Alberta's Tar Sands Gamble

Alberta regulator releases report on province's oil and gas reserves

Alberta has 1.6 billion barrels of remaining conventional oil reserves with 2004 production declining five per cent from 2003 levels to 224 million barrels per day. The EUB report also found an increase in marketable natural gas reserves with current levels at 40 trillion cubic feet or roughly an eight year supply. Alberta produced 4.9 trillion cubic feet in 2004.

Note well that Alberta's NON-RENEWABLE stocks of Oil and Gas are declining. This is where the Alberta bumper surplus comes from, however we still have the lowest royalty and tax rate on oil profits in the World. While our conventional supplies are in a serious decline. The reliance on the Oil Sands currently is one of an long term investment, oil factories are being built, which is creating a temporary job boom, and extraction processing is underway but it is not producing royalties or taxes yet. And probably won't for a decade.

The same can be said about the new kid on the block; Coal Bed Methane production of gas. It's being pushed due to our declining gas stocks, and it too is a gamble that can only pay off in the far future.

Coalbed gas production set to take off
AEUB predicts 25-fold increase by 2014

Gordon Jaremko
The Edmonton Journal

September 16, 2005

Canadian energy firms have extra motivation, on top of strong gas prices, to accelerate coalbed methane development, the board observed. Conventional gas reserves are poised to run down after almost 50 years of almost continuous production growth, due to depletion of aging wells.

The board forecasts Alberta's conventional gas production will remain flat at its recent annual level of about five trillion cubic feet in 2005 then decline at a rate of 2.5 per cent per year.

"CBM production is forecast to supplement the supply of conventional gas in the province," the AEUB said.

But with coal gas development still in its infancy, the board makes no attempt to predict whether coal gas will make up for all the forecast decline in conventional wells or even cause total production to resume growing.

Meahwhile the Tories deliberate underestimation of the cost of gas and oil has allowed them to avoid having any real budget plan based on a realistic estimation of the province's real earnings on the increase price of oil and gas.

Energy windfalls may last decade

Gordon Jaremko
The Edmonton Journal

September 16, 2005

EDMONTON - Alberta's energy boom -- and consumers' pain at the gas pumps -- will last at least 10 years, a radically revised government forecast says.

Oil prices of $50 US per barrel and corresponding high values for natural gas are no temporary windfall, the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board said Thursday in a state-of-the-industry report.

The AEUB's 2005 reserves review double its '04 forecasts, predicting oil will average $55 to $60 a barrel this year and next, then take until 2009 to settle back down to $50 as consumers cut back and supply grows.

The board predicts $50 oil will last at least until the end of its current 10-year projection through 2014. Natural gas is expected to average $7.50 to $8 per gigajoule this year and next, then drop no lower than $7 for the rest of the forecast period.

Although the new AEUB expectations are higher than Alberta Finance's budget projections, the board outlook is within the price zones of industry forecasters, such as FirstEnergy Capital Corp. and Gilberg Laustsen Jung Associates.

But even annual average oil prices of $30 US per barrel and corresponding values for natural gas are high enough to sustain Alberta's oilsands development wave and current record drilling activity, the CERI economist said.

The AEUB echoes industry forecasts that oilsands production will double into a range of two million barrels daily over the next 10 years, while gas drilling continues at record levels and coalbed methane development accelerates.

Alberta Finance and Alberta Energy officials could not be reached to say whether provincial budget and savings policies should change to manage repeated huge annual energy revenue surpluses.

Instead they act like its Christmas every quarter, with that 'aw shucks I never expected to get that,' attitude. Which avoids the actuality of what those earnings are or could be planned and budgeted for.

Leaving the rest of Canada wondering about just what the heck is going on in Alberta. And when the gas price at the pump rises, that what the heck becomes, what the hell lets nationalize. Which makes Calgary Oil Boys very jumpy, and Ralph responds in kind on their behalf.

'Conflict' looms over Alberta's oil wealth
Revenue sharing a potentially explosive campaign issue, survey results indicate

By BRIAN LAGHI

Friday, September 16, 2005

From Friday's Globe and Mail

Asked, for example, whether provincial resources should belong to all Canadians or only to those living in the province where the resource is found, 76 per cent said they belong to all. Even in Alberta, 55 per cent of respondents said the resources belong to the country. And on the more general question of whether provinces should share royalty payments from resources, 42 per cent said at least part of the money should go to other Canadians. Forty-seven per cent of Albertans also felt this way.

This is the reason we need Public ownership of Oil/Gas and the Oil/Gas industry under community and workers control as I blogged here.

The harmony, however, appears to break down when the more specific question on the oil windfall is asked. Mr. Gregg suggested that may be because leaders in Alberta tend to inflame rhetoric by arguing that the surplus belongs solely to the province. "Once you get a political exhortation, like Ralph Klein saying 'keep your hands off it,' I think that's when you get regional interest overarching the national interest," he said.


Alta. won't share energy windfall: Klein
Canadian Press
Friday, September 16, 2005
CALGARY -- Alberta Premier Ralph Klein says the rest of Canada can forget about getting an extra slice of the province's energy windfall.

"It's not in the cards," Klein told reporters Friday after a poll suggested Canadians outside the oil-rich province want to share the wealth being generated by soaring energy prices.

"When you have money, everyone wants some, including the rest of Canada," he said, adding that the current situation is no different than when Alberta was booming in 1980.

"The rest of Canada was saying the same thing: 'Give me, give me, give me,"' said the premier. "Then the price of oil went down and the rest of Canada was wringing their hands in glee saying, 'You deserved it."'

He noted the rest of Canada didn't send economic aid to Alberta when the oil boom collapsed and Alberta was thrown into economic turmoil.

While the rest of the country looks on Alberta's record surpluses with envy they are as much based on sin taxes; tobbacco and VLT's as they are on the royalties and taxes from oil and gas. And those taxes and royalties are on limited conventional reserves, which have around a decade of life left in them.

The Tar Sands are not yet at production levels to match the conventional reserves. The government is tossing the dice in the hopes that by the time the conventional reserves dry out they will be replaced with the equivalent in Tar Sands production.

Ralph and the oil boys have the high hopes of the Riverboat gambler.

Which is why Ralph plays the NEP card, because he knows that this province is gambling on living off declining resources while waiting for the Tar Sands to pay back their investment.

It's all a bit of slight of hand to avoid the real issue of the need to increase taxes and royalties on the current conventional reserves.

And Albertan's recognize that, they too support the public ownership of the oil and gas resources in Alberta. And if the royalties and taxes were at the level of Venezuala's for instance then Albertan's would be overwhelmingly in favour of sharing them.

Which is why the Tories have NOT changed the royalty/tax relief they gave Big Oil back after the last market crash in 1984 which coincided with the NEP.

Of course the 'rest of Canada' did not bail out Alberta when we crashed, because we had boomed during the crash in the rest of Canada, and we simply joined the declining economy of the day.


To put it into perspective, the oilsands are estimated to contain 174.1 billion barrels of bitumen reserves."The size of that reserve would put Canada in about second place in the world behind Saudi Arabia in terms of total oil reserves," said Curran."At current production rates, that's about 400 years of supply," he said. The forecast for bitumen production closely mirrors figures from the Canadian Energy Research Institute. CERI is forecasting production to be 2.5 million barrels per day by 2014 said global energy analyst Vincent Lauerman.


Tar Sands production is of bitumen, shale based oil, the production is not through conventional oil and gas extraction but costly factories that literarly dredge the tar sands of their oil. Its the largest open pit mining operation in the world. And those factories do not employ the same amount of workers as it takes to construct them. The current boom in Alberta is a 'construction boom' not an 'oil' boom! We have yet to have the production levels of extraction out of the Tar Sands that would match our conventional oil production!

"Despite improving technologies, costs (of production) are going up to turn this stuff into usable product," said Lauerman. "The cost is about $30 per barrel and a year before it was about $25 per barrel. The main thing that has changed that is driving this thing forward is light oil prices have increased quite a bit," he said. Higher natural gas prices and higher costs for labour has added to production costs said Lauerman. ........"Mostly because it's a mining operation more than anything else. There's not a lot in it in terms of finding and development costs - it's more on how much does it cost to build a factory," he said.

Teck Cominco pays $475 M for stake in oilsands project
VANCOUVER (CP) -- Teck Cominco Ltd. made a splash in the Alberta oilsands Tuesday with a $475-million deal for a 15 per cent stake in the Fort Hills Energy project owned by Petro-Canada and UTS Energy Corp. -- bringing with it a wealth of experience in open-pit mining.

