Quebec into the fold? Not too likely!

Jean Charest visited with the Alberta premier and came away with policy religion?

Quebec has recently been warming up to the idea of a national energy program... with a few caveats.

Caveat number one is that the feds are not involved in the discussions of the program.   Hard to believe that you can have a national program without the involvement of the national government, but then again, this is Quebec we are talking about.

Caveat number two is that the feds, who are not to be involved in the discussions, must not give a loan guarantee to Newfoundland and Labrador, to create an electricity gateway, from the Lower Churchill Falls to Newfoundland, the other Atlantic provinces and the Northern United States, that bypasses Quebec.

Caveat number three will be that the program has to be named the Quebec and Not-Quebec Energy Program.  OK, I made that up but it is just as absurd as the other caveats.

When, oh when, will Quebec recognize that the current Churchill Falls agreement negotiated in the 1950's is extremely unfair to Newfoundland and agree to renegotiate it.  Then, and only then, should Non-Quebec discuss any agreements with Quebec.

Please check your facts, Mr. Harper

The PM and his minions at the PMO may be good communicators but maybe they should be better fact checkers also.  In his year end rah-rah interviews, Harper tells us that he is not worried about the problems with the Keystone XL pipeline project, designed to carry raw bitumen from Alberta to Texas, because he will sell the stock to China instead.  Fine idea but just one problem.

The North American Free Trade Act (NAFTA) has a clause that maybe he should read again.

The clause is referred to as Proportionality.  In essence it states that Canada cannot reduce the percentage of oil and gas we now export to the United States even in times of domestic shortages.  That clause applies a percentage of our overall production that we must send to the US.  What does it mean when part of our production goes to China?  Does that mean that Canadians have to use less than we do now?  You can't take it from the allotment to the US so it has to come from somewhere.

In a report on Proportionality, co-author Gordon Laxer, a political economist at the University of Alberta, stated this: “The Canadian government must realize it is the only country in the world that has jeopardized the energy needs of its people in this way, and move quickly to exit the proportionality provisions of NAFTA.”

Maybe it is a problem, Steve?