I believe in free markets and responsible resource development. But what we have in Alberta’s oil and gas industry isn’t a true free market — it’s a system that too often prioritizes rapid export and foreign shareholder returns over the long-term interests of the people who actually own the resource: Albertans.

Peter Lougheed: The Last Premier Who Put Alberta First

The last Alberta premier who truly stood up to the oil and gas industry was Peter Lougheed. In the 1970s, Lougheed fought hard against both Ottawa and the major companies. He demanded fair royalties, pushed for more upgrading and petrochemical processing inside Alberta, and created the Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund so future generations would benefit from our non-renewable resources.

Under Lougheed, Alberta extracted maximum value for its people and used that wealth to build excellent public services — hospitals, schools, universities, and infrastructure that we still rely on today. He proved you could attract investment while still putting Albertans first.

The Post-Lougheed Shift:

After Lougheed, that Alberta-first approach largely disappeared.

In the late 1990s under Ralph Klein, regulators approved the Alliance Pipeline — a project specifically designed to ship unprocessed wet natural gas (rich in valuable natural gas liquids) directly to the Aux Sable plant near Chicago. The American and international interests behind it knew exactly what they were getting: the high-value liquids stripped and processed in the U.S., while Alberta got faster export volumes and lower netbacks for producers.

Alberta already had the industrial base and capability to expand in-province petrochemical processing. Instead, we chose the path of quickest export. This pattern continued in later decades with royalty reductions and export-focused infrastructure.

The Bigger Picture: Who Really Owns Alberta’s Oil Patch?

Recent data from the Alberta Federation of Labour (2025) shows the scale of foreign control:

· The four largest oil sands producers (CNRL, Cenovus, Imperial Oil, and Suncor) represent ~80% of production.

· These companies are on average 73% foreign-owned, with 60% American-owned.

· Between 2021–2024, these four companies paid out $79.7 billion in dividends and share buybacks — nearly three-quarters of which went to foreign (mostly American) shareholders.

In plain language: Albertans own the resource in the ground, but when the profits are made, a massive share flows straight out of the province.

I’m not against foreign investment or international markets. Capital is needed. But when foreign shareholders consistently capture the lion’s share of the upside while Alberta bears most of the downside, we have to be honest: this industry is not currently structured to serve the best interests of Albertans or Canadians.

Peter Lougheed showed us a better way is possible. We can attract investment and demand maximum value for our own people. It’s long past time we returned to that Alberta-first approach — smarter royalties, more in-province processing, and policies that actually put Albertans first.

The resource belongs to us. The benefits should too.

We’re already hearing the familiar refrain:

“Disallowance hasn’t been used since 1943.” That’s true.

But the more important truth is this: It hasn’t been necessary.

For decades after Confederation, federal and provincial governments operated within a culture of restraint, compromise, and mutual respect for the constitutional balance. Disagreements were real, but they were resolved inside the guardrails of our system. That era of relative restraint is now under serious strain.

What is Disallowance?

Disallowance is a formal constitutional power held by the federal government under the Constitution Act, 1867 (specifically Sections 56 and 90). It allows the Governor General, on the advice of the federal Cabinet, to veto and annul any provincial law within one year of it receiving royal assent.

In simple terms: if a province passes a bill the federal government believes is unconstitutional, harmful to national interests, discriminatory, or encroaches on federal jurisdiction, Ottawa can strike it down entirely — wiping it from the statute books as if it never existed.

This power was used 112 times between Confederation in 1867 and 1943. It was most active in the early decades under Prime Minister John A. Macdonald, often to protect federal authority or minority rights. The last time it was used was in 1943, when the federal government disallowed an Alberta law that prohibited the sale of land to Hutterites and “enemy aliens” during the Second World War. Ottawa ruled that the province had overstepped into federal jurisdiction over wartime security and aliens.

While the power has fallen into disuse for more than 80 years — leading some scholars to argue it has become a constitutional convention not to use it — it remains fully alive in Canadian law. It has never been repealed or amended out of the Constitution.

Disallowance exists as one of the original “guardrails” of Canadian federalism: a deliberate check designed to maintain balance between the two levels of government and prevent any single province from undermining the federation or fundamental rights.

In today’s context, it is being discussed again precisely because many Canadians worry that longstanding norms of restraint and mutual respect are breaking down.

What Has Changed in Alberta?

We are witnessing a provincial government that has taken a markedly aggressive approach to consolidating power — one that systematically weakens checks and balances, sidelines independent institutions, and expands executive authority at every turn.

Rather than working through normal democratic processes and respecting institutional boundaries, the UCP government has repeatedly:

• Used the Notwithstanding Clause preemptively to shield contentious policies from judicial review.

• Rewritten election and referendum laws to favour activist-driven outcomes.

• Ignored adverse court rulings when they conflict with its sovereignty agenda.

• Employed procedural tactics such as late-night sittings and closure motions to limit debate and scrutiny.

This pattern goes well beyond typical partisan governing. It represents a deliberate shift toward executive dominance and a reduced role for courts, independent officers of the legislature, and public oversight.