It takes energy to make energy in the Tar Sands. Part of the cost is the use of water and steam extraction. For thirty years the Tories have tried to find a way to use Nuclear powered steam injection to get the oil out of the Tar Sands. Scary thought that.

Oil sands players eye nuclear option
Soaring price of natural gas has producers looking for an alternative

Tar Sands oil is energy intensive, hence capital intensive. It is NOT an economical production model unless oil prices are high, alot higher than they are even now. At $80 a barrel Tar Sands oil only becomes feasible due to its energy inputs cost.

Oil sands trigger race for diluent supply
EnCana secures imports of little-known commodity needed to dilute bitumen

Diluent is a mostly unknown commodity outside the oil business and had a low profile even in Alberta until last winter when the industry was slammed hard by severe shortage. Roughly one barrel of diluent is needed to move two barrels of bitumen through a pipeline, a significant cost, and high diluent prices actually made bitumen production briefly unprofitable. "It became clear that we were not just facing a long-term diluent shortage but we were already pretty much on the doorstep of one," Mr. Bird said.EnCana has not yet secured a supply of diluent but the company believes it can probably get it on the spot market from countries that export liquefied natural gas.Not all oil sands production requires diluent. EnCana drills for its bitumen. Others, like Suncor Energy Inc., mine bitumen and then upgrade the heavy oil into synthetic oil, which flows through a pipeline without problem.

The Alberta economy is a game of three card monty; time limited construction jobs created due to the building oil sands factories, reliance on limited reserves of conventional oil and gas while the Tar Sands comes into operation, wait for 25 years before the Tar Sands companies begin to pay back taxes and royalties.

Don't believe little old left winger me, then here it is from the horses mouth:

Reality check needed

By NEIL WAUGH, EDMONTON SUN

The Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (EUB) issued its energy supply-and-demand outlook document last week.

"While non-renewable energy sources and more efficient energy use are increasingly contributing to lower the global demand," the EUB reported, "oil is still the dominant fuel."

As a result the board is upping its long-range price forecast from $28 to $50 US a barrel. Natural gas prices are expected to stay at $7.50 to $8 a gigajoule for the next two years.

That alone should sent Alberta royalties revenues through the roof.

Even though the EUB noted that natural gas production peaked in 2001.

But what's also of note - although scary might be a better word - is the radical shift from conventional oil produced from a pumpjack to synthetic crude manufactured by an oilsands plant.

"Last year synthetic crude oil production equalled light and medium crude oil production for the first time," the report said.

By 2014 it will make up 83% of Alberta's oil production. There's no doubt that oilsands plant construction is a massive engine for the Alberta and Canadian economies.

But it's happening under a royalty regime of a token 1% until the capital costs are fully paid out.

And with conventional oil and gas declining, Albertans could soon find themselves in a revenue squeeze.

Unlike the bubble in the 1980's this is a serious crisis in oil and gas stock and refining capacity. We are hitting the peak oil in reserves of conventional oil and the price will only go up. While good for Alberta in the short term, it will quickly become a burden as we wait for Tar Sands and Coal Bed Gas production to take up the slack. And we have only a decade.

Focus: Oil

It is the great liberator that has changed the course of history. But it has brought misery as well as wealth, and the latest global convulsions triggered by this corrupting substance show how perilous is the world's dependence on it. By Adrian Hamilton

The end of the oil era is upon us. Soon oil output from conventional sources will peak. The strain will then have to be taken by other fuel sources and changes in demand. What we don't know is how high the price will have to go and how great the supply shocks will be before we get there; whether the market alone will effect a solution or whether governments will have to act to suppress demand and preserve supplies.


Crude slips on forecasts of slowing global growth; Venezuela predicts higher prices
Canadian Press
September 16, 2005

Although crude oil prices are more than $6 US lower than the record of $70.85 US set Aug. 30, prices remain nearly 50 per cent higher compared to this time last year. Yet South America's biggest producer, Venezuela, warned that oil prices could reach $100 US a barrel because of the world's limited reserves. Venezuela - an OPEC member and South America's largest producer - said prices could rise to $100 US per barrel because members of the 11-country cartel are pumping at near capacity, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said Thursday. "OPEC is practically already at its production ceiling," Chavez told reporters at a UN summit in New York. "The problem is the oil reserves are running out," said Chavez, whose comments were carried by Venezuelan state television. "It is a true crisis." Venezuela is the world's fifth-largest oil exporter, a major fuel supplier to the United States and one of few countries with proven reserves. Rising demand, primarily from the United States and China, has been blamed for the tight supplies worldwide.

Katrina: It's a Dog-Gone Crime

Coming to the rescue in a dog-eat-dog world
Gary Mason, Globe and Mail, Sept. 12, 2005

This Online article needs a subscription, so I thought I would provide a transcript of some of the major points it makes,about animal resuce in the Aftermath of Katrina.

If the rescue of humans was completely disorganized the rescue of companion animals was even more so.

Add to that the refusal of Buses and other evacuation transportation to take companion animals on board, what's with that?

Another question is, while a lot of focus has been on dogs, what about the other companion animals, cats, birds, etc.


Ethan Gurney on a seperate boat climbs into the putrid water and heads toward the open window. He hoists himself inside while the pit bulls snarl viciously inside. "They had them locked in a room with no water, no food. It had to be 90 degrees in there." the two men bring the dogs onto the front porch where we have placed a bowl of water and some dog food, which are devoured in less than a minute. The rescuers slowly and cautiously begin petting them and eventually scratch behind their ears while whispering, "that a boy", "good doggie","yeah that tastes good, doesn't it?" Soon both the dogs, both of them bearing disfiguring scars that suggest they had been used to fight, are licking the hands and faces of their rescuerers. They are no longer aggressive but instead two scared animals profoundly thankfullfor the kindness they have been shown.

For those of you from Ontario please note that the appreciation two pit bulls used in dog fights, gave to their rescuers, sort of makes you wonder about that Anti-Pit Bull legislation Ontario passed. There are no Bad Breeds just Bad Owners (as in this animal is my property, chattel slave, etc.). Ontario Bans Pit Bulls

Ten thousands have died, not people but pets, companion animals and the death toll can only go up because the rescue operations have been bogged down by bueracracy and the negligence and incompetance at all levels of government. There was no animal rescue plan, and in the aftermath of this disaster there still is no plan! In fact the old bureacratic machinery of local, state and federal agencies are blocking rescue attempts with red tape .

Because of Katreina many have already died or will soon if not rescued. It's a number that Paul Berry, who is directing the Best Friends operation here, estimates will be in the tens of thousands. And as poorly organized as the rescue operation to save humans here was, the one to save animals has been worse. You see there wasn't a plan. "It's a disaster and a national disgrace" says Mr. Berry. "The national agencies FEMA, the Humane Society, someone should have been in control of animal welfare but it didn't happen."

Imagine this many people who evacuated their homes brought along their pets. But when the buses arrived to take the residents to shelters they were told they had to leave their animals behind---right there on the highway. Consequently , there were upward of 1,000 pets, mostly dogs, roaming the freeway there. Several were hit by cars and killed. There have also been reports of dogs being rounded up and shot by the authorities.

The emergency response NOW, two weeks late, to the plight of animals left behind has even gotten local humane soicities involved.
City animal shelter workers to join animal rescue effort
Gordon Kent The Edmonton Journal
Wednesday, September 14, 2005

Ontario women rescue Louisiana dogs

September 18, 2005

CAMBRIDGE, Ont.-- Fifteen dogs that survived hurricane Katrina are still alive thanks to two southwestern Ontario women.

Bonnie Deekon and her friend Meg Brubacher rescued the dogs from an Alexandria, La., shelter this week, north of New Orleans.

The women left for the devastated area in a van, donated by the University of Guelph, on Sept. 7 and just returned to Cambridge.

The pups don't know how close they came to death.

Shelters are so packed with animals left homeless from hurricane Katrina that several are euthanized every hour.

The dogs - seven puppies and eight adults - are now being put up for adoption.

And stupid red tape of the United States Department of Agriculture is NOT helping.

Humane Society of Louisiana president helps pet-rescue efforts from afar

Animals another component in need of hurricane relief

Dogfight brewing over Katrina's furry victims

NEW ORLEANS — If Cindy Healer has her way, 50 dogs and cats rescued from the homes and streets of this devastated city will be loaded into a moving van and driven to Texas, where they'll find refuge at the Humane Society/SPCA of Bexar County.



Animal rescue volunteer Larry Roberts, of Atlanta, carries a dog out of a yard in New Orleans. The animal was suffering from dehydration.

