Kinder Morgan What's next?

136 posts / 0 new
Last post
JKR

Martin N. wrote:

Pondering wrote:

Martin N. wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

 

Boo! Hoo!

I'm taking my ball and going home.

Here we go again!

The new Alberta alienation: Resenting East and West

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-alienation-pipeline-1.4623938

I'm rather saddened by all the discord and selfishness coming out of the woodwork from BC, Alberta and Quebec. Apparently any nationbuilding is impossible due to shortsighted nimbyism. Canada will be much diminished if Canadians can't pull together and other nations will surpass and replace us in the global order. We will become a nation in name only, composed of parochial, decining regions.

If patriotism is the refuge of the scoundrel, arrogance and hubris must be the refuge of the ignoramus.

Just because Alberta is having a temper tandrum doesn't mean it's Canada's fault. If the situation were reversed, and it were BC that had oil and was trying to get a pipeline through Alberta, Alberta would never let it through. Alberta would put its own economic well-being first. 

It must be quite frustrating that Alberta has so much resource wealth. Even though they very much share their prosperity with the rest of Canada, it is evident that the envy and jealousy of the rest of Canada will never diminish. The problem is simply that Canada's oil is under Alberta's dirt. 

If the oil was under Ontario or Quebec, there would be no issue but Alberta must be held up to ridicule and economic throttling because they just have so much that the rest of Canada does not.

It'll be interesting to see what Canada and the world are like after the petroleum era. Hopefully it'll be much better than it is now. The sooner we transition the better.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Here is a picture of one tank farm and a video of another. Both on US territory so they are what would be called world class facilities. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVzxohzcni8

Here is a map of where Trans Mountain wants to expand its existing tank farm.

It is absolute NYBISM to not want this kind of project build beside a major university and next door to residential neighborhoods.  I grew up in Sudbury so I know that no matter what happens it likely won't look as bad as the moonscape I used to play on when I was a kid.  So if there is pollution anywhere and risk of disaster anywhere then obviously any fucking risk is acceptable.

voice of the damned

epaulo13 wrote:

..it's not just a matter of a crown corporation. look at what successive governments has done with trade.

..a crown corp under a progressive government wouldn't be searching for external markets. it would slowly develop the sands in a less damaging way for canada. it would include cleanup. it would build refineries in alta. at the same time have a real plan to transition away from non renewables. it would include undrip. imho.

And that's all good. But my original point with Magoo was about eminent domain. Because, no matter how progressive an energy policy you have, guaranteed that, somewhere along the way, someone is not gonna want the oil industry(state-run though it may be) to do or build something in their region.

Again, supposed PM Broadbent gets his "Owned, run, and used by Canadians" policy implemented in the late 1970s, and so Canadians all start buying and using Canadian oil instead of importing it from abroad. Great. But what if that entails having to build a few more pipelines, in order to get the Canadian oil to all the regions, but some localities don't want the pipelines built near them. Does the government have any more moral authority than the CEO of Imperial Oil to say "Uh, no, sorry, we're calling the shots here, and this is where the pipeline is gonna go"?

Martin N.

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Here is a picture of one tank farm and a video of another. Both on US territory so they are what would be called world class facilities. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVzxohzcni8

Here is a map of where Trans Mountain wants to expand its existing tank farm.

It is absolute NYBISM to not want this kind of project build beside a major university and next door to residential neighborhoods.  I grew up in Sudbury so I know that no matter what happens it likely won't look as bad as the moonscape I used to play on when I was a kid.  So if there is pollution anywhere and risk of disaster anywhere then obviously any fucking risk is acceptable.

Are the fire trucks not parked beside the fire?

How many fires has the TM tank farm had in the last 60 odd years.

Considering that the tank farm has been there for over 60 years, do you not consider the Burnaby fire department negligent for allowing a university and residential neighbourhoods to be built in dangerous proximity to what they state is a hazard that the Burnaby fire department does not have the ability to mitigate?

What is there about built in state of the art foam suppression systems "at the push of a button" you and the Burnaby fire department fail to understand?

I agree completely that the KM expansion through an urban area is wrong but don't blame me, look to the political process and the squeamishness of politicians who refused to expend political capital on more obvious options in favour of waiting until the last moment to be forced into supporting the least favourable option.

