Canada Budget 2012: Feds To Signal Change To Environment Rules Despite Discomfort Among Provinces

CP  |  By Posted: 03/21/2012 4:00 am Updated: 03/21/2012 3:24 pm

Canada Budget 2012 Environment
Next week's federal budget will propose a streamlined environmental assessment process, something which will delight the oil patch and give provinces a larger say over resource development. "Clearly, we need to focus our attention and reviews where they really matter — on big projects with the potential for the greatest economic and environmental impact," Natural Resource Minister Joe Oliver said Tuesday in Saskatchewan. (CP/AFP Getty Images)

OTTAWA - Next week's budget will propose a streamlined environmental assessment process, something which will delight the oil patch and give provinces a larger say over resource development.

But one part under consideration for the package — reforms to the Fisheries Act that would end federal oversight over much of the country's fresh water — is proving difficult for some provinces to swallow, sources say.

The environmental changes will be pitched as part of a major theme of the budget: Get government out of the way and let corporations flourish.

They will reflect commitments made increasingly frequently by Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his environment and natural resource ministers, to remove barriers to investment and development.

Specific legislative amendments and regulatory fixes will likely be introduced later, with the budget merely outlining the new direction.

The package will eventually see Ottawa pay far less attention to small projects, impose time limits on major environmental hearings and pull out of the process altogether if a province is ready to step in with similar standards.

"Clearly, we need to focus our attention and reviews where they really matter — on big projects with the potential for the greatest economic and environmental impact," Natural Resource Minister Joe Oliver said Tuesday in Saskatchewan.

Plus, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency will likely cede ground in some areas to the National Energy Board and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, to eliminate overlap.

At stake, says Oliver, is $500 billion in new energy and mining investment over the next 10 years.

Ottawa has shopped these ideas around to the provinces and there has been general, widespread agreement that the environmental assessment process is arcane, archaic and needs reform.

"I'm happy to say that my provincial and territorial counterparts... agree that our goal should be one project, one review, completed in a clearly defined time period," Oliver said Tuesday.

The oilpatch will stand to benefit, in particular, since changes made in the past to expedite hearings mainly benefited the mining industry, but did not directly tackle the panels often faced by oilsands projects.

"I'm encouraged by the current thrust toward regulatory reform," said Don Thompson, an executive adviser at Canadian Oil Sands Ltd. "It's time to clean it up and reset the clock for the current decade."

At the same time, funding for the major projects management office — a group of federal deputy ministers whose task is to push assessments through the system efficiently — is expected to be renewed in the budget. It was set to expire this year.

It's trickier, however, to tinker with the Fisheries Act.

A leaked draft of one proposal last week showed Ottawa wants to remove habitat provisions from the act, essentially diluting the federal government's oversight of fresh water in the face of industrial development.

Fisheries Minister Keith Ashfield insists no final decision has been made, but says current policies overreach and are under review to better reflect "the priorities of Canadians."

His office will give no details about what policies are under review, when the review will be completed, or whether it plans to consult provincial governments and other stakeholders.

Environmentalists and a large network of environmental scientists are furious about the idea and say Ottawa is ready to abdicate its national and international obligations to protect waterways.

Provinces would likely be expected to pick up the slack, but they are in the dark about how that would work and don't appreciate being handed extra cost and responsibility, some insiders said.

"If this approach is taken, groups such as ours will press the province to address the protection of aquatic habitat in legislation such as the proposed provincial water act," the B.C. Wildlife Federation said in a recent letter to Harper.

The federation said a mosaic of habitat regulations is a bad idea.

The Fisheries Act's habitat provisions are a frequent trigger for government intervention in the development of natural resources, partly because Canada has so many waterways that it's rare to find a mine or project that does not encompass a stream.

Mining companies complain that government officials have cracked down in recent years for no apparent reason, hindering their work. Industry groups in British Columbia have pressured Ottawa for years to change the Fisheries Act so that it doesn't micro-manage minor developments.

"I think the focus needs to be on preservation of key fisheries stock," said Thompson of Canadian Oil Sands.

The federal measures come as a bitter war of words between environmentalists and the government takes full flight.

Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver has condemned "radical" environmentalists, accusing them of taking foreign money to undermine Canada's economic health by opposing the Northern Gateway pipeline proposal.

Environmentalists, for their part, accuse Ottawa of giving up stewardship of the environment to promote energy and mining projects at all costs.