Many of the animals, trapped in homes, have gone two weeks without nourishment. Some, in dire need of medical care, barely cling to life.

"Half these animals were locked in homes and they're emaciated," said Healer, director of operations at the Humane Society. "They need to get out of the state."

It's not clear if authorities will permit that. A spokesman with the U.S. Department of Agriculture said authorities are becoming increasingly concerned some rescue groups are taking animals across state lines without regard for whether the animals were someone's beloved pets.

"They're picking up people's pets and assuming that, because the animals were loose, they were abandoned, but that's not (necessarily) the case," said Larry Hawkins, a USDA spokesman.

Hawkins said transporting animals out of state would complicate efforts to reunite animals with their owners.

He said his agency, working with the Humane Society of the United States and the Louisiana Society for the Protection Against Cruelty to Animals, is deciding how much time to allow evacuated residents to claim their animals from shelters before they're allowed to be put up for adoption.


To help out with the rescue of Katrina's forgotten victims contact:

www.bestfriends.org

www.noahswish.org

And if the treatment of companion animals has been outrageous well there was no plan to evacuate confined sea mammals from the Aquarium in New Orleans.

Swept from aquarium pool, dolphins found alive offshore

By Beth Daley, Globe Staff | September 14, 2005

Eight bottlenose dolphins that were washed out of their Mississippi aquarium pool during Hurricane Katrina have been found alive, huddled together in the fetid waters off Gulfport, Miss. Now, deeply worried about the dolphins' chances of survival, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration officials and aquarium biologists are racing to rescue the weak and wounded animals -- some of which have never before ventured into the wild.

''These animals found us, they came back after Katrina . . . they came home," said Moby Solangi, director of the Marine Life Oceanarium in Gulfport. ''All eight are together. It's the most wonderful news."

Established in 1956, the facility suffered catastrophic damage in the storm. Along with the dolphins, 19 sea lions were swept out of their pools when a giant storm surge engulfed the Oceanarium. Five of them are missing.

On the other hand to give credit where credit is due the New Orleans Zoo had a plan, one that was even better than the one the city had for it's citizens!

New Orleans zoo animals survive Katrina's wrath

04 Sep 2005 21:40:59 GMT

Source: Reuters
By Mark BabineckNEW ORLEANS, Aug 4 (Reuters) - Thousands of people are feared dead in the rubble of storm-shattered New Orleans, but at the New Orleans zoo only three of its 1,400 animals died in the wrath of Hurricane Katrina. The famous Audubon Zoo has the good fortune of being located on some of the city's highest ground, but it also had a disaster plan for the animals that worked better than the city's plan for humans. It suffered no serious flooding, but the storm's fierce winds toppled several large trees and knocked down branches throughout the 52-acre (21-hectare) grounds. The only fatalities so far were two otters and a raccoon, zoo curator Dan Maloney said on Sunday. Fourteen staffers stayed at the zoo to care for the animals throughout the storm and the aftermath that has left New Orleans in ruins. "We stayed here because the animals can't leave," he said. "We were almost done with our ark and were training the animals to march in two-by-two, but we just didn't make it."

The Return of Right To Work

With the usual predictability the right wing corporate think tank the Fraser Institute blows the dust off their old humbug of right to work labour law reform.
In 1997 they published the usual right wing attack on unions accusing them for declines in productivity: Unionization and Economic Performance: Evidence on Productivity, Profits, Investment, and Growth

In 1999 they published the usual attack on minimum wages: The Economics of Minimum Wage Laws

They have released yet another study comparing apples and oranges.

In this case the labour relations in Canada which are Rand Formula, and the labour relations in the US which are Taft Hartely. No freeriders in Canadian unions, everyone pays dues, while in the US its all right to work, sic, which does not mean full employment, but rather favours the bosses in keeping unions out of the workplace.

Yet another American foibel that the Fraser Institute would like to ship north of the border.

This is supposedly a think tank and policy wonk institute for the right wing business interests in Canada, and they can do no better than come up with Canada Bad USA Good.

So it should be no surprize that these simpiltons come up with Unions Bad, Bosses Good.

The Fraser Institute: Media Release; 
Unbalanced Labour Laws and a Large Public Sector
Key Reasons for Canada's High Unionization Rate

VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA--(CCNMatthews - Aug. 31, 2005) - A larger
public sector and biased labour laws are key reasons for Canada's high
unionization rate, which is more than twice that of the United States,
according to Explaining Canada's High Unionization Rates, released today
by The Fraser Institute.

In 2004, the unionization rate in Canada was 31.8 percent, significantly
higher than the United States' 13.8 percent.

According to the authors, differences in labour relations law-the
regulations that govern the interactions between employers and their
employees and union representatives-have a particularly strong influence
on unionization rates.

The second aspect of labour laws seen to influence unionization rates
was allowing mandatory dues payments to be part of collective
agreements. All Canadian provinces, in one way or another, allow the
inclusion of mandatory union dues in collective agreements. This
provides unions with a secure source of revenue and the ongoing
resources needed to promote collective representation.

Clemens pointed out that the United States, on the other hand, only
allows partial mandatory dues payments; U.S. workers covered by
collective agreements cannot be required to pay union dues for political
and social initiatives that are unrelated to representation under the
collective agreement. In addition, 22 U.S. states-the so-called
Right-to-Work states-have expanded the U.S. law to prohibit any
mandatory dues payment as a condition of employment.

The Right-to-Work states maintain much lower average rates of
unionization (8.2 percent), than other states (16.2 percent) and the
Canadian total (31.8 percent).

"There are stark differences in unionization rates between not only
Canada and the U.S. but also between Right-to-Work and non-RTW states,"
commented Clemens. "Clearly, the ability of workers to voluntarily
choose to financially support union activities has a dramatic impact on
unionization rates."

The final area of labour laws reviewed in the study was mandatory union
membership clauses; no Canadian jurisdiction prohibits mandatory union
membership clauses while all U.S. states prohibit such requirements.

In 1996 the Fraser Institute and the National Citizens Coalition (NCC) jointly launched a campaign in Alberta to try and get Right To Work instituted into the provincial labour code. The resistance of unions and unionized employers defeated their efforts. Not before they created Canadians Against Forced Unionization, sic, CAFU. I like the FU part, it really says it all. The Fraser Institute provided a former intern student as chair of CAFU, which was funded by and a lobbying arm of the NCC, he is thecurrent Conservative MP Rob Anders from Calgary. The RTW study doen by the Fraser Institute in 95 was by Fasil Mahil who is currently an Editor with the National Post. And the past director of the NCC is no stranger to Canadians, its Stephen Harper leader of the Conservative Party of Canada.

If these guys say one more thing about the liberal left dominating politics and media in Canada I think I will vomit.

I produced this poster at the time in response to CAFU.

RIGHT TO WORK?

NO THANKS.

ABOLISH WORK!

WORKERS AGAINST FORCED LABOUR

Time For The Four Hour Day

And the Four Day Week.


While surfing I came across this interesting site on an alternative to downsizing workers, downsizing the work day. See links below.

Not a new idea but one that resurfaces when whenever capitalism adopts new technology to reduce labour costs. As Dr. Marx pointed out the class struggle is all about reducing the work day.

This began with the 10 hour movement during the late 19th Century, and quickly grew into the 8 hour movement. You know the saying, "The Weekend,brought to you by the Labour Movement".

The Syndicalist movement in North America called for a 4 hour work day. This was advanced by the IWW in the 1920's!!!. In the 1920's folks. 75 years ago. And today folks are working two jobs and most are working 44-50 hours a week to make ends meet.

Work time has increased, while wages have decreased in real money, and work has become contracted out and precarious.

In the 1930's the Progressive Labour Party and others in the labour movement called for a 32 hour work week, in otherwords a four day week. Even this revisionist demand was met with capitalist distain. Today France has a 35 hour work week which was not without controversy.

Today as more workers are laid off, the Canadian Autoworkers Union has fought and bargianed against forced overtime in favour of increased jobs.

We still hear from folks who offer the 32 hour week as their minimum demand, and thats the problem, its a minimum, and even then capitalism has not embraced it with anymore enthusiaism than the 4 hour day and the 4 day week.

Reducing Working Time

The European Union (EU) Directive on working time (Directive 93/104/EC) required member states to introduce national legislation that would reduce working time to a weekly average of forty eight (48) hours in a year. The 'Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997' has transposed the EU Directive into law in Ireland. This new law has impacted on the dependence that enterprises can have on excessive overtime working. It also reduces the maximum number of hours that employees are allowed to work. In this context both employers and unions are exploring the possible potential of combining changes in work organisation with changes in the pattern of working hours. While employers and unions can have different aims for any reorganisation of work and working time, a recognition of the interdependence of these aims should provide a basis for joint examination of what can be done. In short, the chances for employees to improve guaranteed earnings while working fewer hours are likely to be better if working time can be more effectively matched with the actual needs of the enterprise.