In my humble opinion, a better use of public funds is to assist in moving KM out of Burnaby entirely

 

 

 

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

voice of the damned wrote:

epaulo13 wrote:

..it's not just a matter of a crown corporation. look at what successive governments has done with trade.

..a crown corp under a progressive government wouldn't be searching for external markets. it would slowly develop the sands in a less damaging way for canada. it would include cleanup. it would build refineries in alta. at the same time have a real plan to transition away from non renewables. it would include undrip. imho.

And that's all good. But my original point with Magoo was about eminent domain. Because, no matter how progressive an energy policy you have, guaranteed that, somewhere along the way, someone is not gonna want the oil industry(state-run though it may be) to do or build something in their region.

Again, supposed PM Broadbent gets his "Owned, run, and used by Canadians" policy implemented in the late 1970s, and so Canadians all start buying and using Canadian oil instead of importing it from abroad. Great. But what if that entails having to build a few more pipelines, in order to get the Canadian oil to all the regions, but some localities don't want the pipelines built near them. Does the government have any more moral authority than the CEO of Imperial Oil to say "Uh, no, sorry, we're calling the shots here, and this is where the pipeline is gonna go"?

..in my opinion no more moral authority. context matters in a question like the one you pose voice. just because it's a broadbent led ndp gov does not automatically mean that the oil was refined at source or that appropriate consultations occurred. or that proper environmental impacts were done. or that undrip was in force. i believe there is a place for "saying no" in such projects.

Pondering

Martin N. wrote:
  It must be quite frustrating that Alberta has so much resource wealth. Even though they very much share their prosperity with the rest of Canada, it is evident that the envy and jealousy of the rest of Canada will never diminish. The problem is simply that Canada's oil is under Alberta's dirt.  

If the oil was under Ontario or Quebec, there would be no issue but Alberta must be held up to ridicule and economic throttling because they just have so much that the rest of Canada does not.

What a bizarre theory. Alberta has just as much right to exploit the oil sands as Quebec has to exploit our hydro resources. No one is "throttling" Alberta's economy we just won't be bullied. Alberta's victim posturing is ripe for ridicule. 

Quebec put a moratorium on fracking because we understand the economic value of our environment. I think Alberta has made stupid short-sighted choices but I fully respect the right of Alberta to make its own choices politically and economically. Albertans probably think Quebec has made stupid short-sighted choices politically and economically and that's fine. Canada works because we allow each province to express its political character provincially. 

Maybe if the oil sands were in BC, or in Quebec, we would have a different perspective and rationalize their exploitation every bit as much as Alberta does. Maybe if Alberta were a province of magnificent waterways and majestic forests instead of oil Alberta's attitude would change. 

Alberta's hysterical threats and posturing are bravado. Your notion that we are envious is bizarre. I feel sorry for Alberta. I read an article that in Fort McMurray the city council toyed with the idea of a four day school week to cut back on busing expense. Parents put a quick stop to it but that it was even considered floored me. Your priorities are very different from that of Quebecers and probably almost every other province. Alberta's wealth doesn't seem to have benefited communities. But hey, this is Canada, provinces and regions have their own culture. 

BC never identified with "the west" which generally meant the prairie provinces. Over the past few decades BC has asserted its own identity and it is as distinct from the prairies as Quebec is from Ontario, maybe more so. 

Canada doesn't revolve around Alberta. We aren't envious. We just want to protect what we value. Quebec is with BC because of a shared interest in local democracy. Quebec is 23% of the Canadian population. Lots of seats that are not afraid to go orange. Right about now Trudeau should be praying that the courts rule in favor of indigenous rights and provincial rights. 

NorthReport

Don’t buy this unless of course you want to throw away your hard earned money

KMI

 

Martin N.

Pondering wrote:

Martin N. wrote:
  It must be quite frustrating that Alberta has so much resource wealth. Even though they very much share their prosperity with the rest of Canada, it is evident that the envy and jealousy of the rest of Canada will never diminish. The problem is simply that Canada's oil is under Alberta's dirt.  

If the oil was under Ontario or Quebec, there would be no issue but Alberta must be held up to ridicule and economic throttling because they just have so much that the rest of Canada does not.

What a bizarre theory. Alberta has just as much right to exploit the oil sands as Quebec has to exploit our hydro resources. No one is "throttling" Alberta's economy we just won't be bullied. Alberta's victim posturing is ripe for ridicule. 

