That’s how I had been looking at it. But stability even with a deficit would be better than what we have now. I’m really hoping the Tories can get things together and form a true alternative choice. If they step out and start criticizing smith like a government in waiting, at least we’d finally have some actual opposition.
Balancing the budget will require fundamental reform to delivery of provincial services. This will involve conflict with the public sector unions. The NDP dramatically over values public sector unions as stakeholders. I doubt any third party will ever achieve enough scale to matter.
I tell visitors and newcomers that the Alberta NDP is the "public sector union" party. Their base are "teachers and nurses" and they treat universal monopoly health care like it is a religion, not just a service.
Criticism over the healthcare sourcing scandals and private school funding is so frustrating. Monopolies never innovate, so breaking the government monopolies on health and education is mission critical. Otherwise, spending will continue to grow faster than the ability to fund it. This is not a simple case of raising taxes. A higher tax rate would only capture more of GDP. The revenue from that higher tax rate would not grow faster than GDP, so all the higher tax rate would do is push the collapse further into the future. Thus far, the AB government hasn't done itself any favors in terms of selling the electorate on the benefits of introducing competition. That isn't unexpected due to the complexity. Another way to look at it that preserving public sector union monopolies over service provision is a form of soft corruption.
Pick your poison, cut services or increase taxes. good luck with that. re: then entire mess all western democracies currently have. neither is politically acceptable to voters and therefore you are screwed.
How about program and org reviews to at least try to identify savings? The so called conservative government in AB is "gutting" spending by only increasing education funding by 7% and health by 6%. Nominal GDP will grow 4 to 5% so the hole digs deeper.
Considerable low hanging fruit exists in spite of alleged austerity focused governments in the past. Why does AB need distinct boards for Public, Separate and French schools? The social constructs of the 1800s that drove they segregation are long gone. Why can't some geographically adjacent school boards be combined? How about centralizing IT, Legal, Accounting and Purchasing for the entire education system? What is the purpose of school trustees since AB centralized funding during the Klein years? I've identified opportunities to eliminate thousands of jobs and likely save hundreds of millions without getting creative.
Alberta should develop its own non-mutually-intelligible dialect of English and demand that it be used in all federal communications and that anyone seeking to work in the federal public service should be fluent in that dialect. I recommend starting with a variation on Old English to make sure it has absolutely no application in daily life outside those who deliberately decide to immerse themselves in it. Refuse to deal with anyone who won't speak Alberglish even if everyone so demanding can speak regular English perfectly. Go fucking ballistic if anyone trying to become Prime Minister is not conversationally fluent in a language that he essentially never encounters in his daily life. It would be like Court French but with a pre-Norman-invasion Anglo-Saxon cowboy twang.
Quebec just asks, it's Ottawa and Ontario voters who roll over whenever Quebec proposes policies that exclude the majority of Canadians to senior roles.
Quebec has never asked that senior government roles be bilingual. Quebec does not care about Francophones outside of Quebec. The federal government decided all by itself that any position that has people reporting to it must be bilingual.
I'm not sure who is asking for it per se but poke at official bilingualism and Quebec voters tend to react very badly.
Some back of the napkin math using census data indicates that there are maybe 1 million to 1.5 million French only speakers in Canada, and almost all of these live in Quebec (with some in NB). In Ontario we are talking a few tens of thousands of people.
It seems like national bilingualism better serves a certain type of highly privileged Laurentian by being a marker of being the right kind of person with the right credentials for national leadership than it makes life practically any better for French-only speakers.
The purpose of official bilingualism is to help Francophones feel at home outside of Quebec, so that they would feel that their culture is safe as a part of Canada. Since close to one-quarter of Canadians are Francophones, it doesn’t seem completely unwarranted.
Ok I would lose my shit laughing if every time a politician gave a profound speech they would have to pause every couple of minutes and re-state what they just said using this vocabulary and accent.
If Alberta can pull that off they won't need a separation referendum, they will truly be masters in their own house, and dats de fuckin thing absolutly fuckin right eh!
Alberta might have better luck on that front if they voted smarter. Québec, for all its faults, elects politicians who deliver results. Alberta votes for the same groups over and over and complains they're not getting anything different.
Why would I vote for anyone who's policies want to wreak my economy? Perhaps if other parties would have policies that don't hurt Alberta, I would likely vote for them.
We could negotiate those things if we wanted. We don’t want most of them. Which makes this a silly question. Not to mention we don’t have the same legal system as Quebec either.
As with Brexit, what could go wrong indeed? Let's continue to support Albertans regardless. Lived in Calgary as a kid, many weeks in Suffield and Wainwright in the Army. Family members still live there. How many more years of Smith?
My daughters were born in Wainwright (I know your family!) and one still lives in Alberta, married with children. I can only hope that things will soon settle down there and that Alberta will continue to thrive within Canada.
