The economic consequences were primarily felt in the areas of royalty payment reductions and tax revenues being reduced considerably for the provinces affected (Saskatchewan, Alberta, and British Columbia, with Alberta most severely impacted of the three).

The provinces would receive about 20% less in revenues from production, the petroleum industry would receive about 40 % less, and the federal government would receive about 26% more.

Prices of Canadian-produced crude oil would be limited to 75% of the world (open-market) price.

Petro-Canada, the company owned by the federal government was given the responsibility to implement much of the program, elevating the degree of bitter feelings between Alberta and the federal government.

The Albertaprovincial premier, Peter Lougheed, announced that oil shipments to eastern Canada would be stopped immediately, forcing the federal government to import more expensive crude oil from foreign suppliers.

Voter sentiment indicated that the federal Liberal government was so vilified (hated) that there was much money spent on a program to discredit the Liberal Party, its leaders, and its ideologies and was branded as "communist" be many western leaders.

Bumper stickers were commonly seen in Western Canada with the wording: "Let the Eastern Bastards Freeze in the Dark!" (this, it is regarded, was the West's response to comments that are attributed to the, then, Prime Minister, Pierre Trudeau, being critical of the western leaders and oil company executives as being "blue-eyed sheiks".

While the GDP of all three Western provinces were reduced, dramatically, it was, and remains, difficult to ascertain the extent to which the NEP was responsible versus the fact that world prices for oil dropped, significantly, only months after the NEP was introduced.

Bankruptcies in Alberta rose 150% from 1980 to 1985, again difficult to ascertain whether it was the NEP, the drop in world oil prices, or a combination of the two. The people of Alberta hold that the blame is the responsibility of the NEP, yet the matter of the rapid decline in world prices that began in 1981, and lasted through 1986, are often overlooked.

Question # 3

Could there ever be economic conditions that might make it possible for a "new" NEP to be introduced by the federal government?

Given the subjective nature of this question, there are no "correct" or "incorrect" answers.

If your position is that a new NEP could be possible, then there is an expectation that your answer would address the potential ways that it could help the economy.

If your position is that a new NEP could not be possible, then your position would be assumed to be based upon a negative view, in which case your argument would be based upon ways that it would harm the economy.