Pre-emptive use of the Notwithstanding Clause:

Alberta’s UCP government has invoked Section 33 of the Charter multiple times in just a few months — marking an unprecedented pace. The first use came with Bill 2 (Back to School Act, October 2025), which forced striking teachers back to work, unilaterally imposed a four-year collective agreement, and suspended their right to strike until 2028. Critics argue this effectively placed a price tag on teachers’ constitutional rights to collective bargaining and freedom of association.

Then, through Bill 9 (Protecting Alberta’s Children Statutes Amendment Act, December 2025), the government used the clause again to shield three controversial laws affecting transgender youth from judicial review: restrictions on gender-affirming medical treatments for minors (originally Bill 26), requirements for parental consent on names and pronouns in schools (Bill 27), and gender verification rules for girls’ and women’s sports (Bill 29).

This isn’t occasional or defensive use — it’s becoming a routine pre-emptive shield against constitutional scrutiny on highly contentious social and labour issues.

Bill 14 (Justice Statutes Amendment Act, 2025):

This legislation rewrites the rules around citizen initiatives and referendums. It lowers barriers for petitions, removes early constitutional screening mechanisms, centralizes more approval power in cabinet, and effectively nullifies ongoing court proceedings. Most notably, it was introduced and passed just days after Court of King’s Bench Justice Colin Feasby ruled that an Alberta independence referendum would violate Section 35 Treaty and Aboriginal rights of First Nations. Despite this clear judicial finding — and strong opposition from multiple First Nations including the Confederacy of Treaty 6, Piikani Nation, Sturgeon Lake Cree Nation, and others — the government proceeded anyway. Critics, including the presiding judge, described the move as showing a “cavalier disregard” for the rule of law, court resources, and First Nations intervenors. This directly enabled the Alberta Prosperity Project / Stay Free Alberta independence petition drive to continue.

Bill 54 (Election Statutes Amendment Act, 2025):

This omnibus bill fundamentally weakened Elections Alberta’s ability to investigate and enforce election laws. Most critically, it raised the threshold for launching investigations from a lower “suspected breach” standard to the much higher criminal-law threshold of “reasonable grounds” to believe an offence had occurred. Chief Electoral Officer Gordon McClure publicly warned the government before the bill passed that these changes would severely impair the Election Commissioner’s ability to investigate and enforce compliance — including on campaign finance rules and misuse of voter data.

The bill also dramatically lowered the signature thresholds for citizen-initiated referendums (including on separation) from 20% of eligible voters to just 10% of votes cast in the previous election — making such petitions roughly 70% easier to trigger. It extended signature collection periods and made other changes that critics say tilt the field toward well-organized activist groups while reducing independent oversight at both provincial and local levels (including impacts on municipal elections and recall processes).

These changes have been directly linked by Elections Alberta, opposition critics, and independent observers to the recent massive voter data breach. Nearly three million Albertans’ personal information (names, addresses, and other details from the official List of Electors) was improperly obtained and publicly posted by a separatist-linked group. The higher investigative bar created by Bill 54 reportedly delayed and complicated Elections Alberta’s response.

Broader pattern of centralizing control:

Reduced independent oversight, late-night legislative theatrics, heavy use of closure motions to shut down debate, and deliberate efforts to limit court challenges all point to a deliberate accumulation of executive power.

This isn’t normal policy disagreement. Ramming controversial omnibus bills through the legislature in the pre-dawn hours — sometimes past 2 a.m. — while limiting debate and using procedural tools to silence opposition is not how healthy democracy operates. These tactics may deliver short-term wins for the government, but they erode public trust and undermine the transparency and accountability that protect our democratic institutions. It’s a structural shift that risks eroding the constitutional equilibrium that has kept Canada stable for generations.

Why This Matters — The “Why” Behind the Tools:

Our Constitution was deliberately designed with mutual veto powers for a reason. Provinces are not sovereign states; they operate within a federation. When one province aggressively uses every tool at its disposal to override or sidestep constitutional norms — especially tools meant to protect minority rights or democratic integrity — the federal government has legitimate, lawful counter-tools.

Disallowance (the federal power to invalidate provincial legislation) and reservation exist precisely for moments when the constitutional balance is at risk. They were never intended to sit idle forever while one level of government tests the limits of federalism.

The last use in 1943 was against an Alberta law restricting land sales to Hutterites and “enemy aliens” during wartime — a clear overreach into federal authority. Today, the concerns are different but no less serious: democratic process integrity, Charter rights, Treaty obligations, and the very unity of the country.

Recent events — including the voter data breach tied to separatist groups enabled by these legislative changes — only heighten the urgency. Albertans deserve real protection of their personal data and democratic institutions, not finger-pointing while investigations drag on.

Conclusion: Time for Federal Leadership.

Disallowance should never be used casually or for partisan gain. But pretending it no longer exists — or that it can never be considered — is constitutional negligence.

If a province chooses to push the envelope this aggressively, it is entirely legitimate for the federal government to respond with the lawful tools at its disposal. The Constitution is not a suicide pact. Its safeguards exist to preserve the federation, not to enable its gradual dismantling.

This is one of the closest moments in modern Canadian history to the kind of imbalance the framers anticipated. Canadians — including millions of proud Albertans who want strong provinces within a united Canada — deserve better than drift toward confrontation.