As someone who also writes a few words for a living, the line about how the questions viscerally offend is more than just lively prose. Our bodies know attempts to obfuscate when we encounter them. If the premier wants a clear mandate (if ?) there were thousands of ways those questions could be asked with clarity. So my suspicious side wonders why they didn’t just write simple statements that most voters would understand on first reading—and what that says about what is going on behind the scenes.
We see this attempt to engineer the result BS almost every time a government is forced to, or browbeat into a referendum. The awkward word smithing brought to bear underlines pure self-interest, and I think it's pretty transparent. I also suspect in many cases it's even counterproductive to the goal, further proof these folks maybe shouldn't be deciding strategy for any of us.
Counterpoint: Rob Anderson is an abject moron, Smith herself isn't too bright, and this is the best they and their merry band of idiots could come up with.
The referenda, despite being nonsensical, serve four purposes :
1) flood the zone to distract from the possible separation question
2) up the stakes so that the Feds absolutely must follow through on the terms of the MOU as well as repeal the tanker ban. Anything that the Carney government does to impede energy exports will inflame emotions and turn all of the questions into "Do you hate Ottawa?"
3) delay a federal election call. See number 2 above. A Liberal majority in 2000 lead to the Firewall Letter. Rubbing Albertans' noses yet again in their electoral impotentcy risks an explosive outcome
4) maximize leverage during sensitive CUSMA negotiations. The last thing the Carney government needs is fractured unity. If the PQ wins the Quebec election, if will need to do something to quell Alberta separation. That something is very easy: take the electoral hit and expedite energy export infrastructure and remove federal barriers to increased energy production
The Smith government has its own motivations for the confuserenda, mainly placating the separatist wing and distracting from its massive deficit. But for the four reasons above, timing is in its favor so best to exploit circumstances. Potential blowback from other provinces isn't much of a concern as Alberta has never had allies apart from SK, and likely never will.
> maximize leverage during sensitive CUSMA negotiations. The last thing the Carney government needs is fractured unity.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but if that's her thinking, then she's stupid. (or uncaring about the damage she'll cause.) If Alberta makes things bad with the Americans, Canadians will not respond by punishing Mark Carney... we'll respond by punishing Pierre Poilievre. (Because by the transitive property of "all conservatives are the same", it's his fault.
Canadians are in no mood for quislings, and "give us what we want or we'll eff you over" is not make the rest of us compliant. Quite the opposite. No one is in a mood to be bullied. Albertans aren't in any mood to be bullied.. why on earth would Ms. Smith imagine that the rest of us are?
I've got an increasing suspicion that Danielle Smith is actually a separatist, but aware that most Albertans aren't so being honest would be the end of her political career. So instead she picks fights with Ottawa and creates referendums intended to increase disatisfaction. As Jen noted, none of the things she's putting to a referendum are things she doesn't have the power to pursue right now. So maybe she has no interest in pursuing them... she just wants people upset about them.
Or maybe that's all crap and she's just another "really sucks at her job, but is good in front of a camera" Canadian politician who doesn't think or care about the consequences of her actions... you know... an Alberta Justin Trudeau.
That attitude is the problem. All the Feds have to do is deliver on the MOU. If signing was yet another game, the country deserves to go down in flames.
My attitude is that we’re all on the same team and the Americans are the outsiders trying to harm us. That’s not a problem because we should be on the same team, and the Americans are outsiders, trying to hurt us. (Hint, note the underpayment for Albertan oil.)
Here’s an attitude that is a problem: using a referendum to “maximize leverage during sensitive CUSMA negotiations”. Seeing a foreign attack as an opportunity to extract something from your fellow citizens is a problem. Ultimately it’s a sign of poor moral character, but more immediately it’s a sign of someone betraying their professed national loyalty, so if that’s part of Ms. Smith’s thinking… well… that would indicate poor moral character and an absence of loyalty to her country.
Except we are not on the same team. The Feds don't pull their weight in promoting free movement of goods, services, people and capital within Canada's borders. They also play favorites in gaming the equalization formula to favour Quebec and relentlessly protecting Laurentian industries from competition.
In another sign of bad faith, early indications are that Carney isn't living up to the MOU:
The fact that it has been less than a year makes your complaint meaningless. The fact is that Canada's ability to get things done is really, really bad in a way that has nothing to do with what the LPC wants.
Here's proof. I think we all agree that the LPC really wants to ban more guns every year and confiscate them. And yet... they're how far behind on doing that? That's incredibly less complex than building a pipeline and expanding oil production and they STILL can't get it done even though they want to.
Now.... WILL Mr. Carney get it done? Honestly I have no idea. He's certainly different than Mr. Trudeau. Witness the sidelining of Mr. Guilbault and his subsequent resignation from cabinet. The LPC likes being in government and moved significantly to the right to make that happen. The Mark Carney LPC isn't identical to the Trudeau LPC... but neither is it entirely different. And even if Mr. Carney does all that he can to get things done.. can he succeed?