Quebec put a moratorium on fracking because we understand the economic value of our environment. I think Alberta has made stupid short-sighted choices but I fully respect the right of Alberta to make its own choices politically and economically. Albertans probably think Quebec has made stupid short-sighted choices politically and economically and that's fine. Canada works because we allow each province to express its political character provincially. 

Maybe if the oil sands were in BC, or in Quebec, we would have a different perspective and rationalize their exploitation every bit as much as Alberta does. Maybe if Alberta were a province of magnificent waterways and majestic forests instead of oil Alberta's attitude would change. 

Alberta's hysterical threats and posturing are bravado. Your notion that we are envious is bizarre. I feel sorry for Alberta. I read an article that in Fort McMurray the city council toyed with the idea of a four day school week to cut back on busing expense. Parents put a quick stop to it but that it was even considered floored me. Your priorities are very different from that of Quebecers and probably almost every other province. Alberta's wealth doesn't seem to have benefited communities. But hey, this is Canada, provinces and regions have their own culture. 

BC never identified with "the west" which generally meant the prairie provinces. Over the past few decades BC has asserted its own identity and it is as distinct from the prairies as Quebec is from Ontario, maybe more so. 

Canada doesn't revolve around Alberta. We aren't envious. We just want to protect what we value. Quebec is with BC because of a shared interest in local democracy. Quebec is 23% of the Canadian population. Lots of seats that are not afraid to go orange. Right about now Trudeau should be praying that the courts rule in favor of indigenous rights and provincial rights. 

The majority of BC residents favour building TM so how does that fit into your 'social license' theory?

Martin N.

NorthReport wrote:

Don’t buy this unless of course you want to throw away your hard earned money

KMI

 

How does making a profit equate with "throw away your hard earned money"? Isn't 'money' eevil to you?

Pondering

Martin N. wrote:

The majority of BC residents favour building TM so how does that fit into your 'social license' theory?

It isn't a valid poll because it wasn't done scientifically. If the support is just as strong or stronger then we will see pro-pipeline protesters out in force any day now so no problem, assuming the court cases go your way. 

NorthReport

Alberta is not Texas North and Kinder Morgan's big brains in Houston must've known it

David J. Climenhaga

April 24, 2018

POLITICS IN CANADA

 David J. Climenhaga

There are a few Albertans who happily imagine this place is Texas North.

Alas for those who do, and notwithstanding the media stereotypists who encourage this nonsense, we are as Canadian around here as folks in any other Western province. Maybe more so, since so many people from other parts of Canada keep moving here.

Sure, lots of us who would never actually get up on a horse own a nice pair of cowboy boots and maybe even a wear a ten gallon hat to work for a week in July, but that's about the limit of this regional affectation.

As for knowing anything about this history of Texas, not to mention its current reality, that would be unusual, even among Albertans who think of themselves as Texaphiles.

Never mind the Alamo and the details of the Texas Revolution, I suspect most Albertans would be shocked just to learn Texas has a population almost as big as all of Canada's -- closing in on 30 million at last count.

This road runs both ways, of course. I doubt most Texans have ever had a random thought about Alberta. If they do, they likely think of it as Oklahoma North -- a slightly more apt comparison, to be fair. As for Canada, they'll know about snow. And Mounties, if they're particularly alert. Maybe they're aware that the President is a young guy who wears nice blue suits with brown shoes.

Still, you have to wonder how the great minds of Kinder Morgan, the Houston-based pipeline corporation that has given Canada until the end of May to provide the assurance it needs its Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion Project will generate huge profits in a timely manner, failed to notice Canada is a federation with a Constitution, political parties, a democratic way of choosing governments, and an electorate that sometimes disagrees about stuff.

If Kinder Morgan hadn't missed this -- and one would have thought a corporation with revenue of US$14 billion could afford to hire people who would keep them au courant about this kind of thing -- you have to wonder how its head office could have been surprised there might be some opposition in British Columbia to their plan to expand their pipeline from Alberta to the West Coast.

Yet there was Kinder Morgan CEO Steven Kean a few days ago explaining the company's April 8 decision to stop spending any money on the project thusly: "It's become clear this particular investment may be untenable for a private party to undertake."

And they didn't get this when they … you know … undertook it?

Kean's pronouncement set off a major-league brouhaha in these parts that has been discussed at length here and, well … pretty much everywhere else.