Related on HuffPost:

Loading Slideshow...
  • Canada's Top Polluting Provinces

    As Canada begins the process of withdrawing from the Kyoto Protocol this year, here's a look at the country's top polluting provinces. (Mt CO2 eq refers to megatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent, which is the standard international unit of measurement for reporting GHG emissions. It expresses all greenhouse gases emissions in terms of the global warming potential of carbon dioxide, CO2. One megatonne is equal to one million tonnes.) * Signatories to the Kyoto Protocol submit greenhouse gas emissions inventories to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change annually, but the data itself lags two years behind. ** Facility-reportedemissions are those reported by large industrial facilities like fossil-fuel-powered power plants, mining An activist wears a mask depicting the face of Canadian Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, during a protest in Durban on the sidelines of the UN climate talks, on December 5, 2011. (ALEXANDER JOE/AFP/Getty Images) <em>With files from CBC</em>

  • 7. Quebec - Per capita: 10.4 tonnes CO2 equivalent

    Emissions target: 20 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020 2009* emissions: - Total: 81.7 Mt CO2 eq. - Per capita: 10.4 tonnes CO2 eq. % change from 1990: -1.9 per cent % of Canada's total emissions: 11.8 per cent (**facility-reported emissions: 8 per cent) LEGISLATION: Cap and trade -- Quebec will be the first jurisdiction in Canada to adopt a cap and trade system for reducing emissions, effective January 2012. The first year will be a transition year in which participants are to get a feel for how the system works but are not obliged to comply with the caps. Under the system, the province establishes an overall emissions objective and then sets specific caps on individual sectors based on average emissions in that sector or on a company by company basis. Emitters whose emissions are below the cap will be able to sell emissions credits to companies whose emissions exceed the cap. Quebec will be part of the same cap-and-trade system as California since both are members of the Western Climate Initiative. Some environmental groups, including the Pembina Institute, have said the auction price for emissions credits that Quebec has set --$10 per tonne in 2013 and $15 per tonne in 2020 -- is too low to motivate significant reductions in emissions and have urged the province to raise them. Carbon tax -- Quebec was the first jurisdiction in North America to introduce a carbon tax in 2007. The tax applies to about 50 fuel producers and distributors that use a large amount of hydrocarbons. The $200 million collected annually through the tax goes to fund projects that are part of the province's Climate Change Action Plan. The tax rate varies depending on the amount of carbon released during combustion: - Gasoline: 0.8 cents/litre - Diesel: 0.9 cents/litre - Propane: 0.5 cents/litre - Light heating oil: 0.96 cents/litre - Heavy heating oil: 1 cent/litre - Coke used in steel making: 1.3 cents/litre - Coal: $8/tonne Energy -- It's no accident that Quebec is one of the few provinces to have reduced its emissions from 1990 levels: 96 per cent of the province's electrical power comes from renewable sources. While hydro power is its biggest strength, it has also invested heavily in wind power and aims to develop 4,000 MW of wind-generated electricity by 2015. (Alamy)

  • 6. Ontario - Per capita: 12.6 tonnes CO2 eq.

    Emissions target: 15 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020 2009* emissions: - Total: 165 Mt CO2 eq. - Per capita: 12.6 tonnes CO2 eq. % change from 1990: -6.5 per cent % of Canada's total emissions: 23.9 per cent (**facility-reported emissions: 20 per cent) LEGISLATION: Energy -- The province passed the Green Energy Act in 2009, which set the course for the province's transition to cleaner sources of energy and greater energy efficiency. It came with financial incentives for the development of wind, solar and biomass power-generation projects and created the feed-in tariff program by which producers of renewable energy are paid premium rates to supply the province's power grid. The Act also includes provisions to promote energy conservation and green construction in the public sector. Coal -- The province plans to phase out all of its coal-fired electricity generation by 2014 and replace it with wind, solar and other clean-energy sources. A total of 19 units at five coal plants will be shut; eight have been closed already. In the past decade, the province has gone from relying on coal for 27 per cent of its electricity needs to seven per cent. Cap and trade -- Ontario is part of the Western Climate Initiative and has the legislation in place to implement a cap-and-trade system but has not yet done so. In the last election, the Liberals said they were still committed to setting up the system but did not say when that might happen. Fuel -- Along with the federal regulations on renewable content, Ontario has committed to reducing carbon content in transportation fuels by 10 per cent by 2020. Emissions -- In 2009, Ontarioamended its Environmental Protection Act to allow greenhouse gas emissions to be regulated and laid the groundwork for a cap-and-trade system. As of 2010, any facility emitting more than 25,000 tonnes of CO2 equivalent has to report its emissions annually, but there are no limits on these emissions as yet. (GEOFF ROBINS/AFP/Getty Images)

  • 5. B.C. - Per capita: 14.3 tonnes CO2 eq.

