Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Alberta

Cancelling Keystone XL cost thousands of jobs and billions in GDP: U.S. government report

Published

4 minute read

Keystone facility at Hardisty, Alberta. Photo courtesy Getty Images

From the Canadian Energy Centre Ltd.

Politicians, Indigenous leaders, and labour unions criticized the cancellation for the significant consequences it could have for both Canada and the United States

There is no doubt that Keystone XL’s cancellation was a massive gut punch to Canada and its oil and gas industry. Now the analysis is out showing the impact it had on the United States.

Just a sliver over two years ago the U.S. government nixed the pipeline project which would have added an additional 830,000 barrels of oil per day into the U.S.

The pipeline, which was expected to be complete in 2023, would have provided thousands of jobs and billions in economic activity. In December, the U.S. Department of Energy released its congressionally mandated report on the matter, and it’s now known approximately how many jobs and billions of dollars were foregone due to the cancellation.

The highlighted impacts in the report show that about 20,000 potential construction jobs per year over a two-year period were lost.

The nixing of the project also had a direct impact on the U.S. GDP with a loss of $3.4 billion. Wages were also impacted, with an estimated loss of $2.05 billion in potential earnings.

While there have not been any government numbers released for Canadian job losses, TC Energy said at the time of the cancellation that 1,000 workers would be laid off due to the announcement. It was a missed opportunity to lower costs for U.S. consumers, according to the American Petroleum Institute.  Indigenous groups were also impacted by the cancellation.

Dale Swampy, president of the National Coalition of Chiefs noted that “It’s quite a blow to the First Nations that are involved right now in working with TC Energy to access employment training and contracting opportunities.”

Natural Law Energy, an Indigenous-owned energy company, had signed an agreement to invest a $1 billion equity stake in the pipeline.  This would have had the potential to create jobs and economic opportunity for Indigenous communities, Natural Law Energy said. More than $600 million in supply and employment agreements for Indigenous-owned companies were expected to come from the project’s construction.

While celebrated by many environmental groups, the decision to cancel Keystone XL was controversial on both sides of the border. Politicians, Indigenous leaders, and labour unions criticized the cancellation for the significant consequences it could have for both Canada and the United States.

Teamsters general president Jim Hoffa’s statement strongly encouraged the U.S. government to reconsider the decision. “This executive order doesn’t just affect U.S. Teamsters; it hurts our Canadian brothers and sisters as well who work on this project. It will reduce good-paying union jobs that allow workers to provide a middle-class standard of living to their families.”

Terry O’Sullivan, general president of the Laborers’ International Union of North America said, “By blocking this 100 percent union project, and pandering to environmental extremists, a thousand union jobs will immediately vanish, and 10,000 additional jobs will be foregone.”

The United States is the world’s largest importer of oil, and Canada is its top supplier. America will continue to rely on oil imports, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Absent Keystone XL, imports will come increasingly from other countries that may not have the same environmental and human rights standards as Canada.

 

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Alberta

Alberta mother accuses health agency of trying to vaccinate son against her wishes

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

 

Alberta Health Services has been accused of attempting to vaccinate a child in school against his parent’s wishes.  

On November 6, Alberta Health Services staffers visited Edmonton Hardisty School where they reportedly attempted to vaccinate a grade 6 student despite his parents signing a form stating that they did not wish for him to receive the vaccines.  

 

“It is clear they do not prioritize parental rights, and in not doing so, they traumatize students,” the boy’s mother Kerri Findling told the Counter Signal. 

During the school visit, AHS planned to vaccinate sixth graders with the HPV and hepatitis B vaccines. Notably, both HPV and hepatitis B are vaccines given to prevent diseases normally transmitted sexually.  

Among the chief concerns about the HPV vaccine has been the high number of adverse reactions reported after taking it, including a case where a 16 year-old Australian girl was made infertile due to the vaccine.  

Additionally, in 2008, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration received reports of 28 deaths associated with the HPV vaccine. Among the 6,723 adverse reactions reported that year, 142 were deemed life-threatening and 1,061 were considered serious.   