Maybe Kinder Morgan's strategic brain trust was just as aware of how things run in Canada as they are of other petroleum-jurisdictions like Kazakhstan and Nigeria. It's always possible they simply assumed they could leave things up to the local strongman and be assured of results -- Stephen Harper, what did you tell them?

Or maybe they just got Alberta mixed up with Oklahoma -- they're both on the route of the Keystone XL Pipeline, after all -- and thought we could leave any extra-jurisdictional trauma up to the White House.

In fairness, while the Trans Mountain Pipeline has been operating since 1953, Kinder Morgan only got its hooks into it 13 years ago. So maybe the company's big brains in Houston hadn't had time to figure out that we operate under the rule of law here in Canada. If they had, they'd know means there will be court cases, and inevitably delays, in getting controversial megaprojects done.

Or, to put that another way, maybe this huge and sophisticated international energy corporation's business plan really was so lousy they couldn't hold out for an entirely predictable delay while the plan's legality was clearly established.

Then again, maybe there were other factors. Yes, things change over time. Perhaps Kinder Morgan's leaders now understand the economics of the pipeline expansion plan don't look nearly as good as they did a few years ago. You know, when renewable energy seemed like a pipedream, oil prices were higher, and everyone thought everything would stay that way.

Isn't that the way business decisions based on an understanding of how the wonderful, magical market are supposed to work?

Or maybe like a predator they whiffed the scent of desperation on the wind -- coming from a couple of governments facing electoral challenges. In which case that May 31 deadline really could be more about a shakedown, and not about the need for confidence at all.

Or perhaps they have a political agenda of their own, one that isn't all that sympathetic to the current governments in either Edmonton or Ottawa. Or some combination of such things.

Whatever, most of us here in Canada like Texas well enough, even with the guns and bluster. After all, Texans and Canadians do have one important thing in common: Both used to be citizens of countries that were independent of the United States! But just so you know, the boots and hats are an Alberta thing, not a Texas North thing.

Alberta is not Texas North, no matter what we wear. The rest of Canada isn't Kazakhstan, no matter what Harper used to tell foreigners when he was prime minister. And Kinder Morgan's big brains in Houston must have known that!

http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/alberta-diary/2018/04/alberta-not-texas-...

Martin N.

The difference between an Albertan and an 'activist' is that the Albertan has the bullshit on the outside of the boots.

JKR

Martin N. wrote:

Pondering wrote:

Martin N. wrote:
  It must be quite frustrating that Alberta has so much resource wealth. Even though they very much share their prosperity with the rest of Canada, it is evident that the envy and jealousy of the rest of Canada will never diminish. The problem is simply that Canada's oil is under Alberta's dirt.  

If the oil was under Ontario or Quebec, there would be no issue but Alberta must be held up to ridicule and economic throttling because they just have so much that the rest of Canada does not.

What a bizarre theory. Alberta has just as much right to exploit the oil sands as Quebec has to exploit our hydro resources. No one is "throttling" Alberta's economy we just won't be bullied. Alberta's victim posturing is ripe for ridicule. 

Quebec put a moratorium on fracking because we understand the economic value of our environment. I think Alberta has made stupid short-sighted choices but I fully respect the right of Alberta to make its own choices politically and economically. Albertans probably think Quebec has made stupid short-sighted choices politically and economically and that's fine. Canada works because we allow each province to express its political character provincially. 

Maybe if the oil sands were in BC, or in Quebec, we would have a different perspective and rationalize their exploitation every bit as much as Alberta does. Maybe if Alberta were a province of magnificent waterways and majestic forests instead of oil Alberta's attitude would change. 

Alberta's hysterical threats and posturing are bravado. Your notion that we are envious is bizarre. I feel sorry for Alberta. I read an article that in Fort McMurray the city council toyed with the idea of a four day school week to cut back on busing expense. Parents put a quick stop to it but that it was even considered floored me. Your priorities are very different from that of Quebecers and probably almost every other province. Alberta's wealth doesn't seem to have benefited communities. But hey, this is Canada, provinces and regions have their own culture. 

BC never identified with "the west" which generally meant the prairie provinces. Over the past few decades BC has asserted its own identity and it is as distinct from the prairies as Quebec is from Ontario, maybe more so. 

