Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Who won't be the next SCOTUS appointment | Main | Counterpoints »

Monday, September 05, 2005

'Cause I Know This'll Be Good for a Few Comments

49% want petroleum resources nationalized

... 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 gas 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.


Posted by Account Deleted on September 5, 2005 | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference 'Cause I Know This'll Be Good for a Few Comments:


And what exactly will nationalization achieve, even if it were possible (NAFTA forbids it)?

A poll like this raises more questions than it answers. People are just reacting to high prices at the pumps. Do they really think nationalization would lead to lower prices? Petro-Canada was designed to do that and it was a catastrophic failure in every respect.

If there was a serious attempt to nationalize, Alberta should nationalize itself.

Posted by: Scott | 2005-09-05 6:43:07 PM

Oil-care, Petro-care, Gasoline-care, Fuel-care, Energy-care...nope I can not come up with a good name for this program.

But if it is anything like Medicare I can see long waiting lines, shortages, huge bureaucracy, buying gas at government run retail operation with a disgruntled union clerk telling you how bitter he is. Hmmm...Canada...Socialism...

Posted by: qwerty | 2005-09-05 7:39:51 PM

I'm not sure exactly what the nationalization of petroleum resources entails but as a British Columbian I am somewhat concerned as to how it would effect our provincial economy. The northeastern part of this province has a very robust oil and gas industry which provided the provincial coffers with approximately $2 billion in 2004 from land sales, drilling licences, royalties etc. Shell Canada recently paid the provincial gov't $85 million for 58,000 acres in NE British Columbia. If our petroleum resources were nationalized to whom would Shell have made that cheque payable? Provincial gov't or Federal gov't? How would this lower the price of gas? Would they stop at petroleum or would they do the same with softwood if they felt the price of a lumber was to high? Just some question, hopefully some can inform us of what nationalization really means.

Posted by: Annette | 2005-09-05 7:43:21 PM

Nationalization is a fancy way of Central/Eastern Canada trying to force Western Canada to share oil profits. In other words, rob Peter to pay Paul, a.k.a. socialism.

And this from an Atlantic Canadian. :-)

Posted by: Joel K | 2005-09-05 8:09:31 PM

Interesting, but sort of predictable. Eastern Canada, led by socialist basket case Quebec, most in favour of a Trudeauesque commie proposal. Western Canada, least in favour but with depressingly strong socialist leanings. Time to pack my bags and head for a jurisdiction with more faith in free-markets!

Posted by: JR | 2005-09-05 8:12:36 PM

We all know where socialism eventually takes you, but the numbers in support are not a surprise. Garbage like this is just so typical of this country.

Posted by: Rob | 2005-09-05 8:25:57 PM

If the general population is so short sighted to believe that nationalization is the answer than we already live in a banana republic. Have the roots of socialism rooted that deep already? Who do they tax once they own it all? It will also take a huge tax rebate to get anyone to vote if Canada gets to this stage! The poll needs to be taken with a very big grain of salt as I cannot believe that all of the wheels have come off!!!

Posted by: EL | 2005-09-05 8:39:25 PM

The wheels aren't coming off the bus, EL, but the people who were once in the back of the bus, Alberta in particular and the west in general, are now more than able to drive their own bus. This new situation has been brought about by shifting demographics, changing commodity returns, advances in technology, and the globalization of the market.

What you do see happening is that Old Canada's sclerotic lack of appreciation of the above phenomenon is effecting bus mitosis.

Posted by: Tony | 2005-09-05 9:13:36 PM

I say that all the oil in the world should be nationalized to the UN. And income distributed equally to all the citizen of the world. The resources of this planet belong to all of us.


Posted by: Quebecois separatiste | 2005-09-05 9:28:46 PM

Excellent use of sarcasm Quebecois separatiste.

Posted by: qwerty | 2005-09-05 9:51:23 PM

First of all, how many people were polled in all? And how old are they (since one would hope that anyone say, 40 or older would remember the disastrous results of the LAST time Canada nationalized oil & gas)?

