Why won't the UCP use oil royalty revenue to reinvest in health and education? Because the cuts were never about budget deficits; their purpose was to restructure these sectors--to diminish their functions as universal public goods. 1/ #abpse@PIAlberta@Albertadoctors
Fundamentally, the Jason Kenneys and Travis Toews of this world believe that the provision of health and education should be left to the market, with "market failures" being redressed through charity, church, and "family" (i.e., women's) care work. 2/ @UnitedNurses@ABFedLabour
Millions of people fought and sacrificed to bring about public education and public health care, accessible equally to all citizens. But these public goods are under ceaseless attack by privileged elites who can afford private alternatives & want to increase their wealth. 3/
There is no fiscal necessity to degrade our public services; this is a political choice. Nor do we need to rely on oil and gas revenue to fund our public services--despite what these corporations & the UCP would have us believe. 4/
No party that tells Albertans that the provision of public services depends on oil and gas royalty revenues has a credible fiscal plan or a realistic reading of the future of fossil fuels. 5/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
For anyone who hasn't followed Cdn and Albertan climate policy for the past 30 yrs, and who is listening to the raving of the right-wing press and UCP about the appt of @s_guilbeault & proposed caps on oil sands emissions . . . 1/
AB govts, in lock step with oil & gas corporations and their industry associations and big business associations like the Canadian Business Council have been obstructing meaningful action on GHG reduction since the words "Kyoto Protocol" were first pronounced. 2/
Ab's GHG emission reduction strategy is reducible to a technology fund, much of whose revenue is recycled to large emitters. The so-called "cap" on emissions from the oil sands permitted emissions to RISE rather than requiring them to fall. 3/
A university is not a business. A university is part of the public education system. It does not compete for clients. The role of the PSE system is, firstly, to offer Albertans the educational opportunities they need. 1/ #abpse#abpoli@uasupresident thegatewayonline.ca/2021/10/editor…
When politicians and their board appointees get this into their heads, they will stop increasing tuition fees on the lame grounds that @UAlberta needs to "compete" or that PSEIs should not be government-funded. 2/
For what, or whom, are we supposedly competing? Can any of the board members who voted for the fee increases answer that question? Can the president--who uses such language frequently--answer this question? 3/
We all know that the Allan Inquiry was just a way for the UCP/CAPP govt to reinforce its msg that the interests of the O&G corps and the interests of Albertans are identical. 1/
Hence, whatever frustrates the profit-making projets of Enbridge, TC, Shell, Cenovus, et al. is "anti-Albertan" (could not possibly be in the interests of Albertans). 2/
Being propaganda, it lacks any sense of irony. Recommendation #1 ("Transparency and Accountability"), e.g., is like stand-up comedy for anyone who follows AB govt spending on promotion of the oil sands. 3/
2/ UAlberta wasn’t created overnight; it was built into a top 5 Canadian university by decades of public investment. It is the people’s university, and the people have every right to the best educational opportunities available.
3/ I’m not going to sugar-coat it: @UAlberta is being dismantled. A whole lot of parts are being taken out and tossed away.
Mary Ann Hitt reminds us that 12 yrs ago, climate & env health activists were told that the US would also be reliant on coal for electricity--just as we are told today that demand for oil will continue to grow. 2/n
The US relied on coal for 50% of its electricity. Today, that figure is down to 20% and falling. It can be done, when there is political will to mobilize the necessary resources. 3/n