Another group influenced by the IWW and North American Syndicalism was Technocracy Inc. which also adopted the idea that the MAXIMUM labour required to maintain an advanced industrial society is wait for it, yep, a 4 hour day, 4 days a week.

The Price System be abolished, and be replaced with an Energy Credit”-system. The Energy Credit is an electronic distribution unit of which the value is determined by the resources which the system could distribute to it’s clients, and the costs is equivalent with the production costs – because profit is eliminated. The investments could instead be developed through the total independence and autarchy of the system, and in time, the system will be impossible to destroy. The Energy Credit could never be bartered, loaned, speculated, inflated, stolen or be misused for corrupt purposes, because it’s value and areas of legitimacy is fixated. All inhabitants within the borders of the Technate are given a standard income of energy credits, free residence of living, free means of communication, free clothes, free food, free healthcare, free education, and free recreation. The work time is 4 hours a day, 4 days a week, but it will in each case be a hard task to give everyone a job, but that is not a problem, because everyone will prosper and survive, work or no work. “Machines work, humans play”, as one of the mottos sound.

For a larger picture of this chart click here.

The Passing Of The Wage Slave

The Mystery of Money G. D. KOE, CHQ • 1938

The machine is here to stay. It is emancipating the wage slaves who in ever increasing numbers are becoming like the lilies of the field: they toil not, neither do they spin. The machine does not strike nor talk back and it requires no relief when unemployed. If you wish to continue your Price System you will have to breed a new race of men, men that can lie fallow for a season, or can be stored away in warehouses till they are required.

Human labor means wages. Wages means purchasing power. Purchasing power means profits and profits means savings. Savings mean more and more means of production. And so round and round the endless chain of the Price System. Men work so that they may consume, and consume so that they may have strength to work some more so that they may continue to consume, while close behind comes the grim spectre of scarcity. To protect themselves they saved themselves into the jaws of unemployment. Savings built machines.

When electric power came, human labor lost. Electric power works twenty-four hours and it draws no wages, but the owners pile up savings. More savings, more machines, more production, more machines, less wages, less purchasing power, less employment, larger relief rolls, over production. Still more dividends are being paid and still more savings are being added to the debt structure. A considerable part of the population have become paupers but they have to be clothed and fed that the Price System might still be operated and savings steadily increased. Production slowed down. Fewer new machines for a time and a steadily increasing liquidity in the banks and financial institutions.

Today, liquidity is approaching its maximum and soon the banks, insurance companies, and financial houses will fade quietly away, except as governmental institutions. They cannot earn enough to pay their overhead and must go into voluntary liquidation or they will fail. Any industrialist that does not modernize his equipment (and that means mechanize) must shut up shop. With an ever increasing velocity the Price System approaches its inevitable end. The Price System is a gigantic debt system and the cancellation of debt is but the foundations of that System crumbling into dust. It is wisdom to make your choice now, before you come to the parting of the ways. Then it may-be too late. Which will you have? Chaos or Science? Scarcity or abundance? Disorder or order? Death or life? The choice is yours; but the necessity for the choice cannot long be delayed. Technocracy alone, offers life.

Note this was written in 1938 when automobile production, called Fordism, was rapidly industrializing America as it is now doing in China and has done in the newly developing industrial economies of Korea and the post war development of Japan.

And speaking of Ford he already introduced the idea of increased wages for less work with his new mode of production, of course to encourage increased consumption of his product, and to control his workers by keeping the unions out.

From World's Work, October 1926 pp. 613-616.

HENRY FORD: Why I Favor Five Days' Work With Six Days' Pay

The automobile manufacturer in this authorized interview tells Mr. Crowther why he reduced the working week in Ford plants all over the world to forty hours with no cut in pay*

We now face a political economy of outsourcing and contracting out work, flexible working conditions where you are expected to 'multi-task', which is deskilling of the workforce yet making us pliable for being multi use cogs in the machine of capital production. And yet we still have unemployment, and we are working more for less, and for longer hours.

Yet the society in which we live could provide abundance for all. Strange that.

As Dr. Marx points out in his work the Grundrisse, as automation increases, and allows for greater freedom of the worker, the capitalist system cannot adapt fast enough forcing the workers to give up their lesisure time, in favour of either wage slavery or unemployment.

Surplus value in general is value in excess of the equivalent. The equivalent, by definition, is only the identity of value with itself. Hence surplus value can never sprout out of the equivalent; nor can it do so originally out of circulation; it has to arise from the production process of capital itself. The matter can also be expressed in this way: if the worker needs only half a working day in order to live a whole day, then, in order to keep alive as a worker, he needs to work only half a day. The second half of the labour day is forced labour; surplus-labour. What appears as surplus value on capital's side appears identically on the worker's side as surplus labour in excess of his requirements as worker, hence in excess of his immediate requirements for keeping himself alive. The great historic quality of capital is to create this surplus labour, superfluous labour from the standpoint of mere use value, mere subsistence; and its historic destiny [Bestimmung] is fulfilled as soon as, on one side, there has been such a development of needs that surplus labour above and beyond necessity has itself become a general need arising out of individual needs themselves—and, on the other side, when the severe discipline of capital, acting on succeeding generations [Geschlechter], has developed general industriousness as the general property of the new species [Geschlecht]—and, finally, when the development of the productive powers of labour, which capital incessantly whips onward with its unlimited mania for wealth, and of the sole conditions in which this mania can be realized, have flourished to the stage where the possession and preservation of general wealth require a lesser labour time of society as a whole, and where the labouring society relates scientifically to the process of its progressive reproduction, its reproduction in a constantly greater abundance; hence where labour in which a human being does what a thing could do has ceased. Accordingly, capital and labour relate to each other here like money and commodity; the former is the general form of wealth, the other only the substance destined for immediate consumption. Capital's ceaseless striving towards the general form of wealth drives labour beyond the limits of its natural paltriness [Naturbedürftigkeit], and thus creates the material elements for the development of the rich individuality which is as all-sided in its production as in its consumption, and whose labour also therefore appears no longer as labour, but as the full development of activity itself, in which natural necessity in its direct form has disappeared; because a historically created need has taken the place of the natural one. This is why capital is productive; i.e. an essential relation for the development of the social productive forces. It ceases to exist as such only where the development of these productive forces themselves encounters its barrier in capital itself.

The Times of November 1857 contains an utterly delightful cry of outrage on the part of a West-Indian plantation owner. This advocate analyses with great moral indignation—as a plea for the re-introduction of Negro slavery—how the Quashees (the free blacks of Jamaica) content themselves with producing only what is strictly necessary for their own consumption, and, alongside this 'use value', regard loafing (indulgence and idleness) as the real luxury good; how they do not care a damn for the sugar and the fixed capital invested in the plantations, but rather observe the planters' impending bankruptcy with an ironic grin of malicious pleasure, and even exploit their acquired Christianity as an embellishment for this mood of malicious glee and indolence. They have ceased to be slaves, but not in order to become wage labourers, but, instead, self-sustaining peasants working for their own consumption. As far as they are concerned, capital does not exist as capital, because autonomous wealth as such can exist only either on the basis of direct forced labour, slavery, or indirect forced labour, wage labour. Wealth confronts direct forced labour not as capital, but rather as relation of domination [Herrschaftsverhältnis]; thus, the relation of domination is the only thing which is reproduced on this basis, for which wealth itself has value only as gratification, not as wealth itself, and which can therefore never create general industriousness. (We shall return to this relation of slavery and wage labour.)

It is time to take back our time from the machine, not through reforms like increased paternity leaves paid for out of EI, but in actual time to be with our families and friends by reducing our work time. Not adapting to flexible organisation of the workplace, where we 'job shre', that is share our poverty, our waged work. But rather the fight for the 4 hour day in the 4 hour week for 40 hours pay, is not a utopian ideal but a radical demand upon the system of capitalism.

Capital adapts such demands with its illusionary flexible working conditions for the professional classes. These are based on salaried wages, and give the illusion of a beneficient and paternalistic management in the workplace. In reality it is NOT the reduction of work time, nor its radical transformation into playtime. It is simply the sharing of surplus value time, at our own expense.

Or in the case of working from home, here the benefits of daycare, etc. are absorbed by the worker, costs that would normally acrue to the capitalist and his state.