It’s time for Ottawa to step up, reassert constitutional balance, and offer practical solutions that protect rights, restore trust, and keep our country whole.

Hey Substack fam,

Yup… almost as depressing as what the Republicans are demanding in the U.S. — voter ID to prove you’re a bonafide citizen! What a scam! That was my gut reaction a few weeks ago when the SAVE Act (Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act) kept popping up in the news. As an Albertan who’s all-in on safe democracy — fair elections, real trust in results, no funny business — I wanted to dig deeper. The UCP government here in Alberta isn’t just watching the U.S. debate; in keyways, they’re already implementing (or surpassing) similar ideas. So let’s put it all together: the U.S. SAVE Act, what the UCP has actually passed or announced, the case for tighter rules, the devil’s-advocate counterarguments, and why this matters right here in Alberta. No partisan spin — just the details that actually affect turnout, trust, and who gets to vote.

First, what exactly is the U.S. SAVE Act?

The SAVE Act (passed the House multiple times but stalled in the Senate as of 2026) requires documentary proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections — think passport, birth certificate, naturalization papers, or specific REAL ID docs that explicitly show citizenship. It also pushes photo ID at the polls in many scenarios. Proponents say it closes loopholes: federal law already bans non-citizens from voting, but most states still rely on self-attestation (“I swear I’m a citizen”) plus patchy database checks. With millions of non-citizens in the country, even rare slip-ups erode confidence. Opponents call it a solution in search of a problem — non-citizen voting is documented but tiny in audited numbers — and argue it burdens millions of eligible citizens who lack easy access to those exact documents (especially low-income, rural, elderly, or name-change folks).Now zoom to Alberta: UCP policies that echo (and sometimes lead) the SAVE playbook

Alberta already requires ID to vote provincially and municipally — one piece of government-issued photo ID with name + current address, or two pieces showing name (one with address). But the UCP has tightened things further, often faster than the U.S. federal push:

· Bill 20 (Municipal Affairs Statutes Amendment Act, 2024 — in force for 2025 municipal elections): Mandates government-issued photo ID for municipal voting. It largely eliminates “vouching” (where one voter vouches for another’s identity/address if they lack ID). Critics (including academic estimates) say this could sideline up to 50,000 eligible Albertans who simply don’t carry or have ready access to photo ID. The UCP framed it as “enhancing integrity” and building trust in local democracy.

· Election Statutes Amendment Act, 2025 (Bill 54 — Royal Assent May 2025): Bans electronic vote tabulators (hand-count ballots only), fully eliminates vouching at stations to strengthen ID verification, and makes other tweaks for consistency across provincial, municipal, Senate, and referendum votes. Premier Danielle Smith’s government sold it as making elections “fair, secure, and reflective of the true will of the people.”

· Citizenship marker on Alberta DLs and ID cards (announced September 2025, rollout fall 2026): This is the big one that puts Alberta ahead of most U.S. states. New and renewed driver’s licences and provincial IDs will include a visible “Canadian citizenship” marker (“CAN”). You’ll need to provide proof of citizenship to get/renew it. Smith called it a first-in-Canada move that “strengthens Alberta’s election system… ensuring that only eligible citizens cast ballots” while also cutting red tape for services. One secure card does double duty: ID + citizenship proof.

Recent voter-list breaches (a separatist-linked group allegedly publishing millions of electors’ personal info) have only added fuel — Premier Smith says her government will consider more legislation once RCMP and Elections Alberta probes wrap up.

In short: Alberta isn’t waiting for a federal style SAVE Act. We’re already requiring stricter ID at the polls, killing vouching, mandating hand counts in places, and baking citizenship verification into everyday IDs.

The case for these changes (integrity first):

· Public trust matters. Polls in both countries show overwhelming support (70-80%+) for photo ID and proof-of-citizenship rules. When people think the system is loose, turnout and legitimacy suffer — regardless of who wins.

· Non-citizen voting happens, even if rare. Audits turn up cases (tiny fractions of a percent in most reviews), and with growing migration pressures, better safeguards make sense. Alberta’s new citizenship marker is a practical, low-friction way to verify eligibility without forcing everyone to carry a passport.

· Most democracies do this. Dozens of countries (including many in Europe) require ID or citizenship proof. Alberta’s moves align us with modern norms, not some fringe experiment.

· UCP argument: These aren’t barriers — they’re basics. Free or low-cost IDs exist, and the citizenship marker actually helps eligible voters by making proof easier long-term.

Devil’s advocate: The real-world friction (and why it feels like a scam to some)

Here’s where the details bite, exactly as we discussed earlier:

· It burdens eligible citizens more than it catches fraud. Tens of thousands of Albertans (especially low-income, Indigenous, rural, elderly, students, or recent name-changers) don’t have ready government photo ID. Pre-Bill 20 studies showed vouching was a key backstop. Now gone. The citizenship marker rollout could create short-term headaches for renewals.

· The problem being solved is microscopic in Canada. Unlike U.S. claims of widespread issues, Canadian audits (federal and provincial) consistently find non-citizen voting “virtually nonexistent” in impact. We already have robust registration via Elections Alberta. Is hand-counting ballots and ID crackdowns fixing a crisis — or creating new ones?