It's an open question. But right now the people trying to break up the team are the separatists and quislings who delude themselves into thinking will get everything if only they suck up to Donald Trump harder.
Guns are a great example. Rather than actually enforcing existing gun control legislation, the Liberals continue to list more guns as illegal (even fictitious ones from movies and video games). They don't want to progress on the issue, by throwing more resources or harsher penalties at smugglers, for example, as keeping the issue alive motivates the base. Guns are a proxy for America and nothing better elicits an emotional response than an appeal to Canada's sadly still dominant Loyalist culture. Avoiding enforcement with distractions allows the Liberals to stay away from landmines like the ineffectiveness of the RCMP, the role of the Quebec Mob in gun smuggling and the fact that many guns are smuggled through cross border indigenous reservations. Keeping Anti-Americanism Alive also helps perpetuate the notion that the Federal government is needed to protect the media, airlines, financial services, telecom, dairy and poultry from competition.
I say this as someone who dares theiberals to pry my BFG 9000 from my cold, dead hands.
I wish people would stop sniping at Premier Smith for “pivoting on Immigration”. What Alberta needs are the right kind of immigrants (including those from other provinces) who are qualified, prepared to work hard and make a positive contribution to society, and pay taxes. What Alberta does not need is a flood of unqualified, unvetted non-English speaking welfare hounds of the kind admitted under the Trudeau regime. So I don’t see a pivot here.
AB didn't experience anywhere near the flood of student visa holders and TFWs than did BC and especially ON. That doesn't forgive the Liberals for biasing immigration away from skills towards family reunification and refugees.
It is clear to me that the consensus here is that Alberta absolutely under any circumstances must settle for being a third rate drudge for the Central Canada Laurentian oligarchic corruptocrats.
All of a sudden the destructive octopus economy, a factual and well thought-out term, and the negative effects it creates across the land, is somehow 'not a thing'.
How the Constitution sets up a permanent Colonial Master-to-Colonies inequality, where the Western Canada is the Colonies, is conveniently suppressed.
However I do agree that the multiquestion referendum a bs distraction.
The issue at hand is Danielle Smith’s referendum questions. Their syntax is tortured and unintelligible and they are completely unnecessary. Why does she think that they are necessary?
As to your point, you are creating a strawman argument. No one thinks that Alberta should accept third-rate drudge, whatever that is, and Alberta is not treated that way anyway.
Alberta has legitimate complaints. They can be resolved within Canada. It is their politicians and others who have played on this and whipped it up for sheer political partisanship. No thought for the effect on Alberta or Canada, just “will this play well?”
Topic came up at the dinner table last night. My son thought it was a great idea. I told him about what it does and doesn’t have the power to change and Smith’s complaining letter about the reduced immigration. He then called her a liar and the conversation was over soon after that.
It’s good marketing to people who are conservative. But it doesn’t stand up to the light of day for even 5 minutes and is just a waste of taxpayer money.
I think it’s also notable she wants to do it separate from an election - meaning the referendum itself is hugely expensive and is a waste of money.
These are just additional rings in the UCPs antidemocratic, authoritarian and retrograde governance circus.
Over estimating oil prices and underestimating expenses is a chronic mistake that started with Getty. Yes Klein "fixed" it but left an infrastructure deficit that we continue to struggle with.
Unfortunately the consumption tax that would stabilize things, and let us put windfalls into the HTF, is ingrained as such an "enemy" of Alberta that the mere mention causes apoplexy amongst the chattering classes.
Those who whine about the HTF in comparison to Norway's wealth fund need to understand that the general sales tax (VAT) in Norway is 25%.
A 5% PST in Alberta would go a long way towards getting off the roller coaster but we'd prefer to be angry rather than logical out here?
Yes, exactly. Because we don’t have a PST we are viewed to have more potential revenue available to the government which is why we don’t get a bunch from equalization. This is the part that isn’t spoken about out loud though - you have to research how it actually works to understand it and the government of AB benefits from keeping citizens upset about equalization even though we actually are in such a better place than other provinces.
Sub-market electricity rates offered by Crown corp utilities are also potential government revenue. So would be market based car insurance and Canadian average tuition rates.
A PST would only delay the inevitable. Health and education spending grow faster than GDP. A PST would grab a greater percentage of GDP but the revenue it would raise would not grow faster than GDP. The only solution is to reduce the rate at which spending grows
A PST would provide more predictable revenue. If it results in more spending, it would solve nothing. The rates of growth in health and education spending absolutely must be lowered that of GDP
Danielle Smith is riding a tiger that will eat her up in the end. She must think that the separatists, after losing the referendum, will just go quietly away and life will return to some sort of normalcy. But the referendum will fatally split the UCP leaving the door open to the NDP. I am afraid that the separatists who morphed out of the anti-vaxxers and all of the other already existing malcontents in this province will remain as a group of the outraged on the fringe of political life.
