President Obama’s first foreign foray took him to Canada. The 19 Feb visit was short in terms of hours, but it was long on ‘conceptual’ substantiveness – and both sides accomplished whatever was planned to be covered during the visit. At the end of the talks the President of United State and Prime Minister of Canada looked more like statesmen than politicians.
The significant part of President Obama’s visit was the half hour one-on-one chat between the two leaders. This tête-à-tête was supposed to be of 10 minutes but the fact that it got extended signifies that the two leaders hit it off well and found a lot of common ground. Both agreed to use each other’s first name in subsequent conversations – that says a lot about establishment of mutual respect and rapport.
People’s general perception is that Harper was previous US president George W’s buddy, but people in the know say that Canadian PM was actually never comfortable in Dubya’s company. It doesn’t seem improbable given that one (Bush) was from a rich background, and a former president’s son and the other comes from middle class. Clearly, there is more common between Obama and Harper.
Now, to the substantiveness. Some folks were looking for so-called ‘substantive’ pronouncements after the talks between the two leaders, and were probably disappointed. But the fact of the matter is that this visit was basically for following reasons:
· Get to know each other;
· Get first hand idea of each other’s perception on issues, like, recession, energy, trade (including protectionism), Afghanistan;
· Lay the foundation for further build up on issues of mutual interest
On all the above counts the visit was a success. The press conference after the talks gave a clear indication of ‘conceptual’ substantiveness. The most important being the agreement on a ‘clean energy dialogue’. President Obama exhibited a very realistic position on the so-called clean energy. He comprehends the GHG issues in a practical perspective whether related to coal based power plants in US, or the oilsands industry of Canada.
His assertion that there was no silver bullet to solve the energy needs of the world was a clear indication that he realises that there was no point in getting carried away by the environmental predictions of doom, instead what is important is to figure out a course of action on global warming which encompasses all the major players, including, China and India.
Obviously, there will have to be follow up from both sides on this conceptual agreement. The scope of this conceptual agreement can potentially expand to include Mexico since President Obama appeared keen to formulate a pan-North American initiative on clean energy.
PM Harper did a good job of mentioning how could Canada tighten its own environmental regulatory laws and compete when its neighbour to the south had no tight regulatory framework, and then went on to praise Obama for now showing leadership on the issue. Harper very cleverly passed on the onus of non-regulation to Bush.
The environmental activists in Canada who seem to be intellectually one-dimensional don’t even know the difference between the amount of GHG emitted from US coal based units and GHG emitted from oilsands units in Canada. These intellectually under-developed two-legged creatures only know how to badmouth oilsands and make a spectacle of themselves by going up on a bridge to hang a poster.
The other conceptual understanding related to the border issue. Harper’s pitch on Canada’s perception of North American security threats was clearly aimed at the American media. At the same time he made it clear that US-Canada border should be managed in such a manner that it should not hinder cross-border trade.
On the issue of trade, whereas President Obama made an observation about environmental and labour clauses should be part of main body of NAFTA, PM Harper made his views known in no uncertain terms that Canada hopes that US will adhere to all the international trade agreements. Harper was clearly alluding towards the ‘Buy American’ clause purportedly included in the USD787 billion US economic stimulus package. So, the two sides got a clear understanding of each other’s position.
The discussion on recession focussed more on how to synergise efforts on both sides of the border to maximise the impact of the stimulus packages implemented in the respective countries. There was, again, a conceptual agreement to coordinate efforts on auto sector. President Obama made it clear that US will keep Canada in the loop on the policy decisions made regarding the big three auto makers.
On Afghanistan, again, there was a conceptual understanding on both sides. Obama didn’t press Canada to extend its troop presence beyond 2011; however, the two sides felt that Afghanistan needs more than simply military solution. The corollary to it is that Canada may be requested to look in to the possibility of contributing in non-military way before and after 2011.
All in all, the working visit of the US President accomplished all that was envisaged by both sides. As well, President Obama made sure to demonstrate his good preparation for this visit by stopping at a market place to buy beaver tail and Canadian cookies for his daughters. Unlike other dignitaries he also took out a crisp Cdn$20 bill to pay for the items he bought. The shopkeeper, however, showed his good gesture by refusing to accept the payment.
President Obama’s parting remark at the press conference was “I would like to come back to Canada”, and after a pregnant pause added, “when it warms up”. One hopes he wasn’t alluding to ‘warming up’ on the part of Canadian leadership. One would hope that PM Harper was warm enough in his conversations with Obama. Harper’s demeanour didn’t seem to suggest anything otherwise. Or, did we fail to notice something that was cleverly hidden under the smiles of the two leaders?!!
