Canada is “closed for business” is the message sent by the Trudeau Government with Bills C-69 and C-48

The Petroleum Services Association of Canada (PSAC) is expressing extreme disappointment with the decision by the Trudeau government to not accept the full slate of amendments for Bill C-69 proposed by the Senate following lengthy consultation with Canadians.

“Bill C-69 in its current form will mean the end of pipeline infrastructure for Canada as no proponent would be prepared to make application or invest in the face of the uncertainty and risk prevalent in this Bill. If the Government of Canada wanted to send a signal to the world that we are closed for business, they have certainly achieved it with this Bill,” said Gary Mar, President and CEO of PSAC.

According to a Fraser Institute report on the Flight of Capital from Canada, investment in other countries by Canadians increased by a whopping 74 percent from 2013 to 2017 while investment into Canada plunged a staggering 55 per cent in the same period.

Duncan Au, Chair of PSAC and President and CEO of CWC Energy Services, commented, “With Bill C-69, the decline in capital investment in the Canadian energy sector over the last couple of years will only deepen and result in more job losses along with lost economic opportunities for our indigenous peoples. With the oil and gas industry’s national supply chain, that will also include manufacturing jobs in Ontario and Quebec.”

The Premiers of Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, New Brunswick and the Northwest Territories, representing 59 per cent of the Canadian population and 63 per cent of Canada’s GDP, wrote to Prime Minister Trudeau urging him to accept the amendments of the Senate. The amendments were drafted after the Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment, and Natural Resources heard 38 days of testimony by 277 witnesses from indigenous communities, industry, Premiers, and specialists, including PSAC.

“The Trudeau government has displaced the informed and reasonable judgment of the Senate and Premiers with the uninformed and unreasonable judgment of the Federal Cabinet”, said Mar.

To add to this woeful state of affairs, Bill C-48 will also curtail investment in Canada as it discriminates against crude products from western Canada limiting our options to access international markets beyond our only customer, the U.S., that happily accepts our crude at discounted prices resulting from the current lack of pipeline capacity.

Mar noted that, “With these Bills, the Trudeau government has clearly made a decision that will have grave and disastrous consequences for our economic future and the prosperity of all Canadians.”

Honouring cultural traditions or disrespect through caricature? This is the fundamental debate over use of Indigenous names and imagery in sports in recent years.

For decades North American sports teams have utilized Indigenous and other ethnocultural imagery and nomenclature. In some cases, this has been rather overt - the Washington Redskins, Cleveland Indians, Edmonton Eskimos – while in others the references to these groups have been more indirect, such as the Atlanta Braves, Kansas City Chiefs or Notre Dame’s Fighting Irish.

A new study from the non-profit Angus Reid Institute finds Canadians divided on whether or not the practice of using such terminology and logos should continue in the face of protests and team name changes across the country.

Slightly more than half (56 per cent), driven by men over the age of 35 and women over the age of 55, say that these teams should not make changes to the names that fans have grown accustomed to over the years.

However, more than four-in-10 (44 per cent), led by majorities of young women and those with university educations, say that these names should, in fact, be changed to ensure that no offence is given to communities that may feel ostracized by their usage.

The CFL’S Edmonton Eskimos are a source of concern for a number of Canadians. The team name is seen to be offensive by three-in-10 (29 per cent). The generational aspect of this debate is again highlighted with respect to the term Eskimos. More than two-in-five (44 per cent) 18-to-34-year old’s find the name offensive, compared to just 18 per cent over the age of 55. In recent months, the team has been researching the impact of its name and consulting with Inuit communities, and says that no plans to change the name are imminent.

More Key Findings:

- For many, this is a discussion with degrees of intensity. For example, more than four-in-10 (43 per cent) express concern about either the name or logo of the Washington Redskins and Cleveland Indians. Many, but far fewer, say that the same problems exist with the Atlanta Braves and Kansas City Chiefs (24 per cent in each case).

- A majority of Canadians (56 per cent) say that Mcgill University made the correct decision in recently deciding to discontinue its use of the name ‘Redmen’ for the campus’ male sports teams. Though it was initially meant to reference the team’s primary red uniform colour, the school incorporated Indigenous imagery over the decades.

- This is also not a discussion that is limited entirely to Indigenous symbols and names. Just as many Canadians say they have an issue with the Notre Dame Fighting Irish name and logo as they do with the aforementioned Braves or Chiefs.

The full poll can be viewed at http://angusreid.org/sports-team-names/