For me, this reads like a risk-averse federalist critique. It seems to me that Smith wants a return to constitutional talks, but it looks nobody wants to do that for fear of what ... Quebec separatism for the thousandth time? What is happening in Alberta is a movement and I am anxious to see what their petition total is. I wouldn't even venture to offer a number.
Referendums signal instability to markets. Another thing that signals instability to markets is the instability of having a disunited Canada going through a national unity crisis. It is not a "dumb" political stunt with high risks. It's a negotiation pressure point to force federal reform. Does it stir up anger among the population? Probably. But the status quo is doing the same thing.
A return to the table is badly needed and yep it might upset Quebec. That does not take much work, in my opinion. There is huge risk for Canada right now at home and geopolitically. At the end of the day, it looks like Smith is saying that Alberta wants the same deal as Quebec. I wonder why Alberta shouldn't have the same deal?
We have to negotiate to keep this country together now more than ever. All its going to take to introduce utter chaos is Trump even musing about recognizing Alberta independence. That might happen and that scares the crap out of me.
A final note. I think a great deal of the vitriol aimed at Smith is because she is a woman.
The stakes are high and the Feds must expedite export pipelines and remove all other barriers to increased energy production as a gesture of good faith. Ten years of games have lead to this
I suspect Smith is betting on rising oil and gas prices. Given geopolitical instability, rising energy consumption from AI and US shale rolling over, I would take that bet.
I hope not because that would be super dumb, lol. No pro would risk an entire provincial budget on "the gift of foresight" because we know it doesn't exist.
I had to spend months travelling to AB in the mid-teens to clean up investment messes made by inexperienced folks who thought it "was different this time", or "different here", when all their commodity accounts vaporized. It's not different.
They same could be said of those people in ON and BC that bought houses in 2022. The reality is that imagined wealth has the same effect no matter the culture or the source of thst imagined wealth
lol that's awesome. I've always said I'd rather be lucky than smart. It would be the height of stupid to elect a person who's strategic foundation was "I'd rather be lucky than smart."
I agree. Despite the misinformation spewing from the public sector unions, Alberta dramatically overfunds health and education services. Spending has grown far faster than GDP. Regardless, I still think we are in the early stages of a commodity supercycle that could deliver tens of billions in royalty windfall. Of course Canada being Canada won't be able to full take advantage of it.
Jen, I've come to expect well thought out, non-partisan approaches to important issues facing Canada in general and Alberta in particular, but in your take on the planned referendum I detect both thinly veiled rage and a not so thinly veiled personal dislike of our Premier. Were all Albertans subject to Mr. Nenshi's attaining of the Premiership would you be more at ease or are you now beyond something more than a just healthy cynicism/skepticism?
These referendum questions are both a waste of time, and also a stupid political ploy. The thing that everybody understands but doesn't like to admit is that most voters don't pay a lot of attention to politics, and don't really know much about the issues being debated. Voters either will not have given much thought to the issues being addressed by these questions, and the ones who have will often be coming to them with an understanding formed by unchallenged partisan perspectives.
Basically, Smith will need to tell people how she wants them to vote on these questions and make the case for why they should vote that way. So, as an elected government, why not just do it? If they're worried about whether they've got the necessary support, call an election and make the case at the ballot box with your party platform.
COULD WE JUST BALANCE THE GODDAMN BUDGET, PLEASE?! JG
At least Smith recognizes the problem.
Agreed. Unfortunately the NDP alternative is unlikely to do better
That’s how I had been looking at it. But stability even with a deficit would be better than what we have now. I’m really hoping the Tories can get things together and form a true alternative choice. If they step out and start criticizing smith like a government in waiting, at least we’d finally have some actual opposition.
Balancing the budget will require fundamental reform to delivery of provincial services. This will involve conflict with the public sector unions. The NDP dramatically over values public sector unions as stakeholders. I doubt any third party will ever achieve enough scale to matter.
I tell visitors and newcomers that the Alberta NDP is the "public sector union" party. Their base are "teachers and nurses" and they treat universal monopoly health care like it is a religion, not just a service.
No one has told me I'm wrong yet.
Criticism over the healthcare sourcing scandals and private school funding is so frustrating. Monopolies never innovate, so breaking the government monopolies on health and education is mission critical. Otherwise, spending will continue to grow faster than the ability to fund it. This is not a simple case of raising taxes. A higher tax rate would only capture more of GDP. The revenue from that higher tax rate would not grow faster than GDP, so all the higher tax rate would do is push the collapse further into the future. Thus far, the AB government hasn't done itself any favors in terms of selling the electorate on the benefits of introducing competition. That isn't unexpected due to the complexity. Another way to look at it that preserving public sector union monopolies over service provision is a form of soft corruption.
The Alberta Tories are likely to perform about as well at the polls as they did under their old name, The Alberta Party.
There is no salvation coming from that direction.
Pick your poison, cut services or increase taxes. good luck with that. re: then entire mess all western democracies currently have. neither is politically acceptable to voters and therefore you are screwed.
