants resource revenues included. Of course, they want the money that we're enjoying now. Albertans have earned that money." Klein said he will fight "tooth and nail" against attempts by Quebec to reap any of Alberta's massive energy windfall. He added, however, that Alberta is also a "caring province, we're a sharing province, and we're willing to do our part by abiding by a decision to have a 10-province formula." "There may be differences of opinions . . . but c'est la vie, as they say in Quebec. That is life," added Klein. "And our position is quite clear, and I'll defend that position." With the Conservatives intent on securing a majority in the next election by building on their modest gains in Quebec, officials in other provinces privately fear Harper will cater to Quebec Premier Jean Charest at the expense of the others. Klein says he expects strong support from western and Atlantic Canada premiers at the leaders meeting, and he wants the issue resolved before he retires in the late fall. He has previously suggested that failure on the part of the federal government to resolve the issue could reignite separatist sentiment in Alberta -- which gave Harper 28 seats. A line in the sand Despite Klein's bluster, CTV's Ottawa bureau chief says there's been no indication from the federal government that it intends to include oil and natural gas revenues within equalization payments. "I think what Ralph Klein is doing is laying a line in the sand for anybody who's going to succeed him, to never to give up Alberta's energy revenues in terms of equalization," Fife said on CTV's Mike Duffy Live. "I think what you're going to see (Harper)doing is offering tax points to the provinces; in other words, the federal government will give up some tax room where it normally taxes Canadians, to allow the provinces to come in and make up that room to be able to get the extra revenue." He added: "I don't think you're going to see Ottawa wanting to pick a fight with Alberta . . ." A recently released report prepared for the federal government called for 50 per cent of resource revenues to be included in the calculation of equalization -- a complex system of revenue sharing between provinces. A report prepared for the provinces called for all resource revenues to be used in the calculation. Currently, the federal government calculates the fiscal capacity of each province, then establishes a standard by averaging the capacity of five provinces: Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and British Columbia. Ontario, Alberta and Saskatchewan, the so-called "have" provinces -- currently are above the standard. But all other provinces fall below and receive equalization payments from federal coffers to ensure similar services nationwide. Most provinces are now pushing for a standard based on the fiscal capacity of all 10 provinces, including energy-rich Alberta, so that they will receive more money. Harper's letter to the provinces during last winter's federal election campaign promised an equalization formula based on an average of 10 provinces and excluding resource revenues. Federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty has said recently that the Conservatives are sticking to that election promise. With reports from The Canadian Press ---------------------------------------------------------- They are saying not to include natural resources and to only share revenues from other industries, but shouldn't it be the other way around or something? Oil is something that just happens to be on their land, trees are soemthing that just happens to be on ours, so if we're protecting what these people are working so hard for, shouldn't we be protecting the stuff that's based purely on work instead of luck? Of course there's a lot of work in the oil industry but the same would be true if that industry is here, if the idea is really to protect what the people work for, the difference will only show if the revenue that we DON'T share doesn't include oil. For some reason it seems so much more fair to share resources and not share the other things. Maybe it's just me. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» moondancer replied on Thu May 25, 2006 @ 1:00pm |
| Coolness: 92330 | Besides, Alberta is useless if we can't have any of their oil money. They just screw up our votes. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» basdini replied on Fri May 26, 2006 @ 12:14am |
 Coolness: 145265 | i love this line
"(Ontario Premier Dalton) McGuinty is on a different wavelength, so is Quebec," he said. "Quebec wants resource revenues included. Of course, they want the money that we're enjoying now. Albertans have earned that money." how is it we pay the highest taxes yet your somehow giving us money... |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» neoform replied on Fri May 26, 2006 @ 8:27am |
 Coolness: 339730 | nah, the interesting part of that line is that they "earned" the money..
