Friday 19th July 2019

Resource Clips


Posts tagged ‘alberta’

Conrad Black suggests Alberta set an example in reforming securities regulations

July 11th, 2019

…Read more

Crediting Vivian Krause, Alberta calls inquiry into foreign-funded anti-oilsands campaign

July 4th, 2019

by Greg Klein | July 4, 2019

Forsaking a slingshot to work “from my dining room table, using Google on my own nickel,” independent researcher Vivian Krause took on an extremely well-funded Goliath. Now her findings and the questions they raise should come to light in a formal inquiry. Alberta’s United Conservative Party government, elected last April, has ordered an examination of what Premier Jason Kenney said “amounts to a premeditated, internationally planned and financed operation to put Alberta energy out of business.”

Crediting Vivian Krause, Alberta calls inquiry into foreign-funded anti-oilsands campaign

After years of Quixotic efforts, Vivian Krause’s
research comes to prominence.

At risk for foreign-funded Canadian activist groups will be their eligibility for government grants or charitable status. But their credibility also faces challenges. Kenney directed the commission to determine whether foreign groups “provide financial assistance to a Canadian organization which has disseminated incomplete, misleading or false information about the Alberta oil and gas industry.”

Kenney questioned activists’ focus on Alberta while doing “little or nothing” about American oil production doubling over the last decade and global production rising from 90 million to 100 million barrels per day during the same period.

“We’ve seen huge increases in production and consumption from OPEC countries, from the Russian autocracy, from the Venezuelan dictatorship and even from our neighbours to the south but almost all of this political pressure [targets] this liberal democracy with the highest human rights, labour and environmental standards. And we want to know why, who and how much. We want to know what exactly lies behind this campaign to defame and landlock Canadian energy.”

Kenney blamed the campaign for the loss of tens of thousands of Albertan jobs, thousands of business closures, negative economic growth and a massive increase in public debt.

Headed by forensic accountant Steve Allan, the commission will interview witnesses as well as review existing info and conduct further research. A public hearing may follow. Backed by a $2.5-million budget, the commission must deliver an interim report by January 31 and a final report with recommendations by July 2, 2020.

The premier emphasized the inquiry comprises one aspect “of a comprehensive plan to fight back against those seeking to hurt our prosperity and kill our jobs while applying a hypocritical double standard to other energy producers.” His government also plans an “energy war room” to counter disinformation, legal action against bills C-48 and C-69, and the creation of a coalition of provincial and territorial governments, first nations and business groups to encourage resource development.

Crediting Vivian Krause, Alberta calls inquiry into foreign-funded anti-oilsands campaign

Along with energy minister Sonya Savage,
Kenney announces the inquiry on July 4.
(Photo: Government of Alberta)

Kenney praised Krause’s “valiant research” in tracing over half a billion dollars from American foundations to Canadian activists. He also noted U.S. and NATO evidence that Russia provided money and used social media tactics to encourage opposition to North American and European oil and gas projects.

On the same day as the Alberta announcement, the Calgary Herald reported a recent speech in which Krause accused Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of preventing the Canada Revenue Agency from auditing politically active charities and then having retroactively changed legislation to allow political activism. One week after she testified before a House of Commons committee on the subject, she said, the CRA deleted 14 years of tax records from its online database, leaving only the last five years on the Web.

According to the Herald, Krause also alleged that the CRA had been concerned about an approximately $400,000 severance payment from the World Wildlife Fund to Gerald Butts when he left the charity to become Trudeau’s principal secretary.

Exactly what power Alberta might have to counter anti-oilsands funding remains to be seen. But “sunlight makes the best disinfectant,” Kenney said. Additionally, Krause’s years of research now gain considerable attention as the country faces a federal election.

Read more about Vivian Krause.

Conscription, colonization, a gold-backed buck: Some Conrad Black remedies for Canada

June 3rd, 2019

by Greg Klein | June 3, 2019

Here’s a guy who wants to make this country a “world-important nationality”—in other words, to put Canada on the map. Yes, a country that makes “unassuming” a euphemism for “sub-mediocre” just might have hope after all. But Canadians would have to follow Conrad Black’s plan, Conrad Black says.

Conscription, colonization, a gold-backed buck Some Conrad Black remedies for Canada

Not at all modest in his proposals, the former Canadian who renounced his citizenship outlines them in his most recent book, The Canadian Manifesto. Despite zero likelihood of finding acceptance, the ideas do offer a peculiar interest.