How about program and org reviews to at least try to identify savings? The so called conservative government in AB is "gutting" spending by only increasing education funding by 7% and health by 6%. Nominal GDP will grow 4 to 5% so the hole digs deeper.
Considerable low hanging fruit exists in spite of alleged austerity focused governments in the past. Why does AB need distinct boards for Public, Separate and French schools? The social constructs of the 1800s that drove they segregation are long gone. Why can't some geographically adjacent school boards be combined? How about centralizing IT, Legal, Accounting and Purchasing for the entire education system? What is the purpose of school trustees since AB centralized funding during the Klein years? I've identified opportunities to eliminate thousands of jobs and likely save hundreds of millions without getting creative.
Agreed.
We just need one referendum question:
"Should Alberta have all the same rights and privileges as Quebec currently receives?"
If Alberta was treated the same as Quebec there wouldn't be a separatist movement. A separation referendum is the most obvious point from A to B.
That Ottawa doesn't accept this just shows Albertans that they aren't as valued as Quebec unless they behave like Quebec.
Alberta should develop its own non-mutually-intelligible dialect of English and demand that it be used in all federal communications and that anyone seeking to work in the federal public service should be fluent in that dialect. I recommend starting with a variation on Old English to make sure it has absolutely no application in daily life outside those who deliberately decide to immerse themselves in it. Refuse to deal with anyone who won't speak Alberglish even if everyone so demanding can speak regular English perfectly. Go fucking ballistic if anyone trying to become Prime Minister is not conversationally fluent in a language that he essentially never encounters in his daily life. It would be like Court French but with a pre-Norman-invasion Anglo-Saxon cowboy twang.
Quebec just asks, it's Ottawa and Ontario voters who roll over whenever Quebec proposes policies that exclude the majority of Canadians to senior roles.
Quebec has never asked that senior government roles be bilingual. Quebec does not care about Francophones outside of Quebec. The federal government decided all by itself that any position that has people reporting to it must be bilingual.
I'm not sure who is asking for it per se but poke at official bilingualism and Quebec voters tend to react very badly.
Some back of the napkin math using census data indicates that there are maybe 1 million to 1.5 million French only speakers in Canada, and almost all of these live in Quebec (with some in NB). In Ontario we are talking a few tens of thousands of people.
It seems like national bilingualism better serves a certain type of highly privileged Laurentian by being a marker of being the right kind of person with the right credentials for national leadership than it makes life practically any better for French-only speakers.
The purpose of official bilingualism is to help Francophones feel at home outside of Quebec, so that they would feel that their culture is safe as a part of Canada. Since close to one-quarter of Canadians are Francophones, it doesn’t seem completely unwarranted.
Yet what are the actual outcomes of that policy?
It's a litmus test. Bilingual means you are a better sort of Canadian.
Or just go with this:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/eZzh3pFEmm8
Ok I would lose my shit laughing if every time a politician gave a profound speech they would have to pause every couple of minutes and re-state what they just said using this vocabulary and accent.
If Alberta can pull that off they won't need a separation referendum, they will truly be masters in their own house, and dats de fuckin thing absolutly fuckin right eh!
Alberta might have better luck on that front if they voted smarter. Québec, for all its faults, elects politicians who deliver results. Alberta votes for the same groups over and over and complains they're not getting anything different.
Why would I vote for anyone who's policies want to wreak my economy? Perhaps if other parties would have policies that don't hurt Alberta, I would likely vote for them.
Alberta now has three Liberal MPs - almost 10% of our sitting MPs.
How much better off are we...?
We could negotiate those things if we wanted. We don’t want most of them. Which makes this a silly question. Not to mention we don’t have the same legal system as Quebec either.
Well, isn't a referendum asking if we want those things? Most Albertans who voted in the 2021 referendum wanted equalization to be renegotiated.
As with Brexit, what could go wrong indeed? Let's continue to support Albertans regardless. Lived in Calgary as a kid, many weeks in Suffield and Wainwright in the Army. Family members still live there. How many more years of Smith?
Smith has many years ahead. The NDP has more or less been absent under Nenshi and will be dragged down further if Lewis leads the federal NDP
Sigh
Friend, NDP has become a racist wokeist camp loaded with shitty disproven ideas. They absolutely hate freethinkers.
Their obsessions with cradle to grave social services alienates most Albertans.
My daughters were born in Wainwright (I know your family!) and one still lives in Alberta, married with children. I can only hope that things will soon settle down there and that Alberta will continue to thrive within Canada.
appreciate your reply
As someone who also writes a few words for a living, the line about how the questions viscerally offend is more than just lively prose. Our bodies know attempts to obfuscate when we encounter them. If the premier wants a clear mandate (if ?) there were thousands of ways those questions could be asked with clarity. So my suspicious side wonders why they didn’t just write simple statements that most voters would understand on first reading—and what that says about what is going on behind the scenes.
