Canadians favour nationalizing gas resources, companies

[fourier jr]

you guys get more oil from Canada than any other country. the way it is now, there is miniscule Canadian participation in Canada's oil industry; man the US would be ****ed if this actually happened.

Canadians favour nationalizing gas resources, companies: poll

MONTREAL (CP) - Almost half of Canadians wanted to see petroleum resources and oil companies nationalized as fuel prices hit record levels, a new poll suggests.
The Leger Marketing telephone survey of 1,500 people was conducted between Aug. 24 and Aug. 31, the bulk being done before the devastating effects of hurricane Katrina were felt.

Gasoline prices have jumped around 25 cents a litre since the storm that battered the U.S. Gulf Coast.

On Monday, for example, prices in Montreal and Halifax averaged $1.38 a litre but the regulated price in St. John's, N.L., was $1.48. In Toronto, prices stood at about $1.35 but were also seen at around $1.22.

Western drivers tanked up for between $1.08 to $1.13 in Edmonton and between $1.07 to $1.14 in Calgary.

In the Leger poll, which was provided to The Canadian Press, 49 per cent of respondents wanted petroleum resources nationalized while 43 per cent said they would like to see the same fate for oil companies.

Quebecers were the strongest supporters of resource nationalization at 67 per cent, followed by residents of the Atlantic provinces at 53 per cent, Ontarians at 45 per cent and British Columbia at 42 per cent.

Forty per cent of respondents on the Prairies and 36 per cent of Albertans were in favour. Among those opposed, Albertans led the way at 49 per cent followed by British Columbians at 39 per cent

Quebec led in support for nationalization of oil companies, with 61 per cent in favour, followed by the Atlantic provinces (46 per cent). Alberta was most opposed at 59 per cent, followed by the Prairies (49 per cent), B.C. 46 per cent and Ontario, 41 per cent.

Most of the respondents - 79 per cent - suggested they would like to see taxes on gasoline cut, although federal and provincial governments have made it clear that is unlikely.

Seventy-six per cent of respondents indicated they would like the government to intervene after recent gas hikes preceeding Katrina. Fifty-four per cent suggested they would like the government to fix the pump price.

etc

http://www.mytelus.com/news/article.do?pageID=ab_home&articleID=2022143

edit: i wonder who hired this group to do the poll? probably some org like the council of Canadians or something

 

[Smurf]

FINALLY! Damn Canadians won't recognize a problem until it hits their pockets the ****ing mind slaves

 

[Burnsys]

the same happened in bolivia but for nationalization of Gas.Masive movilizations, road block, clashings with the police and the military.
2 Presidents overtrown but no nationalization yet..

In a decision that surprising by its little publicity, Paraguay granted total immunity to the troops of the U.S.A.. It did through a law approved by the Senate the 26 of last May, that only in the last hours reached a ampler diffusion.

Asked on if he were feasible that the law opens the door to the installation of a base of the U.S.A. in the region, as it happens in Blanket (Ecuador), Panama and Guantánamo (Cuba), Vela’zquez fantasea people responded that “” and remembered much that the United States is an ally of Paraguay. “Between allies we must defend to us”, concluded.

It puts U.S. troops within easy striking distance of the Bolivian provinces of Santa Cruz and Tarija, home to the second largest gas reserves in South America.

Meanwhile, work from within Bolivia’s borders is underway to create military networks. The U.S. State Department recently asked riot gear manufacturers to submit proposals for equipment it plans to send to the Bolivian government. It wants 3,700 upper body tactical padding suits and 3,700 pairs of shin guards. On the same day as that request, the U.S. Army issued a separate request for proposals to build an emergency operations center in La Paz, including a two-story building with reinforced concrete floors, according to a report from Narconews.com by Stephen Peacock

 

[stoned]

Back when Trudeau was prime minister of Canada he wanted to nationalize Canadian oil under the National Energy Program, but very succsesfull effort and scaremongering prevented it. Canadians were told that and are until today that eveything private is better and they have swallowed it whole.

