Calgary Federal Politics

[Dado]

Originally Posted by artvandelay

You seem like like a reasonably well-informed individual and I have complete confidence in your ability to connect the dots on your own.

Well there has only ever been one federal energy policy that touched on oil at all that I am aware of, and that was the National Energy Program of the early 1980s.

The thing is, the NEP never envisaged shipping western oil to Eastern Canada. That would have involved investing money in long-lived infrastructure in the form of an oil pipeline, something that the Trudeau-era Liberals never really liked; they much preferred to ramp up program spending instead.

What the NEP did do is it used the revenue from western oil (sold to the US) to subsidize the cost of oil imported into Eastern Canada. It was also supposed to generate a pile of money to use to on yet more program spending... a kind of Canadian version of trying to duplicate the Dutch Disease, if you will.

So to this day Eastern Canadians continue to buy imported oil at world prices while Alberta is now unable to sell its oil at world prices due to the lack of access to world markets, and every attempt at sending its oil somewhere by way of building pipelines is meeting with problems. But the one direction it seems not to have tried sending an oil pipeline is also the one it would likely have the most success with (we're talking basically about a pipeline through Northern Ontario around Superior and Huron to Sarnia). It would allow Canada to cease importing oil and through the miracle of arbitrage provide Eastern Canadians with cheaper oil and Albertans with higher prices.

Put simply, the lack of an oil pipeline to Ontario has been costing Alberta's oil patch billions of dollars in lost revenue and costing Eastern Canadians through higher gas prices. Nothing quite like losing at both ends at once.


Anyway, if you're aware of some other federal energy policy that proposed shipping western oil to Eastern Canada, please let us know about it.

[ByeByeBaby]

Originally Posted by Radley77

Unfortunately, Crockatt can't afford to bring these issues up this late in the game for fear of changing a three way race into a two way race.

Gosh, Crockatt must have been fuckin' terrified the entire length of the game, since she hasn't brought up any issues at any point. Her website contains four federal party news releases and a helpful map of the area. She has a virulent fear of talking to other candidates with someone watching. Her twitter account is almost entirely platitudes. 95% of her campaign strategy is to have the word "Conservative" next to her name on the ballot.

[MalcolmTucker]

The thing is, the NEP never envisaged shipping western oil to Eastern Canada. That would have involved investing money in long-lived infrastructure in the form of an oil pipeline, something that the Trudeau-era Liberals never really liked; they much preferred to ramp up program spending instead.

Actually, Line 9 was subsidized for exactly this purpose. Over time it was reversed
because the world price was lower than the central USA price.

In response to the recent price shifts, the line is slowly being reversed again.

The NEP was just the last in a long line of bad policies to delink the Canadian oil price from the world price. Important to note even the Joe Clark conservatives didn't support moving to the world market price - the failed '79 budget had the goal of reaching 85% of the world price by the mid 1980s.

Originally Posted by fusili

Could not say it better. One example would be the feed-in-tariff (Germany's implementation of it, not Ontario's). It provides industry with a stable market price with which they can operate in, and better, the "subsidy" is tied to energy production, and isn't just a one-off capital grant (which is stupid IMO). Behind this is a stable regulatory regime in Germany where manufacturers can act with stability.

I have a friend involved in the wind industry in Britain. The problems there are a completely unpredictable and unstable regulatory regime. Investors, entrepreneurs, banks, customers etc all need to be able to work in an environment where they know investments today can be counted on tomorrow. That is the regulatory framework we are talking about and one that works well.

Feed in tariffs are being phased out or reduced in most jurisdictions. They do support investment yes, but they aren't efficient because solar isn't anywhere close to efficient. Canada has lots of hydro potential to use in conjunction with wind where it makes sense before we move onto solutions that are much more expensive. (ignoring nuclear for the sake of not shifting the argument)

[artvandelay]

Originally Posted by Dado

So to this day Eastern Canadians continue to buy imported oil at world prices while Alberta is now unable to sell its oil at world prices due to the lack of access to world markets, and every attempt at sending its oil somewhere by way of building pipelines is meeting with problems. But the one direction it seems not to have tried sending an oil pipeline is also the one it would likely have the most success with (we're talking basically about a pipeline through Northern Ontario around Superior and Huron to Sarnia). It would allow Canada to cease importing oil and through the miracle of arbitrage provide Eastern Canadians with cheaper oil and Albertans with higher prices.

Western oil is currently refined at Sarnia, so some of the supply in the East is currently purchased at the WTI benchmark (i.e.. Alberta) price. It is the refineries in NB and Quebec that are forced to import from international sources. Enbridge is currently in the process of reversing one of its lines in Ontario to open up more west-to-east capacity and TransCanada has looked at converting it's mainline from NG to oil. What you suggest would be beneficial to Eastern Canada indeed by allowing them to purchase more supply at the WTI benchmark, but it wouldn't really do anything to reduce the Brent/WTI spread (which is what Alberta needs) unless massive pipeline capacity increases are completed to allow exports via the Atlantic - I think that Northern Gateway approval is far more likely than Quebec allowing any new pipeline development. So yes, shipping oil eastward would be an option for Alberta, but it would be far more costly than either the pacific route or the elimination of the roadblock at Cushing, Oklahoma. It only becomes feasible if both of these options are denied.

