• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

CAN-USA 2025 Tariff Strife (split from various pol threads)

Winnipeg is place I have always wanted to visit. I have heard the indie music scene is really something.
Food, music, architecture, history, arts, Winnipeg has a lot going for it, despite its problems. I don't think it's too much of a leap to say Winnipeg is the cultural capital of the West. I love my home and have zero desire to move elsewhere. Certainly helps that Winnipeg is one of the last bastions of the middle class in Canada.
 
Winnipeg gets a bad rap for violence, but in my considerable experience dealing with the outcome of said violence, I can confidently say that it's generally closed community stuff. Stranger violence is relatively rare, provided folks know where and when not to be someplace, and keep their heads on a swivel.
 
That's for self serving political purposes only. If he was really serious about trying to change the Bloc's leader's position, he would have drafted and sent the letter in French. You don't get people to change their minds by disrespecting them, twice in this case: by not using Blanchet's language, and by calling Blanchet small minded.


BTW, I would really like to know what "foreign nations" we are "so dependent" on, particularly where energy is concerned.

Irving imports large quantities of oil from Saudi Arabia
 
Winnipeg gets a bad rap for violence, but in my considerable experience dealing with the outcome of said violence, I can confidently say that it's generally closed community stuff. Stranger violence is relatively rare, provided folks know where and when not to be someplace, and keep their heads on a swivel.
Perspective is important. Winnipeg wouldn't even break the top 50 in terms of murder rates in the US. Our 2024 rate of 4.9 per 100,000 would make us slightly more murder-y than Glendale, AZ at 4.81 in the 71st position on the top 100 list of major cities. Perspective perspective perspective. That said, gang-based violence in the North End is a scourge that needs holistic approaches to mitigate.
 
Wonderful. Pity he couldn't manage it with the cameras rolling in the WH. He obviously has to make that point more strongly to correct the misimpression.

He did.

BTW, I would really like to know what "foreign nations" we are "so dependent" on, particularly where energy is concerned.

Quebec imports from (in order):
1. Saudi Arabia,
2. Algeria,
3. Norway and
4. Nigeria.

Quebec imported over half of all of Canada’s oil imports, followed by close second New Brunswick (also Saudi Arabia is their #1 source)

 
Funny you mention that.


In my mind, Port Nelson would be a better LNG terminal, a pipeline could be run along the existing road to Gillam>Sundance and along a new road to Port Nelson, which is only about 70 miles further NE. From the Hudson Bay it's only about 3500 nautical miles to the Port of Hamburg, which I'm sure would be more than happy to take our LNG.

Churchill could be used for heavier goods like grain and Manitoba's new potash reserves (millions of tons in Westman, being developed as we speak, super exciting) as they make more sense for rail traffic on the existing railroad. Part of the royalties on the potash should be directed to the upgrading of the railway to southern standards and the construction of a TC Canadian pipeline spur North from Winnipeg. With some vision, which I believe Wab actually has, we could become an important little province pretty quick.


And adjacent to Port Nelson is York Factory on the Hayes. I am not recommending York Factory as a site. Just noting that York Factory was a central export port for the Cree for the best part of 300 years. Port Nelson to York Factory is 18.2 km, the distance from Stanley Park to Richmond or closer than the distance between Pearson Airport and Union Station in Toronto.

1740942829181.png


York Factory is on the north bank of the Hayes River, about 11 kilometres (7 miles) inland. The mouth of the Nelson River is to the north, across "Point of Marsh". The Hayes is a more practical canoe route, although the Nelson is much larger, with it draining Lake Winnipeg. Seagoing ships anchored at Five Fathom Hole 11 km (7 mi) from the fort due to the shallow bottom, and goods were transferred by smaller boats.The Shamattawa Airport and Gillam Airport are nearby today.

York Factory was a settlement and Hudson's Bay Company (HBC) factory (trading post) on the southwestern shore of Hudson Bay in northeastern Manitoba, Canada, at the mouth of the Hayes River, approximately 200 kilometres (120 miles) south-southeast of Churchill.

York Factory was one of the first fur-trading posts established by the HBC, built in 1684 and used in that business for more than 270 years. The settlement was headquarters of the HBC's Northern Department from 1821 to 1873. In 1936, the complex was designated a National Historic Site of Canada.

In 1957, the HBC closed it down. It has been owned by the Canadian government since 1968 and the site is now operated by Parks Canada. No one lives permanently at York Factory; there is a summer residence for Parks Canada staff, and some nearby seasonal hunting camps. The wooden structure at the park site dates from 1831 and is the oldest and largest wooden structure built on permafrost in Canada.

From the 17th to the late 19th century, the depot at York Factory and its predecessors were the central base of operations for the Hudson's Bay Company's (HBC) control of the fur trade and other business dealings with the First Nations throughout Rupert's Land, the vast territory comprising the entire watershed of Hudson Bay, and which now forms much of Canada.

The first three HBC posts were established on James Bay about 1670. In 1684, Fort Nelson, a fur trading post at the mouth of the Nelson River and the first headquarters of the Hudson's Bay Company, was established at the mouth of the nearby Nelson River. The company built a second fort, York Factory, on the Hayes river, naming it after the Duke of York. The establishment of the forts provoked a response from New France.
 
He did.



Quebec imports from (in order):
1. Saudi Arabia,
2. Algeria,
3. Norway and
4. Nigeria.

Quebec imported over half of all of Canada’s oil imports, followed by close second New Brunswick (also Saudi Arabia is their #1 source)

There are allegations that some Canadian imports are, in fact, blends that include Russian oil.

My simple solution would be to build a refinery to handle AB oil sands product in Quebec, for onwards sale to Atlantic Canada.
 