    Emissions target:33 per cent below 2007 levels by 2020 2009* emissions: - Total: 63.8 Mt CO2 eq. - Per capita: 14.3 tonnes CO2 eq. % change from 1990: +28.1 per cent (2 per cent below 2007 levels) % of Canada's total emissions: 9.2 per cent (**facility-reported emissions: 5 per cent) LEGISLATION: Carbon tax -- B.C. introduced a tax on fossil fuels in 2008. It started at $10/tonne and will rise by $5 a year until 2012. It is currently at $25/tonne and applies to gasoline, diesel, natural gas, heating fuel, propane and coal -- and to peat and tires when used to produce energy. Revenue raised from the tax is put toward lowering other taxes. The tax covers about 70 per cent of B.C.'s emissions. Electricity -- B.C.'s Clean Energy Act requires that 93 per cent of the province's electricity come from renewable sources and aims to make B.C. not only self-sufficient in terms of its electricity supply but also to be a net exporter of clean electricity. Some have criticized the legislation, because it reverses B.C.'s past policy of generating only enough electricity to meet the province's own needs and allows the government to exploit rivers and the environment by selling surplus power. It also mergers the generating and transmission sides of the electricity sector that past governments had taken pains to separate. This can undermine the oversight authority of the B.C. Utilities Commission, particularly its ability to reject certain hydro power projects, critics say. Coal -- B.C. has abandoned coal-fired electricity generation in favour of renewables but is still Canada's biggest exporter of coal. In 2010, it exported about 23 million tonnes. Fuel -- B.C.'s Renewable and Low Carbon Fuel Requirements Regulation has targets for reducing emissions from transportation fuels. Its overall target is to reduce the carbon intensity of fuels by 10 per cent by 2020. Carbon intensity measures the CO2 equivalent emissions of fuel per unit of energy. The regulations also stipulate that gasoline must have five per cent renewable content beginning in 2010 and diesel must have five per cent renewable content by 2012. The province is also testing a fleet of 20 fuel-cell buses that have zero tailpipe emissions. The $89.5 million federal-provincial project runs until March 2014. Public sector -- In June 2011, the province announced it had succeeding in making government operations carbon neutral, meaning that by reducing emissions and purchasing carbon offsets for reductions made in other sectors, the net contribution to the province's emissions from the public sector would be zero. Many have questioned the government's methodology in declaring itself carbon neutral, pointing out that it exempted some government-owned operations, such as BC Ferries, and didn't give credit to some institutions for reducing certain heavy-emitting activities, such as commuting. Cap and trade -- B.C. is a member of the Western Climate Initiative formed in 2007 between several U.S. states and four Canadian provinces. The members of the initiative have agreed to set a regional target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions of 15 per cent below 2005 levels by 2020, which is less ambitious than the federal target Canada and the U.S. agreed to under the Copenhagen Accord; and to establish a regional cap-and-trade program. Although B.C. has the legislation in place to implement a cap-and-trade system and had initially said it would launch the program in 2012, the Liberal government under new leader Christy Clark has not committed to carrying out the plan and is currently reviewing whether a cap-and-trade model is the best way to meet the provincial target. So far, only Quebec and California have moved forward with the cap-and-trade plan. Both are to begin a trial year of operation in 2012. Christy Clark, Premier of British Columbia, Canada, speaks during the World Economic Forum - India Economic Summit in Mumbai on November 14, 2011. (PUNIT PARANJPE/AFP/Getty Images)

  • 4. Manitoba - Per capita: 16.6 tonnes CO2 eq.

