12

PM and Prentice discuss economy, energy, environment, aboriginal matters

Prentice said the topics discussed during Friday’s meeting included the economy, energy prices, the environment, aboriginal matters.


 

CALGARY — Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Alberta’s new premier are both describing their first meeting since Jim Prentice was sworn in last month as productive.

Prentice said the topics discussed during Friday’s meeting included the economy, energy prices, the environment, aboriginal matters.

It also included Alberta’s labour needs and the importance of skilled labour — a subject Prentice has criticized the federal government for due to this year’s changes to the Temporary Foreign Workers program.

“I thought that we made significant progress on a range of issues. We’re interested in having a constructive partnership with the federal government and we’ll continue to work towards that end,” Prentice said Saturday after spending time door-knocking in Calgary, where he’s running in a byelection to secure a seat in the legislature.

“There’s certainly a national perspective and an Alberta perspective on issues and we’ll continue to discuss that.”

Prentice, who once was a senior minister in Harper’s cabinet, said the meeting in Calgary lasted about an hour-and-a-half.

On Twitter, Harper said the meeting with Prentice was productive and he was looking forward to working with him to “build a stronger Canada.”

Prentice said he and Harper touched on the temporary worker issue during the meeting, but noted that federal Employment Minister Jason Kenney and his Alberta counterpart, Ric McIver, met this past week and are “exploring” how to work together to meet Alberta’s labour needs.

In June, Harper’s government brought in rules to limit the number of foreign workers that large and medium-sized companies can hire, to ensure Canadians are first in line for jobs.

The premier has dismissed criticism that an exploitative province is to blame for its labour shortage, which he’s said has hit Alberta’s roaring economy hard.

However Kenney reaffirmed last week that there will not be any changes to the June rules, saying that in Alberta the program has been “overused.”

“We’re basically going to allow minister Kenny and minister McIver to continue with their discussions and it’s the beginning of a process and not the end of a process,” Prentice said.

As of December 2012, there were more than 68,000 temporary foreign workers in Alberta — 20 per cent of the Canadian total.

Prentice said he and the prime minister had a “robust” discussion about energy, the environment and securing market access for Alberta oil. But he wouldn’t go into detail when asked whether new strategies might be used to achieve the goal of building new pipelines to access those markets.

“These are increasingly challenging times. Energy prices have slipped significantly. We discussed the economy and the importance of the integration of energy and the environment policies,” Prentice said.

“Of course, a lot turns on market access because we cannot basically advance our standard of living as an energy marketer unless we’re able to access tidewater and international markets, because as Canadians and as Albertans, we’ll only secure global prices if we access global markets. So we had a discussion about that as well.”


 

PM and Prentice discuss economy, energy, environment, aboriginal matters

  1. Excerpt:
    “Prentice said he and the prime minister had a “robust” discussion about energy, the environment and securing market access for Alberta oil. But he wouldn’t go into detail when asked whether new strategies might be used to achieve the goal of building new pipelines to access those markets.”

    Rail to Alaska for tidewater access. No supertankers and No (new) oil pipes in BC.

    Ask the FN’s if this would work. Listen for answer.

    But that would be an alterNATIVE to Business as Usual opportunity. It Knocks.

    Can these guys re-train their minds and follow a different track?

  2. Only goes to prove Harper is really the PM for anyone living in Alberta not the ROC…..we just get to subsidize O & G corporations through our tax expenditures….$billions in the last budget.
    Prentice has complained about the TFWP that will in future cut the #’s to 10% from the current 20+%….68,000 TFW’s current…..where will the workers for the oil fields and slaughter houses come from?…it might help if Alberta didn’t have the lowest minimum wage, the highest hydro rates and highest rents in Canada….add to that the grand experiment of 8X the methyl mercury over 9500 square miles and what is not to love about Alberta.

  3. Green Jim will not be getting any federal taxpayer dollars to support his vision of turning Alberta into Ontario with his wind and solar unicorn fart.

    Prentice is a Liberan a blue suit.

    Vote Wild Rose

  4. GERMANm, JAPANESE,m et al, SHAREHOLDERS AWAIT FINDINGS to SUPREME COURT of CANADA, ‘MERKEL’ Letter, et al.
    The SUPREME COURT of CANADA;
    The SHAREHOLDERS, corporates CANADA, AMERICA, EUROPE, CHINA, The TRANS PACIFIC NATIONS, et al,
    VERSUS
    the harmless non shareholders of Canada, both; Native & non Native, et al.

    TPPartnership, CETAgreement, C-CITreaty, et al; More Taxes & Less Services to pay The SHAREHOLDERS (Tribunals).

    “WILL The COURT CONSIDER…?”
    Are YOU Depriving your Highest Court of the INFO to Decide Against the Global Corporate Economy?
    Has Frau Bundaskanzarin Angela Merkel (Germ.) shared the Info with YOU?
    by David E.H. Smith

    (CAN.)…Therefore, as a consequence of the aforementioned abuses that have been listed in the enclosed research articles & the dire peril that these abuses puts the NON shareholding Canadians in, both; Native & non Native, et al, as an elaborate, ”inhumane”, ”unethical”, “immoral” & probably, criminal, enterprise, the writer humbly asks; under what circumstances would The Court consider the following?