at what point did pulling black liquid from the ground, then selling it for lots of money count as "earning" it.. ? |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» moondancer replied on Fri May 26, 2006 @ 8:33am |
| Coolness: 92330 | Exactly.. hard earned natural resources my ass. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» moondancer replied on Fri May 26, 2006 @ 8:35am |
| Coolness: 92330 | Someone get rid of this province. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Morphine replied on Fri May 26, 2006 @ 10:01am |
 Coolness: 51035 | i dont really see how you can blame alberta or ralph klein for not wanting to share the wealth |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» moondancer replied on Fri May 26, 2006 @ 10:24am |
| Coolness: 92330 | I didn't. It's just funny how they try to justify it. And I also find it stupid that the government will do it this way but I guess if they didn't Alberta would lose like everything it ever had. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» neoform replied on Fri May 26, 2006 @ 1:28pm |
| Coolness: 339730 | Not wanting to share the wealth? Alberta is a province of Canada. plain and simple, they should be FORCED to share the wealth. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Mico replied on Fri May 26, 2006 @ 6:29pm |
 Coolness: 150525 | you think Quebec would give a penny to anyone else? Canada revolves around Quebec and Ontario. the other provinces -not just alberta- are being exploited. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» neoform replied on Fri May 26, 2006 @ 10:07pm |
| Coolness: 339730 | Yeah, and Quebec deserves a big fucking bitchslap for being a whinny little bitch who always wants more. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» basdini replied on Sat May 27, 2006 @ 12:52am |
| Coolness: 145265 | i guess our social programs are to generous... |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Trey replied on Mon May 29, 2006 @ 12:29am |
 Coolness: 102830 | The problem with Alberta is they see only short term gains....
The extra moola they make from Oil sands are not reinvested in the Province's future. Istead they are given as tax breaks. Yeah it would be cool if my gov gives me a check, but as a citizen of a society, i rather have the goverment reinvested the extra cash into programs that will ensure the future of baby Canadians. Also, Alberta gambling revenue has surpassed those of the oil sands.....In the 2nd quarter of last year, Gambling brought it 1.24 billon $$$. imo, a goverment depending largely on gambling revenue (instead of a fix revenue such as income tax) to meet its fiscal year not a dope idea. Oil sands won't be there forever... |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» basdini replied on Mon May 29, 2006 @ 3:31am |
| Coolness: 145265 | i ve heard that there is more oil in the tar sands than in saudi arabia |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Mico replied on Mon May 29, 2006 @ 7:41pm |
| Coolness: 150525 | Well, maybe... I read one article that said the Alberta Oil Sand deposits were second largest to Saudi-Arabia.
In Canada, oil sands occur in Cretaceous fluvial-estuarine deposits of northeastern Alberta, covering an area greater than140,000 kilometers2...The largest single hydrocarbon deposit in the world is the Athabasca oil sands of northeastern Alberta, near Fort McMurray... In 2003, Alberta's reserves estimates of remaining established oil sands reserves is 174.5 billion barrels, comparable with the oil reserves of Saudi Arabia. In 2001, Alberta's production of raw bitumen and synthetic crude oil exceeded that for conventional crude oil, accounting for 53 percent of Alberta's oil production. This trend is expected to increase to be about 80 percent of Alberta's oil production by 2013.
[ emd.aapg.org ] "Your so rich, when you walk into a bank, the teller goes: Yipee!" |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Mico replied on Mon May 29, 2006 @ 8:00pm |
| Coolness: 150525 | In the best interest of the citizens of Alberta, a check in the mail (which I got, nyuk nyuk nyuk) is better than sending it to Ottawa who will only give back... what?
I dunno. Learn more about the Eqaulization program [ www.fin.gc.ca ] A University of Calgary political science professor and staunch critic of the federal Liberals, Cooper fully expects that, as the oil sands continue to develop, they will become a flashpoint in federal-provincial relations. Alberta already pays far more in equalization transfers to other provinces than it receives in federal program spending. And as the gap grows between rich Alberta and the poorer parts of the country, the demands to spread the wealth are sure to follow -- especially if prices for gasoline and heating oil skyrocket, as many predict. It's guaranteed to fan the flames of western discontent, Cooper says. "It's Alberta's oil if you live in Alberta and it's Canada's oil if you live in Ottawa," he says. "Energy has become the basic fault line of federalism."
Read this article from Mcleans Magazine to learn more about Canada's World position with regards to Energy in the comming years. [ www.macleans.ca ] |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Trey replied on Thu Jun 1, 2006 @ 5:47am |
| Coolness: 102830 | oi in my previous post, i fail to specify that when i said Alberta that doesn't reinvest into its future, meaning its own province.
I wasn't commenting about the Equalization. I don't think a goverment, whether provincial, state, or federal should largely depend on gambling for income. I read somewhere on someone's blog; "Lottery is the tax on the dream of the poor" |
Alberta Doesn'T Wanna Share
| Page: 1 |
[ Cumbre de Página ] |
Post A Reply |
You must be logged in to post a reply.
[ Cumbre de Página ] |