Children whose parents had written “refused” on their forms were supposed to return to the classroom when the rest of the class was called into the vaccination area.  

However, in this case, Findling alleged that AHS staffers told her son to proceed to the vaccination area, despite seeing that she had written “refused” on his form. 

When the boy asked if he could return to the classroom, as he was certain his parents did not intend for him to receive the shots, the staff reportedly said “no.” However, he chose to return to the classroom anyway.    

Following his parents’ arrival at the school, AHS claimed the incident was a misunderstanding due to a “new hire,” attesting that the mistake would have been caught before their son was vaccinated.   

“If a student leaves the vaccination center without receiving the vaccine, it should be up to the parents to get the vaccine at a different time, if they so desire, not the school to enforce vaccination on behalf of AHS,” Findling declared.  

Findling’s story comes just a few months after Alberta Premier Danielle Smith promised a new Bill of Rights affirming “God-given” parental authority over children. 

A draft version of a forthcoming Alberta Bill of Rights provided to LifeSiteNews includes a provision beefing up parental rights, declaring the “freedom of parents to make informed decisions concerning the health, education, welfare and upbringing of their children.” 

Continue Reading

Alberta

Alberta’s fiscal update projects budget surplus, but fiscal fortunes could quickly turn

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill

According to the recent mid-year update tabled Thursday, the Smith government projects a $4.6 billion surplus in 2024/25, up from the $2.9 billion surplus projected just a few months ago. Despite the good news, Premier Smith must reduce spending to avoid budget deficits.

The fiscal update projects resource revenue of $20.3 billion in 2024/25. Today’s relatively high—but very volatile—resource revenue (including oil and gas royalties) is helping finance today’s spending and maintain a balanced budget. But it will not last forever.

For perspective, in just the last decade the Alberta government’s annual resource revenue has been as low as $2.8 billion (2015/16) and as high as $25.2 billion (2022/23).

And while the resource revenue rollercoaster is currently in Alberta’s favor, Finance Minister Nate Horner acknowledges that “risks are on the rise” as oil prices have dropped considerably and forecasters are projecting downward pressure on prices—all of which impacts resource revenue.

In fact, the government’s own estimates show a $1 change in oil prices results in an estimated $630 million revenue swing. So while the Smith government plans to maintain a surplus in 2024/25, a small change in oil prices could quickly plunge Alberta back into deficit. Premier Smith has warned that her government may fall into a budget deficit this fiscal year.

This should come as no surprise. Alberta’s been on the resource revenue rollercoaster for decades. Successive governments have increased spending during the good times of high resource revenue, but failed to rein in spending when resource revenues fell.

Previous research has shown that, in Alberta, a $1 increase in resource revenue is associated with an estimated 56-cent increase in program spending the following fiscal year (on a per-person, inflation-adjusted basis). However, a decline in resource revenue is not similarly associated with a reduction in program spending. This pattern has led to historically high levels of government spending—and budget deficits—even in more recent years.

Consider this: If this fiscal year the Smith government received an average level of resource revenue (based on levels over the last 10 years), it would receive approximately $13,000 per Albertan. Yet the government plans to spend nearly $15,000 per Albertan this fiscal year (after adjusting for inflation). That’s a huge gap of roughly $2,000—and it means the government is continuing to take big risks with the provincial budget.

Of course, if the government falls back into deficit there are implications for everyday Albertans.

When the government runs a deficit, it accumulates debt, which Albertans must pay to service. In 2024/25, the government’s debt interest payments will cost each Albertan nearly $650. That’s largely because, despite running surpluses over the last few years, Albertans are still paying for debt accumulated during the most recent string of deficits from 2008/09 to 2020/21 (excluding 2014/15), which only ended when the government enjoyed an unexpected windfall in resource revenue in 2021/22.

According to Thursday’s mid-year fiscal update, Alberta’s finances continue to be at risk. To avoid deficits, the Smith government should meaningfully reduce spending so that it’s aligned with more reliable, stable levels of revenue.

Continue Reading

Trending

X