Gen X at 40

Canada's Favorite Blog


Comments are locked. No additional comments may be posted.

Andrew -

Aren't the "conditions and clawbacks" that are "being imposed" something along the lines of: If Newfoundland and Nova Scotia become 'have' provinces due to their oil, then they will not be entitled to equalizatin payments.

And, if this is so - then why is this a bad thing? Last I heard the two provinces were trying to have their cake & eat it too....

Alan -

I understand it is not that. I understand it is you will be clawed back (something which no other province has had to endure on its path to resource based wealth) before you become a "have province". If there was a delay of the clawback until prosperity that is one thing. But if 80% (or whatever) continues to get clawed back, there never will be prosperity.

Hans -

Al, I couldn't agree more. Resource-based wealth has been the real ticket to ride for Alberta, Ontario and all the other provinces that were granted resource rights by the Federal Government. All the bullshit about Atlantic Canadian welfare cases need to be viewed through this lens. Now, when NS & NL want to join the party, the Feds get "wise". To me, it seems like a simple equation: The provinces get the resource rights; when the revenue stream becomes a surplus, they no longer receive equalization, but pay into it. What could possibly make more sense than that. Both sides need to make their positions better understood in the public. I don't know much about Danny Williams, but, like, Clyde Wells, he at least stands up for himself and for his province, which may, in the long term, benefit all Canadians.

SayNay? -

I thought they were offered an eight year exemption from the clawback which would end once the province's per-capita wealth reached the same level as Ontario or, in the alternative, a guaranteed equalization payment over that time. It seems these Provinces want the resource revenue excluded from the equalization formula. Does that work for you?

It is clear, however, that in economic terms the "clawback" is a disincentive to resource development in the Atlantic Provinces. In fact, it would seem that the whole equalization forumla is a disincentive to economic development in the "have not" provinces ie. 70% of economic gain is "clawed back" - why bother for 30% - but are we not talking about reaching a fair balance here?
What is Alberta's deal on resources and equalization?

Alan -

Alberta received its resources and developement subsidization (the CPR) before equalization so it has never had any clawback as far as I know.<p>

We are of course talking about equality and fairness.

SayNay? -

I agree that if this prior deal was fair to Alberta then, why would not the same deal be fair to Newfoundland and Nova Scotia now? If it has allowed Alberta to be a "have" province, why would we continue to use this crazy "equalization" system to keep these other provinces down. It really brings into question this whole liberal "share the wealth" equalization nonsense that brought into being after the Altberta deal.