Connect with us

Opinion

Election 2017 is almost over. Was it a repeat of past elections? Will Election 2021 be a repeat of this one?

Published

5 minute read

Election 2017 will be over in about 48 hours, and then what?
“The odds are all the incumbents will get re-elected so nothing will change.” If that is your argument, then vote for a challenger. You do not have to vote for all 14 or 16 positions depending on school boards. Find one name that you would like to see win a seat, and vote for that person.
If you find some more names, all the better.
Remember the vote you gave your last choice may be the vote that gives your last choice the win over your first choice. In 2013 Paul Harris only beat Tanya Handley by 8 votes, Bill Stuebing got 5 more votes than Bev Manning, and Cathy Peacock and Jim Watters tied. Incumbents usually fill the last few blanks because of name recognition.
“Wasn’t the removal of the railyard going to revitalize the downtown, about 20 years ago, and haven’t the Riverlands been brought up in the last 3 or 4 elections?” The downtown revitalization is a continuous circle and will never be completely revitalized. There will be new ideas, new plans, changes, and hopes that the next project will be the one, that cures the downtown’s ailments. Next election we may be voting on a new vision for the downtown because the issues are still there.
This year the fashionable issue of the day was “Crime” and with Red Deer having the 2nd highest Crime Severity Index in Canada, it was no surprise. We have the highest number of Fentenyl deaths in Alberta and we hand out 500,000 needles per year and can only account for 350,000 back. Haven’t we heard some of the same arguments since 2004 and in 2011 weren’t we 15th on the Crime Severity Index and now we are up to 2nd. Are we trying for number 1? Is this an issue that disappears between elections?
“We are a growth community.” No we are not. We were in 2013 but we are declining in population, our businesses are closing and or relocating. “It is the recession.” No it isn’t. The province grew, the neighbours all grew, just us that declined. The tax differential is still there but it was there when we were growing.
“Our environmental stewardship is a leader.” We have the poorest air quality in Alberta which is the lowest across Canada. Perhaps we could look at the way we build our city, and make some changes. We have all industry in the north-west and we are building our high schools in the East, South-east. Do we need to build 5 high schools along 30th Ave. So either you commute across the city to work or your children commute across the city to high school. The monitors having been reading in the “needs immediate attention” range sine 2009. Harder to deal with but perhaps better planning may help. The next high school will be a public high school, and perhaps a new board might consider building it north of the river and not along 30th Ave?
There are a lot of reasons to change direction, and since the incumbents seem unwilling to let go the levers of power, the voters must.
If you are satisfied with the status quo, vote for the status quo.
I have voted in over 30 elections at different levels. I have seen the same discussions repeated time and again. The biggest change I saw was the 2015 Alberta election that brought in a whole new government. The world did not end, and the apocalypse did not arrive.
I am sure that the world will continue on but I am hoping for some fresh ideas, fresh thinking, fresh discussions and a fresh start in a new direction.
Perhaps we should just wait and see and discuss this during Election 2021. We might.

Follow Author

Business

Canada’s critical minerals are key to negotiating with Trump

Published on

From Resource Works

By

The United States wants to break its reliance on China for minerals, giving Canada a distinct advantage.

Trade issues were top of mind when United States President Donald Trump landed in Kananaskis, Alberta, for the G7 Summit. As he was met by Prime Minister Mark Carney, Canada’s vast supply of critical minerals loomed large over a potential trade deal between North America’s two largest countries.

Although Trump’s appearance at the G7 Summit was cut short by the outbreak of open hostilities between Iran and Israel, the occasion still marked a turning point in commercial and economic relations between Canada and the U.S. Whether they worsen or improve remains to be seen, but given Trump’s strategy of breaking American dependence on China for critical minerals, Canada is in a favourable position.

Despite the president’s early exit, he and Prime Minister Carney signed an accord that pledged to strike a Canada-US trade deal within 30 days.

Canada’s minerals are a natural advantage during trade talks due to the rise in worldwide demand for them. Without the minerals that Canada can produce and export, it is impossible to power modern industries like defence, renewable energy, and electric vehicles (EV).

Nickel, gallium, germanium, cobalt, graphite, and tungsten can all be found in Canada, and the U.S. will need them to maintain its leadership in the fields of technology and economics.

The fallout from Trump’s tough talk on tariff policy and his musings about annexing Canada have only increased the importance of mineral security. The president’s plan extends beyond the economy and is vital for his strategy of protecting American geopolitical interests.

