It appears that the energy industry is not of one mind when it comes to the impact of increased royalties recommended in “Our Fair Share” review report.
The Calgary Sun is reporting that Enbridge is not following the herd using the same speaking points in the news releases that have recently been promulgated by some energy industry doomers and gloomers.
Interesting in this same Calgary Sun story is comments that clarify (sic) Talisman’s position. They are now repositioning their attempts to punish Alberta. Now they believe “…that public opinion isn’t fully informed.” They say “One of the reasons for Jim’s letter is to educate and inform – it’s important for the public to be aware.” “Jim” I believe is a former Talisman CEO. Shareholders must be wondering why is he still speaking for Talisman instead of the current CEO?) Could there be a difference of opinion between them?
So are we to understand that, as a public service, Talisman issued a news release saying they are pulling $500m of investment out of Alberta because of the “Our Fair Share” Royalty Review Report. Of course that is the reason. What else could it be?
Yes, upon reflection, I do feel much more “educated and informed.” I have a much more educated and informed. Now, thanks to Talisman tactics, I am much more capable of forming an “opinion.” I have a much clearer and more committed opinion of the kind of company Talisman is and how they “communicate.”
They say Talisman’s vow to divestment “is not meant to be threatening.” I don’t feel threatened. I feel insulted. And I think the recent polls showing 88% of Albertans - who actually own the oil and gas - and who believe the oil patch should pay more – are all also insulted.
Citizens of Alberta have never been so focused, so furious,at so many levels and in so many ways over their government's incompetence and the arrogance and intimidation efforts by some energy industry players.
The Calgary Sun is reporting that Enbridge is not following the herd using the same speaking points in the news releases that have recently been promulgated by some energy industry doomers and gloomers.
Interesting in this same Calgary Sun story is comments that clarify (sic) Talisman’s position. They are now repositioning their attempts to punish Alberta. Now they believe “…that public opinion isn’t fully informed.” They say “One of the reasons for Jim’s letter is to educate and inform – it’s important for the public to be aware.” “Jim” I believe is a former Talisman CEO. Shareholders must be wondering why is he still speaking for Talisman instead of the current CEO?) Could there be a difference of opinion between them?
So are we to understand that, as a public service, Talisman issued a news release saying they are pulling $500m of investment out of Alberta because of the “Our Fair Share” Royalty Review Report. Of course that is the reason. What else could it be?
Yes, upon reflection, I do feel much more “educated and informed.” I have a much more educated and informed. Now, thanks to Talisman tactics, I am much more capable of forming an “opinion.” I have a much clearer and more committed opinion of the kind of company Talisman is and how they “communicate.”
They say Talisman’s vow to divestment “is not meant to be threatening.” I don’t feel threatened. I feel insulted. And I think the recent polls showing 88% of Albertans - who actually own the oil and gas - and who believe the oil patch should pay more – are all also insulted.
Citizens of Alberta have never been so focused, so furious,at so many levels and in so many ways over their government's incompetence and the arrogance and intimidation efforts by some energy industry players.
Please appreciate this public opinion poll result is not intended to be threatening to Talisman or the Government of Alberta. It is meant to be a clear message that things are about to change. Those changes will be in royalties, revenues and relationships with both our government as our trustee and the energy sector as our tenants.
I'm insulted when oil and gas is asking for my support (a rural Albertan) on royalty issue, yet have low visibility in my rural community 99.999% of the time. The CEOs of mining and forest companies that have operations in my community visit and attend community functions, yet I don't think a CEO from an oil and gas company has ever done that. So which sectors are more interested in community sustainability and which ones are most interested in making the rich richer?
ReplyDeleteAnother note - A question - is a community (and all its residents) better off with or without the oil and gas sector?
I hope you adjust your opinion to the changing facts. As from the Globe and Mail article (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20071004.RTALISMAN04/TPStory/TPBusiness/Prairies/) the new stats are the following:
ReplyDelete"In a poll sponsored by two local newspapers this week, 55 per cent of Albertans surveyed said royalties in the oil sands should rise. However, 56 per cent of people said royalties on gas should remain the same or be lowered, and 52 per cent said conventional oil royalties should stay static or be cut."
not the 88% anymore which only 900 people in a province of 3,375,763 in 2006.
What kind of blog is this if you don't even allow freedom of speech. You are moderating responses! Clearly you are not open to an honest and healthy discussion. I refuse to post an educated, thoughtful, and respectful comment on your "controlled" website; but I will post this message to you, assuming you will 'moderate' it.
ReplyDeleteAnon at 1:26 - I moderate for defamation because I may be liable as a publisher if I were to allow them.
ReplyDeleteI also tolerate anonymous comments like yours from people who wish to enlighten the rest of us but have to hide their identity. It seems seem odd that such heartfelt opinions come from people who lack sufficient courage or character to let the rest of us know exactly who they are.
I post them even if we can only guess at your biases and who you may be speaking for. But alas, such is the state of Blogosphere.
I presume readers will pass judgement as to if you are "educated thougthful and respectful."
I for one noted none of those qualities were apparent in your last posting.
Based on your statements I presume we have seen the last your comments on this Blog.
Ken: I mirror the anger here.
ReplyDeleteI'm annoyed because Mr. Stelmach et al haven't announced right off the bat that they support Hunter's document in its entirety. Didn't they just pay the guy for it? I am not the only taxpayer to get more than a little fed up when I find out my Governments - Muni, prov, and fed - pay good money for reports, and then ignore them or water them down for political purposes, and I also get annoyed when paid auditors are ignored as well.
I'm buying that Mr. Stelmach and the gang want to take time to be thorough, but too much of a delay makes it look like they are trying to figure out how to soften the whole thing on behalf of the oil companies.....
And if big oil doesn't think that others aren't waiting in line to jump into the best oil environment in the world......
Kind of hard to have Encana try to bite back the hand that fed it from
birth....But I guess that means that Encana should be putting up most of their leases at bargain basement prices to sell off to the dummies that will fill the void left behind in such a royalty wasteland.....
G. Fletcher, Edmonton.