Forced military service is one of them, as is a Canadian colonial empire in the Caribbean. Of interest to goldbugs, however, is Black’s “sensible, radical and imaginative” alternative to the northern peso: “Canada should tie the value of its currency to a combination of the prices of gold, oil, and a consumer shopping basket in equal thirds.”

Sounds interesting, as far as it goes. But that’s as far as it goes. Black provides no additional info.

As for Canada’s resource industries, Black lambastes the “faddish environmental trends” holding them back.

“All that we have that the world needs are natural resources. More than forty per cent of the stock values on the Toronto Stock Exchange are extractive industries that operate in Canada. The banking cartel lives largely off the resources companies, which feed all heavy, and most light industry, and the legal and accounting and consulting professions live off the banks and their principal clients.”

Speaking of the TSX, Black says it suffers from over-regulation. He suggests one province, preferably Alberta, simplify its securities system. Provinces that follow its example “would almost immediately become serious international financial centres, and not just, as Canadian stock exchanges have always been, non-essential eddies of local resource promotion and small-capital start-ups and the odd site of a great international and inter-listed company. Canada could easily surpass Singapore, Hong Kong, and any other centre—except New York and London and perhaps Tokyo and Shanghai—as a world leader in modern securities issuance and trading.”

A capricious and pestilential tumour on the entire Canadian securities industry.—Conrad Black ponders the
Ontario Securities Commission

As for that “sociopathic securities regulator” looming over Toronto, “an added benefit would be the humbling of the Ontario Securities Commission, which periodically tries to shoulder aside the other provinces and become a national regulator, and has become a capricious and pestilential tumour on the entire Canadian securities industry, such, in its stunted condition, as it is.”

Looking at other aspects of the Canadian malaise, Black challenges the Charter of Rights, under which “practically every judge in Canada is now cock-a-hoop imposing his or her own idiosyncratic versions of legislation.

“[….] Pierre Trudeau himself told me, nearly twenty years after the patriation of the Constitution and promulgation of the Charter, that he never intended any such disorderly rout as had already begun to tumble out of the many courts and jurisdictions in his last years.”

Compulsory service, military and civil, augments Black’s plan to tackle unemployment and impress the world. “We need at least 100,000 more people in the armed forces,” he insists.

How on earth would Ottawa sell such an idea? By making it sexy, Black suggests: “The military could also be kitted out in far more attractive uniforms, by Canadian designers, and that would help instil greater pride in military service, which the distinguished military traditions of Canada certainly justify. One need only look at YouTube videos of Italian carabinieri, or crisply professional and stylishly clad contemporary Chinese female soldiers to see how easily the martial career, even if used chiefly for assisting in humanitarian disasters, could be made more attractive.”

A measure that would quickly expand the population would be the absorption of parts of the West Indies.—Conrad Black advocates Canadian colonialism

Of course Black’s “world-important nationality” would need many more people. One tactic of population expansion could be territorial expansion with “the absorption of parts of the West Indies.” As examples he mentions Bahamas, Barbados, Antigua and Bermuda, along with Haiti, “already a significant contributor to such increases as there are in the French-speaking population of Quebec.”

Black examines other topics including health care, culture and education, the latter problem sometimes evident in this document’s editorial standards. The book can be unintentionally entertaining for its curmudgeonly comments as well as its impractical boldness. But, even if it proposes to substitute one wretched dystopia with another, The Canadian Manifesto does offer a serious perspective on a country that’s lost its way, if it ever had one. This could be just the thing to read on a Canada Day trip to the States.

Read Mark Steyn’s comments on Conrad Black’s prosecution.

Alberta Premier Jason Kenney vows to counter a U.S.-backed campaign against the province’s resources

May 23rd, 2019

…Read more

Vivian Krause discusses her one-person campaign to expose wealthy American interests bankrolling Canadian environmentalists

April 26th, 2019

…Read more

Canadian Greens surge again as party takes second place in PEI election

April 23rd, 2019

by Greg Klein | April 23, 2019

Press time results (seats at dissolution in parentheses)

  • Progressive Conservatives: 12 seats, 36.5% of the popular vote (8)
  • Greens: 8 seats, 30.6% (2)
  • Liberals: 6 seats, 29.5% (16)
  • New Democrats: 0 seats, 3% (0)
  • Independent: 0 seats, 0.4% (1)
  • (Voting in one district was postponed)

Promoting its use of wind energy, Prince Edward Island likes to call itself “Canada’s Green Province.” On April 23 PEI’s government just missed turning Green itself.