Originally Posted by Dado

Well there has only ever been one federal energy policy that touched on oil at all that I am aware of, and that was the National Energy Program of the early 1980s.....

Anyway, if you're aware of some other federal energy policy that proposed shipping western oil to Eastern Canada, please let us know about it.

The word they used was distribution, not shipping. Much more ambiguous. I also highly doubt that the Greens would ever advocate any increased west-to-east pipeline capacity. If you are attempting to argue that the Green's energy plan doesn't resemble NEP you should read a little more of their policy document:
"Support the establishment of a Canada-first National Energy Plan to regain control over Canada's, energy supply and to ensure Canada's energy needs are met prior to any export, and assist in the, transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy."

I actually agree with your view of the NEP and value your contributions to this thread, but I would appreciate it if you lost the condescending attitude.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Feed in tariffs are being phased out or reduced in most jurisdictions. They do support investment yes, but they aren't efficient because solar isn't anywhere close to efficient. Canada has lots of hydro potential to use in conjunction with wind where it makes sense before we move onto solutions that are much more expensive. (ignoring nuclear for the sake of not shifting the argument)

True, feed in tariffs are not the be all and end all of policy solutions. I think wind, for example, can be pretty competitive on a $/KWH basis and really just needs to be able to sell at the spot market price, without having to pay for transmission, as I understand how the AESO does it. Considering how much wind generating capacity is being built in

In terms of reducing carbon emissions due to electricity production our biggest wins are shifting from Coal to Natural Gas, expanding wind capacity and probably the least talked about, modernizing the grid (Grid 2.0) and increasing efficiency. Smart appliances that turn on when electricity prices are low (by receiving wireless info about spot market prices) not only reduce carbon emissions, due to more efficient use of energy and less need on peaking plants (usually coal), but they also save people money.

Thoughts on the best way to implement more "smart" appliances?

[MalcolmTucker]

Not the place for this, but Alberta's electricity market is very different because industry makes up a much larger portion of demand than elsewhere and our peak consumption is in the middle of winter around dinner time. Can't really time shift the running of furnace motors when it is -35 along with electric stoves, ovens, and lights.

Even with conservation measures and higher prices consumption keeps growing in Alberta because Alberta is growing. Not much we would want to do to stop that!

A fair priced carbon tax that is revenue neutral and deals with the regessive problem is the best way to go. No need to have any other green house gas emission policies or sector by sector persciptions when there is a good market signal for what you want to do.

If only the greens still believed in that, instead of wanting to do a carbon tax plus awful command and control measures.

[suburbia]

Media discussion about advanced polling in Calgary-Centre:
http://www.ipolitics.ca/2012/11/21/advance-by-election-numbers-raise-more-questions-than-answers/

Originally Posted by Article Excerpt Only

Elections Canada today released advance voting figures for three by-elections set to take place Monday that showed a fierce battle in Calgary Centre attracting the least number of early voters.

But that’s pretty much all the numbers tell you — let me explain.

Unofficial figures point to 2,740 people having cast their ballots in Calgary in a race centering around Conservative Joan Crockatt and Liberal Harvey Locke, a turnout lower than in the two other by-elections in Durham, Ontario and Victoria, B.C.

In Durham, 5,171 people showed up over the three-day early voting stretch — Friday, Saturday and Monday — and 6,445 came out to cast their ballots in Victoria.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by suburbia

Media discussion about advanced polling in Calgary-Centre:

One observation that I would like to make, the Calgary Centre tilt looks to be an apathetic voter festival compared to the other two byelections. The two forum polls plus the advance poll show that Calgary Centre is significantly behind the other two WRT voter engagement. I think this points to Calgary Centre voters just not caring about the election depsite the media attention (media attentions is generally higher in Calgary Centre than either of the other two ridings by comparing the number of mentions in the respective local media outlets.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by Cage

One observation that I would like to make, the Calgary Centre tilt looks to be an apathetic voter festival compared to the other two byelections. The two forum polls plus the advance poll show that Calgary Centre is significantly behind the other two WRT voter engagement. I think this points to Calgary Centre voters just not caring about the election depsite the media attention (media attentions is generally higher in Calgary Centre than either of the other two ridings by comparing the number of mentions in the respective local media outlets.

Or are people waiting it out until election day. The One Calgary Centre group has their vote on Thursday night. Perhaps some are waiting for this to play out.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by fusili

Or are people waiting it out until election day. The One Calgary Centre group has their vote on Thursday night. Perhaps some are waiting for this to play out.

Let's just say that there is clearly no Nenshi in the running!

Speaking quite frankly though, people who rent and get into condos so they don't need to cut the grass couldn't be bothered to vote. Unless the condo fee includes a uniformed guy going around door to door with a polling station, the turn-out is going to remain low. Just my opinion based on what we have learned to this point w.r.t. the voter turnout.