· Turnout effects are real. Studies on similar ID laws show 2-3%+ drops, hitting marginalized groups hardest. In close races (municipal or provincial), that uneven friction can decide outcomes without ever catching a single ineligible voter.

· Ahead of the U.S. doesn’t always mean better. SAVE Act critics in the States warn it kills online/mail registration and third-party drives. Alberta’s citizenship-on-ID is innovative, but if proof-of-citizenship becomes de facto required at polls via the marker, it risks the same “paperwork tax” on citizens who just want to vote.

Bottom line in devil’s-advocate mode:

Safe democracy needs both access and integrity. Trading a microscopic fraud risk for real barriers to tens of thousands of eligible Albertans feels like overkill unless the fixes (free mobile ID services, better outreach, database matching) are rock-solid.

So where does Alberta stand in 2026?

The Neutering of Elections Alberta: How the UCP Turned an Independent Watchdog Into a Paper Tiger (2019–2026)

The UCP is undeniably ahead of the curve on election-security theatre — or genuine safeguards, depending on your view. While Republicans in the U.S. are still fighting over the SAVE Act federally, Alberta has already:

· Tightened municipal ID rules.

· Killed vouching.

· Mandated hand counts in some contexts.

· Pioneered citizenship markers on provincial IDs.

What could possibly go wrong?

In conclusion, this isn’t accidental incompetence — it’s a calculated political strategy by the UCP to control who gets to participate in Alberta’s democracy. By weakening oversight through Bill 54 and related legislation, they created the conditions for the very voter data breach we’re now seeing exploited. Now they’ll use the fallout to push stricter voter ID rules, citizenship markers, and restrictions that hit women hardest (over 50% of Alberta’s population) while claiming it’s all about “integrity.”

This mirrors tactics used south of the border with the SAVE Act, but it’s being executed right here through our own provincial laws and institutions. Albertans deserve better: real accountability for the breach, stronger protections for voter data, and an Elections Act that actually safeguards access to the ballot box — not restricts it under the guise of security.

We’re Taking Alberta Forward, not backward. Demand transparency, fight the suppression, and make your voice heard before the next election locks things down even tighter. #TakingAlbertaForward

What do you think, Alberta? Is the UCP protecting the vote — or gatekeeping it? Drop your take below. Let’s keep the conversation honest. — Taking Alberta Forward

(Originally drafted after digging into the SAVE Act debate and our own backyard rules. Sources linked inline for transparency.)

U.S. SAVE Act:

· U.S. Congress: H.R.22 - Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act (119th Congress) — congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/22

· Campaign Legal Center / Brennan Center analyses on impacts and criticisms (2025-2026 updates).

· Gallup, Pew Research Center polls on voter ID / proof-of-citizenship support (2024-2025).

Alberta / UCP Policies:

• Bill 20 (Municipal Affairs Statutes Amendment Act, 2024): Alberta government fact sheets and Legislative Assembly documents. Criticisms on potential disenfranchisement (e.g., ~50,000 voters) from Policy Options and The Tyee (2024).

• Election Statutes Amendment Act, 2025 (Bill 54): Royal Assent May 15, 2025. Alberta.ca overview on hand counts, ID verification, and no vouching — alberta.ca/improving-consistency-fairness-albertas-democratic-processes.

• Citizenship marker on DL/ID cards (announced Sept 2025, rollout fall 2026): Premier Danielle Smith announcements and Service Alberta details. Coverage in CBC, Globe and Mail, Calgary Journal.

• Current Alberta voter ID requirements: Elections Alberta official page — elections.ab.ca/voters/id-required-to-vote.

• Voter list breach / investigations (2026): CBC, Town & Country Today reports on Centurion Project and RCMP/Elections Alberta probes.

· Broader Context & Studies:

• Non-citizen voting incidence (U.S. and Canada): Audits from state/provincial elections officials, Brennan Center, and Center for Election Innovation & Research (rare/tiny numbers in most reviews).

• Voter ID turnout impacts: Academic studies summarized in Brennan Center reports and journals (mixed but some suppression effects noted for strict rules).

• International norms: Various global election data sets showing widespread use of ID requirements.

Alberta’s Sovereignty Push: Challenging International Law and Its Impact on Treaty Agreements.

The End!

This week (May 1–2, 2026), Albertans learned of a massive privacy and integrity crisis: the personal information of nearly 3 million voters — names, addresses, and phone numbers — was shared and misused by a separatist-linked group through the “Centurion” app. Elections Alberta secured a court injunction to shut it down, and the RCMP launched a criminal investigation.

The Chief Electoral Officer’s statements make the situation even more damning. UCP legislation passed in 2025 (including provisions tied to Bill 14 and related reforms) raised the threshold for investigations so high that early warnings about exactly this kind of misuse could not be pursued. This is not a glitch. It is the predictable outcome of years of deliberate weakening of Alberta’s independent election authority.

The graphic says it plainly: millions of Albertans’ personal info is now public. Identity theft risk? Enabled by the UCP.

