42
Alberta deserves more than half CPP assets if it exits program: report
(calgary.ctvnews.ca)
What's going on Canada?
๐ Meta
๐บ๏ธ Provinces / Territories
๐๏ธ Cities / Local Communities
๐ Sports
Hockey
Football (NFL)
unknown
Football (CFL)
unknown
Baseball
unknown
Basketball
unknown
Soccer
unknown
๐ป Universities
๐ต Finance / Shopping
๐ฃ๏ธ Politics
๐ Social and Culture
Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:
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.