    Emissions target: none 2009* emissions: - Total: 20.3 Mt CO2 eq. - Per capita: 16.6 tonnes CO2 eq. % change from 1990: +9.6 per cent % of Canada's total emissions: 3.1 per cent (**facility-reported emissions: 1 per cent) LEGISLATION: Emissions -- Under the NDP government of Gary Doer, Manitoba passed the Climate Change and Emissions Reductions Actin 2008, which committed the government to reducing emissions to six per cent below 1990 levels by 2012. It abandoned that target this December, after Canada withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol -- although, with 2012 fast approaching and Manitoba's emissions nowhere near six per cent below 1990 levels, the move was largely moot. Carbon tax -- The provinceintroduced a small carbon tax of $10 a tonne of CO2 equivalent on coal-fired electricity generation in July 2011, but it only affects three companies that are large emitters of greenhouse gases. Cap and trade -- Manitoba is a member of the Western Climate Initiative but has not yet laid the legislative groundwork for setting up a cap-and-trade system in the province. Manitoba Legislature in Winnipeg. (<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/jezz/">Flickr: Jezz's Photostream</a>

  • 3. Nova Scotia - 22.3 tonnes CO2 eq.

    Emissions target: 10 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020 2009* emissions: - Total: 21 Mt CO2 eq. - per capita: 22.3 tonnes CO2 eq. % change from 1990: +10.5 per cent % of Canada's total emissions: 3 per cent (**facility-reported emissions: 4 per cent) LEGISLATION: Electricity -- Almost 90 per cent of Nova Scotia's electrical power comes from fossil fuels, mostly coal. In 2009, the province passed regulations limiting emissions in the electricity sector. It set caps on any facility emitting more than 10,000 tonnes of CO2 equivalent per year. Clean energy -- The province passed an Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act that sets targets for reducing emissions and increasing energy efficiency and the use of renewable fuel sources. The province aims to get 25 per cent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2015. Two Canadian bagpipers play in front of the town clock in Halifax. (Tim BREAKMEIE/AFP/Getty Images)

  • 2. Alberta - Per capita: 63.6 tonnes CO2 eq.

    Emissions target: 14 per cent below 2005 levels by 2050 2009* emissions: - Total: 234 Mt CO2 eq. - Per capita: 63.6 tonnes CO2 eq. % difference from 1990: +36.7 per cent % of Canada's total emissions: 33.8 per cent (**facility-reported emissions: 47 per cent) Alberta has also expressed its target as a 50 per cent reduction in emissions intensity below 1990 levels by 2020, which according to the Pembina Institute, translates to a reduction of 60 megatonnes in annual emissions below the business-as-usual level by 2020. Emissions intensity doesn't measure emissions in absolute terms but instead factors in GDP to measure GHG as a unit of production. This means that if production increases, emissions can increase and the province can still meet its target. Alberta's 2008 climate change strategy expresses its reduction targets as a cut in annual emissions of 50 Mt by 2020 and 200 Mt by 2050, a cut of 50 per cent below business as usual level. LEGISLATION: Emissions -- Alberta was the first province to implement regulations limiting greenhouse gas emissions when in 2003 it passed the Climate Change and Emissions Management Act. That act gave the province the right to regulate emissions, require mandatory reporting of emissions from certain facilities and set an overall provincial target of reducing emissions intensity to 50 per cent of 1990 levels by 2020. In 2007, the province added the Specified Gas Emitters Regulation. Under those laws, as of March 2008, existing facilities that emit more than 100,000 tonnes of greenhouse gas per year had to cap their emissions intensity at 12 per cent below the average for 2003-2005. Facilities built from 2000 on have a three-year reprieve before they have to start reducing emissions intensity by two per cent a year for five years. Emitters can choose to pay a penalty for exceeding their targets of $15 for every tonne over their limit. The money goes into the Climate Change and Emissions Management Fund, which as of September 2011 had collected $257 million -- from about $40 million in 2008. In 2009, the province set up a Climate Change and Emissions Management Corporation to invest the fund money into "emission reduction technologies." They can also purchase credits to offset their own emissions from emitters that have already reached their reduction targets or from companies that are not subject to the regulations (i.e. those who emit less than 100,000 tonnes a year) but have voluntarily reduced emissions. Environmentalists have criticized Alberta's emissions regulations for several reasons: - Measuring emissions intensity instead of absolute emissions allows the province to keep increasing emissions. The Alberta Environmental Law Centre has said that studies have shown that the province will be able to meet its emissions intensity target of 50 per cent below 1990 levels even if absolute emissions grow by 60 to 80 per cent above 1990 levels. According to the Pembina Institute, between 1990 and 2009, Alberta's greenhouse gas emissions increased more than those of any other jurisdiction in North America. - The regulations apply only to large emitters. - The $15/tonne penalty for exceeding reduction targets is not high enough to motivate changes in behaviour. Electricity -- Small-scale producers of renewable energy can feed the provincial grid and are compensated at the retail, rather than wholesale, price for electricity. As of 2005, almost all of the electricity in government buildings comes from renewable sources like wind and biomass, but overall, renewables still make up only five per cent of the province's total generating capacity. About 45 per cent comes from coal, and 40 per cent from natural gas. Coal --About 59 per cent of the province's electricity generation is fuelled by coal. Alberta angered many environmentalists in August 2011 when it approved a new $1.7-billion coal plant at a facility near Grande Cache owned by Maxim Power. The company plans to build a 500-megawatt generating station next to its existing 150-megawatt H.R. Milner plant, which is to shut down in 2012. The Pembina Institute estimates the new plant will emit more than three million tonnes of greenhouse gases each year -- the equivalent of adding 590,000 vehicles to the road. Source: Canada's 2011 national greenhouse gas inventory submission to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Aerial view of the Suncor oil sands extraction facility near the town of Fort McMurray in Alberta on October 23, 2009. (MARK RALSTON/AFP/Getty Images)