Just as in self employment, the very basis of the wage slavery of the mercantile classes, which includes trades men, white collar managers, owners of fast food franchises, etc. the classic petit-bourgoise, here we now have the contracting out and privatization of public sector jobs to a sector that now must pay the burden of benefits and insurance, and pensions, out of their own pocket with not employer contribution. Hence most don't and end up destitute later on due to accidents, health problems, or catastrophic personal financial burderns. Thus the self employed are the self deluded, thinking they are no longer wage slaves.

This is one of the consequences of downsizing. The other is the quick capitalization and valorization of the business as the workers are disposed of but their surplus value is kept. Wages, benefits, pension funds, all are disposed of as liquid capital, which is why after downsizing corporations see their share price rise on Wall Street. Regardless of the socio economic grouping that gets laid off, waged employees, salaried employees, white collar, blue collar, support staff, production staff, distribution staff, or management.

All are one class; the wage slaves to the machine of capital.

New Study Reveals One in Three Americans Are Chronically Overworked
Triggers for Overwork and Solutions for Workplace Stress are Explored

Key Study Data

• One in three American employees are chronically overworked.
• 54 percent of American employees have felt overwhelmed at some time in the past month by how much work they had to complete.
• 29 percent of employees spend a lot of time doing work that they consider a waste of time. These employees are more likely to be overworked.
• 79 percent of employees had access to paid vacations in 2004.
• More than one-third of employees (36 percent) had not and were not planning to take their full vacation.
• On average, American workers take 14.6 vacation days annually.
• Most employees take short vacations, with 37 percent taking fewer than seven days.
• Only 14 percent of employees take vacations of two weeks or more.
• Among employees who take one to three days off (including weekends), 68 percent return feeling relaxed compared with 85 percent who take seven or more days (including weekends).
• Only 8 percent of employees who are not overworked experience symptoms of clinical depression compared with 21 percent of those who are highly overworked.

Study: Reducing hours isn’t always a career killer

By Kathy Gurchiek

Choosing to cut your workload to three or four days a week is not a career killer for top-level employees, according to Crafting Lives that Work: A Six-Year Retrospective on Reduced-Load Work in the Careers and Lives of Professionals and Managers, a study that was released Feb. 16. 2005

“Many leading employers have been formally and informally offering alternative work arrangements such as reduced-load work for many years,” according to the executive summary of the report by McGill State University, Canada’s leading research-intensive university, and Michigan State University (MSU).

“However, little research has been conducted on how choosing to use these new ways of working affects individuals, their careers, and their families over time.”

The study followed up with 81 of the original 87 salaried, nonunionized participants interviewed in 1996 to 1998 who voluntarily cut back from full-time to part-time status at 43 companies in the United States and Canada. Ages ranged from 33 to 58. Men were included, but most participants were women, and the typical one was 45, married, a manager, and had reduced her workload to 66 percent of full time.

Nearly half of those working part time were still doing so six years later, and most of those no longer working a reduced schedule wanted to return to it, according to the study, funded by the nonprofit philanthropic Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.

In addition, it found that a significantly higher percentage of those working reduced work schedules had elder care responsibilities, family health problems or major personal health problems compared to those working full time. A high commitment to family and the need or desire to spend time with their children were the reasons why more than half of the participants continued working a reduced schedule.

Timesizing versus Downsizing
we address the two biggest questions of our times:
(1) When introducing technology, how, without makework, can CEOs avoid downsizing employees & the consumer markets they represent? (2) Then how do we shift from maximizing consumption to save the economy, to minimizing consumption to save the planet?
Two answers, two 'gears'. (1) Timesizing = trim workweeks, not workforce & consumer base; make not taxpayer-support but self-support easier; re-employ & re-activate all marginalized consumers. (2) Once everyone is included in the worksharing system, economic growth becomes optional instead of desperately needed, because for the first time growth can be limited without starving the now well-employed 'poor'. So we then cut the workweek further to downshift production & consumption and "save the planet," that is, ecosystems and the whole biosphere.

The big picture & the-time-trilogy

We had a lot of help, but not from standard economists. They hate people like us. We're mavericks. Most of us are indeed dreaded "autodidacts" - self-taught people with no particular stake in any particular economic conclusion - except that maybe our whole economic juggernaut could be a lot more "win-win" than it is. Charlie Kindleberger, despite being personally a nice Ray Bolger-type of guy and a bit of an outsider himself (an American historical economist is a rare bird), said, with reference to Jane Jacobs, "All of us hate these autodidacts." (Warsh, Economic Principles, 396.) One of us autodidacts didn't get translated into English for 162 years (Sismondi).

OK, part of our problem is that we're not win-win with standard economists. We badmouth them. Jane Jacobs says economics is a "fool's paradise" and what's needed now is a wholesale rethinking of the field, a "trip back to reality." (Warsh, 396.) Joan Robinson called economics a branch of theology! And Sismondi opposed economic systems and all forms of dogmatism. But let's face it, standard economists deserve it.

We discovered that over the years, indeed the centuries, there were other autodidacts and mavericks who went over much of the same ground as us ("us" is maverick-correct here, an English disjunctive attested in Chaucer) and they laid down a pretty good foundation. In the last 20 years, Ben Hunnicutt. In the 1950s, Nobel-reject John Kenneth Galbraith. Art Dahlberg and Ed Filene in the 1930s. Lord Leverhulme (a "Lever Brother") and Stephen Leacock (a Canadian Mark Twain) in the nineteen-teens. Thorstein Veblen in the 1890s. Jean-Charles Sismondi in the early 1800s and Sir William Petty in the 1600s - see our bibliography. There are probably a lot more but they're tough to find because the mainstream does little or nothing to publicize them. None of these people get Nobels. Guess they make in-the-box thinkers uneasy. Kindleberger went on to say, "We are in the business of teaching people, and we want them to learn our stuff, not make it up." Sounds like primitive territoriality.

Another Canadian Site is:

Welcome to the TimeWork Web: the limitation of the working day is a preliminary condition without which all further attempts at improvement and emancipation must prove abortive.

And of course they have created a Workless Party, Parteee..the site is located in BC which is a wonderful land to want to work less in and play more.

I could party for that.

"Workers of the world - RELAX !!!!"

Work Less Party

Work Less, Consume Less, Live More!!!

240-Minute Man

Gabe Sinclair Has Seen the Future, and It Includes a Four-Hour Workday

By Michael Anft

Baltimore City Paper: 240-Minute Man (March 21 - March 27, 2001)

THE IDEA

At the beginning of the last century, the tractor and the assembly line revolutionized the American economy. The eight-hour workday and the forty-hour week soon prevailed as a natural consequence of these innovations.

The computer and other minor miracles have since opened glorious opportunities for a further reduction of our drudgery, yet nothing of the kind has happened. Modern life remains a headlong rush into long commutes, two-income families, late nights at work, and exhausting recreation. How could this be? What is it about our collective personality that drives us over this cliff of endless rat race?

The Four-hour Day Foundation exists to assemble a particular coalition of people prepared to question the fundamental assumptions of how we labor and how we distribute our immense wealth. Two percent of Americans now grow all of our food and then some. Another thirty million or so do all the mining, manufacturing, and construction. If this minority can produce our modern cornucopia, then the four-hour day is within easy reach. If we can rearrange world politics so as to honestly collaborate with other nations, anything is possib

DeBeers versus the Bushmen

Diamonds are not a Bushmans best friend.



Away from the prying eyes of the world, the last remaining Kalahari Bushmen, or San people of Botswana, are being starved of food and water in a bid to force them off the land their forefathers have roamed for the past 30,000 years.
This is the final chapter in a 17-year saga which has seen the relocation of some 2,200 San out of the Central Kalahari Game Reserve (CKGR) into resettlement camps by the Botswana Government.

According to the Reporters segment BBC World Report DeBeers and diamonds have been responsible for the forceable removal of all but 200 Kalahari Deseert Bushmen from their land by the Botsawana Government.

Bushmen fight for homeland

If you have ever taken an introductory Anthropolgy course, the Kalahari Bushmen are the first case study you read about. The Kung and San are stone age peoples who live in the South African Desert. For that time they have lived as hunters and gathers and give us an insight into our ancestors.

Now the Botswana government has forcely removed them from their ancestoral lands, lands they own, in order to "modernize" them, you know make them consumers and landless workers under capitalism.

