POLITICS: Half of Canadians Want Oil Industry Nationalized

Originally posted by Duzey

The only thing I remember positively about the NEP was that Canadians had lower gas prices.

[edit on 7-9-2005 by Duzey]

You should go back to it; apparently it caused US merkins to have lower gas prices, too.

And your right about Nafta, also. It was bad for everyone, in all three countries, who doesn't own things for a living.

Here's some history on the topic:

www.nationmaster.com...

Here's a nice CBC archive of the history of Alberta's fight with the Feds over the NEP. Lots of TV and radio clips.

One spewing geyser of oil at Leduc, Alberta on Feb. 13, 1947 transformed the province’s economy. Until the oil strike Alberta struggled as a have-not province. Leduc "blowing in" was famous and rare because Albertans had never imagined large oil reserves existed beneath the wheat. But ownership of the resource challenged by the national energy program became a political battle: East versus West, Trudeau versus Lougheed.

archives.cbc.ca...

Great Find Gools!!!!

The implication if this were come to pass are huge and would change alot in the oil industry. Alot of countries may then consider this esp the smaller oil producers.

I am torn. It would benifit the citizens of Canada but set back the free flow of capitalism. I am going to have to devote a bit of time to research the true implications of this event if it were to come to pass.

Side Note Historicaly nationalizing ones oil has changed the path of many countries. Iran had a democraticaly elected leader in Mossadeq who the us at the urging of Churchill deposed and placed the Shah in his place. Little did they realize that that would give rise to SHiite fundamentalism and the rise of Khomeni. Search ATS for Operation Ajax for more details on that debacle.

For our Canadian members what would your choice be on this

[edit on 9/7/05 by FredT]

For our Canadian members what would your choice be on this

If the profits go to where it's needed the most(like Healthcare and the Navy so we can patrol our fisheries better) then I'm all for it. I don't want to see a Government monopoly though, Public Private Partnerships could be usefull. It would allow us to leverage foreign technology without ceeding any mineral rights.

Allthough before this can happen, I believe NAFTA would have to be scrapped

Originally posted by sardion2000
I don't want to see a Government monopoly though, Public Private Partnerships could be usefull. It would allow us to leverage foreign technology without ceeding any mineral rights.

Allthough before this can happen, I believe NAFTA would have to be scrapped

Yep.

Anything with private participation or involvement falls under NAFTA control.

Personally I think that as a Canadian resource it belongs to Canada, as in the Canadians, as in All the Canadians. Regardless where we find our homes, or the politics of the region, first and foremost we are Canadians.

That said though, I am from Ontario and I have heard it said that we have it easy or we eun things.... Being on the "inside" I can't comment anymore than a fish can comment on water, but it is my hope that we are still viewed as Canadians, even if some of our city's seem to want to be like NY2.

I guess what I am saying is this... I'll tell you if we should federalize the oil industry, when you can show me a party with the political will to run it like we do the beer and liq. stores. I just don't see it being done. Beer is Canada, and you don't have to be too smart to figure out that we are typically a nation of drinkers. That is our weakness. Aslong as they don't mess with the supply of booze, we are typically a very serene and laid back group - almost across the board from what I have seen. They have a very vested interest in that we are serene and willing to put up with, seemingly, any injustice or lawlessness.

Here's to Beer, the cause of, and solution to, all of lifes little troubles.

In other words, should we federalize it, Yes - because it is an important commodity and may be required for the good of all the people of the country. No - because regardless who is in they'll bugger it up.

Canadian resources do belong to Canada -- and no other country. Only when exported does any Canadian exported product transfer in deed.

North American Frre Trade Agreement aka NAFTA only comes into effect at time of export.

Dallas

[edit on 7-9-2005 by Dallas]

Originally posted by FredT
For our Canadian members what would your choice be on this

This is a real toughy Fred. Our politics are WAY different than your. Our regions are fragmented with political parties for each of them. While I would like our natural resources to go to benefit all Canadians, with the fragmentation we are experiencing now, it would only benefit those with representation. This is the only part of Canada with political representation:

www.stay-in-canada.com...

Quebec used to, no longer imo.

So, do we do this to benefit, basically Ontario, or allow the US to continue to drain them? For every Canadian outside of Ont., does the choice really matter?

I hope that if Canada nationalizes their oil industry that you have enough oil and refining capacity internally to meet your needs. Any oil imports that you have now are going the way of the Dodo. Exxon, Shell, BP and the rest of them are not international conglomerates by accident. The only influence that your government is going to have is on the actual assets and equipment within the borders of your country. Once the nationalization takes place no outside oil company is going to sell Canada any oil.

I'm still undecided.

I've seen what happens when the government takes over managing resources, and I suspect intrepid has similar memories. Fish stocks, anyone????

Yes, we should give our 6 months notice and be done with NAFTA. As for nationalizing the oil, I just don't know about that.

But if Canada has enough for itself, why would we need anyone to send us any? Canada, IMO, is in a very good position to being completely self-sufficient, sans birth-rates. We have oil, fresh water, huge arible lands, great farming capacity and some very clever people that can put it all to work.

I have never figured out why we haven't been used to our capacity. Britian loseing world dominence I suspect has something to do with it.

I hear yah and agree in kind. But Canada wants to make money and has our local trading partner in a deficit. Canada exports more than it Imports money wise overall ( not just lumber).