  • 1. Saskatchewan - Per capita: 71 tonnes CO2 eq.

    Emissions target: 20 per cent below 2006 levels by 2020 2009* emissions: - Total: 73.1 Mt CO2 eq. - Per capita: 71 tonnes CO2 eq. % change from 1990: +69 per cent % of Canada's total emissions: 7.3 per cent (**facility-reported emissions: 9 per cent) LEGISLATION: Emissions -- The province passed a Management and Reduction of Greenhouse Gases Act in 2010 that allows it to regulate emissions but has not yet implemented emissions limits on facilities or required them to report their greenhouse gas emissions. Regulations to that effect are expected to be introduced in 2012, with the first caps coming into force in 2013. The province plans to set a price on carbon and have facilities that exceed the caps pay into a green technology fund similar to the one that exists in Alberta. Saskatchewan's emissions have grown more than those of any other province since 1990, increasing by 69 per cent. This is largely due to the explosive growth in the province's oil and gas sector, which accounts for 37 per cent of its total emissions. Saskatchewan is Canada's second largest producer of oil after Alberta and accounts for about 20 per cent of the country's oil production. Potash mining and the expansion of coal-fired power generation have also contributed to the growth in emissions. Coal -- About 60 per cent of Saskatchewan's electricity comes from coal-fired generation. The province has no plans to phase out coal but instead aims to retrofit existing units to include carbon capture and storage technology to reduce emissions. (<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/justaprairieboy/">Flickr: Just a Prairie Boy's photostream</a>)

  • Canada - Per capita: 20.5 tonnes CO2 eq.

    Emissions target: 17 per cent below 2005 levels by 2020 This is the target Canada agreed to under the 2009 Copenhagen Accord, which laid out the broad outlines of a possible agreement to replace the Kyoto Protocol once it expires in 2012. It is a smaller cut over a longer period than what Canada originally agreed to under Kyoto, which would have required Canada to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to six per cent below 1990 levels by 2012. The target mirrors the one proposed by the U.S. during the Copenhagen negotiations. After announcing on Dec. 12 that Canada will withdraw from Kyoto, Environment Minister Peter Kent said the government will stick to the Copenhagen target, even though it is not legally binding as the Kyoto target was. Canada's 2009*emissions: - Total: 690 Mt CO2 eq. - Per capita: 20.5 tonnes CO2 eq. % change from 1990: +16.9 per cent LEGISLATION: Coal -- federal emissions limits for coal-fired power plants are to come into force in July 2015. They will limit emissions to 375 tonnes of CO2 per gigawatt-hour of electricity produced per year. Emitters will be able to use carbon capture and storage to meet their emissions caps. The regulation will apply to any coal-fired unit commissioned after July 1, 2015, or at the end of its useful life -- which is the lesser of 45 years or the year 2020. Some critics say this limits the effectiveness of the law since about two-thirds of Canadian coal plants won't be subject to the regulations until 2020, and nine plants won't have to comply until 2030. Some also fear that the 2015 starting date for newly commissioned plants could prompt a rush to get new coal plants online before then to avoid being subject to the regulations. Indeed, one example of this already happened in Alberta, where Maxim Power received approval in August 2011 to build a new coal plant that won't have to comply with the emissions caps. Canada has 51 coal-burning electricity plants, which account for 13 per cent of the country's greenhouse gas emissions; 33 of the plants will be at the end of their life by 2025. Fuel -- In 2010, the government passed a regulation requiring an average of five per cent renewable content in gasoline and an annual average of two per cent in diesel fuel and heating oil. It adopted fuel emissionsstandards for passenger cars and light trucks for model years 2011-2016 that mirror those introduced in the U.S. Cars and light trucks account for 12 per cent of Canada's overall greenhouse gas emissions (and 43 per cent of transportation emissions). The transportation sector as a whole accounts for 27 per cent of overall emissions. Parliament Hill is blanketed in snow 18 December 2007 in Ottawa, Canada, (MICHEL COMTE/AFP/Getty Images)