Canada doesn't revolve around Alberta. We aren't envious. We just want to protect what we value. Quebec is with BC because of a shared interest in local democracy. Quebec is 23% of the Canadian population. Lots of seats that are not afraid to go orange. Right about now Trudeau should be praying that the courts rule in favor of indigenous rights and provincial rights. 

The majority of BC residents favour building TM so how does that fit into your 'social license' theory?

This most recent poll shows BC'ers supporting their government's position, 58 - 42%.

Angus Reid: TransMountain troubles: Alberta-B.C. pipeline battle splits Canadians down the middle

http://angusreid.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/2018.02.22-pipelines2.pdf

Martin N.

http://www.jwnenergy.com/article/2018/4/13-trans-mountain-expansion-pass...

Another B.C. First Nation has come out in public support of the $7.4 billion Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. 

The Simpcw First Nation, whose traditional territory covers a significant portion of the pipeline corridor, is among the First Nations that signed a benefits agreement with Kinder Morgan Canada.

But few of those First Nations have gone public with their support. On Monday, April 23, the Simpcw issued a press release confirming its support for the project, and challenged B.C. Premier John Horgan for what the nation’s chief characterized as selective listening.

“After seeing what’s out there in the media, council decided that it’s important we speak out,” Chief Nathan Matthew said.

Identify opportunities and empower your strategic decision making with the Daily Oil Bulletin.

START YOUR FREE TRIAL!

A number of First Nations leaders, including Stewart Phillip, grand chief of the Union of BC Indian Chiefs, have spoken out against the project and led protests against it.

Matthew reiterated what Cheam Chief Ernie Crey has also recently asserted: “No other Nation or organization [First Nation or environmental] has the authority to speak on Simpcw’s behalf.”

Matthew also challenged Horgan for failing to speak with those First Nations that support the project.

“Since coming into office, the new B.C. government has not reached out once to Simpcw First Nation regarding our position on the project,” Matthew said. “Perhaps this is because Premier Horgan is only interested in speaking with those First Nations who align with his opposition.”

“We welcome Premier Horgan reaching out to us – he simply cannot continue to ignore the fact that First Nations in this province, with unceded aboriginal title to their lands, have agreed to the project proceeding.”

After two years of negotiations, Matthew said the benefits agreement offered to his people was put to a referendum, and 78% voted in favour of the agreement.

“If the project does not go ahead, we will lose out on opportunities that we have been working hard at obtaining in the last year or so,” said Simpcw Councillor Don Matthew.

“We have dedicated time and resources towards this project and there would be a negative impact if this project were to go away.”

Formerly known as the North Thompson Indian Band, the Simpcw are part of the Secwepemec (Shuswap) Nation, whose traditional territory ranges from Jasper to Clearwater, B.C. It covers roughly one-third of the pipeline corridor in B.C., Matthew said.

“That means one third of the pipeline has the support of the Nation who holds aboriginal title to the land,” he said.

In recent weeks, a number of First Nations have come out in support of the project – notably the Cheam First Nation.

More recently, the Musqueam First Nation also came out publicly in favour of the project's completion. The Musqueam, which are not signatories to any benefits agreements with Kinder Morgan, were originally part of a federal appeal court case against the project, but withdrew last year.

Last week, the Musqueam issued a statement suggesting the Musqueam supports the federal government’s attempts to see the expansion completed.

“We support the Prime Minister’s efforts to find a positive resolution, which would be in the vital strategic interest of Canada: including the Musqueam First Nation,” Chief Wayne Sparrow said in a press release.

Martin N.

Well, there is some 'social license' for you. 78% they say?  But, but the activists are saying they speak for the entire province.

Martin N.

Your priorities are very different from that of Quebecers and probably almost every other province.

---------------------------

First of all, I live in BC, on the coast, on a little island, right on the water.

Secondly, Alberta sends 22 billion dollars more to Ottawa (last year) than it gets back. What is your province's contribution to Canada over what they get back?

Looking down on Alberta's hard times while at the same time living off their largesse is not very nice. Especially when despite their hard times, Alberta keep sending the wealth east without fail.

progressive17 progressive17's picture

Climenhaga wrote:

Maybe they're aware that the President is a young guy who wears nice blue suits with brown shoes.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bH3HsZHe_AI

progressive17 progressive17's picture

Of course Alberta sends more in than they get back. They have higher incomes, silly! If you don't want to send more back, just take a cut in pay. Works for the rest of us biomechanical service units!

