Cambridge Energy Research Associates has published a study that shows that the lifecycle CO2 emissions from oil sands is only marginally higher that other oil sources:

This pretty much refutes the statements made by some environmentalists (and the US administration) regarding oil sands being worse for the climate…

Kevin Libin has written an excellent exposé of the Children’s Aid Societies (and their other named kin) across Canada, and he has gotten a significant amount of feedback supporting his findings.

The problem is that unaccountable “social workers” have been given supra-legal powers to enter homes and “apprehend” children based on entirely subjective criteria.  If people’s children are to be taken away, this should require a court-order (from a real judge) – and be based on objective criteria – such as clear evidence of physical or sexual abuse, malnutrition, or other measurable things.  A statement from a three year old that “Mommy and Daddy fight” would never fly as evidence in a real courtroom, and no one could be convicted of assault because someone has a bruised knee.

Additionally, if and when children do need to be removed from an unsafe environment, they must be placed into a demontrably safe one – and it needs to be above and beyond normal safety.  Children should have their own rooms, beds, good food, clothing, schooling and counselling.  They should not go hungry, or die in the care of so-called foster parents who are really only in this for the cheque they get from the government.

Like the HRCs, the Children’s Aid Societies and Family Services organizations need to be reined in lest they destroy our civilization.

I find it extremely frustrating the our Governments speak out of one side of their mouth on free-trade vs. protectionism, but on another subject that is not really so different they are of the completely opposite opinion.

With regards to our largest trading partner, Canada’s government is trying very hard to convince America to tone down the “Buy America” provisions in that countries legislation and activities, and also trying to convince the provinces to reduce interprovincial trade restrictions in an attempt to placate the EU so a free-trade agreement can be negotiated.

But they continue to impose restrictions on which airlines can fly into Canada, how often and to which cities.  Emirates, the flag carrier of the UAE, land of Dubai and Abu Dhabi, is currently allowed to fly to Toronto three times a week fom their hub in Dubai.  They want to fly daily to Toronto, and to add flights to Calgary and Vancouver.  But Ottawa says no.  The arguments are ridiculous, as no Canadian airline flies to Dubai (or anywhere else in the Gulf).  I have trouble understanding why the pilots union would be lobbying for such protectionism, but they are.  We are basically limiting the opportunities for business and leisure travel between Canada and the Persian Gulf region (and beyond).  And all these restrictions really do is make sure that someone who wants to travel between the Gulf and Canada must fly through Europe or the United States – whose jobs are we trying to protect?

The Tory government in Ottawa should immediately embark upon privatization of various Crown Corporations, and they should start with Ridley Terminals in Prince Rupert, B.C.

Terence Corcoran has a good piece in the Post on this subject, and references a few columns written by the current chairman of Ridley, Daniel Vienez.   It is frustrating to see MPs of the so-called business friendly, free-market loving Conservative Party trying to ensure that Ridley continues to be a subsidy to the coal mining industry and anti-competitive.

In Saturday’s National Post, there was an excellent interview with Dambisa Moyo, which provided a very good explanation of why aid to Africa has failed and should be abandoned in favour of the free market.  The best quotes, in my opinion:

… try to raise a teenager to be an engineer or a doctor or to really contribute to the global society when you are constantly being told you are poor, you’re inefficient, you need a handout. This is not a formula for success. It is a great disappointment that, by and large, celebrities use their platforms to basically push a negative story…

So I believe it would be a much better use of Mr. [Stephen] Lewis’s time to actually agitate for the things that can meaningfully put a dent in poverty across the African continent instead of pushing a strategy that means that, in another 50 years … your children and your children’s children will basically be paying for my children and my children’s children to go to school and get health care.

The emphasis is mine.  Methinks I may need to pick up her book.

Here are a number of things wrong with the GM bankruptcy and bailout package:

• The Canadian Taxpayer is putting in $10.5 Billion, which the government now admits we will likely never recover.
• In return we get $1.7 Billion in GM debt (so they owe us MORE money), and 12% of the stock in the company (which is essentially worthless)
• The deal is going to force GM to maintain 19% of it’s North American automobile production in Canada, regardless of whether that is the best business decision…  This sounds like a good way for an activist government to screw GM again later.
• Governments (Canada and US) will select all but one of the board of directors.  And the UAW gets to pick the final one.  And none of those three groups has any clue how to run a business…
• The deal that sold Opel to Magna (and Sberbank) prevents them from competing in North America – that sounds like a questionably legal cartel arrangement, but with government support it will survive.

One guy who has written some good stuff on this is Keith Hennessey.  His post today has some good ideas.  I don’t agree with everything he has written, but this was particularly good:

I urge the President to:

• Enshrine the principles from today’s fact sheet in the term sheets for the taxpayer investments in GM (and other firms). We did this last December in the GM and Chrysler term sheets. Tie yourself to the mast. This will give you an easy excuse later when someone pressures you to vote those shares in a way that conflicts with the taxpayer’s interest.
• Set clear rules for Administration contacts with GM – it’s probably best to funnel all contacts through specific Treasury or NEC officials on the autos task force.  No freelancing phone calls to the Administration-appointed directors or “informal chats” with them from White House staff, or from DOT, EPA, USTR, DOE, even State.  Put a firewall around interactions with GM.
• Come out hard and quickly against the first proposal from a Member of Congress to leverage the ownership stake for a non-taxpayer goal.  Nip it in the bud, especially if the idea comes from a friend.

I would have let GM fail in spectacular fashion – because the government shouldn’t be in business at all.  And if GM had been allowed to collapse it might have taught the rest of business world a real lesson in caution.

In the news today, Border guards abandon posts on Mohawk reserve.  If the Mohawk at Akwesasne want to be a “sovereign nation”, perhaps we should set up the border posts AROUND the reserve with armed guards.  And Ottawa should stop sending them money.

Voila – problem solved!

Peter Foster provides a very good explanation of why private members bill C-300 should be killed post-haste.  The most concise line indicating why it should die?

Karl Marx couldn’t have said it better.

The government of Canada has finally come to an intelligent idea: selling the CANDU business of AECL.  This is the right thing to do – because there is no reason for the government to be in the business of developing this technology, nor trying to sell and support the CANDU reactors around the world.  Free-enterprise can do a better job of any industrial activity, and there is nothing particularly strategic about having a “Canadian” nuclear technology.  If the CANDU technology is as good as some people claim, it should be able to compete on the world stage without assistance from the Canadian taxpayer.