Bushmen mourn lost lifestyle

The Government is claiming it wants to protect the Desert Wildlife preserve where the Bushmen live. However that reserve is also the Bushmen's territorial land, whats left of it. They are of course claiming that this area should be free from human habitation, even the humans who have lived there for the past 30,000 years. As for environmental concerns, the Bushmen using traditional methods of hunting and gathering are an important part of the ecology of the desert. With them present animal life has increased, through proper human culling. Without them well that should be obvious even to the Botswana government.

And like other aboriginal peoples those who have been forced into the new concrete concentration camps the Botswana reserves the Bushmen have been introduced to modernization through forced schooling, unemployment, and hanging at the local bar. So AIDs and Alcholism the diseases of modern capitlaism are now running rampant through the community, a community that had never known these diseases mere years ago.



And it all has to do with DeBeers and their lust for diamonds. For under the much needed to be protected wildlife preserve of the the Kalahari lays a vast store house of diamonds.

Bushmen 'moved for diamonds'

And rather than deal with the inconvincance of dealing with the real owners of the land, the Bushmen, they deal with the State and allow their pals in the Botswana government do the dirty work.

Yep ain't capitalism grand.


Living as part of nature-The hunter gatherer lifestyle of the Kalahari Bushmen epitomises what many consider to be the closest relationship with nature that humans can have. Laurens van der Post made the Bushmen famous in his book the Lost World of the Kalahari in which he depicted them as living in some idyllic Eden. He even ate with them from a tree he called the tree of knowledge.



The Kalahari Bushmen

The Bushmen are a group of nomadic hunter-gatherers who are believed to be descendents of the first inhabitants of South Africa, with records dating back 30,000 years. Also known as the San or Basarwa, the Bushmen are a unique group of people with a distinct culture, language, and lifestyle.

Life of the Bushmen
The hardiness of the Bushmen has allowed them to adapt to various changes. They have had to deal with the encroachment of modern civilization with its huge cities, large farms, and grazing cattle as well as the persecution of governments attempting to relocate and "educate" the Bushmen. This hardiness has allowed the Bushmen to survive in the harsh conditions of the Kalahari, where some still reside today.

Being hunter-gatherers, the Bushmen were mainly concerned with survival. They are renowned for being master trackers and hunters, using cleverly designed bows and arrows to kill animals. As trackers, the Bushmen are able to follow the tracks of an animal across virtually any terrain, and they are able to distinguish the tracks of a wounded animal. Traditionally, men hunted while the women gathered, but it is not uncommon for women to assist in the hunt and men to help in the gathering of edible plants.

Since the Bushmen lived off the land, they were unable to stay in one place. They needed to move constantly from one place to another, but they were never reckless in their wandering. The Bushmen carefully mapped out their annual route, plotting a course that would take them to areas where the food had recently ripened.

Art and Dance of the Bushmen
The Bushmen love to draw. They have created rock paintings all over southern Africa, in an estimated 50,000 sites. Early historians believed the paintings depicted everyday life but, on the contrary, the paintings held a deep spiritual and religious meaning.

Experts now believe that many of the paintings were closely associated with the Bushmen medicine man, also known as a shaman. A shaman is someone who enters a trance in order to perform a variety of functions, such as healing the sick and wounded and ensuring good hunting. The rock paintings were a result of these trances, as the shamans sought to depict their visions.



Dancing also plays a big part in the Bushmen culture. The trance dance is a ritual dance performed only when someone is ill. A fire is lit and the women sit around it in a circle. The dancers, mostly men, then start dancing in a circle around the women while the women sing, clap and tend to the fire. The first few hours are relaxed and sociable, but once a dancer enters a trance, the clapping and singing intensify and the shaman begins the healing process.

The rain dance is similar to the trance dance, but the whole event is much more relaxed. If you're lucky, you may be able to witness one of these spectacular events, or you may even be asked to join.

Visiting the Bushmen
Today, many of the Bushmen have been driven off their native lands to make room for mining and farming operations. A majority of the population are no longer hunter-gatherers. Instead, they work on farms or ranches, but all is not lost. People working for the preservation of the Bushmen culture have realized that tourism may be their path to salvation. Tours are available that allow you to visit the Bushmen and experience the hunter-gatherer lifestyle. You will be able to participate in hunts, gather edible plants, and witness the wonder of a ritual dance. And with that money, the Bushmen hope to be able to keep their land, preserve their culture and continue their historical survival.



some photos from: Kalahari by Dennis White

It's Time to Take Back Our Oil and Gas

Nationalize Oil and the Oil Industry
Under Community and Workers Control

Nationalize oil firms, almost half of Canadians say

Montreal — Almost half of Canadians wanted to see their petroleum resources and their gas companies nationalized as fuel prices hit record levels, a new poll suggests.

The Leger Marketing telephone survey of 1,500 people was conducted between Aug. 24 and Aug. 31, the bulk being done before the devastating effects of hurricane Katrina were felt.

n the Leger poll, which was provided to The Canadian Press, 49 per cent of respondents wanted petroleum resources nationalized while 43 per cent said they would like to see the same fate for gas companies.

Quebeckers were the strongest supporters of resource nationalization at 67 per cent, followed by residents of the Atlantic provinces at 53 per cent, Ontarians at 45 per cent and British Columbia at 42 per cent.

Forty per cent of respondents on the Prairies and 36 per cent of Albertans were in favour. Among those opposed, Albertans led the way at 49 per cent followed by British Columbians at 39 per cent.

Quebec led in support for nationalization of oil companies, with 61 per cent in favour, followed by the Atlantic provinces (46 per cent). Alberta was most opposed at 59 per cent, followed by the Prairies (49 per cent), B.C. 46 per cent and Ontario, 41 per cent.

We need to seriously look at the success Venezuala has had with its nationalization under workers control for a model of what to do in Canada with our Gas and Oil Reserves, the majority being in Alberta, and the American Oil companies.

In this case it should not be about the Federal Government owning the resources, but the people, under a Prodhounian share capital model, with workers on the boards of directors and acting along with the public as share owners of the nationalized industry.

First Nations peoples need to have a direct ownership in the resources, which are all situated on their lands and which they have not been compensated for by the Provincial government.

And as the Globe and Mail reported this spring; Crude awakening
The world's thirst is not sustainable as experts predict an imminent decline and fall in oil production. In this seven-day series, the Globe investigates what awaits the world as the reserves dry up.

In this age of Peak Oil, with a decline in reserves that will bottom out in 2010-2020 the price of oil and gas will only continue to rise. Despite the previous two oil driven recessions, 1974 and 1984, that was not about declining reserve stocks, but about at the well head price increases by OPEC. Today with China, India and other newly industrialized (read Fordist automobile production) countries vying with the US for market share of oil and gas, prices will continue to rise. See the Economist article below.

This rise in oil and gas prices has effectively made the Alberta Tar Sands a viable economic operation. While it has put royalties and tax funds into the Alberta economy giving us ten years of surpluses, in actuality Alberta Royalties and Taxes from Oil and Gas are the lowest in the world. In fact we make more money in VLT's and Tabacco taxes then we make off the Tar Sands.

This is the essential reason that our resources need to be taken out of the hands of the State, in this case the Alberta Government, and put back in the hands of the people, us the citizens, the first nations, and the workers who construct, produce and deliver the oil and gas.

The success of Petrocan which the Liberals just sold off the last Federal investment in, proves that a nationalized oil company can weather the storms of volatile markets.

And there is the irony as the Edmonton Sun editorial below points out. That in order to fund its Kyoto targets the Liberals cut their nose to spite their face and sold off the public's shareholdings in Petro Canada as oil prices began to skyrocket.

Clearly we cannot trust politicians whether Ralph or Paul, to keep the public's best interests in mind. It will take real public ownership of our oil and gas resources as well as the secondary, tertiary production, refining and distribution to benefit all of us.

Gas prices ease, but not before new record reached

CALGARY -- Gasoline prices across Canada and the United States are expected to ebb this week from their current record levels, but the worst may be yet to come for the cost of heating oil.

As of yesterday morning, the nationwide average cost of a litre of regular gasoline jumped by 22 cents -- a record -- to $1.26, also a record, according to a weekly survey from M.J. Ervin & Associates Inc. that substantiated earlier anecdotal reports of surging prices.

The sudden and rapid rise in the cost of gasoline sparked calls for government regulation or investigation into the oil industry

The highest prices were recorded in Newfoundland, which also regulates the cost of gasoline. Gander had posted prices of $1.496 a litre, while St. John's was slightly lower at $1.481 a litre.

The single largest increase was in PEI; for free-market prices, the biggest jump was in St. Catharines, Ont., where the cost of gas jumped 35 cents a litre to $1.334.