We see this attempt to engineer the result BS almost every time a government is forced to, or browbeat into a referendum. The awkward word smithing brought to bear underlines pure self-interest, and I think it's pretty transparent. I also suspect in many cases it's even counterproductive to the goal, further proof these folks maybe shouldn't be deciding strategy for any of us.
Counterpoint: Rob Anderson is an abject moron, Smith herself isn't too bright, and this is the best they and their merry band of idiots could come up with.
The referenda, despite being nonsensical, serve four purposes :
1) flood the zone to distract from the possible separation question
2) up the stakes so that the Feds absolutely must follow through on the terms of the MOU as well as repeal the tanker ban. Anything that the Carney government does to impede energy exports will inflame emotions and turn all of the questions into "Do you hate Ottawa?"
3) delay a federal election call. See number 2 above. A Liberal majority in 2000 lead to the Firewall Letter. Rubbing Albertans' noses yet again in their electoral impotentcy risks an explosive outcome
4) maximize leverage during sensitive CUSMA negotiations. The last thing the Carney government needs is fractured unity. If the PQ wins the Quebec election, if will need to do something to quell Alberta separation. That something is very easy: take the electoral hit and expedite energy export infrastructure and remove federal barriers to increased energy production
The Smith government has its own motivations for the confuserenda, mainly placating the separatist wing and distracting from its massive deficit. But for the four reasons above, timing is in its favor so best to exploit circumstances. Potential blowback from other provinces isn't much of a concern as Alberta has never had allies apart from SK, and likely never will.
> maximize leverage during sensitive CUSMA negotiations. The last thing the Carney government needs is fractured unity.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but if that's her thinking, then she's stupid. (or uncaring about the damage she'll cause.) If Alberta makes things bad with the Americans, Canadians will not respond by punishing Mark Carney... we'll respond by punishing Pierre Poilievre. (Because by the transitive property of "all conservatives are the same", it's his fault.
Canadians are in no mood for quislings, and "give us what we want or we'll eff you over" is not make the rest of us compliant. Quite the opposite. No one is in a mood to be bullied. Albertans aren't in any mood to be bullied.. why on earth would Ms. Smith imagine that the rest of us are?
I've got an increasing suspicion that Danielle Smith is actually a separatist, but aware that most Albertans aren't so being honest would be the end of her political career. So instead she picks fights with Ottawa and creates referendums intended to increase disatisfaction. As Jen noted, none of the things she's putting to a referendum are things she doesn't have the power to pursue right now. So maybe she has no interest in pursuing them... she just wants people upset about them.
Or maybe that's all crap and she's just another "really sucks at her job, but is good in front of a camera" Canadian politician who doesn't think or care about the consequences of her actions... you know... an Alberta Justin Trudeau.
That attitude is the problem. All the Feds have to do is deliver on the MOU. If signing was yet another game, the country deserves to go down in flames.
My attitude is that we’re all on the same team and the Americans are the outsiders trying to harm us. That’s not a problem because we should be on the same team, and the Americans are outsiders, trying to hurt us. (Hint, note the underpayment for Albertan oil.)
Here’s an attitude that is a problem: using a referendum to “maximize leverage during sensitive CUSMA negotiations”. Seeing a foreign attack as an opportunity to extract something from your fellow citizens is a problem. Ultimately it’s a sign of poor moral character, but more immediately it’s a sign of someone betraying their professed national loyalty, so if that’s part of Ms. Smith’s thinking… well… that would indicate poor moral character and an absence of loyalty to her country.
Except we are not on the same team. The Feds don't pull their weight in promoting free movement of goods, services, people and capital within Canada's borders. They also play favorites in gaming the equalization formula to favour Quebec and relentlessly protecting Laurentian industries from competition.
In another sign of bad faith, early indications are that Carney isn't living up to the MOU:
https://macdonaldlaurier.ca/carneys-energy-superpower-talk-isnt-cutting-it-we-need-action-heather-exner-pirot-in-the-hub/
The new Liberals are the same as the old Liberals.
Another example where Carney has failed to deliver:
https://www.ctvnews.ca/calgary/article/canadian-natural-defers-oilsands-mine-expansion-citing-regulatory-uncertainty/
Sure it has been less than year, but the Liberals have to deliver some results soon to demonstrate "we’re all on the same team".
The fact that it has been less than a year makes your complaint meaningless. The fact is that Canada's ability to get things done is really, really bad in a way that has nothing to do with what the LPC wants.
Here's proof. I think we all agree that the LPC really wants to ban more guns every year and confiscate them. And yet... they're how far behind on doing that? That's incredibly less complex than building a pipeline and expanding oil production and they STILL can't get it done even though they want to.