And I'm just assuming that QS above is either a troll or someone just trying to stir things up. Or incredibly naive.

Posted by: Candace | 2005-09-05 9:54:31 PM

Possession is nine-tenths of the de facto law. The debate is over the de jure law.

That's why people are talking about jurisdictional boundaries. De facto simply is. De jure, on the other hand, is jurisdictional.

Posted by: Tony | 2005-09-05 10:11:05 PM

Ever notice those who insist on sharing are always the ones who receive rather than give?

Posted by: Scott | 2005-09-06 12:22:09 AM

Let me be very very clear. I favour universal free gasoline for every Canadian, regardless of ability to pay. Make no mistake, I will uphold the principles of the Canada Energy Act come hell or high water.

Today, I announce an additional $41 billion in energy funding to the provinces over the next ten years, with the understanding that they will direct this money toward reducing wait times at the gas stations, and purchasing new gas pumping equipment.

Posted by: Raging Ranter | 2005-09-06 12:34:22 AM

They surveyed 1500 "across Canada", but it sounds like they left out the Territories. So, let's say they surveyed in the 10 provinces. If they had equal numbers from each province, that means they interviewed 150 people per province. If they weighted it to be in line with % of national population, then that means they would have more respondents from Quebec and Ontario, meaning fewer in B.C., Alberta, Sask, and Manitoba than the 150. If they really wanted, I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to find a high percentage of 150 or less people of Alberta to say they supported nationalization.

As for NAFTA, although it does not forbid nationalization, it does forbid two-tier or differential pricing; ie: Canadians cannot receive a lower price than that paid by whom we sell it to (U.S. or Mexico). However, with the softwood rumblings of pulling out of NAFTA (even though softwood was only included as an annex that was to be renegotiated every set amount of years, and therefore isn't really a part of NAFTA), Martin would then be able to institute differential pricing, and consequently buy more Ontario and Quebec votes.

Posted by: CanRev | 2005-09-06 3:41:54 AM

Nationalization is what Fidel Castro did to all the privately owned companies and businesses in Cuba in 1960. The Cuban economy has never recovered and the Cuban black market is rampant.

Posted by: Speller | 2005-09-06 5:41:34 AM

Hey Qwerty,

Maybe the respondents to the poll would like the Hydrocarbon Control Board of Ontario, with limited selection and excise taxes up to the gills ;o)

Damian Penny had it right: "bad ideas never die."

Posted by: Jim Whyte | 2005-09-06 8:10:18 AM

Quebec can nationalize its Hydro. They want to have money without doing any damage to their precious natural capital.

Leger marketing 'gave' the poll to the Canadian press? I doubt they'd do it for free.

Posted by: Aaron | 2005-09-06 10:07:32 AM

"Pollease pollease me, oh yeah, like I pollease you..."

Probably just a push-poll, like that goofy little one the WS did up a few weeks ago. Methodology flawed, too small a sampling, blah blah blah. The true thinkers know no one in western Canada favours separation and no one in eastern Canada has one whit of interest in Alberta's natural resources.

In keeping with the British band theme:

"The child is grown, the dream is gone. I have become comfortably numb."

Posted by: firewalls 'r us | 2005-09-06 10:28:38 AM

The "Big Lie" that governments use to obtain and keep power: "We will give you what you want and we will make someone else pay for it." This is an appealing notion to the "inner freeloader" present to some extent in all of us, but strongly manifested in the more socialist among us. Until people learn that in order for them to get somthing for nothing from the government, someone else has to endure the theft of their property at the hands of that government, the situation won't change. So stick out your hand for your share of the booty.


Posted by: fighthestate | 2005-09-06 10:59:55 AM

"The government consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office. Their principal device to that end is to search out groups who pant and pine for something they can't get and to promise to give it to them. Nine times out of ten that promise is worth nothing. The tenth time is made good by looting A to satisfy B. In other words, government is a broker in pillage, and every election is sort of an advance auction sale of stolen goods." -H.L.Mencken

Posted by: Tony | 2005-09-06 1:05:27 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.