Softwood such as Pine and Poplar grows abundently in Canada (East) and regrows fast. So there is little if any lumber depletion and 'cause we have so much land un-occupied we have a respectable export resource.

Dallas

Originally posted by intrepid

For every Canadian outside of Ont., does the choice really matter?

Yes - with a good negotiator.

Ie., right now, Martin is dependent on third party support. That could be parlayed into some good deals.

Originally posted by JIMC5499
Once the nationalization takes place no outside oil company is going to sell Canada any oil.

We don't need anyones oil, we have plenty for ourselves. We are in no threat of running out. I would think the problem would be, how do we sell it elsewhere and keep jobs. But it seems like people want it, so maybe it's not a problem after all.

Originally posted by JIMC5499
Once the nationalization takes place no outside oil company is going to sell Canada any oil.

That's just it though. We are a net exporter of oil and a few other basic necessities... We will be selling the oil to them rather than having them extract it and keep the profits for their board members and shareholders.

And there are plenty of countries to trade with. I expect all net exporters of oil will contemplate this move.

The evironmental damage from their extraction and use alone will remain with the people for a long time to come it only makes sense that profits should be used to mitigate those effects among many other things we could use the money wisely for.

Dr. a most excellent post.

I agree with the competition argument to a point, but unbridled it leads inevitably to a "last man standing" scenario (think Microsoft) and a situation of limited supply signals the end game IMO. I'd rather the last man standing be my government than some foreign oil company.

The present guy is having trouble building his infrastructure, since no one wants to move equipment to Venz that will end up being nationalized anyway.

I think the Canadian Oil Industry can handle it.

You know, don't you, that the politicos have just as much fun fleecing the corporate barons as they do ripping off the taxpayers, don't you? In America, they called it a "windfall profits tax," and it drove most of the US oil companies out of business, leaving only the biggest and meanest to survive. . . .

At least a Crown Corporation has public oversight and the books are public.

What do people think of a currency based on oil?

I think only countries with oil supplies will avoid the inflation-based non-stop-growth fiat money fiasco awaiting us. And those with Gold reserves.

PS: You can add Hydro Quebec to the list of profitable Crown Corporations.
.

Originally posted by intrepid
Here's some history on the topic:

www.nationmaster.com...

From that link:

The government maintained closer controls over Petro-Canada than was usual for a Crown Corporation so they could use it as a policy tool.

Idiots! They played politics.

The government of Prime Minister Brian Mulroney (1984-1993) stopped using Petro-Canada as a policy tool, and it began to compete fully, and successfully with the private sector companies.

So it was doing well after the politics were cleaned up. Then they sold it:

In 1990, the government announced its intention to privatize Petro-Canada and the first shares were sold on the open market in July 1991...

During the first year, the value of the shares gradually dropped to $8 as Petro-Canada suffered a huge loss of $603 million, primarily because of the devaluation of some assets. The newly private company significantly reduced the number of properties in which it had a direct interest. It reduced its annual operating costs by $300 million and it went from a staff of close to 11,000 to only about 5,000 employees. Many of these laid off employees went on to work and start up other oil companies in Alberta creating a new group of Canadian producers.

In his 2004 federal budget, Finance Minister Ralph Goodale pledged to sell the government's remaining stake in the company.

So opening it up to the market nearly killed it.

Yeah Ralph selling our shares at a time of maximum profit is good but not worth giving up control of a comodity that can only increase or at least remain high in value.
.

Passer By:But if Canada has enough for itself, why would we need anyone to send us any?
Its abit of politics. Use theirs before using our own. That's what I'd do. How about you?

Dallas

Dallas, sounds naive I know. But that "lets pillage their's and ruin any chance of their survival when the envarible fit hits the shan" is rather crass and completely, IMO, unneeded.

I don't understand a lot of the politic's involved, but it seems to me that mankinds main advantage in any situation is the ability to think through a problem. Now the entire world is coming to a problem, we all know this. We can either hurt alittle right now by self limiting our usage, due to the import stoppage and correlating increases in oil costs, will enhance the cost/benefit to alternative means of fuel, which will increase their usage, will will lower their costs(economies of scale), which will promote their usages(and R&D), which will again lower the costs both now and in the future as the R&D brings the market new and more efficient models. While this is going on with every alternative fuel source able to take the place of oil, increases the amount of oil required for those items that there are no(as of yet) alternatives...From a per capita amount of oil needed per person against our reserves we may actually come out ahead. Or, we can do what we are doing, going with the flow until it becomes obvious that there is simply no more and we will have to contend with whatever problems there are then...That would hurt a lot.

We see that when the fit hits the shan people tend to act really crazy and erratic. How about we work towards a solution to a problem we all know is enevitable while there is still time and we can rationally and methodically work things through before we are actually confronted with the enevitable?

Then again.. I admitt I really don't understand all the trade stuff and international politic's. SO if it is completely off the wall that is why....

Originally posted by Gools

What do people think of a currency based on oil?

Gawd no! That would only encourage them.

I think only countries with oil supplies will avoid the inflation-based non-stop-growth fiat money fiasco awaiting us. And those with Gold reserves.

PS: You can add Hydro Quebec to the list of profitable Crown Corporations.

BTW - Whatever did happen to everyone's gold? Is it all in Switzerland, or did the aliens get it?

...Manitoba Hydro also is a profitable Crown Corp - you may be on track looking at an energy-based currency - but a plutonium-based currency could get out of hand...


.