There are allegations that some Canadian imports are, in fact, blends that include Russian oil.

Meh, Quebecers are sleeping soundly at night, so it’s not really a problem, is it?

My simple solution would be to build a refinery to handle AB oil sands product in Quebec, for onwards sale to Atlantic Canada.

No go. That would need dangerous pipelines all the way from Vaudreuil and Dorion to Levis. Way too dangerous. That’s 294km of precipitous death.
 
He did.



Quebec imports from (in order):
1. Saudi Arabia,
2. Algeria,
3. Norway and
4. Nigeria.

Quebec imported over half of all of Canada’s oil imports, followed by close second New Brunswick (also Saudi Arabia is their #1 source)

Do you know what it breaks down to per year? Just wondering on the capacity requirement
 
Do you know what it breaks down to per year? Just wondering on the capacity requirement
The article and others I researched didn’t break down fractions in Qc and NB, but you can see the refining capacity here:
*Irving’s Saint John refinery is the largest in Canada and Ultramar’s Levi refinery is Canada’s second largest. Both are light crude refineries, not heavy/sour refineries.

NEW BRUNSWICK
Irving Oil RefineryIrving OilSaint John, NB1960320,000
QUEBEC
Montreal RefinerySuncor EnergyMontreal, QC1955137,000
Jean-Gaulin RefineryValero (Ultramar)Lévis, QC1971235,000
 
There are allegations that some Canadian imports are, in fact, blends that include Russian oil.

My simple solution would be to build a refinery to handle AB oil sands product in Quebec, for onwards sale to Atlantic Canada.
So I’d like to see some offshore bank accounts that I think lots of Canadians have.

Follow the money
 
Be interesting to see who's fleet carries that oil from over seas.
That oil is a blend of all the ME including the countries on the banned list.

Makes things even more interesting
 
The article and others I researched didn’t break down fractions in Qc and NB, but you can see the refining capacity here:
*Irving’s Saint John refinery is the largest in Canada and Ultramar’s Levi refinery is Canada’s second largest. Both are light crude refineries, not heavy/sour refineries.

NEW BRUNSWICK
Irving Oil RefineryIrving OilSaint John, NB1960320,000
QUEBEC
Montreal RefinerySuncor EnergyMontreal, QC1955137,000
Jean-Gaulin RefineryValero (Ultramar)Lévis, QC1971235,000
interesting. I wonder what the needs are to justify a pipeline? I note that Trans Mountain was 300,000 and expanded to 890,000
Would those refineries take WCS?
 
The Charter (including the notwithstanding clause) do not apply here but the constitution does.

s 91 provides



s 92 provides



My reading is that if a pipeline is inside a province and doesn't extend outside of it then the province controls but if the pipeline connects several provinces or simply transits a province from one to another through a third then the Feds are in charge. The responsible agency is the Canada Energy Regulator.

This is far from my area of expertise, but I think that a Federal government, with the political will, could make it happen.

🍻
FJAG...you're bang on in regards to inter-provincial lines requiring federal approval. But internally it's just provincial law.
 
FJAG...you're bang on in regards to inter-provincial lines requiring federal approval. But internally it's just provincial law.
Yeah, the whole constitutional question arose out of the early ask about if the feds could just use the notwithstanding clause.
 
What
Yeah, the whole constitutional question arose out of the early ask about if the feds could just use the notwithstanding clause.

While I know it's the federal legislation involved with the operation and construction of lines (have dealt with it professionally and the NEB has no sense of humour) I'm still not clear what the federal powers are in the face of provincial opposition to build trans-provincial projects. I remember this dispute where Alberta was against the pipeline expansion as it would bring more BC Natural gas into the Alberta system depressing already low prices...https://www.biv.com/news/resources-agriculture/alberta-threat-gas-pipeline-puts-northern-bc-economy-notice-8252091
I've been able to find the approval decision - via Federal authority but not much on the legislation or official opposition from Alberta beyond media noise.

Once built it's very clear how things stack up as proven in the latest court case I know of in 2018 on the BC/AB dispute over TMX. Supreme Court of Canada takes thirty minutes to unanimously reject British Columbia's proposed regulation of Alberta heavy oil through the Trans Mountain Pipeline | BD&P

I did find a Canada Highways Act, the Canada Transportation Act (for railways) and what appears to be the correct one: The Canadian Energy Regulator Act which covers both powerlines and pipelines....but only if inter-provincial or offshore/onshore. But even knowing the legislation I still can't figure out if the Federal Government can "force" approval on projects or how.
 
Yup, we’re saying the same thing. I wasn’t suggesting a pipeline is local by any means. I’m agreeing that S.92 exclusive provincial jurisdiction over works and undertakings does not apply. However there’s also not an exclusive federal jurisdiction enumerated either; I.e., while regulation is obviously going to be a federal matter, there doesn’t seem to be a S.91 enumerated federal power that would let them legislate roughshod over the provinces on this. If neither side has exclu*sive* power, potentially neither side is exclu*ded*, in the sense that both probably have a seat they can righteously claim at the table. The original constitution explicitly included certain forms of interprovincial works as federal; pipelines have never been added, including in 1982 when the best opportunity to do so arose.

Anyway, I’m just suggesting it’s a murky enough picture to lead to years of litigation.
I've got a question and it may not be as silly as it first may appear.
What's the difference between the Rideau canal and the discussed pipeline from a legal point of view?
Can't you describe them both as projects built for the purpose of National Defence?
And in spite of all the somewhat bizarre political gymnastics when it comes to Federal Provincial relations. Defence falls into the Federal purview as opposed to Provincial.
Or it least it used to .....
 
Back
Top