In an historic first for Canada, the home of Confederation voted Greens into second place, following a few years of electoral gains for the once-marginal party in other parts of the country. At press time the popular vote showed Dennis King’s Progressive Conservatives just 6% higher than Peter Bevan-Baker’s Green Party, which came in barely ahead of the incumbent Liberals whose leader Wade MacLauchlan lost his district to a Tory. But the seat count gave PCs 12, Greens eight and Liberals six. That raises the question of who will rule the province, and how. Among the possibilities is a Green-supported minority government, as is the case in British Columbia.

Canadian Greens surge again as party takes second place in PEI election

PCs won more seats but Greens flourished in the
land of Green Gables. (Photo: PEI government)

Voting in one of the province’s 27 districts was postponed following the death of Green candidate Josh Underhay and his six-year-old son in a Good Friday canoeing accident.

The Liberals collapsed after three terms in office despite budget surpluses and avowals that PEI had built Canada’s strongest economy. Still the country’s biggest potato producer, the province’s other main resource industry is fishing. Economic diversification includes an aerospace industry that accounts for 20% of provincial exports and a bioscience sector employing over 1,000 people.

With 27 electoral districts for a population estimated at 154,748, most winning candidates draw well under 1,500 votes. At 5,660 square kilometres, the province holds just over one-sixth the landmass of Vancouver Island.

But the Greens’ performance suggests continuing growth in some parts of Canada. Last October the party took three places each on Vancouver’s council, parks board and school board, along with one each on neighbouring Burnaby’s council and school board. In B.C.’s 2017 provincial election, Greens rose from one MLA to three, a feat matched by New Brunswick Greens last September. Ontario elected its first Green MPP in June.

Southern Vancouver Island hosts Canada’s sole Green MP, as well as the three MLAs who hold the balance of power supporting B.C.’s minority NDP government.

The environmentalist-nationalist Québec Solidaire went from three to 10 seats in October’s Quebec election.

Not surprisingly, however, Greens fared poorly in last week’s Alberta election, where the party polled only 0.4%. Should PEI PCs hold onto government, they’ll join Alberta along with Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and New Brunswick in a bloc of provincial conservative governments.

A referendum asking whether PEI should switch to a mixed-member proportional voting system passed in 15 of 27 districts but failed to reach the 17-district threshold.

Alberta fights back

April 16th, 2019

New government promises bold measures to defend a resource-based economy

by Greg Klein

Updated results (seats at dissolution shown in parentheses)

  • United Conservative Party: 63 seats, 55.2% of the popular vote (25 seats)
  • New Democratic Party: 24 seats, 32.2% (52 seats)
  • Alberta Party: 0 seats, 9.2% (3)
  • Liberal Party: 0 seats, 1% (1)
  • Independent candidates: 0 seats, 0.5% (3)
  • Freedom Conservative Party: 0 seats, 0.5% (1)
  • Progressive Conservative Party: 0 seats, 0% (1)
  • (One vacant seat at dissolution)

 

The outcome wasn’t as surprising as last time, when the once-marginal New Democratic Party swept to power in what had long been a moderately conservative one-party province. Yet this was probably Alberta’s most dramatic election since 1935, when a victorious upstart tied to the economic movement known as Social Credit grabbed international attention. Rarely has Western alienation played out so strongly as in this campaign, provoked by Ottawa’s stance on, among other issues, the ongoing war against Canadian resource industries. Foreign interference in the form of U.S. money also came to light, while aspects of the culture wars helped inflame passions.

The new government promises bold measures to defend a resource-based economy

Back in the ’30s, however, William Aberhart’s Social Credit failed to enact the radical reforms intended to deal with the Great Depression. The results of incoming premier Jason Kenney’s bold talk remain to be seen, despite the overwhelming victory of his United Conservative Party. Kenney’s biggest challenge will be to overcome the opposition to pipelines and tankers that deprives Albertan oil producers of Asian markets and consequently much higher prices.

Certainly Kenney won a decisive mandate. Barely half an hour after polls closed, media projections called a UCP majority. The party comprises a 2017 merger of the Progressive Conservatives and Wildrose Party, which together polled 52% in 2015, compared with only 40.6% for the NDP. But that year the New Democrats took 54 of 87 seats.

