The Conservstive party is a national party. For the time being, Atlantic Canada has strongly embraced the Liberal party. But the Conservatives have a very deep history in that region and they will make gains there.
I cannot speak about Quebec. I find Quebec politics intriguing but I do not understand the politics of that province.
Rural Ontario is a Concervstive steonghold. They are strong in the 905 as well.
The Conservatives dominate rural Manitoba and have strong showings in Winnipeg as well.
Alberta and Saskatchewan are solid Conservative.
Concervstives are strong in the BC interior, lower mainland, and the island ususally.
They win seats in the North.
It looks to me like they are a solid and vibrant national party.
And as for gay rights, minority, reproductive rights, etc. They are always progressive issues. Just look at the United States. Look at Bolivia right now. Look at Iran. Look at your own secular law. What people fight very hard for and gain can just as easily be taken away.
They are always always always always progressive issues, and the battle is never over.
I understand that you don't like Alberts. You don't like pipelines. You don't like oil. While you sit and criticize Alberta, take a look at the number of planes that take off and land every single day at your two airports. Take a look at the number of cars that drive on your streets every day. Then multiply that by all the cities in Quebec. Then compound that with all the cars and planes that consume fuel just in one day in all of Ontario.
We are doing absolutely nothing to combat the consumption of fossil fuels in Canada. Urban transport is just a small dent in the problem.
I am not defending Alberta. But as long as we have oil refineries refining oil at ever increasing levels, demonizing Alberta and fixating on them solely is counterproductive.
They are going to get TMX. They may eventually get more. And if they don't, then they can and most likely will build more oil refineries in Alberta.
As long as the world CONSUMES oil, there will be suppliers that provide it.
So beyond urban transport, what realistically can we do as a society to stop people from flying in airplanes, driving all those vehicles, using less cargo ships, etc.
All I hear is Alberta.
There are indigenous communities who support the pipeline because they need jobs. So why do these communities feel that the only jobs that they can get are in the lumber and oil industry? Why have Canadians lived off extracting materials from the environment and not on getting value added? Why haven't the governments invested more in manufacturing?
Aside from screaming about Alberta and screaming for more urban transit, the left has no vision to get us off fossil fuels.
i don't like B.C. pipelines because B.C. is on a fault line. You don't build pipelines on fault lines. Period. You don't build nuclear power plants on fault lines either but I am not the Ontario government so I cannot make those decisions.
so instead of fixating on Alberta, I want to really know how the left plans to grow crops and sustain our economy without the use of fossil fuels: maybe that is a healthier topic than all this negativity about Alberta.
This is dead on. If the left want to succeed in getting off oil -- really want to succeed then they will make it a national project and invest in it. Restraining Alberta is a cheap investment from the East and expensive in the AB, SK and NL. It will go nowhere.
Both sides are hypocritical though. Those who support extraction not being penalized shoudl support consumption models like A Carbon tax. I say "a" becuase this cardon tax does not address consumption of carbon in goods imported.
As I have said for a long time these should be taxed based on the life of the product thereby making the investment in longer lasting products with better warranties a better buy than cheap stuff made for landfill after a couple uses. These products in our present carbon taxes are untouched and this is a mistake as we penalize domestic extraction but not the use of extracted oil to produce wasteful products made for a short lifespan.
Alberta is correct to say that the country is not playing fair with it.
It is also not dealing honestly either as it whines about equalization under rules set up by Kenney and harper in 2009 (yep guess where they come from) or efforts to get off oil.
Alberta should not be opposing recognition of climate change or all policies to mitigate against it. The rest of the country should not be proposing that we manage climate change but that this become Alberta's problem.
Like most disputes, this is fueled by unreasonable positions on both sides. Unfortunately, we do need to address climate change and we are running out of time as both sides entrench.
We need better efforts to curb consumers -- these will do more than obstructing extraction and they will cost Ontario and Quebec. but it is time to put some money where the Eastern mouth is. Once these are in place a swing at Alberta extraction might not produce as much of the well-justified backlash. Sure unjustified backlash will continue but at least it will be unjustified and we will have done something toward the project we say we believe in.
Some seriouely inconvenient truths for Eastern Canada in this debate if anyone cares to look.
