Is Alberta Opening the Way to Privatizing Water?
Why not? They’re doing it for health care as well.
Thanks to William Munsey over at the Berry Patch for highlighting this threat in his latest post. He focuses on the ever-increasing plight of family farms, threatened by agri-business and indifferent government. The Green Party is certainly on the side of the small- to medium-sized farms and has an extensive policy to support them and make farming rewarding, financially as well as spiritually.
What concerns me here, what becomes an issue for the whole country, is the threat of NAFTA. As soon as we allow one jurisdiction to commoditize water we open the door to MNCs under NAFTA and our various free trade agreements.
Once we do that, we can kiss our right to water good-bye. Personally, I don’t want to live in a country where we have the most abundant freshwater resources in the world but we can’t access them, where they are no longer part of the Commons.
Let’s hope that the Council of Canadians and the Green Party hop on this bandwagon and rallies support to stop this move by a short-sighted, oil sands-obsessed government.
Green Energy Sector? I don’t think so.
I have to thank Elizabeth May for pointing this out last Friday at the Green Party of Canada Economic Summit in Toronto.
Please turn to page 102 of your copy of Budget 2010. You do have one, right? If by some oversight your copy hasn’t arrived yet, you can download it here.
Read with me, if you will, the first paragraph of the creatively titled section: Green Jobs and Growth.
Canada has established itself as an energy superpower, being the third-largest global producer of gas, seventh in oil production, and the world’s largest supplier of uranium. Our international reputation as a safe and reliable energy supplier creates unprecedented opportunities for exporting our energy products within an integrated North American energy market and to the rest of the world. Our substantial reserves of oil, natural gas and other energy sources make Canada an increasingly attractive destination for global investment. These major new investments will allow us to tap our abundant energy potential while contributing to faster economic growth, creating a significant number of high value jobs and rejuvenating communities, especially in remote and rural areas.
Awesome! It really convinces me that our government is on the right track with Green development. Gas, oil and uranium – it just doesn’t get greener than that. Okay, I’m totally kidding. The second paragraph is no better but the third paragraph is very promising with a discussion of renewable energy sources leading up to these bullet points.
Bullet 1: A billion dollars for “clean energy technologies” through the Clean Energy Fund. Since they’ve already allotted $800 million to carbon capture and storage (CCS) there really isn’t any doubt that it is actually a CCS Fund.
Bullet 2: A billion dollars over 5-years for the Green Infrastructure Fund. No idea? Me neither. So I looked here and, ohmigosh, this is brilliant.
Eligible projects are those that promote cleaner air, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, and cleaner water and fall within any of the following categories: wastewater infrastructure; green energy generation infrastructure; green energy transmission infrastructure and solid waste infrastructure, and carbon transmission and storage infrastructure.
Looks great right up until the end… do you see it? CCS! “The fund will focus on a few, large scale, strategic infrastructure projects.” Definitely something to keep an eye on. To be fair, almost half of the Fund has already been allocated and none of it is for CCS so far. Here are the projects so far – mostly water treatment and energy transmission. I stand corrected.
“But it has to get better!” you say. All right, let’s move on. After some discussion on transforming the forestry sector the Budget moves on to Modernizing the Regulatory System where we find efforts to streamline major projects (insert oil sands and CCS joke here) and this nugget: “Responsibility for conducting environmental assessments for energy projects will be delegated from the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency to the National Energy Board and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission for projects falling under their respective areas of expertise” (p104).
No. Seriously. The government is moving Environmental Assessments away from CEAA to the National Energy Board. Say good-bye to any attempts at oversight. Getting angry now? I am.
But it gets better. There is some good ideas on page 105 about Forestry and Accelerated Capital Cost Allowances for renewable energy projects. Good, good, things are looking up. Projects for Great Lakes and Arctic monitoring and the development of Environmental Sustainability Indicators. Not sure how those will provide jobs or grow the Green Economy but they are nice. I’m starting to feel a bit more hopeful. And then…
The section finishes with Nuclear Energy on page 107. The section basically says, and this is a heavy paraphrase, “It’s losing lots of money but we’ll continue to support it!”
Just a reminder that if you want to see Green Economics then you had better Vote Green.
Now *that* is some quick spin
It was so fast I had to go back and read it again. On Tuesday during Question Period, Bloc leader Gilles Duceppe and PM Stephen Harper had a little exchange about oil and gas companies that caught my eye while reading the Hansard. (Yup, I’m totally poli-geeking out.) Here is the exchange under Oral Questions: Government Spending.
{snip}
Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ): Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is quite right to say that this is a first: it is the first time I have seen a government abolish vacant positions.
The government could recover $3 billion if it prohibited the use of tax havens, but it prefers to abolish vacant positions. It could do away with tax benefits for the oil companies, which would save $3.2 billion, but it prefers to abolish vacant positions. It could cut military spending by $1 billion, but it prefers to abolish vacant positions.
Will the Prime Minister admit that what is lacking is not solutions, but political will?
Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC): Mr. Speaker, obviously, the first step in abolishing positions is not to fill them. If the leader of the Bloc would care to suggest any other positions that should be abolished, I encourage him to do so.
The Bloc leader talks about subsidies for the oil companies. This government has cut taxes for all businesses in Canada, not just the oil companies. This is another example of grandstanding by the Bloc.
{snip, emphasis mine}
umm… I could be wrong here but I’m pretty sure that Mr. Duceppe was not talking about tax cuts for the oil and gas industry.
Actually, I’m almost positive he was talking about eliminating the incentives for oil and gas exploration and production that result in a more-than billion dollar subsidy for oil and gas companies and their investors.*
Sadly, none of that was mentioned due to the deft handling by Mr. Harper. Very impressive. And too bad that Mr. Duceppe couldn’t handle the pass.
*I’m not sure where Mr. Duceppe got the $3.2 billion figure from – let me know if you do.
Twitter
LinkedIn
Facebook