Much of Kenney’s success came from his portrayal of “the Trudeau-Notley alliance,” in which he blamed the prime minister and incumbent premier for wrecking Alberta’s economy through a combination of appeasement, indifference and outright animosity. Notley, at best an ineffectual supporter of Alberta oil and at worst an ideological enemy, made an easy target. So did Justin Trudeau, struggling with an image tarnished by SNC-Lavalin, that scandal’s revelation of favouritism towards Quebec jobs, and policies towards Alberta jobs that evoked memories of his father’s National Energy Program, often blamed for wrecking Alberta’s economy during the 1980s.

The new government promises bold measures to defend a resource-based economy

Kenney found easy targets in the “Trudeau-Notley alliance”
but victory might give him tougher battles to fight.
(Image: United Conservative Party)

Allusions to the NEP surfaced in Kenney’s description of Bill C-69, “the Liberals’ ‘No More Pipelines’ Law” and “a federal sucker punch to an already-reeling Alberta economy.” Kenney promised a constitutional challenge.

He portrayed Notley’s opposition to Ottawa’s Bill C-48, banning oil tankers from northern B.C. ports, as an insincere and tardy effort.

Kenney committed to ditch Notley’s carbon tax and sue Ottawa if it tries to impose the federal carbon tax on Alberta, as Trudeau’s government has done to provinces that didn’t enact their own carbon taxes.

Addressing an especially sore point for Albertans, Kenney promised a referendum on equalization. Consistently punishing Alberta through good economic times and bad, the inter-provincial transfers of money consistently benefit Quebec through bad times and good.

Turning his confrontational stance westwards, Kenney vowed to take on Trans Mountain pipeline foe British Columbia “on day one” by proclaiming Alberta’s Turn off the Taps legislation. Also known as Bill 12, it would stop Alberta oil shipments to an Alberta oil-dependent province that opposes exports of Alberta oil to Asia. B.C., on the other hand, stands ready to defend its convenient ethics in court.

Kenney also vowed action on foreign funding in Canadian campaigns. The issue gained prominence just days before the vote, with an April 12 Financial Post article by researcher Vivian Krause. American money, she stated, was helping finance efforts to defeat UCP candidates, part of a much wider, ongoing U.S.-funded campaign to “landlock” Albertan oil and gas, as well as destroy other Canadian resource industries.

From the very beginning, the campaign strategy was to land-lock the tar sands so their crude could not reach the international market where it could fetch a high price per barrel.—Tar Sands Campaign
director Michael Marx,
as quoted by Vivian Krause

According to documents she’s made public, foreign money moved from activism and court challenges to specifically anti-UCP efforts that benefit the NDP.

A group called Progress Alberta was working against UCP candidates, while another group called Leadnow urged its supporters to join Progress Alberta’s anti-UCP efforts, she stated. Referring to U.S. tax returns, Krause reported that “both Leadnow and Progress Alberta are partially funded—US$62,843 (2016-2017) and US$162,587 (2013-2016) respectively—by the Tar Sands Campaign.” The Tar Sands Campaign gets its money from the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, she added.

Krause quoted Tar Sands Campaign director Michael Marx as stating: “From the very beginning, the campaign strategy was to land-lock the tar sands so their crude could not reach the international market where it could fetch a high price per barrel.”

Krause charged that Notley knew about the foreign-funded activity but refused to act.

Kenney was quick to follow up. “We now know that for months Rachel Notley has been sitting on a legal opinion indicating that the government of Alberta could take action against groups behind the Tar Sands Campaign,” he declared. “Some have estimated that Alberta is losing up to $16 billion a year in value from the price discount that results from our oil producers being captive to the U.S. market. This is a direct result of the campaign to landlock Canadian energy supported by the Tar Sands Campaign, which in the last year has succeeded in delaying the Trans Mountain Expansion, Keystone XL and the Line 3 replacement project.”

Some have estimated that Alberta is losing up to $16 billion a year in value from the price discount that results from our oil producers being captive to the U.S. market. This is a direct result of the campaign to landlock Canadian energy supported by the Tar Sands Campaign.—Jason Kenney

Kenney pledged to challenge the charitable status of foreign-funded groups, cut off their provincial funding, hold a public inquiry into foreign funding that attacks Albertan energy, ban foreign entities from financing political action committees and urge Ottawa to pass Bill S-239, which would ban foreign money from federal politics.