Now.... WILL Mr. Carney get it done? Honestly I have no idea. He's certainly different than Mr. Trudeau. Witness the sidelining of Mr. Guilbault and his subsequent resignation from cabinet. The LPC likes being in government and moved significantly to the right to make that happen. The Mark Carney LPC isn't identical to the Trudeau LPC... but neither is it entirely different. And even if Mr. Carney does all that he can to get things done.. can he succeed?
It's an open question. But right now the people trying to break up the team are the separatists and quislings who delude themselves into thinking will get everything if only they suck up to Donald Trump harder.
Guns are a great example. Rather than actually enforcing existing gun control legislation, the Liberals continue to list more guns as illegal (even fictitious ones from movies and video games). They don't want to progress on the issue, by throwing more resources or harsher penalties at smugglers, for example, as keeping the issue alive motivates the base. Guns are a proxy for America and nothing better elicits an emotional response than an appeal to Canada's sadly still dominant Loyalist culture. Avoiding enforcement with distractions allows the Liberals to stay away from landmines like the ineffectiveness of the RCMP, the role of the Quebec Mob in gun smuggling and the fact that many guns are smuggled through cross border indigenous reservations. Keeping Anti-Americanism Alive also helps perpetuate the notion that the Federal government is needed to protect the media, airlines, financial services, telecom, dairy and poultry from competition.
I say this as someone who dares theiberals to pry my BFG 9000 from my cold, dead hands.
I wish people would stop sniping at Premier Smith for “pivoting on Immigration”. What Alberta needs are the right kind of immigrants (including those from other provinces) who are qualified, prepared to work hard and make a positive contribution to society, and pay taxes. What Alberta does not need is a flood of unqualified, unvetted non-English speaking welfare hounds of the kind admitted under the Trudeau regime. So I don’t see a pivot here.
AB didn't experience anywhere near the flood of student visa holders and TFWs than did BC and especially ON. That doesn't forgive the Liberals for biasing immigration away from skills towards family reunification and refugees.
It is clear to me that the consensus here is that Alberta absolutely under any circumstances must settle for being a third rate drudge for the Central Canada Laurentian oligarchic corruptocrats.
All of a sudden the destructive octopus economy, a factual and well thought-out term, and the negative effects it creates across the land, is somehow 'not a thing'.
How the Constitution sets up a permanent Colonial Master-to-Colonies inequality, where the Western Canada is the Colonies, is conveniently suppressed.
However I do agree that the multiquestion referendum a bs distraction.
The issue at hand is Danielle Smith’s referendum questions. Their syntax is tortured and unintelligible and they are completely unnecessary. Why does she think that they are necessary?
As to your point, you are creating a strawman argument. No one thinks that Alberta should accept third-rate drudge, whatever that is, and Alberta is not treated that way anyway.
Alberta has legitimate complaints. They can be resolved within Canada. It is their politicians and others who have played on this and whipped it up for sheer political partisanship. No thought for the effect on Alberta or Canada, just “will this play well?”
I agree. The referendum
Topic came up at the dinner table last night. My son thought it was a great idea. I told him about what it does and doesn’t have the power to change and Smith’s complaining letter about the reduced immigration. He then called her a liar and the conversation was over soon after that.
It’s good marketing to people who are conservative. But it doesn’t stand up to the light of day for even 5 minutes and is just a waste of taxpayer money.
I think it’s also notable she wants to do it separate from an election - meaning the referendum itself is hugely expensive and is a waste of money.
The Iron Lady and Atlee were right.
These are just additional rings in the UCPs antidemocratic, authoritarian and retrograde governance circus.
Over estimating oil prices and underestimating expenses is a chronic mistake that started with Getty. Yes Klein "fixed" it but left an infrastructure deficit that we continue to struggle with.
Unfortunately the consumption tax that would stabilize things, and let us put windfalls into the HTF, is ingrained as such an "enemy" of Alberta that the mere mention causes apoplexy amongst the chattering classes.
Those who whine about the HTF in comparison to Norway's wealth fund need to understand that the general sales tax (VAT) in Norway is 25%.
A 5% PST in Alberta would go a long way towards getting off the roller coaster but we'd prefer to be angry rather than logical out here?
A PST would also change how we fared in the equalization payment calculations.
How? The appropriate change would be including below market electricity, tuition and car insurance as unused fiscal capacity.
Actually, I agree that a PST would defuse a lot of the equalization issues - want to know why?
...because the Equalization Formula ASSUMES we already have one.
Equalization is not based on actual government revenues, it is based on POTENTIAL government revenues.
Yes, exactly. Because we don’t have a PST we are viewed to have more potential revenue available to the government which is why we don’t get a bunch from equalization. This is the part that isn’t spoken about out loud though - you have to research how it actually works to understand it and the government of AB benefits from keeping citizens upset about equalization even though we actually are in such a better place than other provinces.
Sub-market electricity rates offered by Crown corp utilities are also potential government revenue. So would be market based car insurance and Canadian average tuition rates.