Drivers in Edmonton were the least worst off in the country. Prices rose by 11.5 cents to $1.098 in the Alberta capital, where lower provincial taxes keep down the cost of a fill-up.

The smallest increase was in Whitehorse, where prices barely budged, rising just 0.8 cents to $1.175 a litre.

From Thunder Bay westward, price increases were much more muted, with no city recording a rise of more than 16.9 cents a litre, well below the national average.

The Edmonton Journal Friday, September 02, 200

EDMONTON - Motorists may have to put up with erratic prices at the pump for a few more days as gasoline supplies remain tight in the wake of hurricane Katrina.

Regular gas prices in Edmonton ranged Thursday from below $1 to $1.29 a litre, an overnight jump of 29 per cent, the greatest one-day price hike in recent history.

This came in spite of a moderation in world oil prices, which have dipped just below record prices of $70 US for a barrel following a steady climb.

About 1,000 trucks blocking roads in N.B. over soaring gas prices

Protest organizer Eric Bijeau said refineries are raking in excess profits and governments aren't doing anything about it.

Crude oil rises ahead of report

Likely to show U.S. stocks fell from Katrina

Edmonton Sun EDITORIAL: Waiting for the Oil Fairy

Ironically, most of our oil and gas resources are "nationalized" in that they belong to the people of Alberta, who license energy companies to exploit them. Albertans will collect over $10 billion this year in royalties. Back in the terrible days of the NEP, Pierre Trudeau imposed his own royalties on Alberta's resource in the form of two confiscatory taxes, and force-fed the industry with massive tax incentives to move their exploration activities away from Alberta and onto remote federal lands.

A slightly smaller number of Canadians (43%) told Leger they'd go one step further and nationalize the oil companies. Presumably this government agency would dispense gasoline at rock bottom prices and basically ignore world market forces. Where the bargain-basement crude would come from is never really answered. Our best guess is the Oil Fairy

Albertans have seen all of this before. The NEP was a partial confiscation of the province's resources. Ottawa's integrated oil agency, Petro-Canada, was supposed to act as Trudeau's "window" on the oil industry.

PetroCan was created with massive amounts of Canadian taxpayers money in several controversial takeovers. Ironically, it was only a few months ago that Ottawa sold off the remainder of its Petro-Canada shares so it could have billions of dollars available to implement its equally controversial Kyoto accord, which is seen by many as another assault on Albertans' oil and gas riches.

My Response to this bit of Son of NEP hype appeared today as well as this editorial.

The Edmonton Sun published my letter to the Editor today.

RE: PAUL Stanway's Sept. 4 column. The real issue in Alberta, from the time of Peter Lougheed until today, is that the people of this province who own the resources do so in name only. Instead of worrying about a new "son of NEP" we should be concerned that this tired old Tory government has failed to secure our resources. They have sold them off to monopoly oil interests for a song. We need to put our energy resources directly under provincial control - that is, nationalize them as they have done in Venezuela and other countries, which get much higher royalties than we currently do.

Eugene Plawiuk

(Petro-Alberta?)-Sun editor comment

And even the Sun website poll shows that Canadians support Nationalization:

Should Canada's petroleum resources and oil companies be nationalized?
Yes. 55%
No. 40%
Not sure. 5%

Total Votes for this Question: 329

As for the Sun's blithe comment about the Oil Fairy lets look at what the much vaunted uber-capitalist magazine the Economist says about that, shall we. And low and behold guess who does not set their oil and gas prices by the much vaunted free market, well the Good Ol US of A.

LEADERS

Oil

The oiloholics

Aug 25th 2005
From The Economist print edition

Oil prices could yet go higher—unless the world's biggest gas guzzlers curb their thirst

THE price of oil affects the cost of almost everything. It helps determine not just the cost of driving to work or flying off on holiday, but also the cost of furniture, food and anything else which has to be transported from factory to shop floor. The past three global recessions were all triggered by a jump in oil prices. Thus, it should be alarming that oil prices have more than tripled since late 2001. So far, though, the world economy has held up remarkably well: global GDP growth is strong and inflation remains modest. How long can this continue?

The optimists point to a host of reasons for why “this time is different” and why high oil prices will not trigger a global downturn. For example, it is claimed that in real terms, adjusted by consumer prices, oil is still cheap. Most businessmen reckon that is tosh: relative to producer-output prices, real crude oil prices are now close to a record high (see article). In any case, the notion that rising oil prices have no economic impact until they hit the previous peak in real terms is ridiculous.

Oil and the global economy Aug 25th 2005 Oil and exchanges Aug 25th 2005 China, United States Oil The New York Mercantile Exchange has information about oil prices. The US Department of Transport announces proposed fuel-economy rules. See also the IMF.

Roll out the barrel

The main reason why high oil prices have so far not kiboshed the world economy is that cheap money has supported spending sprees and housing bubbles in many countries, notably America, which have offset the impact of dearer oil. The two main engines for the world, the United States and China (also the two biggest oil consumers), have both had their growth boosted by lax monetary conditions in the past couple of years. Indeed high oil prices can partly be seen as a consequence of low interest rates. The two most important prices in the world economy are the price of oil and the price of money, and they are linked. If interest rates are abnormally low (in bond yields as well as short-term rates), then as global demand increases in response, oil prices should rise—especially if production capacity is tight, as it is today.

So referring to the recent climb in oil prices as a “shock” is misleading. The market is simply responding to stronger oil demand on the back of a strong world economy. The increases in both global GDP and global oil consumption last year were the biggest for almost 30 years. Rising oil prices may even be read as a signal that global economic growth has been more rapid than existing output capacity can sustain. Normally, bond yields would perform that role. But the bond market has been behaving mighty oddly, with yields falling over the past year. The rising oil price is thus taking some of the job of constraining the world economy away from higher interest rates. From this point of view, a high oil price is quite healthy, a way of helping to prevent the global economy from overheating. A much more efficient solution would be tighter global monetary conditions. But tighter money now risks pushing the housing and borrowing booms into reverse, tipping economies into recession.

Moreover, even if rising oil prices are a natural market response to rising demand, they can still have nasty consequences for slower-growing economies, such as Europe's. Excessive growth in demand in America and China is, in effect, imposing a tax on others by pushing world prices higher than they would otherwise be. Even more serious, with little spare capacity in the oil industry, such rapid growth in consumption leaves the market vulnerable to any supply disruption, like those that initiated previous oil shocks.

This effect is exacerbated by the fact that the economies that are currently growing the fastest tend also to be the least efficient users of oil. To produce one dollar of GDP, emerging economies use more than twice as much oil as developed economies. Many emerging economies, including China and India, subsidise oil. Insulated from the reality of rising world prices, consumers guzzle more oil than if they had to pay full market prices. This, in turn, pushes global oil prices higher.

Such pressures are likely to grow. The IMF forecasts that over the next five years emerging economies could account for almost three-quarters of the increase in world oil demand. China has single-handedly accounted for one-third of the growth in global oil demand since 2000. With China's oil consumption per person still only one-fifteenth of that in America, it is inevitable that its energy demands will increase over the coming years if its income does too. But China's consumption is also being inflated because domestic petrol prices have not been allowed to rise as fast as crude prices. It is time for governments to scrap price controls and subsidies to allow the market's price signals to get through to consumers.

It is easy to point a finger at China's growing oil demand (which has in fact cooled off this year), but America remains the biggest consumer, using one-quarter of the world's output of the black stuff. America uses 50% more oil per dollar of GDP than the European Union, largely because consumers pay less. As petrol prices have hit $3 a gallon in some cities, there has been an outcry from motorists. Even so, petrol remains dirt cheap in America, compared with Britain or Germany where prices are above $6 a gallon. America's heavy dependence on oil not only leaves the economy more vulnerable to a supply shock, it also pushes prices higher for the rest of the world.

Time for a cure

The best long-term solution—for America as well as the world economy—would be higher petrol taxes in the United States. Alas, there is little prospect of that happening. America, unlike Europe, has preferred fuel-economy regulations to petrol taxes. But even with those it has failed abysmally. These regulations have been so abused that the oil efficiency of its vehicles has fallen to a 20-year low. This week, the Bush administration announced proposals for changing the fuel-economy rules governing trucks and sport-utility vehicles, but failed to close loopholes that allow these gas guzzlers to use more petrol than normal cars, a shameful concession to carmakers.

America and China, in their different ways, are drunk on oil consumption. The longer they put off taking the steps needed to curb their habit, the worse the headache will be. George Bush once learned that lesson about alcohol. It is time for him to wean America off oiloholism too.