Krause has previously stated that Rockefeller money helped fund Leadnow’s anti-Conservative campaign in the 2015 federal election.

Now that a provincial government intends to act on her findings, something that started as a Quixotic one-woman campaign could have enormous impact. According to her figures, U.S. interests like the Rockefellers have paid Canadian activists well over half a billion dollars so far.

Of course the extent to which Kenney’s tough talk produces results remains to be seen. Still Notley had nothing to show for any claim of supporting Alberta resources. Kenney found it easy to associate her with the prime minister, the UCP’s continual target. The anti-pipeline Bill C-69 “is just one of the terrible consequences of the Trudeau-Notley alliance,” Kenney argued. “Alberta’s NDP gave Justin Trudeau licence to kill Northern Gateway, to surrender to a U.S. veto of Keystone XL, to change regulations that led to the death of Energy East and to fold in the face of the B.C. New Democrats’ obstruction of the Trans Mountain expansion. On top of that we’ve got Trudeau’s tanker ban, Bill C-48 and a cap on our oilsands.”

Krause pointed out that heavy-handed enviro-activism persisted despite Notley’s attempts at appeasement. The NDP increased the carbon tax, capped allowable emissions and created the world’s largest boreal forest preserve. “Surely the campaign against Alberta would finally be over,” Krause wrote. “But, again, no.”

The UCP victory adds considerable weight to moderate conservative provinces, now stretching from Alberta to Ontario and including New Brunswick. Along with the federal Conservatives, they could present troublesome interference to the federal Liberals’ re-election efforts in October. In fact as a six-term MP who served a number of cabinet positions in Stephen Harper’s Conservative government, Kenney could overshadow federal Conservative leader Andrew Scheer.

On the other hand, a strong conservative bloc might discourage the Liberals from almost any interest in economic issues, thereby freeing them to campaign exclusively on their Trudeauvian zeitgeist.

American machinations

March 23rd, 2019

Vivian Krause exposes U.S. money and tactics behind Canadian environmentalism

by Greg Klein

This isn’t the kind of Yankee imperialism Canadian protesters typically protest. Powerful American interests pay Canadian environmental activists big, big money—well over half a billion dollars so far—that does nothing for the environment but undermines our economy and national unity. That’s Vivian Krause’s message and, as the pipeline controversy gains intensity, her story’s gaining prominence. But, she argues, Ottawa still shows no intention of using its power to stop this foreign interference.

The money trail begins with huge American backers that include the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, and the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, she says.

Vivian Krause exposes the U.S. money behind Canadian environmentalism

They fund intermediaries like the Oak Foundation, Tides Canada and its U.S.-based parent organization the Tides Foundation.

The intermediaries, in turn, channel money to Canadian groups like the David Suzuki Foundation, Greenpeace Canada, the Pembina Institute, West Coast Environmental Law, the Dogwood Initiative, several first nations and the Council of Canadians, supposedly founded as a nationalist group to protect Canadian sovereignty.

Some examples? The Moore Foundation alone, she says, has pumped $259 million into Canada through more than 500 payments averaging about half a million each. Tides got $83 million. “West Coast Environmental Law, for example, receives on a monthly basis between $25,000 and $100,000 just from this one foundation.” Some first nations got $58 million in 99 payments averaging $580,000 each.

Backed by U.S. bucks, the beneficiaries go after Canadian resource industries, especially Alberta oil production, focusing on proposed Canadian pipeline projects and oil tanker traffic. Oddly excluded from the concerns of American funders and Canadian protesters are American oil production and American tanker traffic—even the American tankers that navigate British Columbia’s coast.

Ready to reveal sources, her website links to tax returns, policy papers and other documents to substantiate her message. Not only does she expose so much of their funding, but she also disputes the truthfulness of some of their key statements. Working “from my dining room table, using Google on my own nickel,” Krause single-handedly challenges an extremely well-funded and vocal movement.

She’s been accused of shilling for the federal Conservatives and the oil industry. But that brings a spirited retort: “I did what I did in spite of the Conservative party and in spite of the oil industry,” Krause tells ResourceClips.com. “I actually did what they should have done. But none of them were doing proper issue management research. They weren’t even following this.”

Vivian Krause exposes the U.S. money behind Canadian environmentalism

Vivian Krause delivers the keynote speech at
Resource Works’ fifth anniversary celebration.

