Gillard faces down mining bosses

Julia Gillard has thrown down the gauntlet to mining bosses, telling them face-to-face that they don't own the nation's resources and Australians deserve their share.

Ms Gillard delivered a feisty speech to the Minerals Council last night, one month out from the introduction of the carbon tax, telling them she is determined to stick to Labor's plan to share the benefits of the boom.

Her frank challenge to the industry came after Opposition Leader Tony Abbott told mining bosses that she had caved in to union pressure to water down a deal to allow foreign labourers to build new mines.

Ms Gillard told her audience that she knew they would not like what she was telling them.

"I know that not all of you in this room are in love with the language of 'spreading the benefits of the boom'," she said.

"Australia needs tough leadership and I think you know by now I'm prepared to fight."

But she said that with more than $500 billion of investment in the pipeline, there was no better place in the world to invest in than Australia.

She told some of the industry's major players that Australians did not begrudge them their success.

"But I know this too: they work pretty hard in car factories and panel beaters and in police stations and hospitals.

"And here's the rub: you don't own the minerals; they own it and they deserve their share," she added.

"Governments only sell you the right to mine the resource - a resource we hold in trust for a sovereign people."

But the mining industry warned the Prime Minister her plan to spread the benefits of the boom may not be sustainable.

Minerals Council president Peter Johnston called it the wrong approach, criticising the "endless dialogue about redistribution".

"All governments need to shift gears from spreading the benefits of the boom through higher taxes, ad hoc spending and increased regulation to tackling the real challenges of fiscal sustainability productivity growth," he said.

The Prime Minister made just the briefest mention of her controversial plan to allow mining companies to import foreign workers to help build new mines.

"For projects where there's a real need for some temporary overseas workers, we will support that, we will join with you in making sure our first priority is to secure jobs and training for Australian workers," she said.

"There is nowhere in the world where mining has a stronger future, and this is Australia and it has a Labor Government."

Ms Gillard's frank challenge to the industry came after Mr Abbott also addressed the Minerals Council.

He seized on Labor's decision to form a new Caucus subcommittee to oversee future foreign worker deals.

"The unions spooked the Prime Minister and now the Caucus has rolled the Cabinet on these matters," he said.

"You can be absolutely confident that as time goes by, these enterprise migration agreements will be more difficult to negotiate."

Gillard faces down mining bosses - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-05-31/gillard-faces-down-mining-bosses/4043276?WT.svl=news0)

Too bad no one in this Con government has the balls Gillard has.....but then Harper is not interested in the public weal....

Dutch disease is alive and well in Canada thanks to Harper's misguided policies and turning Canada back to hewers of wood and drawers of oily water. :mad:

Gillard is an ass who is leading her country to economic ruin. She'll be out by the next election.

Up next - Alberta suing the oil patch for pollution....hell freezing over comes to mind as more likely....

But then again the irony of this is rather.....ummmm...:rolleyes:

Alberta seeking $10-billion in lawsuit against tobacco companies - The Globe and Mail (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/alberta-seeking-10-billion-in-lawsuit-against-tobacco-companies/article2448008/)

In the "oops" category....some right wing ideologue will likely claim the NDP sabotaged it for Mulcair's visit :rolleyes:

Pipeline spill sends 22,000 barrels of oil mix into Alberta muskeg

A huge pipeline spill has released 22,000 barrels of oil and water into muskeg in the far northwest of Alberta.

The spill ranks among the largest in North America in recent years, a period that has seen a series of high-profile accidents that have undermined the energy industry’s safety record. The Enbridge Inc. pipeline rupture that leaked oil near Michigan’s Kalamazoo River, for example, spilled an estimated 19,500 barrels.


Pipeline spill sends 22,000 barrels of oil mix into Alberta muskeg - The Globe and Mail (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/pipeline-spill-sends-22000-barrels-of-oil-mix-into-alberta-muskeg/article2447765/)

I wonder if the holding pond drinking Con minister is gonna swill this too.XX)

Once again, I thank Alberta for its development of the Oil Sands. I expect that an operation this vast will see some mistakes made from time to time--however, an entire nation owes a large portion of its continuing economic success to this endeavour.

While some people slaver at the idea of profiting by suing productive businesses, others--such as those in the energy sector--are actually doing something to make a difference.