FOLLOW CANADA POLITICS

OTTAWA - Next week's budget will propose a streamlined environmental assessment process, something which will delight the oil patch and give provinces a larger say over resource development.But one pa...
OTTAWA - Next week's budget will propose a streamlined environmental assessment process, something which will delight the oil patch and give provinces a larger say over resource development.But one pa...
Filed by Michael Bolen  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 44
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
01:27 AM on 03/23/2012
When Citibank and Travelers Group sought the removal of the Banking Act (Glass-Steagall) to allow their merger in the late 90s, their argument was that the regulations were 'arcane', 'old-fashioned', out-of-step with the times'. Of course we now know they simply wanted a free hand to gouge with, and gouge they did. Now our oil and mining companies want a freer hand with our environment... What do think they will do with that new freedom, other than maximize shareholder value at the expense of everything else. This is like watching a bad movie full of crony caricatures. The Harper Tories are without any honour or any respect for our nation.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
efffox
The truth is NOT halfway between right and wrong
05:05 PM on 03/22/2012
I knew that the Harper government would be bad for Canada - I just didn't know they would ruin the country so damn quickly. They barely got a majority and they are so arrogant they think they can change all the rules overnight. If Canadians paid more attention to what was going on in this country - they would NEVER vote Conservative. Sadly, there seems to be a lot of low-information voters in this country that I USED to be so proud of!!
01:01 PM on 03/22/2012
"We are not surprised that self-serving union bosses would once again tout a plan to raise taxes, hike spending and increase the size of government," Sean Osmar said in an email."

Union bosses server the union, the people of Canada, without the people theri would be no unions.

Corporations make it a point to let you know they are only working for themselves and the shareholders. They have a mandate to make aprofit whether it causes harm or not. This is the DEFINITION of self-serving. This crap needs to stop, would some reported just once stand up and say BS when they spout these lies.

It's ok to pay someone to act like a Conservative MP, workign in a liberal MP's riding (Colter). And have it payed for by the taxpayer. This is reducing govt? How about the new dept meant to aduit EI? been around for three years , no official mandate but millions spent on furniture? This is reducing govt?

Seems the only thing Flaherty has learned in all his years is how to cut. The concept of how to improve the economy is lost on these luddites, if you reduce jobs, you reduce money being spent in the economy.

The worst part is in 6 years the cons will be screaming about how the new govt (not con) ruined the economy and only wants to spend.Fiscal conservatives, what an oxymoron if I ever heard one, never met one yet.
SamEasy
You really don`t want to know.
12:55 AM on 03/22/2012
.............take Government out of the way and let corporations FLURISH!!

We are well on our way to being an American State. Thanks to Harpers Republican Party.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Glass Cannon
Let every eye negotiate for itself.
06:11 PM on 03/21/2012
Yes indeed. No oversight, no accountability. I don't think our masters are even in Ottawa anymore, but rather London, NYC, Beijing, etc. The elected people are simply agents for them now. The real problem is that they honestly believe that their new system will somehow work.

Given the kind of financial troubles currently brewing for many ordinary Canadians I can't see how anyone with a little foresight could possibly support these changes the government is enforcing. Unless they just don't care, and that's pretty hard to bear. The ability of human beings to destroy themselves seems like an almost biological imperative sometimes.
05:05 PM on 03/21/2012
Notice how there is no mention of who wll be gettign the 500 billion over the next ten years. I can guarantee it will not be the people of Canada, but the corporations of the "global" economy.
04:53 PM on 03/21/2012
Well......... I'm starting to think about moving to some other country where they actually take care of their environment and their people... not the corporations... how about Norway? or maybe Germany? ... Denmark sound pretty good too. Man I'm tired of this bullshit!
01:08 PM on 03/22/2012
Vote ndp, what harm could it really do at this point. They (libs, cons) insist it will destroy the economy, they will just spend. I ask what would really be the difference?