Having spent the 1990s working for UNICEF in Guatemala and Indonesia, she then took a job with one of the world’s largest producers of farmed salmon, an industry opposed by B.C. environmentalists. She happened to find documentation tracing their money and strategies to American sources. Then the money trail branched out.

“The same funders blocking farmed salmon from markets were starting to do the same to Alberta oil,” she recalls. “The tactics were the same, the funders were the same, some of the same individuals were involved.

“I worked with charities so I understand charities and charitable foundations. I worked in Indonesia, one of the most corrupt countries in the world, so I was trained to spot things that are fishy, and I also knew a resource-based industry—I witnessed the frontlines of activism against the salmon farming industry.”

As her research continued, she “couldn’t find anyone else who would do this. I kept wondering which think tank, which organization will take this over so I don’t have to do this anymore. I couldn’t find anybody.”

She acknowledges some honorariums in the past and the occasional speaker’s fee, but she remains a self-supporting individual fighting a one-person counter-campaign.

That’s against a movement that “doesn’t help the environment,” she argues. “All it does is bench Canada from the world market. And I would argue that we are one of the best oil producers. Look at what Alberta has done—they put on a carbon tax, they capped production and they created a protected boreal forest. No other oil-producing jurisdiction has done anything near that. Despite all that the Alberta government has done, they’re still being bullied out of the market. So I would argue that this anti-pipeline activism, if it intended to help mitigate the climate and environmental impacts of oil, has had the opposite impact.”

Despite all that the Alberta government has done, they’re still being bullied out of the market. So I would argue that this anti-pipeline activism, if it intended to help mitigate the climate and environmental impacts of oil, has had the opposite impact.

The American-funded campaign also intensifies the conflict between Alberta and some other Canadian jurisdictions, thereby weakening national unity, Krause says. Additionally she’s found American money intruding into Canadian election campaigns.

In one example following Canada’s 2015 federal election, she discovered the Oakland-based Online Progressive Engagement Network (OPEN) boasting that its Canadian campaign contributed “greatly to the ousting of the conservative Harper government.” Krause describes OPEN as a Rockefeller intermediary and the parent organization of Leadnow. Leadnow claimed to have defeated 26 Conservative incumbents, an obviously dubious statement, but Krause maintains the group may well have made a difference in some ridings.

So what’s Ottawa doing about this foreign interference? Nothing, Krause says. Her submissions to the Canada Revenue Agency have gone unanswered. As for Elections Canada, “I feel that they ignored crucial evidence and had they not ignored it they would have come to a different conclusion.”

Canada’s Elections Act has loopholes so big “you could drive a heavy hauler through them,” she adds. “And the amendments that the current government has proposed will not solve the problem.”

But any solution would depend on the CRA, she emphasizes. “As I was told during the Elections Canada investigation, if the Charities Directorate allows Canadian-registered charities to bring in money for those purposes, they then ‘Canadianize’ the money. And then, when those charities report the money to Elections Canada, for the purposes of Elections Canada it’s Canadian. So the CRA needs to enforce the Income Tax Act so that charities are not conducting activities that are not exclusively charitable.”

Nevertheless, she remains optimistic. For that, she credits several prominent natives for “lifting the taboo. There was a taboo on talking about this American funding. The BC Liberals, for 10 years, said we can’t fight it. They used to say, ‘They’ve got billions, we’ve only got millions. We have to go along with this Great Bear Rainforest’ [a 6.4-million-hectare West Coast environmental reserve] even though they knew that there’s no great bears in the Great Bear Rainforest.

“The taboo has been lifted. Now we can start asking for some accountability, starting with the CRA.”

Visit Vivian Krause’s website.

Watch Resource Works’ site for an upcoming video of a March 14 speech by Vivian Krause.

Rex Murphy comments on the carbon tax and Fort McMurray’s decline

March 8th, 2019

…Read more

Miners and explorers pick their spots in Fraser Institute’s latest report card

February 28th, 2019

by Greg Klein | February 28, 2019

Ontario dropped dramatically but an improved performance by the Northwest Territories and Nunavut helped Canada retain its status as the planet’s most mining-friendly country. That’s the verdict of the Fraser Institute’s Annual Survey of Mining Companies 2018, a study of jurisdictions worldwide. Some 291 mining and exploration people responded to questions on a number of issues, supplying enough info to rank 83 countries, provinces and states.

