Many natural resources, like oil, are not renewable. Once they are gone, they are gone for good (or at least the next 50 million years).

So it talks to the senses to ensure that the population of the region (province, country) should profit greatly from that temporary source of wealth.

Now, if the land of Canada belongs to the people who live in Canada (as it should be), then the logic of saying that Canada's natural resources as part of the landscape should also belong to the people of Canada.

When we speak of mines and forestry, private corporations pay us royalties, which is in fact admitting that they owe us something for exploiting our resources... So if we own the resource, the next logical step is to take full control of it.

Other industries

When we speak of banks, retail stores and even manufacturing, most of the time these businesses are the product of a group of people who could have chosen to establish their businesses anywhere and in any country. They do not owe us anything directly, although they might have gotten a bit of help from our government and certainly profit from our investments in transport and education and that's why they are paying taxes.

To nationalize businesses that do not exist as a direct consequence of the ownership of the land by Canadians would make us somewhat like Fascists and it is not good.

This is why I am a proponent of nationalizing natural resources only under the understanding that: The resources of a land should contribute to the well being of its population.

Otherwise, it would make no difference if we were to be born in a barren desert like the Sahara or a frozen wasteland like Antarctica.