Showing posts with label Prime Minister Harper. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Prime Minister Harper. Show all posts
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Sunday, January 18, 2009
THANK YOU, MR. IGNATIEFF, FOR YOUR POSITIVITY ON OIL SANDS – ALBERTANS AND CANADIANS APPRECIATE IT!!
Canada’s Federal Liberal party leader Michael Ignatieff has come out with some very sensible views on oilsands – an issue on which his predecessor (Stephane Dion) had championed a revenue-neutral carbon tax which, oilpatch observers were worried, would have inflicted disproportionate damage on Alberta's carbon-based economy, and consequently on Canadian economy.
Dion’s party fared poorly in Federal elections last year and along with him went out of the door his thought-less policy too.
In an interview to a radio station on 16th Jan, Ignatieff admitted that any policy that comes from Ottawa can't jeopardize the oilsands - which is one of the only industries propping up the Canadian economy right now. "When you're in St. John's airport and you see a guy in cowboy boots and a cowboy hat getting on the plane you know what the oilsands mean to the entire Canadian economy," Ignatieff reportedly said.
The present Liberal leader admitted his party made mistakes with energy policy in the past, including the national energy plan. He said his goal was to develop environmentally and socially sustainable policies for the oilsands.
While speaking to a newspaper last week, Ignatieff went on to insist the federal government must consider offering the oil and gas sector a stimulus package in its Jan. 27 budget, comparable to the multi billion-dollar bailout of the Ontario-based auto industry. "The West should be rightly angry if we assisted only Central Canada," Ignatieff told the newspaper. "We can't put money into the auto sector in Central Canada without considering the legitimate concerns of the B.C. forest industry and the Alberta oil industry. There has to be regional fairness in the stimulus package."
Ignatieff’s views clearly go above partisanship, beyond petty politics; they are patriotic, pro-Canada. Ignatieff’s pan-Canada outlook got further articulated when he said that while oilsands has its environmental challenges, oilsands are a lucrative tool, both financially and politically, that increases Canada's stature around the globe and allows the country to stand its ground on several policy fronts against the U. S.
The above bodes well for not only for Alberta but the whole of Canada. His views are now more or less along the lines of views held by Alberta’s Premier Ed Stelmach, and Canada’s Prime Minister Steven Harper. These statements will no doubt be providing much needed hope to the people of Canada who can now justifiably look towards political stability in Ottawa.
Canada’s federal budget will come up for voting on Jan 29, and Harper’s minority government needs support of at least one opposition party to survive the voting. Harper has indicated that he will listen to Ignatieff’s suggestions on the upcoming budget with an open mind.
If Harper can accommodate some of Liberal party’s suggestions, he can undoubtedly rest assured that Liberals won’t let his government fall. That will mean stability in Ottawa, and political stability is what encourages the potential investors, including the big oil companies, who are currently sitting on the fence in wait-and-watch mode.
It is important to note that the sudden slow down in investment in oilsands projects was not prompted by slumping oil prices alone; in fact, it is farcical to believe that any short-term drop in oil prices should have disrupted many oil companies' investment plans, as it did; oil companies which are run by people of decent dose of competence base their decisions on the WHOLE life span of the project. The life span of oilsands projects range from 20-40 years, even more.
It does not require much intelligence to grasp that given the aggressive production cutting stance taken by OPEC countries (plus drop in non-conventional oil production), and stimulus packages announced by the G-7 countries, China and India, the aggregate demand of oil will start picking up by Q3 of this year. Coupled with the impact of production cuts, by the end of 2009 price of oil is expected to be any where between 60-100 dollars per barrel, probably more likely upwards of $70. The price of oil will remain on an upward looking curve thereafter.
So, the price of oil was not so much of a concern for the likes of Shell, TOTAL or Statoil et al. It was the uncertainties on policy level of both Canada and the new US administration regarding oilsands that impelled these companies to adopt more circumspect approach. Unless these companies are sure of policies on oilsands – of both Canada and US – and sure of a stable government in Ottawa ,which has a balanced view on oilsands, the oil companies would remain on the fence.
It may be mentioned for the benefit of those not familiar with Canadian politics that leader of an opposition party, known as NDP, had gone on record to say that given the chance his party will stop all oilsands projects. Such intellectually-challenged people were willing to cut their noses to spite their faces. Their political aspirations got better of whatever amount of intelligence they have to ignore the vital importance of a resource, like, oilsands to Canada as a whole – on economic and political fronts.
However, Liberal party’s aforementioned views on oilsands will certainly help Harper’s folks in formulating bi-partisan policy on environment, including policies relating to carbon capture. Once there is clarity on Federal environment policy, again, that will provide necessary confidence to the investors to finalize their investment decisions in regard to oilsands projects.
