I almost took a heart attack when I saw Claude Williams walking out.
These Minister usually take the side door.
As a rookie Minister? He must have had a lot on his mind???..lol
2 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Bernie's great friend Harper? _______________ N.B. could lose in Harper's equalization shuffle Last updated Apr 13 2006 09:14 AM ADT CBC News Premier Bernard Lord has returned from Montreal after a two-day meeting about changes to the federal equalization program that could mean big financial losses to New Brunswick.
Canadian premiers discussed various options that Lord says will bring more money to New Brunswick. But that won't happen unless Lord can change the minds of western premiers and Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
INDEPTH: Equalization payments Harper campaigned on changing the formula to allow provinces to keep more of their natural resource revenues, which would shift money that is now paid to poorer provinces back to the pockets of the wealthy.
Currently, 35 per cent of Canada's equalization money is spread around to the four Atlantic provinces, even though as a group they have less than 10 per cent of Canada's population.
New Brunswick is Canada's second-poorest province, making equalization payments from Ottawa critical to its survival. For every dollar the New Brunswick government spends, 22.5 cents comes from federal equalization payments.
The money helps pay for everything the New Brunswick government does, which is why Lord is concerned about a proposal to shift up to 25 per cent of New Brunswick's current equalization share to Western Canada.
On Wednesday, Saskatchewan Premier Lorne Calvert laid out his claim for more equalization money, including some of the money now flowing to New Brunswick. "There are very thorny issues before us, one of them being the question of non-renewable natural resources. Our position on that is well known," he said.
Saskatchewan has substantial oil and gas money, which has made it too rich to qualify for much equalization money, but several provinces are backing a proposal to stop counting oil and gas money toward equalization.
If natural resources are taken out of the mix, Saskatchewan and B.C. would seem much poorer than they are and qualify them for a quadrupling of equalization money, at the expense of provinces like New Brunswick.
Alberta Premier Ralph Klein backs Saskatchewan's claim for removing oil and gas resource revenue from the equation, and shifting significant equalization entitlements to the West.
During the last two elections, Harper has consistently promised to change equalization to the benefit of the West, and in the end, no matter how much the premiers talk about the issue, it's Harper's decision to make.
The real sticking point is how to define natural resources. Is a natural resource something in the ground, or something that a province has? The vast majority of NB's GNP comes from oil:
"Irving Oil now represents 64% of Canada's petroleum product exports to the US, 19% of all US gasoline imports, and 55% of New Brunswick's foreign exports."
The question is, does that oil belong to US because it is refined here, or does it belong to someone else because it comes out of the ground somewhere else?
If oil is discounted in NB under those guidelines, NB will also benefit significantly, as a HUGE amount of provincial spending comes from oil. Irving ships out 280,000 barrels of oil per day, that's conservatively $8 million per day. That's 2.9 billion per year.
Even at 12% corporate tax that's a huge amount. No doubt there are loopholes, however, if natural resources are taken out of the mix, then ALL provinces will benefit except Ontario and BC. However, if natural resources are defined simply as the extraction of a resource, then there's trouble. If they see refinery services as being separate from 'natural resources', which would be a tough claim to make, then the province is screwed big time.
2 comments:
Bernie's great friend Harper?
_______________
N.B. could lose in Harper's equalization shuffle
Last updated Apr 13 2006 09:14 AM ADT
CBC News
Premier Bernard Lord has returned from Montreal after a two-day meeting about changes to the federal equalization program that could mean big financial losses to New Brunswick.
Canadian premiers discussed various options that Lord says will bring more money to New Brunswick. But that won't happen unless Lord can change the minds of western premiers and Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
INDEPTH: Equalization payments
Harper campaigned on changing the formula to allow provinces to keep more of their natural resource revenues, which would shift money that is now paid to poorer provinces back to the pockets of the wealthy.
Currently, 35 per cent of Canada's equalization money is spread around to the four Atlantic provinces, even though as a group they have less than 10 per cent of Canada's population.
New Brunswick is Canada's second-poorest province, making equalization payments from Ottawa critical to its survival. For every dollar the New Brunswick government spends, 22.5 cents comes from federal equalization payments.
The money helps pay for everything the New Brunswick government does, which is why Lord is concerned about a proposal to shift up to 25 per cent of New Brunswick's current equalization share to Western Canada.
On Wednesday, Saskatchewan Premier Lorne Calvert laid out his claim for more equalization money, including some of the money now flowing to New Brunswick. "There are very thorny issues before us, one of them being the question of non-renewable natural resources. Our position on that is well known," he said.
Saskatchewan has substantial oil and gas money, which has made it too rich to qualify for much equalization money, but several provinces are backing a proposal to stop counting oil and gas money toward equalization.
If natural resources are taken out of the mix, Saskatchewan and B.C. would seem much poorer than they are and qualify them for a quadrupling of equalization money, at the expense of provinces like New Brunswick.
Alberta Premier Ralph Klein backs Saskatchewan's claim for removing oil and gas resource revenue from the equation, and shifting significant equalization entitlements to the West.
During the last two elections, Harper has consistently promised to change equalization to the benefit of the West, and in the end, no matter how much the premiers talk about the issue, it's Harper's decision to make.
The real sticking point is how to define natural resources. Is a natural resource something in the ground, or something that a province has? The vast majority of NB's GNP comes from oil:
"Irving Oil now represents 64% of Canada's petroleum product exports to the US, 19% of all US gasoline imports, and 55% of New Brunswick's foreign exports."
The question is, does that oil belong to US because it is refined here, or does it belong to someone else because it comes out of the ground somewhere else?
If oil is discounted in NB under those guidelines, NB will also benefit significantly, as a HUGE amount of provincial spending comes from oil. Irving ships out 280,000 barrels of oil per day, that's conservatively $8 million per day. That's 2.9 billion per year.
Even at 12% corporate tax that's a huge amount. No doubt there are loopholes, however, if natural resources are taken out of the mix, then ALL provinces will benefit except Ontario and BC. However, if natural resources are defined simply as the extraction of a resource, then there's trouble. If they see refinery services as being separate from 'natural resources', which would be a tough claim to make, then the province is screwed big time.
Post a Comment