I expect that an operation this vast will see some mistakes made from time to time--however, an entire nation owes a large portion of its continuing economic success to this endeavour.

Yeah, China.

Unfortunately, if we enforced better environmental stewardship and more equitable profit sharing, I'm sure the oil would just jump out of the ground and move to a more "business friendly" jurisdiction, so there's no way Canada can do anything other than let foreign multinationals pillage our natural resources. :-( :rolleyes:

Develop, extract and sell, not pillage.

Editorial cartoon, June 2 (http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Editorial+cartoon+June/6720506/story.html)

Here it is:

I suspect the biggest complainers here are suffering from a healthy dose of Western envy. No amount of green voodoo can create this sort of wealth.

Very good article...

Illogical leaps of logic on the oil sands and economic growth (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/illogical-leaps-of-logic-on-the-oil-sands-and-economic-growth/article4227823/)
G&M

Federal NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair is clearly a man who chooses to enrage rather than engage. In advance of his visit to Alberta’s oil sands last week, he declared that “their model for development is Nigeria.” That he had never been to either Nigeria or to the oils ands was clearly no impediment to that astonishing pronouncement.

Nevertheless, his Alberta hosts did their best to show him the great strides industry has made in reducing the environmental impact of oil-extraction operations, as well as the restored mine sites where wood bison and other wildlife now roam.

Mr. Mulcair would have learned that the entire disturbed area of the oil sands is 100 square kilometres smaller than the footprint of the City of Toronto and comprises just one-10th of 1 per cent of the Alberta northern boreal forest. He would also have learned that the oil sands produce only 5 per cent of Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions.

There is no sign that such information altered his characterization of the oil sands as a threat to local and global eco-systems, but surely his earlier declaration obliges him to next visit the Niger Delta. There, he would see firsthand that thousands of oil spills have made the drinking of water almost as hazardous as being subjected to the human rights abuses and deadly conflicts that pervade the region.

Along with Mr. Mulcair’s environmental Armageddon routine came his economic argument about the oil sands, based on the “Dutch disease” theory (which refers to manufacturing decline that occurred in the Netherlands after a boom in natural gas exports in the 1970s). His argument starts with the premise that because oil-export revenue lifts Canada’s balance of payments and generates national wealth, global money markets will value our dollar higher than if we didn’t produce oil. All true, so far.

But then comes his leap of logic that if we just stopped producing oil, the dollar would fall, manufacturers would thrive and Canadians would be better off. But would they really?

No one disputes that Alberta is the biggest beneficiary of oil sands development, but Albertans return much of that financial gain to the country. In 2009, Alberta corporations and individuals paid some $40-billion in federal taxes, while receiving $19-billion in goods and services. That $21-billion difference helps finance federal programs that benefit the entire country.

Mr. Mulcair has conveniently neglected to mention that oil from Alberta – as well as Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Newfoundland – is only one of the resource exports that help strengthen our dollar. B.C.’s natural gas, forest products and metal resources; Saskatchewan’s potash; and Manitoba and Quebec’s hydro power all contribute to Canada’s trade balance.

If his theory that Canada would be better off without oil exports were true, then wouldn’t it follow that stopping all resource exports would allow manufacturers to thrive even more?

But here are some more of those darned facts that clash with his theories. A recent study by the Institute for Research on Public Policy concluded that only one-quarter of total Canadian manufacturing output has been negatively impacted by a stronger loonie. And where plants have closed, it’s sometimes because of the government actions, such as the huge increase in electricity costs driven by Ontario’s misguided green-energy subsidies.

A new world economic order is dawning, with global growth moving from the West to the East. Resource-hungry Asia is rising to lead that new order. Canada is the only Group of Eight country capable of supplying those resources, which account for half of the country’s export revenue. The resource sector employs hundreds of thousands, from labourers to skilled trades to engineers and accountants.

The environmental record of Canada’s resource industries ranks among the best in the world. Rather than accusing those who work in such industries of taking part in unsustainable practices, someone aspiring to be prime minister should understand Canada’s resource advantage can keep the country strong and prosperous in the new world economic order.

Very good article...


Mulcair sounds like the old style NDPer, having nostalgia-gasms about the long-gone prosperous days when the CAW was in the catbird seat.