 

[fourier jr]

Back when Trudeau was prime minister of Canada he wanted to nationalize Canadian oil under the National Energy Program, but very succsesfull effort and scaremongering prevented it.

that's partially true; under the NEP the goal was for the government to eventually take a 50% interest in all the oil discovered in Canada, but not nationalize everything. at first it was a very modest (by international standards) 25% & was scheduled to increase by roughly 2% each year so by 1990 the government would take 50% of all the profits collected by any oil company operating in Canada (foreign or domestic). the government (both PC & Liberal parties) also planned for Canada to be self-sufficient in oil by 1990. there were also various incentives which discriminated in favour of oil companies which had high levels of Canadian ownership.

the only real problem was that the federal government wanted to 'equalize' oil prices in the country so that there would be a single national price for gas. since every time oil prices went up, so did inflation, and Alberta would collect more $$$ & since the federal government was only collecting 25% of the provincial share of oil & gas revenues it was losing financially as world prices rose. ottawa wanted to have a single, national price for oil so it had to pay the difference between the cost of overseas oil imported for eastern Canada & the price charged for consumers. this cost a huge amount of money (~$3,000,000,000/yr) so the feds had to get it from somewhere... Alberta. it was the (unfortunate) deep hostility of the Alberta government that was the only real problem with the NEP; one of the oil companies did a poll & found that ~85% of all Canadians were in favour of it. to paraphrase john diefenbaker, "everyone was against it except the people".

the definitive study ont he NEP, as far as i know, is chapter 3 of stephen charkson's (U of toronto political economist & rhodes scholar) "canada and the reagan challenge", which was awarded in 1984 the john porter book prize by the Canadian sociology & anthropology association for being the best book written about Canadian society.

 

[loseyourname]

What exactly would nationalization entail here? Would the government be buying the resources and companies from their current owners, or simply seizing them? Those are two completely different animals. Why exactly would the US be f*cked, too? Is there some plan to cease all exportation once the nationalization is finished? Wouldn't that mean an enormous decrease in the revenue that Canada makes off of these resources? Sounds like both parties would be f*cked.

 

[fourier jr]

nationalizing means the government buys it. if the government just seizes stuff it's called expropriation. if Canada's government bought out all the subsidiaries of US oil companies then they'd be losing their assets & the profits would go to the government of Canada. with transfer pricing foreign corporations can get their profits out of the country without being taxed. the so-called "schultz report" of the US government found that "71% of the dollars which US companies brought into Canada to finance their expanded capacity returns to the US in the same year". take an example. in 1978 the nova scotia light & power company won its case with imperial oil, successfully proving that imperial used the mechanism of transfer pricing to siphon off profits -- & tax yields -- from its Canadian subsidiary to its tax-free subsidiary in bermuda while keeping prices higher than world levels for Canadian consumers. in 1979 imperial was in trouble again when exxon cut back on Canada's allocation of oil shipments from iran which were diverted elsewhere by the parent firm. it's all in stephen clarkson's "canada & the reagan challenge"

 

[loseyourname]

Okay, so you just mean US oil companies would be f*cked. You confused me when you said the US itself would be f*cked. As long as exports continued, the common man shouldn't suffer from this.

 

[Smurf]

lol, the Canadian government isn't going to seize assets loseyourname, we're not that extreme yet. :rofl:

 

[fourier jr]

Okay, so you just mean US oil companies would be f*cked. You confused me when you said the US itself would be f*cked. As long as exports continued, the common man shouldn't suffer from this.

well due to nafta we can't cut back on our oil exports, even if we are running short. if we had no nafta we could turn off the tap if we thought we had to. turning off the tap completely would be very extreme though.

 

[loseyourname]

lol, the Canadian government isn't going to seize assets loseyourname, we're not that extreme yet. :rofl:

I know the government wouldn't do it, but this poll is just about what Canadian citizens want the government to do.

 

[revelator]

well due to nafta we can't cut back on our oil exports, even if we are running short. if we had no nafta we could turn off the tap if we thought we had to. turning off the tap completely would be very extreme though.

We should just scrap NAFTA, considering America isn't living up to her end of the deal. I'm sure we can find a market for our resources elsewhere, likely China and India.

 

[stoned]

We should just scrap NAFTA, considering America isn't living up to her end of the deal. I'm sure we can find a market for our resources elsewhere, likely China and India.

If Canada ever tries to do that ( yeah right ), USA is going to "Liberate" our oil

 

[Burnsys]

If Canada ever tries to do that ( yeah right ), USA is going to "Liberate" our oil

Well they are getting ready to do that in bolivia

 

[Smurf]

Well they are getting ready to do that in bolivia

I hadn't heard anything about that. Where did you hear that? (if it's something big you should make a new topic about it!)

 

[fourier jr]

I hadn't heard anything about that. Where did you hear that? (if it's something big you should make a new topic about it!)

well see post #3 above

 

[Smurf]

No links or sources?

 

[Art]

I hadn't heard anything about that. Where did you hear that? (if it's something big you should make a new topic about it!)

Heres an article a few months old http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_1710519,00.html