And the ndp are the only party who campaign that they are there for the people of Canada, to keep a middle and work for the unions. What harm could it do to let them try? They could just turn around and do the same things the libs and cons have done for 145 years, or they might actually start workign for you.
You can be cynical if you want but it seems most Canadian attitudes towards the ndp are like children who have never tried broccolli but hate it. And att his point do you really think they can screw things up any worse than any of the other bozos over the last 145 years?

Besides if neither the libs or cons get any votes they lose their 2 dollar per vote fund, which means big business just needs to spend more on the next election. Stick it to the man, take away their slush fund and make them pay more to buy your vote the next time.
photo
albertarick
These are questions for wise men with skinny arms
04:28 PM on 03/21/2012
Regulatory reform worked so well in the financial industry. What could go wrong here? Maybe check with the Fort McKay First Nation, who have experienced the Oil industries practices of removing barriers to investment and development. They may have some concerns about those minor developments, or small mines intersecting with their waterways. Possibly about where the federal oversight of their fresh water has been all these years. Don Thompson is looking to "reset the clock for the current decade". I would guess that, with the mess he has left behind, a reset would be nice. Unfortunately in the reality the rest of us experience, one can't just buy a Natural Resource Minister to erase our past sins.
03:19 PM on 03/21/2012
"A leaked draft of one proposal last week showed Ottawa wants to remove habitat provisions from the act, essentially diluting the federal government's oversight of fresh water in the face of industrial development."

Paving the way for CETA

http://www.vancouverobserver.com/politics/2012/03/14/canada-eu-free-trade-most-ambitious-plan-history-called-corporate-trojan-horse
03:04 PM on 03/21/2012
The good news is Joe Oliver's campaign may have committed electoral fraud and a bi-election could be called in his riding. The bad news is someone else will take his place and push Harper's anti-science, anti-environment, pro-corporate agenda against the better wishes of the vast majority of Canadians.
photo
Spanky McFarlane
ILLEGITIMUS NON CARBORUNDUM.
02:32 PM on 03/21/2012
We are dealing with a Government that would legalize ASBESTOS for use in Canada if they could-. That is the extent to which this Government heeds the word of science.

It's disgusting, that they have to settle for killing men, women & children in the developing world, despite their own willingness to do likewise here at home . How is it we have a Government with a Corporate Conscience, yet are in deficit up past our keister? Is this the 'sound economic stewardship 'we've heard so much about in the past five years but have yet to see any glimpse off?

A pethitic Government that can't attain the goals of it's predecessors, now bent on lowering the bar- how wondrously below average the Harper tenure has been. It has set a low standard & has failed to maintain it.
Honestly, it makes one wonder how do they sleep at night?

I am ashamed of our Government & it's actions on the environmental world stage,& I am not alone.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
samseed
We're here for a good time, not a long time
01:30 PM on 03/21/2012
Harper Cons are a walking environmental disaster. This is utterly sickening.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
vyskol
01:10 PM on 03/21/2012
Ah yes, "let corporations flourish." That's great. Can't wait.

Because they're doing so poorly now.
04:57 PM on 03/21/2012
o_O .... hahahaha... so poorly... their just breaking profit records... but they need our money to pay their executives bigger bonuses.
photo
BCSLAVE
Got a key?
12:48 PM on 03/21/2012
Soon "Love Canal" will be legal in your suburban neighbourhood. Thanks Harper!
12:13 PM on 03/21/2012
Minister Oliver states; "Specific legislative amendments and regulatory fixes ... will eventually see Ottawa pay far less attention to SMALL PROJECTS"
JUST wondering WHO will be deciding whether a proposed project is "SMALL or not"? I think we all know the oil & mining corporations projects will ALL be SMALL ones, thereby eliminating the need for a focused assessment. I think it sucks that we now feel we need protection from our own gov't.
photo
albertarick
These are questions for wise men with skinny arms
04:31 PM on 03/21/2012
Paying attention is not the Harper governments strong point. They are going with their strengths, bullying, ignoring, not blinking, pandering to corporate interests, etc...