Here the scion of Capitalism is calling for an INCREASE in TAXES. Whooa. And yet in Canada across the board governments provincially and federally are wringing their hands saying there is nothing they can do about the increases we are facing at the pumps, for home heating and of course for electricity and other utilities that are gas fired.

Gas tax cut call falls on deaf ears
Canadians are wasting their breath calling on governments to cut gasoline and home heating oil taxes, say economists and tax experts.

Ever since the price of gasoline burst through the $1 per litre barrier earlier this summer, pleas and demands for tax relief have been rising with each increase at the pumps. With the exception of Nova Scotia, which is pondering the removal of the provincial sales tax on heating oil, governments across the country have swiftly squelched the idea of lowering fuel levies.

That's because governments are loath to give up any taxing power, said David Perry, an economist with the Canadian Tax Foundation.

Once a tax is removed, "you'll never know when you'll need them again," he said in a recent interview from Toronto.

"Also, if you get rid of a tax, you're throwing the load on other taxpayers. If you drop the tax in one area, you'll have to raise it somewhere else."

There is also the so-called slippery slope argument of bureaucrats who say that once a tax is removed in one area, demand for the subtraction of others would increase, said Perry.

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation, the Canadian Automobile Association, a host of other organizations, and opposition politicians have called for the removal of the goods and services tax from fuel - gasoline in particular.

In Alberta the real increases, price gouging, we experience is in our Electrical bills while we get the joy of having less drastic increases at the gas pump. Since the failed deregulation of Electrical utilities in the province we have seen these companies like their oil company counterparts rack up enormous profits, while consumers are paying more and more.

Canadians being social democrats by and large except for those living in Calgary are open to public ownership of our resources. Unlike those neo-cons whose fetish is for the privatization of everything, we recognize the social benefit of public ownership.

Here in the home of the neo-cons the City of Medicine Hat owns its oil, gas and utilities giving it the lowest utility rates and pump rates in the country. Public Ownership works for the benefit of all even in Alberta.

As in the 1970's and 1980's once again the solution to Peak Oil and the crisis we face is public ownership under community and worker control.

This is something that should be rolling off the lips of Jack Layton and the NDP but sadly is not. Instead Jack has called for yet another commission to look into industry collusion over pricing.

While Bloc Leader Gil Duceppe warns against public ownership, a contradiction that, like the NDP he too is calling for yet another commission to investigate prices at the pump and collusion in the industry.

The Bloc leader also rejected the idea of nationalizing Canada's oil industry, saying it would be too costly and would infringe on provincial jurisdiction. "Natural resources belong to the provinces, and to (nationalize oil) you would have to go over Alberta's head and if we go over Alberta's head it opens the door to bypassing Quebec on hydroelectricity, which as clean energy is an energy of the future," Duceppe said.

There are only seven oil companies in the world so of course there is collusion.

That the so called Competition Bureau of Canada, set up by neo-con PM Brian Mulroney after his Conservative party eliminated FIRA, the Foreign Investment Review Board, never finds collusion is an example of Canada's complying with NAFTA and the FTA which Mulroney signed. Of course they will never find collusion anymore than three blind men could describe an elephant.


Big oil's bigtime looting
Of the world's seven most profitable corporations, four are ExxonMobil, Royal Dutch Shell, BP, and Chevron. ExxonMobil is the world's most profitable company, making $25.3 billion last year. It and the other three corporations had combined profits last year of $72.8 billion. ExxonMobil is also the world's most valuable company, with a market value, according to Forbes magazine, of $405 billion. The combined market value of ExxonMobil, BP, Royal Dutch Shell, and Chevron is nearly $1 trillion.

And that was last year. A month ago, ExxonMobil, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips announced record second-quarter profits of $7.6 billion, $3.7 billion, and $3.1 billion, respectively. Royal Dutch Shell's quarterly profits of $5.2 billion were up by 34 percent over the same period last year. Other well-known companies like Sunoco also had record second-quarter earnings.

If ExxonMobil were to maintain its current pace of profits, it would cross the $30 billion barrier for 2005. The company's chief financial officer, Henry Hubble, bragged in classic corporatese, ''Our disciplined project management and operating practices deliver the benefits of strong industry conditions to our shareholders."

Duceppe's reluctance to embrace 'nationalization', because he fears it would apply to hydro electricty in Quebec, despite being a Quebec Nationalist, and a marxist lenninst at that, is predictable, it is also laughable as he becomes a centrist politician like the rest.

Bloc Quebecois hopes to boost its numbers in the next election, Duceppe says

The Bloc plans to resume its attacks of the government when Parliament resumes Sept. 26 by focusing on the fiscal imbalance, softwood lumber and mad cow.

The high cost of gasoline is another subject over which the party hopes to score some political points.

Duceppe has accused Martin of not having the courage to confront the refineries, which he claimed are making enormous profits.

This is why Public Ownership not State Ownership is needed.

It's an idea whose time has come again, despite the thirty years of neo-con counter-reformation in Canada.

If you wish to support this idea the Socialist Caucus of the NDP is conducting a mail/petiton campaign to get the Federal NDP to move on the idea of Public Ownership and sending the following letter to Jack and the caucus.

To NDP Federal Leader Jack Layton and the NDP Parliamentary Caucus:

I am writing to request that the New Democratic Party of Canada immediately
initiate a major campaign to win:
1. a twenty-five per cent reduction in the retail price of gasoline, then
to be capped at that price, and
2. public ownership of the oil industry in Canada, from oil well to
gasoline pump, under democratic workers' and community control.
Compensation of the current industry owners ought to be in the form of
long term, low-interest-bearing government bonds.

In its September 1, 2005 lead editorial "Gas price increase defies
explanation", the Toronto Star showed that Hurricane Katrina could account
for, at most, an 8 per cent price rise, not the 20 per cent-plus hike that
has occurred. Indeed, the Star did explain the jump as a function of
"company profits or .... price gouging".
That's putting it mildly.
But the most that some politicians in Ottawa and the Toronto Star call for
is "price regulation" and lowering of federal taxes on gas sales.
The obvious immediate and long-term answer is public ownership.
Poor and working class consumers need immediate price relief, which should
be ordered by the government. As for the long term, public ownership is
required because the world's oil supply is being depleted, and current
stocks should be carefully managed in the public interest while every
effort is made to replace oil with environmentally-friendly, alternative
energy resources and systems as rapidly as possible. Commitments to Kyoto
demand it. If consumer prices must eventually rise to fund an energy
transition, the money should go into the public purse, for use in the
public interest, not into private pockets.
Public ownership of energy resources, total transparency and
accountability, and genuine democratic management are needed now to grapple
with our share of one the world's gravest crises. Regulation of the oil
barons just won't cut it.
It's high time that Big Oil in Canada become a public asset, under
democratic public stewardship, put to work for a safe, clean and
sustainable energy and transportation future.
I look forward to your acknowledgement and response to this appeal.

In solidarity,

Send to:
laytoj@parl.gc.ca, blaikb@parl.gc.ca, daviel@parl.gc.ca, godiny@parl.gc.ca, angusc@parl.gc.ca, broadbent.e@parl.gc.ca, chrisd@parl.gc.ca, comarj@parl.gc.ca, crowdj@parl.gc.ca, cullen@parl.gc.ca, desjab@parl.gc.ca, juliap@parl.gc.ca, martipd@parl.gc.ca, martito@parl.gc.ca, masse.b@parl.gc.ca, mcdonough.a@parl.gc.ca, siksab@parl.gc.ca, stoffp@parl.gc.ca, wasylj@parl.gc.ca



NEW

Petition:

To NDP Federal Leader Jack Layton and the NDP Parliamentary Caucus:

We, the undersigned, request that the New Democratic Party of Canada

immediately initiate a major campaign to win:

1. a twenty-five per cent reduction in the wholesale and retail prices of

gasoline, home heating oil and natural gas, then to be capped at those

prices, and

2. public ownership of the oil industry in Canada, from oil well to

gasoline pump, under democratic workers' and community control.

Compensation of the current industry owners ought to be in the form of long

term, low-interest-bearing government bonds.

Name Signature Address

Phone / E-mail

1._______________________________________________________________________________

2._______________________________________________________________________________

3._______________________________________________________________________________

4._______________________________________________________________________________

5._______________________________________________________________________________

6._______________________________________________________________________________

7._______________________________________________________________________________

8._______________________________________________________________________________

9._______________________________________________________________________________

10.______________________________________________________________________________

11.______________________________________________________________________________

12.______________________________________________________________________________

13.______________________________________________________________________________

14.______________________________________________________________________________

15.______________________________________________________________________________