It is hoped that taking cue from Ignatieff, leaders of other Canadian opposition parties will set aside petty-minded politics and rally together to do what is in the best interest of the country. They will do well to remember there is much to gain, nationally and politically, in a prosperous Canada rather than in an economically and politically weak Canada.
Dion’s party fared poorly in Federal elections last year and along with him went out of the door his thought-less policy too.
In an interview to a radio station on 16th Jan, Ignatieff admitted that any policy that comes from Ottawa can't jeopardize the oilsands - which is one of the only industries propping up the Canadian economy right now. "When you're in St. John's airport and you see a guy in cowboy boots and a cowboy hat getting on the plane you know what the oilsands mean to the entire Canadian economy," Ignatieff reportedly said.
The present Liberal leader admitted his party made mistakes with energy policy in the past, including the national energy plan. He said his goal was to develop environmentally and socially sustainable policies for the oilsands.
While speaking to a newspaper last week, Ignatieff went on to insist the federal government must consider offering the oil and gas sector a stimulus package in its Jan. 27 budget, comparable to the multi billion-dollar bailout of the Ontario-based auto industry. "The West should be rightly angry if we assisted only Central Canada," Ignatieff told the newspaper. "We can't put money into the auto sector in Central Canada without considering the legitimate concerns of the B.C. forest industry and the Alberta oil industry. There has to be regional fairness in the stimulus package."
Ignatieff’s views clearly go above partisanship, beyond petty politics; they are patriotic, pro-Canada. Ignatieff’s pan-Canada outlook got further articulated when he said that while oilsands has its environmental challenges, oilsands are a lucrative tool, both financially and politically, that increases Canada's stature around the globe and allows the country to stand its ground on several policy fronts against the U. S.
The above bodes well for not only for Alberta but the whole of Canada. His views are now more or less along the lines of views held by Alberta’s Premier Ed Stelmach, and Canada’s Prime Minister Steven Harper. These statements will no doubt be providing much needed hope to the people of Canada who can now justifiably look towards political stability in Ottawa.
Canada’s federal budget will come up for voting on Jan 29, and Harper’s minority government needs support of at least one opposition party to survive the voting. Harper has indicated that he will listen to Ignatieff’s suggestions on the upcoming budget with an open mind.
If Harper can accommodate some of Liberal party’s suggestions, he can undoubtedly rest assured that Liberals won’t let his government fall. That will mean stability in Ottawa, and political stability is what encourages the potential investors, including the big oil companies, who are currently sitting on the fence in wait-and-watch mode.
It is important to note that the sudden slow down in investment in oilsands projects was not prompted by slumping oil prices alone; in fact, it is farcical to believe that any short-term drop in oil prices should have disrupted many oil companies' investment plans, as it did; oil companies which are run by people of decent dose of competence base their decisions on the WHOLE life span of the project. The life span of oilsands projects range from 20-40 years, even more.
It does not require much intelligence to grasp that given the aggressive production cutting stance taken by OPEC countries (plus drop in non-conventional oil production), and stimulus packages announced by the G-7 countries, China and India, the aggregate demand of oil will start picking up by Q3 of this year. Coupled with the impact of production cuts, by the end of 2009 price of oil is expected to be any where between 60-100 dollars per barrel, probably more likely upwards of $70. The price of oil will remain on an upward looking curve thereafter.
So, the price of oil was not so much of a concern for the likes of Shell, TOTAL or Statoil et al. It was the uncertainties on policy level of both Canada and the new US administration regarding oilsands that impelled these companies to adopt more circumspect approach. Unless these companies are sure of policies on oilsands – of both Canada and US – and sure of a stable government in Ottawa ,which has a balanced view on oilsands, the oil companies would remain on the fence.
It may be mentioned for the benefit of those not familiar with Canadian politics that leader of an opposition party, known as NDP, had gone on record to say that given the chance his party will stop all oilsands projects. Such intellectually-challenged people were willing to cut their noses to spite their faces. Their political aspirations got better of whatever amount of intelligence they have to ignore the vital importance of a resource, like, oilsands to Canada as a whole – on economic and political fronts.
However, Liberal party’s aforementioned views on oilsands will certainly help Harper’s folks in formulating bi-partisan policy on environment, including policies relating to carbon capture. Once there is clarity on Federal environment policy, again, that will provide necessary confidence to the investors to finalize their investment decisions in regard to oilsands projects.
It is hoped that taking cue from Ignatieff, leaders of other Canadian opposition parties will set aside petty-minded politics and rally together to do what is in the best interest of the country. They will do well to remember there is much to gain, nationally and politically, in a prosperous Canada rather than in an economically and politically weak Canada.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)