[DougB]

I don't see these any of these being a positive for Alberta.

Suspending the fact that they will not move the needle at all. The size and sparsely populated country make telecom, media, commercial air travel competition impossible because of the costs. Not to mention if competition does emerge it will be where there actually is population, in Southern Ontario not Alberta.

I lived in Australia for years. It abandoned its equivalent of supply management years ago and the sky did not fall. It also allows foreign ownership of media and telecom.

Since Canada is geographically adjacent to the US, the business case for existing companies to expand into Canada would be much stronger than that in Australia.

 

[DougB]

There isn't a vacuum that exists where the federal government is the only government guilty of the things you mention:

Picking winners and loser
- Governments twists themselves into knots for the hand that feeds them

• Alberta: Oil and Gas
• Saskatchewan: Potash
• Ontario: Manufacturing

Alberta has never drilled like its drilling now. Removing the carbon tax and not pursuing an emissions cap would help them drill more but the people of Canada (whether you agree with them or not) did elect the federal government to take environmental action. The most carbon intensive industry was never going to escape that.

Strays from operating within its jurisdiction
-Governments insert themselves into things in their own best interest

• Alberta: Institutes party politics at the municipal level because they're tired of people electing representatives that actually represent them and not electing a banner.
• Ontario: Removes bike lanes from Toronto streets because losing a lane of travel is the reason Toronto traffic is so bad and not decades of poor city building.

Is it frustrating having a government that doesn't represent your personal values? Yes!

The anti-Canada rhetoric from people that are willing to cheer on the demise of the country so Alberta can get a little more oil drilled will never square with me.

I'm cheering on the demise of the Liberal Party and especially the celebrity spokesmodel that leads it, and focus of the federal government on its own jurisdiction. Trump might finally make that happen.

 

[darwink]

I lived in Australia for years. It abandoned its equivalent of supply management years ago and the sky did not fall. It also allows foreign ownership of media and telecom.

Since Canada is geographically adjacent to the US, the business case for existing companies to expand into Canada would be much stronger than that in Australia.

Yeah well, lets have Pierre come out against it and the Premiers. I agree it would be good, but this government does not have a mandate to do that.

 

[DougB]

There isn't a vacuum that exists where the federal government is the only government guilty of the things you mention:

Picking winners and loser
- Governments twists themselves into knots for the hand that feeds them

• Alberta: Oil and Gas
• Saskatchewan: Potash
• Ontario: Manufacturing

Alberta has never drilled like its drilling now. Removing the carbon tax and not pursuing an emissions cap would help them drill more but the people of Canada (whether you agree with them or not) did elect the federal government to take environmental action. The most carbon intensive industry was never going to escape that.

Strays from operating within its jurisdiction
-Governments insert themselves into things in their own best interest

• Alberta: Institutes party politics at the municipal level because they're tired of people electing representatives that actually represent them and not electing a banner.
• Ontario: Removes bike lanes from Toronto streets because losing a lane of travel is the reason Toronto traffic is so bad and not decades of poor city building.

Is it frustrating having a government that doesn't represent your personal values? Yes!

The anti-Canada rhetoric from people that are willing to cheer on the demise of the country so Alberta can get a little more oil drilled will never square with me.

Alberta may be picking a champion with O&G, but who is the loser? That is the difference. The disconnected social policy activists who inhabit the current federal government pay claim ephemera like "Canada's reputation as a climate leader".

Alberta is expected to take one for the team on every issue: ex. climate action (even though the majority of O&G emissions support exports which should be accounted by the end user), agricultural retaliation from China over EV tariffs, oligopolistic pricing from the mostly Larentian dairy, telecom and bank cartels, gamed equilization formulae (no PST is considered unsued "fiscal capacity" while below average tuition and daycare is not, selling renewable resources is not "fiscial capacity" but selling assets such as non-renewable resources is).

Most relevant, the federal government has moved into areas of provincial jurisdiction like natural resources, health and education. That may be fine if you live in Ontario or Quebec where Ottawa is geographically, economically and culturally proximal. The feedback loop is short. Such is not the case with Alberta which might as well be an island. Canada was constructed as a federation with two orders of government on purpose.

 

[CalgaryTiger]

I'm cheering on the demise of the Liberal Party and especially the celebrity spokesmodel that leads it, and focus of the federal government on its own jurisdiction. Trump might finally make that happen.

That is fair, I'm not here to defend the Justin Trudeau led Liberal government. They don't have a champion in me.

It won't be Trump that will make it happen, although he may take the credit, it will be the Canadian voters that have caused the Liberal's to sink in the polls. There has to be a distinction between cheering for the demise of the Liberals and the demise of the country, for a lot of people they want to see it all come burning down. Alberta has faired quite well since 2015, and no court has upheld any challenge to the federal government inserting itself where it shouldn't be. This country could work a lot better together, maybe Trump does get us there.

I lived in Australia for years. It abandoned its equivalent of supply management years ago and the sky did not fall. It also allows foreign ownership of media and telecom.

Since Canada is geographically adjacent to the US, the business case for existing companies to expand into Canada would be much stronger than that in Australia.

Foreign ownership isn't the silver bullet, when I hear that I think about foreign private equity taking over more than it already has. If there was a business case for more competition there would be more competition foreign or domestic.

The trends are also pushing small businesses out in favour large monopolies, to me the answer isn't looking outside for a saviour it is championing what we have to turn into the competition we crave to make life cheaper.

I don't think things you would like to change would change under a different party's government because Conservatives have won Alberta since 2015, for them to win, they will need to win in the regions you're fighting against. Sure, Alberta will have MPs on the winning team but in order to stay in power in Ottawa it takes winning in Ottawa (Pierre's riding). There's already stories about Pierre's top-down leadership style, good luck to those Alberta MPs who think they'll have any sway under him.

Quebec figured out you get action on your priorities federally by thinking regionally. Things will not change for Alberta unless there is a federal Alberta/Western party.