Since forming government in 2019, the United Conservative Party has systematically altered the role, resources, and independence of Elections Alberta. Critics argue these moves have “neutered” the non-partisan office responsible for administering elections, enforcing finance rules, and overseeing recalls and citizen initiatives. The government maintains the changes improve integrity, accountability, and fairness.

Here is the timeline.

Jason Kenney Era (2019–2022): Expansion of Mandate: Expansion of Mandate with Early Constraints on Enforcement.

In its early years, the UCP did not launch broad attacks on Elections Alberta’s core independence or base budget. Instead, it significantly expanded the office’s responsibilities while making targeted legislative adjustments and resource decisions that critics say weakened its investigative capacity from the outset.Key actions included:

• Passing the Recall Act and Citizen Initiative Act in 2021, which introduced MLA recall petitions and citizen-led referendums/petitions. These became major new duties for Elections Alberta. The party framed them as empowering voters and increasing accountability between elections.

• The Election Statutes Amendment Act, 2021 (No. 2), which fixed the general election date to the last Monday in May for predictability, substantially raised party spending limits (to a formula expected to reach ~$3.2 million), and placed restrictions on certain third-party advertisers. Early signals also pointed to amendments to the Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act.

During this period, the government also reduced resources for election investigators. This had a tangible impact on enforcement, including high-profile matters tied to the Kenney campaign. For example, Alan Hallman (Kenney’s campaign manager in the 2017 Calgary-Lougheed by-election) was fined for obstructing an Elections Alberta investigation, a case that highlighted ongoing challenges in oversight during the transition to UCP government.

Overall, this era added significant workload to Elections Alberta without corresponding sustained funding increases for core enforcement functions. While presented as democratic enhancements, the combination of new mandates and constrained investigative resources set the stage for later criticisms of a weakened watchdog.

Alberta premier dismisses concerns over firing of election commissioner

Danielle Smith Era (2022–Present): Resource Constraints, Power Shifts, and Direct Interventions:

Under Premier Smith, the approach intensified through multiple legislative packages, funding decisions during politically sensitive moments, and overrides of independent processes. The Chief Electoral Officer, Gordon McClure, issued repeated public warnings about risks to independence and enforcement.

Notable changes include:

• Election Statutes Amendment Act (Bill 54, ~April 2025): Banned electronic vote tabulators (requiring hand counts), eliminated voter vouching, reintroduced corporate and union donations, lowered thresholds for citizen-initiated referendums, and extended signature collection periods. McClure warned the changes would impair the Election Commissioner’s ability to investigate and enforce compliance, including on financial rules.

• Recall Funding (Late 2025): As more than a dozen recall petitions targeted UCP MLAs, Elections Alberta requested $13.5 million to manage the surge. A UCP-majority legislative committee reduced it to approximately $1.45 million, severely limiting capacity.

• Justice Statutes Amendment Act / Bill 14 (December 2025): Included further Election Act amendments (higher nomination signatures, party name restrictions) and changes affecting referendums and citizen initiatives. McClure wrote to all MLAs flagging risks of partisan influence, noting the Chief Electoral Officer “should not be taking direction from the executive branch.” Some adjustments followed his input, but the concerns underscored broader patterns.

• Electoral Boundaries (2025–2026): An independent bipartisan commission delivered its final report in March 2026. The UCP rejected it and passed a motion for a new process overseen by a UCP-majority MLA committee, with an expedited timeline and plans to expand to 91 seats. Opposition parties and analysts accused the government of gerrymandering to favor rural strongholds.

Across these years, McClure (recommended for the role in 2024) has repeatedly highlighted threats to public trust, investigative powers, and arm’s-length operations.

The pattern is unmistakable. The UCP introduced accountability tools like recalls and citizen initiatives, then constrained the agency tasked with running them when those tools turned against the party. They expanded spending possibilities and donation sources while weakening oversight mechanisms. They overrode independent boundary recommendations when the outcomes were inconvenient.

This week’s voter data breach — enabled by raised barriers to investigation — is not an anomaly. It is Exhibit A in the case that Alberta’s electoral watchdog has been systematically undermined since 2019.

Strong democracy requires robust, independent institutions that can act without fear or favour. When the referee is sidelined or defunded at critical moments, everyone loses trust in the game. Albertans deserve better: properly resourced oversight, transparent processes, and genuine arm’s-length administration of our elections.

Accountability starts with sunlight. The next election — and any future reforms — must restore faith in the system that protects every voter’s voice.

Sources

• Elections Alberta official statements and reports (elections.ab.ca)

• CBC News coverage of the May 2026 voter data breach, recall funding, and Bill 14

• Global News and The Globe and Mail reporting on Bill 54, CEO warnings, and boundaries process

• Chief Electoral Officer Gordon McClure letters and committee testimony (2025)

• Legislative records on the Election Statutes Amendment Act, Justice Statutes Amendment Act (Bill 14), and electoral boundaries motion (2026)

• Alberta Politics (David Climenhaga) and other independent analysis of the commission override

This article reflects publicly available information and statements from officials. It is intended to inform democratic discourse in Alberta.