A PST would only delay the inevitable. Health and education spending grow faster than GDP. A PST would grab a greater percentage of GDP but the revenue it would raise would not grow faster than GDP. The only solution is to reduce the rate at which spending grows
Certainly both are likely required to get off the roller coaster.
A PST would provide more predictable revenue. If it results in more spending, it would solve nothing. The rates of growth in health and education spending absolutely must be lowered that of GDP
Danielle Smith is riding a tiger that will eat her up in the end. She must think that the separatists, after losing the referendum, will just go quietly away and life will return to some sort of normalcy. But the referendum will fatally split the UCP leaving the door open to the NDP. I am afraid that the separatists who morphed out of the anti-vaxxers and all of the other already existing malcontents in this province will remain as a group of the outraged on the fringe of political life.
This is a problem only for those who wish for a normally functioning democracy. I’m not sure that describes Smith.
The NDP is a non-force under Nenshi. Maybe it can reinvent itself over the next few years
For me, this reads like a risk-averse federalist critique. It seems to me that Smith wants a return to constitutional talks, but it looks nobody wants to do that for fear of what ... Quebec separatism for the thousandth time? What is happening in Alberta is a movement and I am anxious to see what their petition total is. I wouldn't even venture to offer a number.
Referendums signal instability to markets. Another thing that signals instability to markets is the instability of having a disunited Canada going through a national unity crisis. It is not a "dumb" political stunt with high risks. It's a negotiation pressure point to force federal reform. Does it stir up anger among the population? Probably. But the status quo is doing the same thing.
A return to the table is badly needed and yep it might upset Quebec. That does not take much work, in my opinion. There is huge risk for Canada right now at home and geopolitically. At the end of the day, it looks like Smith is saying that Alberta wants the same deal as Quebec. I wonder why Alberta shouldn't have the same deal?
We have to negotiate to keep this country together now more than ever. All its going to take to introduce utter chaos is Trump even musing about recognizing Alberta independence. That might happen and that scares the crap out of me.
A final note. I think a great deal of the vitriol aimed at Smith is because she is a woman.
The stakes are high and the Feds must expedite export pipelines and remove all other barriers to increased energy production as a gesture of good faith. Ten years of games have lead to this
Indeed. For me, this has been going on for 46 years. There was no reason to trust the feds in1980 and there still isn’t now.
Did she actually blame low oil prices?!
Omg, does the woman understand household budgets include both incoming and outgoing? Imma gonna guess every other Albertan does.
Maybe she's just dumb (as opposed to cynical, condescending, lol.)
I suspect Smith is betting on rising oil and gas prices. Given geopolitical instability, rising energy consumption from AI and US shale rolling over, I would take that bet.
I hope not because that would be super dumb, lol. No pro would risk an entire provincial budget on "the gift of foresight" because we know it doesn't exist.
I had to spend months travelling to AB in the mid-teens to clean up investment messes made by inexperienced folks who thought it "was different this time", or "different here", when all their commodity accounts vaporized. It's not different.
They same could be said of those people in ON and BC that bought houses in 2022. The reality is that imagined wealth has the same effect no matter the culture or the source of thst imagined wealth
Yes! I wouldn't give them power over the purse either. Great point.
AB's deficit may have halved in less than a week:
U.S. crude oil set to top $70 a barrel when trading begins on fears of Iran supply disruption
https://www.cnbc.com/2026/03/01/crude-oil-futures-iran.html?__source=androidappshare
lol that's awesome. I've always said I'd rather be lucky than smart. It would be the height of stupid to elect a person who's strategic foundation was "I'd rather be lucky than smart."
I used to think that. I know think that being smart enough to keep your options open increases the chances of being lucky.
I agree. Despite the misinformation spewing from the public sector unions, Alberta dramatically overfunds health and education services. Spending has grown far faster than GDP. Regardless, I still think we are in the early stages of a commodity supercycle that could deliver tens of billions in royalty windfall. Of course Canada being Canada won't be able to full take advantage of it.
Jen, I've come to expect well thought out, non-partisan approaches to important issues facing Canada in general and Alberta in particular, but in your take on the planned referendum I detect both thinly veiled rage and a not so thinly veiled personal dislike of our Premier. Were all Albertans subject to Mr. Nenshi's attaining of the Premiership would you be more at ease or are you now beyond something more than a just healthy cynicism/skepticism?
It appears you disagree rather vehemently with the questions posed.
Also hoping Jason Kenny comments.
These referendum questions are both a waste of time, and also a stupid political ploy. The thing that everybody understands but doesn't like to admit is that most voters don't pay a lot of attention to politics, and don't really know much about the issues being debated. Voters either will not have given much thought to the issues being addressed by these questions, and the ones who have will often be coming to them with an understanding formed by unchallenged partisan perspectives.
Basically, Smith will need to tell people how she wants them to vote on these questions and make the case for why they should vote that way. So, as an elected government, why not just do it? If they're worried about whether they've got the necessary support, call an election and make the case at the ballot box with your party platform.