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by suburbia

Let's just say that there is clearly no Nenshi is the running!

Speaking quite frankly though, people who rent and get into condos so they don't need to cut the grass couldn't be bothered to vote. Unless the condo fee includes a uniformed guy going around door to door with a polling station, the turn-out is going to remain low. Just my opinion based on what we have learned to this point w.r.t. the voter turnout.

You're right, voter turn-outs for by-elections are usually very low, and there are obstacles/barriers(/excuses) for a lot of renters not to vote: no proof of address or can't find it, their name is not the name on the lease, more renters have second jobs and no time to vote, have not been in the community as long as property owners and have less interest in local politics, etc.

Furthermore, the result of this by-election will be purely symbolic, and everyone knows this, resulting in even lower turn-out. The leading candidate has some views that might even alienate her conservative base to the point that they won't care to get out and vote. For example, thirty seconds into a conversation about CBC she feels the need to bring up porn, based on her view that a certain government-funded TV channel in Quebec shows moderate scenes of nudity after hours. She also comes off a little abrasive in her comments to our popular mayor, telling him to pass messages to voters at the debate she chose not to attend. Clearly, she sees herself as having fundamentally different ideologies from Nenshi, which is fine, but her comments are being perceived as a little divisive. All of this will not help conservative base turnout in one of the most progressive ridings in the city.

Therefore, while it's always been Crockatt's to lose, anything could happen. I'd be surprised if any of the opposition parties threw in the towel in order to split the vote less, but it could happen. All 3 leading candidates seem pretty good on paper in terms of experience and expertise, but Crockatt to me seems the LEAST like someone from yyccentre. Then again, maybe I hang out with the wrong crowd. Who knows?

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by fusili

Or are people waiting it out until election day. The One Calgary Centre group has their vote on Thursday night. Perhaps some are waiting for this to play out.

Nah. It is just really hard to drive high engagement in very urban areas. Combine that with the high percentage of turnover in the riding (Calgary Buffalo a large provincial part of Centre turns over at 20%+ a year) and that one of the largest deterrents to voting amongst young people is the belief one is not registered to vote, you'll have low low turnout.

[PoscStudent]

On Power and Politics Evan Soloman mentioned a poll that has the CPC at 29%, the Liberals at 28%, the Greens at 21%, 16% undecided and the NDP at 4%.

[Radley77]

Noteworthy today that Crockatt called out McGuinty the Liberal natural resource critic for telling Alberta Tories to "go home." McGuinty later resigned from that position. Really wishing the Liberal party would revisit their policies too.

[simster3]

Originally Posted by Radley77

Noteworthy today that Crockatt called out McGuinty the Liberal natural resource critic for telling Alberta Tories to "go home." McGuinty later resigned from that position. Really wishing the Liberal party would revisit their policies too.

Not that I agree with his wording but I do understand how he came to that conclusion. It is something along the lines of how Turner keeps saying we don't need more oilsands cheerleaders in Ottawa. What I think McGuinty was trying to say was that as a federal representative you must look at a national level for solutions to our energy problems. The oilsands are not the be all end all of our economy.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by Radley77

Noteworthy today that Crockatt called out McGuinty the Liberal natural resource critic for telling Alberta Tories to "go home." McGuinty later resigned from that position. Really wishing the Liberal party would revisit their policies too.

CPC is running robocalls in Calgary Centre featuring David McGuinty quote. Got a call lastnight on my land line phone.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by PoscStudent

On Power and Politics Evan Soloman mentioned a poll that has the CPC at 29%, the Liberals at 28%, the Greens at 21%, 16% undecided and the NDP at 4%.

I have a suspicious feeling those numbers are about to change.

[simster3]

just did the 1CalgaryCentre vote. It was an interesting survey. I hope they release a wide range of statistics.

[Radley77]

Originally Posted by simster3

Not that I agree with his wording but I do understand how he came to that conclusion. It is something along the lines of how Turner keeps saying we don't need more oilsands cheerleaders in Ottawa. What I think McGuinty was trying to say was that as a federal representative you must look at a national level for solutions to our energy problems. The oilsands are not the be all end all of our economy.

Totally agree that Calgarians are already having a multitude of conversations and the oilsands needs more stewards and critics with environmental backgrounds. Hard to say how much support the Green Party has given Turner in the election, but I think if all the candidates had been running as independents that Turner would have won in a landslide (sans Green Party policies). Even the most Conservative partisan seems to get that Crockatt's style of politics isn't in the best interest of Calgarians.

Update below is charting one day growth, Turner growing at a rate of twice Locke and 26 fold Crockatt or Meades:
Crockatt:Meades:Locke:Turner = 1:1:11:26

[PoscStudent]

Originally Posted by fusili

I have a suspicious feeling those numbers are about to change.

Yes, I just saw another poll on twitter that was conducted on the 20 and 21 that has the NDP at 12%, the Greens at 17%, the Liberals at 32% and the Conservatives 37%.

If the poll is to believed Joan Cockatt should win after the Liberals screw ups this week.