As someone who believes fully in DEIA — Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility — Alberta’s recent rollback has been deeply troubling. The rebranding of equity work in our universities and legislation like Bill 13 aren’t neutral “refreshes.” They’re part of a broader attack that dilutes commitments to fairness and representation. And for me, the attack on supports for people with disabilities has been the last straw.

Labeling those of us who defend DEIA as “woke” is a tired smear meant to dismiss real efforts to build equitable systems. Accessibility — the “A” — is the practical heart of true inclusion, yet it’s getting sidelined or undermined amid these changes. Meanwhile, corporations often treat DEIA as a flexible PR tool, defending it only when it fits the “business is business” bottom line.

Alberta deserves better: institutions and leaders that advance all four pillars of DEIA without apology, especially for the one in four Albertans living with disabilities.

The Key Points:

1. Alberta’s regressive rollback of DEIA
   Universities like the University of Alberta have shifted from explicit “equity, diversity, and inclusion” language to softer terms like “access, community, and belonging.” While framed as inclusive, critics see this as diluting focus on addressing historical and systemic barriers. Similar rebrands have happened elsewhere, often paired with moves away from equity considerations in hiring and programming.

2. Bill 13 (the Regulated Professions Neutrality Act) further restricts mandatory training on topics like cultural safety, unconscious bias, disability awareness, and inclusion. Health and nursing groups have warned this could weaken safe, equitable care for diverse patients, including those with disabilities. These aren’t protections of neutrality — they limit tools that help professionals serve everyone better.

3. The “Woke” label: a way to shut down progress.
   Calling DEIA supporters “woke” turns evidence-based work on representation, barrier removal, and belonging into a culture-war insult. It avoids honest discussion about why underrepresentation and exclusion persist in our institutions, workplaces, and professions. In Alberta, this rhetoric frames necessary equity efforts as ideological excess rather than essential steps toward a province that works for all.

4. Accessibility: the critical piece that’s being undermined.
   Accessibility is about concrete action — removing physical, digital, attitudinal, and systemic barriers so people with disabilities can participate fully and independently. It’s universal design, accommodations, captioning, flexible supports, and shifting attitudes. It benefits everyone (curb cuts help parents with strollers; accessible tech aids many learners).

   This is the part of DEIA that should unite us, yet it’s the one getting shortchanged. Alberta still lacks comprehensive accessibility legislation (one of only two provinces without it), and recent private member’s bills aimed at creating standards were voted down. At the same time, the shift to the new Alberta Disability Assistance Program (ADAP, launching July 2026) has raised serious concerns from advocates: lower maximum benefits for many ($1,740 vs. previous AISH rates), reduced employment income exemptions, and a dual-track system that some fear pits “able to work” against others, potentially deepening poverty for disabled Albertans amid rising living costs. While Budget 2026 touts record overall disability spending, the details on benefit cuts, clawbacks, and limited appeal rights feel like steps backward — exactly when stronger DEIA frameworks (including robust accessibility) are needed most.

5. Corporations and the “business is business” playbook.
   Many companies embraced DEIA after 2020, pointing to innovation, talent retention, and customer appeal. Yet when political pressure rises, some quietly scale back, rebrand, or defend commitments only through narrow “business case” metrics. This pragmatic approach treats equity and accessibility as optional extras rather than core values.

   In reality, genuine DEIA — including strong accessibility — builds stronger, more resilient organizations and societies. Corporations that waver when it matters send the message that inclusion is expendable. Albertans deserve consistent leadership from both government and business that embeds these principles deeply, not as a toggle switch for profits or politics.

The attack on DEIA in Alberta isn’t just about words or rebrands — it’s eroding tools for real equity and inclusion, with the heaviest impact falling on people with disabilities. The “woke” label distracts from the urgent need to protect accessibility as a non-negotiable foundation. For me, the recent changes to disability supports were the final wake-up call.

We must defend the full DEIA framework: diversity that reflects our province, equity that closes gaps, inclusion that fosters belonging, and accessibility that removes barriers for everyone. Corporations should step up as true partners, not fair-weather allies hiding behind “business is business.” Albertans committed to progress aren’t extremists — we’re fighting for a province where no one is left behind. If the rollback on disability supports was your last straw too, let’s keep speaking out, pushing for stronger accessibility standards, and holding leaders accountable.

Share if you stand for real DEIA and accessible inclusion for all. #AlbertaDEIA #AccessibilityForAll #DisabilityRights #EquityMatters #InclusionNotOptional #TakingAlbertaForward

In no way do I presume to speak for any First Nations, Treaty partners, or Indigenous communities in Alberta or across Canada—this statement and my work reflect my own perspective as a non-Indigenous advocate. My role is one of steadfast support, active allyship, and unwavering commitment to upholding the principles of free, prior, and informed consent, meaningful reconciliation, and respect for the inherent rights of Indigenous Peoples. I recognize and honour the sovereign and enduring rights of First Nations to their traditional lands, waters, and environments—rights that predate colonial structures and that we all share responsibility to protect and steward together. It is through this lens of humility, learning, and solidarity that I engage in these discussions, always guided by the voices and leadership of those whose territories and Treaties form the foundation of this place we call home.