Canadian and American jurisdictions dominated the most important section, with four spots each on the Investment Attractiveness Index’s top 10. Combined ratings for all Canadian jurisdictions held this country’s place as the miners’ favourite overall.

The IAI rates both geology and government policies. Respondents typically say they base about 40% of their investment decisions on policy factors and about 60% on geology. Here’s the IAI top 10 with the previous year’s numbers in parentheses:

  • 1 Nevada (3)

  • 2 Western Australia (5)

  • 3 Saskatchewan (2)

  • 4 Quebec (6)

  • 5 Alaska (10)

  • 6 Chile (8)

  • 7 Utah (15)

  • 8 Arizona (9)

  • 9 Yukon (13)

  • 10 Northwest Territories (21)

Here are Canada’s IAI rankings:

  • 3 Saskatchewan (2)

  • 4 Quebec (6)

  • 9 Yukon (13)

  • 10 Northwest Territories (21)

  • 11 Newfoundland and Labrador (11)

  • 12 Manitoba (18)

  • 15 Nunavut (26)

  • 18 British Columbia (20)

  • 20 Ontario (7)

  • 30 New Brunswick (30)

  • 51 Alberta (49)

  • 57 Nova Scotia (56)

Despite Ontario’s fall from grace, the province’s policy ratings changed little from last year. Relative to other jurisdictions, however, the province plummeted. Concerns include disputed land claims, as well as uncertainty about protected areas and environmental regulations.

The Policy Perception Index ignored geology to focus on how government treats miners and explorers. Saskatchewan ranked first worldwide, as seen in these Canadian standings:

The evidence is clear—mineral deposits alone are not enough to attract precious commodity investment dollars. A sound regulatory regime coupled with competitive fiscal policies is key to making a jurisdiction attractive in the eyes of mining investors.—Ashley Stedman,
senior policy analyst,
the Fraser Institute

  • 1 Saskatchewan (3)

  • 9 New Brunswick (13)

  • 10 Quebec (9)

  • 11 Nova Scotia (24)

  • 14 Alberta (16)

  • 18 Newfoundland (10)

  • 24 Yukon (22)

  • 30 Ontario (20)

  • 33 Manitoba (27)

  • 42 NWT (42)

  • 44 B.C. (36)

  • 45 Nunavut (44)

The NWT and Nunavut’s indifferent PPI performance suggests greater appreciation of the territories’ geology boosted their IAI rank.

This year’s study included a chapter on exploration permitting, previously the subject of a separate Fraser Institute study. Twenty-two jurisdictions in Canada, the U.S., Australia and Scandinavia were evaluated for time, transparency and certainty. Cumulatively, the six American states did best, with 72% of explorers saying they got permits within six months, compared with 69% for the eight Canadian provinces, 53% for the two Scandinavian countries (Finland and Sweden) and 34% for the six Australian states.

A majority of respondents working in Canada (56%) said permitting waits had grown over the last decade, compared with 52% in Australia, 45% in Scandinavia and 28% in the U.S.

A lack of permitting transparency was cited as an investment deterrent by 48% of respondents working in Australia, 44% in Canada, 33% in Scandinavia and 24% in the U.S.

Eighty-eight percent of explorers working in the U.S. and Scandinavia expressed confidence that they’d eventually get permits, followed by 77% for Australia and 73% for Canada.

Saskatchewan led Canada for timeline certainty, transparency and, with Quebec, confidence that permits would eventually come through.

As for the IAI’s 10 worst, they include Bolivia, despite some recent efforts to encourage development; China, the only east Asian country in the study; and problem-plagued Venezuela.

  • 74 Bolivia (86)

  • 75 La Rioja province, Argentina (80)

  • 76 Dominican Republic (72)

  • 77 Ethiopia (81)

  • 78 China (83)

  • 79 Panama (77)

  • 80 Guatemala (91)

  • 81 Nicaragua (82)

  • 82 Neuquen province, Argentina (57)

  • 83 Venezuela (85)

Explorers made up nearly 52% of survey respondents, producers just over 25%, consulting companies over 16% and others nearly 8%.

“The evidence is clear—mineral deposits alone are not enough to attract precious commodity investment dollars,” said Ashley Stedman, who co-wrote the study with Kenneth P. Green. “A sound regulatory regime coupled with competitive fiscal policies is key to making a jurisdiction attractive in the eyes of mining investors.”

Download the Fraser Institute Annual Survey of Mining Companies 2018.