Currently, the U.S. remains dependent on China for rare earth minerals, and this is a major handicap due to their rivalry with Beijing. Canada has been named as a key partner and ally in addressing that strategic gap.

Canada currently holds 34 critical minerals, offering a crucial potential advantage to the U.S. and a strategic alternative to the near-monopoly currently held by the Chinese. The Ring of Fire, a vast region of northern Ontario, is a treasure trove of critical minerals and has long been discussed as a future powerhouse of Canadian mining.

Ontario’s provincial government is spearheading the region’s development and is moving fast with legislation intended to speed up and streamline that process. In Ottawa, there is agreement between the Liberal government and Conservative opposition that the Ring of Fire needs to be developed to bolster the Canadian economy and national trade strategies.

Whether Canada comes away from the negotiations with the US in a stronger or weaker place will depend on the federal government’s willingness to make hard choices. One of those will be ramping up development, which can just as easily excite local communities as it can upset them.

One of the great drags on the Canadian economy over the past decade has been the inability to finish projects in a timely manner, especially in the natural resource sector. There was no good reason for the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion to take over a decade to complete, and for new mines to still take nearly twice that amount of time to be completed.

Canada is already an energy powerhouse and can very easily turn itself into a superpower in that sector. With that should come the ambition to unlock our mineral potential to complement that. Whether it be energy, water, uranium, or minerals, Canada has everything it needs to become the democratic world’s supplier of choice in the modern economy.

Given that world trade is in flux and its future is uncertain, it is better for Canada to enter that future from a place of strength, not weakness. There is no other choice.

Continue Reading

Economy

Ottawa’s muddy energy policy leaves more questions than answers

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Kenneth P. Green

Based on the recent throne speech (delivered by a King, no less) and subsequent periodic statements from Prime Minister Carney, the new federal government seems stuck in an ambiguous and ill-defined state of energy policy, leaving much open to question.

After meeting with the premiers earlier this month, the prime minister talked about “decarbonized barrels” of oil, which didn’t clarify matters much. We also have a stated goal of making Canada the world’s “leading energy superpower” in both clean and conventional energy. If “conventional energy” includes oil and gas (although we’re not sure), this could represent a reversal of the Trudeau government’s plan to phase-out fossil fuel use in Canada over the next few decades. Of course, if it only refers to hydro and nuclear (also forms of conventional energy) it might not.

According to the throne speech, the Carney government will work “closely with provinces, territories, and Indigenous Peoples to identify and catalyse projects of national significance. Projects that will connect Canada, that will deepen Canada’s ties with the world, and that will create high-paying jobs for generations.” That could mean more oil and gas pipelines, but then again, it might not—it might only refer to power transmission infrastructure for wind and solar power. Again, the government hasn’t been specific.

The throne speech was a bit more specific on the topic of regulatory reform and the federal impact assessment process for energy projects. Per the speech, a new “Major Federal Project Office” will ensure the time needed to approve projects will be reduced from the currently statutory limit of five years to two. Also, the government will strike cooperation agreements with interested provinces and territories within six months to establish a review standard of “one project, one review.” All of this, of course, is to take place while “upholding Canada’s world-leading environmental standards and its constitutional obligations to Indigenous Peoples.” However, what types of projects are likely to be approved is not discussed. Could be oil and gas, could be only wind and solar.

Potentially good stuff, but ill-defined, and without reference to the hard roadblocks the Trudeau government erected over the last decade that might thwart this vision.

For example, in 2019 the Trudeau government enacted Bill C-48 (a.k.a. the “Tanker Ban Bill”), which changed regulations for large oil transports coming and going from ports on British Columbia’s northern coast, effectively banning such shipments and limiting the ability of Canadian firms to export to non-U.S. markets. Scrapping C-48 would remove one obstacle from the government’s agenda.

In 2023, the Trudeau government introduced a cap on Canadian oil and gas-related greenhouse gas emissions, and in 2024, adopted major new regulations for methane emissions in the oil and gas sector, which will almost inevitably raise costs and curtail production. Removing these regulatory burdens from Canada’s energy sector would also help Canada achieve energy superpower status.

Finally, in 2024, the Trudeau government instituted new electricity regulations that will likely drive electricity rates through the roof, while ushering in an age of less-reliable electricity supply: a two-handed slap to Canadian energy consumers. Remember, the throne speech also called for building a more “affordable” Canada—eliminating these onerous regulations would help.

In summation, while the waters remain somewhat muddy, the Carney government appears to have some good ideas for Canadian energy policy. But it must act and enact some hard legislative and regulatory reforms to realize the positive promises of good policy.

Continue Reading

Trending

X