In recent years, Alberta’s United Conservative Party (UCP) government under Premier Danielle Smith has pursued policies emphasizing provincial autonomy, often framing them as defenses against federal and international overreach. This agenda has sparked significant controversy, particularly regarding its implications for historic Treaty agreements with First Nations and Canada’s commitments under international law, such as the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). At the heart of this tension is the International Agreements Act, enacted in late 2025, which allows Alberta to challenge or refuse enforcement of federal-signed international pacts in areas of provincial jurisdiction. Critics, including First Nations leaders, argue this legislation undermines Treaty obligations and fosters division.

This article examines the UCP’s resolutions from its 2025 Annual General Meeting (AGM), the details of the International Agreements Act, and the strong backlash from Alberta’s Treaty Chiefs, highlighting how these developments intersect with constitutionally protected Treaty rights and international norms.

Historical Context: Treaty Agreements and International Law in Alberta:

Alberta’s landscape is defined by Treaties 6 (1876), 7 (1877), and 8 (1899)—nation-to-nation agreements between First Nations and the Crown, signed long before Alberta became a province in 1905. These Treaties guaranteed Indigenous rights to lands, resources, education, and self-governance “as long as the sun shines, grass grows, and rivers flow.” They are enshrined in Section 35 of Canada’s Constitution Act, 1982, making them part of the supreme law of the land. Provinces like Alberta must respect these rights, including duties to consult and accommodate First Nations on matters affecting them.

Internationally, these Treaties gain additional weight through UNDRIP, adopted by the UN in 2007 and implemented in Canadian federal law in 2021. UNDRIP emphasizes free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) for developments on Indigenous lands and supports modern interpretations of Treaty rights, including resource sharing and co-management. While not directly binding, UNDRIP influences Canadian jurisprudence and is invoked in disputes over land and resources. For Alberta’s Treaty territories, this international framework bolsters claims that provincial actions cannot unilaterally override Crown commitments.

UCP’s 2025 AGM: Resolutions Targeting International Overreach:

The UCP’s November 2025 AGM in Edmonton saw members pass all 35 proposed policy resolutions, many reflecting grassroots demands for greater sovereignty. Two resolutions stand out for their direct relevance to Treaty agreements and international law:

1. Defending Provincial Jurisdiction Over International Matters: This resolution urges the government to assert Alberta’s authority against international emergencies, treaties, or agreements impacting provincial areas like natural resources, health, education, and security. It positions Alberta as a gatekeeper, potentially allowing the province to ignore federal commitments if deemed harmful to Albertans.

2. Protecting Crown Lands from UNDRIP Interpretations: Explicitly targeting UNDRIP, this resolution calls for safeguarding Alberta’s Crown lands from unlawful seizure by international or federal bodies through neocolonial interpretations of the declaration. It claims such interpretations could lead to land transfers to First Nations followed by international reclamation, while affirming that Treaty spirit and intent should only be revised through negotiation.

These resolutions, now part of the UCP’s Member Policy Declaration, signal a broader agenda to prioritize provincial interests over federal or international obligations. While non-binding on government, they have influenced legislation and rhetoric, drawing parallels to earlier UCP moves like the 2022 Alberta Sovereignty Act.

The International Agreements Act: Legislation to Challenge Federal Pacts:

Building on AGM priorities, Premier Smith introduced Bill 1, the International Agreements Act, on October 23, 2025. The Act received Royal Assent on November 26, 2025, and came into force immediately. Its core provision requires that any federal international agreement touching on provincial jurisdiction—such as health, education, or resources—must be implemented via Alberta legislation to be enforceable in the province.

Smith described the Act as a common-sense measure to ensure decisions that impact Alberta are made in Alberta, drawing inspiration from Quebec’s approach to international relations. The Act could apply to UNDRIP-related commitments or other pacts like WHO health treaties or climate accords, potentially allowing Alberta to opt out if they conflict with provincial priorities.

Legal experts warn the Act risks constitutional challenges, as provinces cannot unilaterally void Canada’s international obligations. It has also been linked to broader UCP efforts, including invocations of the Charter’s notwithstanding clause, raising concerns about eroding rights protections.

Bill 14: Overriding Judicial Rulings and Paving the Way for Separatist Referendums:

A pivotal development in Alberta’s sovereignty agenda came with the passage of Bill 14: Justice Statutes Amendment Act, 2025, introduced by Justice Minister Mickey Amery on December 4, 2025, and receiving Royal Assent on December 11, 2025. This sweeping legislation amended multiple acts, including the Citizen Initiative Act, Referendum Act, and others, fundamentally altering the rules for citizen-led petitions and referendums.

Key changes included:

· Transferring authority from the independent Chief Electoral Officer to the Minister of Justice to decide whether citizen initiative petitions can proceed, including whether to refer questions to the courts.

· Removing safeguards that previously required referendum questions to be constitutional, factually accurate, not contravene the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, respect First Nations Treaty rights, or stay within provincial jurisdiction.

· Discontinuing ongoing court proceedings related to these requirements, effectively halting judicial reviews of proposed questions.

· Applying some changes retroactively, which reset or nullified certain active petitions.

