A report commissioned by the Alberta government says the province would be entitled to more than half the assets of the Canada Pension Plan - $334 billion - if it were to exit the national retirement savings program in 2027.
A report commissioned by the Alberta government says the province would be entitled to more than half the assets of the Canada Pension Plan - $334 billion - if it were to exit the national retirement savings program in 2027.
There is no change in hands in what you describe. It would still be the same public asset, even if the public saw its transformation into something new.
Who owns it doesn’t matter. What matters is that it isn’t paved or developed. Pavement and digging basements reduce the land’s ability to absorb water, which can cause flooding and reduce groundwater availability in surrounding areas.
Who owns it does matter when talking about privatization. Your definition of a public asset has no way to transfer ownership. It will forever and always be a public asset.
It’s only a public asset as long as it’s untouched (i.e. not paved or developed). The Greenbelt laws keep it that way.
Think of the Rocky Mountains as a public asset. I don’t know who owns them, but that doesn’t matter. They are a public asset as long as they exist, but if someone is allowed to flatten them, or carve the faces of dead prime ministers into them, they are no longer an asset to the public. Both of those are much more difficult to do than it is to build a house or a parking lot, so I’m not terribly worried about that scenario unfolding, but it’s the same idea, just bigger.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
Not really. Land being removed from the Greenbelt would allow it to be developed and paved over, minimizing it’s worth in all of those aspects.
There is no change in hands in what you describe. It would still be the same public asset, even if the public saw its transformation into something new.
Who owns it doesn’t matter. What matters is that it isn’t paved or developed. Pavement and digging basements reduce the land’s ability to absorb water, which can cause flooding and reduce groundwater availability in surrounding areas.
Who owns it does matter when talking about privatization. Your definition of a public asset has no way to transfer ownership. It will forever and always be a public asset.
It’s only a public asset as long as it’s untouched (i.e. not paved or developed). The Greenbelt laws keep it that way.
Think of the Rocky Mountains as a public asset. I don’t know who owns them, but that doesn’t matter. They are a public asset as long as they exist, but if someone is allowed to flatten them, or carve the faces of dead prime ministers into them, they are no longer an asset to the public. Both of those are much more difficult to do than it is to build a house or a parking lot, so I’m not terribly worried about that scenario unfolding, but it’s the same idea, just bigger.