Pondering

Martin N. wrote:

Your priorities are very different from that of Quebecers and probably almost every other province.

---------------------------

First of all, I live in BC, on the coast, on a little island, right on the water.

Secondly, Alberta sends 22 billion dollars more to Ottawa (last year) than it gets back. What is your province's contribution to Canada over what they get back?

Looking down on Alberta's hard times while at the same time living off their largesse is not very nice. Especially when despite their hard times, Alberta keep sending the wealth east without fail.

I am not looking down on Alberta. Just saying Alberta cannot force its will on others. 

Alberta does not send money east. They send it to the federal government and they don't have a choice. It does not give them the right to dictate to other provinces.

JKR

Martin N. wrote:

First of all, I live in BC, on the coast, on a little island, right on the water.

Secondly, Alberta sends 22 billion dollars more to Ottawa (last year) than it gets back. What is your province's contribution to Canada over what they get back?

Looking down on Alberta's hard times while at the same time living off their largesse is not very nice. Especially when despite their hard times, Alberta keep sending the wealth east without fail.

Albertans are obviously the most generous people in the world. The word "generosity" leaps to one's mind at the mere mention of such great philanthropic leaders such as Stephen Harper, Jason Kenney, Jim Prentice, Ralph Klien, Preston Manning, and Stockwell Day. Was Mahatma Gandhi secretly an Albertan?

NorthReport
voice of the damned

JKR wrote:

Was Mahatma Gandhi secretly an Albertan?

Maybe. There is actually a statue of him in Edmonton. Well, more precisely, a bust...

https://tinyurl.com/ybfaugd4

I gather Houston has one of him as well, yet another Texas North parallel.

NorthReport
progressive17 progressive17's picture

I heard some very nasty rumors involving Mahatma Gandhi. You might say he was a little more like a Catholic Priest than you might think.

NorthReport
NorthReport
Martin N.

JKR wrote:
Martin N. wrote:

First of all, I live in BC, on the coast, on a little island, right on the water.

Secondly, Alberta sends 22 billion dollars more to Ottawa (last year) than it gets back. What is your province's contribution to Canada over what they get back?

Looking down on Alberta's hard times while at the same time living off their largesse is not very nice. Especially when despite their hard times, Alberta keep sending the wealth east without fail.

Albertans are obviously the most generous people in the world. The word "generosity" leaps to one's mind at the mere mention of such great philanthropic leaders such as Stephen Harper, Jason Kenney, Jim Prentice, Ralph Klien, Preston Manning, and Stockwell Day. Was Mahatma Gandhi secretly an Albertan?

It is disappointing that the inclination is not recognized as a south coast BC trait.

Other than sarcasm, there does not appear to be any legitimate criticism of the points I made. Puts some truth to the ad age that: sarcasm is the refuge of the scoundrel.

NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport

Federal program funds summer job to help 'stop Kinder Morgan pipeline'

B.C. citizen activist group hiring student to help scuttle the project

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/kinder-morgan-summer-job-program-dogwood...

JKR

Martin N. wrote:

JKR wrote:
Martin N. wrote:

First of all, I live in BC, on the coast, on a little island, right on the water.

Secondly, Alberta sends 22 billion dollars more to Ottawa (last year) than it gets back. What is your province's contribution to Canada over what they get back?

Looking down on Alberta's hard times while at the same time living off their largesse is not very nice. Especially when despite their hard times, Alberta keep sending the wealth east without fail.

Albertans are obviously the most generous people in the world. The word "generosity" leaps to one's mind at the mere mention of such great philanthropic leaders such as Stephen Harper, Jason Kenney, Jim Prentice, Ralph Klien, Preston Manning, and Stockwell Day. Was Mahatma Gandhi secretly an Albertan?

It is disappointing that the inclination is not recognized as a south coast BC trait.

Other than sarcasm, there does not appear to be any legitimate criticism of the points I made. Puts some truth to the ad age that: sarcasm is the refuge of the scoundrel.

I thought your point was that Alberta sends their wealth east without fail. That sounds very generous to me.

progressive17 progressive17's picture

If Albertans want to send less money to Ottawa, the answer is very simple. Make less money. Take a cut in pay. If you do it right, you will be getting equalization payments too!

NorthReport

I am impressed by the University of Alberta’s courage to bestow an honorary degree on Divid Suzuki as it must be controversial in Alberta

josh
NorthReport

Pages