    1) Will The Court consider ensuring that any further attempts by off shore enterprises, such as the aforementioned attempts by the global corporate “arrangements”, including
    corporate Canada & its associates within the government of Canada, et al, as a “reciprocity pool” of shared “secret decisions” against the non shareholders of Canada, et al,
    will be dealt with punitively.

    2) And, in the interim, until The Court can make a determination of any wrongful intent, &/or, abuses of the ”arrangements” as a criminal enterprise,
    will the open & public Supreme Court of Canada consider
    preventing the further use of the non shareholders’ tax dollars from being used to make any, &/or, any more secret decisions against themselves, ie. the NON shareholders.

    3) Furthermore, can, or, will The Court consider ordering the return of any & all of the tax dollars that have been used by the government, &/or, corporate Canada & their lawyers, et al, that have been used for the development of the aforementioned “arrangements” of a what The Court may determine to be a criminal enterprise (for examples; a) as a means of using/legitimizing off-shore money, et al, b) laundering money from the proceeds of criminal enterprises, &/or, c) going toward the funding of “criminals”, et al, who may be involved in other criminal, or, unethical, or, inhumane, immoral enterprises),
    and thus,
    the tax dollars have not been used for the purposes that the taxpayers had intended, such as; for goods, services (particularly to police organizations & judiciaries for their investigation of, not only the aforementioned secret/privileged relationship between corporate Canada via its lobbyists
    and
    the executives of the relevant political parties,
    but, the alleged wrong doing by others, as well),
    programs, health, education, etc. that are consistent with the NON shareholders’ understanding of what “good” government entails
    and
    return the tax dollars with punitive penalties paid to the NON shareholding Canadians, both: Native & non Native, et al.

    Similarly, given the reckless endangering situation that the government, et al, has placed the NON shareholders in, can, or, will the Court ensure that the necessary funds will be spent for their, the NON shareholders’, intended purposes in order to “guarantee” these services, et al,
    and
    consider ordering corporate Canada, its shareholders & their lawyers, advisers & service beneficiaries of the present “arrangements” will be paid with their own funds, prior to presenting their future “adventures”, &/or, “arrangements” to:
    A) The Court, &/or, its representatives
    and then,
    B) the NON shareholders for their consideration, discussions, improvements, &/or, rejections, et al,
    in open forums that have eliminated the fear of recriminations, retributions, etc. by corporate Canada, its shareholders, The Tribunals, et al.

    4 A) And, less one forgets that the revelation of the present perilous International treaties/”arrangements” began with the regard for the rights of Native Canadians as per the Treaties/”arrangements” that corporate Canada & the Government of Canada have “foisted” upon Native Canadians who have been deliberately deprived of the due diligence information, such as the information in The W.A.D. Accord, et al,

    I am compelled to ask The Court:
    will the Court consider whether, or, not The Court’s recent “Tsilhqot’in Decision”, makes
    it easier for corporate Canada, its global economic associates, their shareholders, et al, to sue the Tsilhqot’in First Nation & other Native communities in Canada
    and thereby, to seek financial relief from the harmless NON shareholding, non Native Canadians via the Government of Canada? And, will The Court consider preventing
    any unrelated hardship to the NON shareholders as a consequence of the creation of the
    aforementioned Tribunals & corporate Canada & its associates intent to obtain the unencumbered access to the natural resources that are continuing to be found in Canada & irrespective of Native title to these lands & its resources?

    B) And, similarly, does the plan espoused by the American born Tom Eugene Flanagan which would enable First Nations communities to become municipalities, also make it easier for corporate Canada, its associates, et al, to sue Native communities, or, seek remedies from the Government of Canada (ie. from the NON shareholders) for any encumbrances that the new, Native municipalities, et al, might impose upon the development, &/or, access to the aforementioned natural resources, etc.?

    (And, regarding the settlement of Native land claims that are presently before Canadian courts, & will continue to be before the courts for some time, the following question can help The Court a great deal in these deliberations, and that is; how were Europeans convinced to settle in North America in the first place & in particular, the land that became known as Canada?)

    5) Therefore, can I only hope that given the enclosed information about the abuse, the potential for abuse & the intent of the aforementioned Tribunals which is:
    A) to abuse & to limit The Court’s ability to hear…

    *******
    To SHARE Information & Questions re; The Relationship between Human
    (Nature) Rights & Economics in 1) the C-CI Treaty, the CET Agreement, TPP, et al, and 2) Native Canadian Treaties via The WAD Accord,
    see; davidehsmith.wordpress.com
    …For the FULL ARTICLE
    see; The Supreme Court of Canada.

Sign in to comment.