These amendments came at a critical moment. Just one day after Bill 14’s introduction, Justice Colin Feasby of the Alberta Court of King’s Bench ruled that a proposed separatist referendum question from the Alberta Prosperity Project—”Do you agree that the Province of Alberta shall become a sovereign country and cease to be a province of Canada?”—was unconstitutional. The judge held that the existing Citizen Initiative Act did not empower citizens to initiate referendums on matters that would infringe on constitutional rights, including Section 35 Treaty rights and the Charter. He emphasized that such a question would impair First Nations’ ability to exercise their Treaty rights and violate the rule of law.

Bill 14’s passage effectively circumvented this ruling by removing the constitutional barriers and judicial referral process that had blocked the petition. Separatist advocates hailed it as a victory for “democratic reform” and “removing gatekeepers,” while critics—including judges, legal experts, opposition parties, and First Nations—condemned it as an erosion of judicial independence, the separation of powers, and protections for Indigenous rights.

First Nations leaders expressed profound alarm. The Confederacy of Treaty No. 6, Treaty 7 G4 Nations (Tsuut’ina, Bearspaw, Chiniki, and Goodstoney), Sturgeon Lake Cree Nation, Piikani Nation, and others argued that the bill enables unconstitutional questions that threaten Treaty relationships. They noted that Alberta’s existence and borders stem from Crown-First Nations Treaties predating the province, and any separation would require Indigenous consent—something Bill 14’s changes do not ensure. Multiple First Nations launched or joined legal challenges, asserting that the legislation itself violates constitutional norms and Treaty obligations by sidelining oversight that protects Section 35 rights.

This move amplified tensions already evident in the UCP’s AGM resolutions and the International Agreements Act, reinforcing perceptions that provincial autonomy efforts prioritize political goals over foundational Crown-Indigenous commitments and the broader Canadian constitutional framework.

First Nations Backlash: Non-Confidence and Calls for Unity:

Chiefs call on Alberta to nip separatist movement. The Canadian Press

The UCP’s agenda has provoked a unified response from Alberta’s First Nations. On February 26, 2026, the Assembly of Treaty Chiefs (representing Treaties 6, 7, and 8) passed a unanimous vote of non-confidence in the UCP government—the first such action in its history. Chiefs cited the government’s failure to uphold Treaty-based constitutional and governance responsibilities, promotion of separatism, and creation of unsafe conditions for Indigenous peoples through ignorance and intolerance.

Treaty 6 Grand Chief Joey Pete stated that the UCP government has created conditions in Alberta that are unsafe for First Nations peoples—promoting ignorance and intolerance along with its support for the separatist agenda is leading to outright racism. Treaty 8 Grand Chief Trevor Mercredi added that the growing climate of division and separation is a direct result of its failure to respect Treaty Rights. Tsuut’ina Nation Head Chief Ellery Starlight emphasized the unconstitutional exercise to separate Alberta from the Crown.

On March 9, 2026, Indigenous leaders rallied at the Alberta Legislature, urging the UCP to quash separatism and expressing disappointment over the government’s opposition to an NDP motion for a non-confidence vote on its handling of the issue. This follows earlier criticisms of UCP resolutions as undermining UNDRIP’s role in advancing Treaty rights.

Alberta Treaty Chiefs come down on UCP government as non-confidence motion shot down. CityNews

Recent Developments: Federal-Provincial Thaw?

Amid tensions, a potential olive branch emerged on March 6, 2026, when Prime Minister Mark Carney and Premier Smith announced an agreement-in-principle to streamline major project approvals in Alberta. The draft Co-operation Agreement on Environmental and Impact Assessment aims for a one project, one review process, accelerating construction while ensuring the rights of Indigenous communities are respected. A 21-day consultation period, including funding for Indigenous participation, is underway. This could signal de-escalation, but it remains unclear how it aligns with the International Agreements Act or addresses Treaty concerns.

Implications for Alberta’s Future:

The UCP’s efforts to challenge international law through legislation like the International Agreements Act represent a bold assertion of provincial power, but they risk deepening rifts with First Nations and the federal government. For Treaty partners, these moves threaten the foundational Crown-Indigenous relationship, potentially leading to legal battles and economic uncertainty. As Alberta navigates these waters, the call from Treaty Chiefs for unity underscores a pivotal moment: balancing provincial ambitions with constitutional and international obligations that predate the province itself. With ongoing consultations and legislative sessions, the coming months will reveal whether dialogue prevails over division.

It is now time for all Albertans—Indigenous and non-Indigenous alike—to take meaningful action. As Treaty people sharing this land, we must stand together to reject division, support the voices of Treaty Chiefs who have called for an end to separatist rhetoric and renewed respect for Treaty rights, and demand leadership that fosters reconciliation rather than discord. Whether through civic engagement, supporting inclusive dialogue, contacting elected officials, or amplifying calls for unity, every Albertan has a role in ensuring our shared future is built on mutual respect, constitutional integrity, and the enduring spirit of the Treaties. The path forward lies not in separation, but in solidarity—let us choose dialogue, accountability, and collective stewardship of this place we all call home.

The End

Sources:

· Government of Alberta: International Agreements Act (Bill 1) overview and status (alberta.ca/protecting-provincial-jurisdiction).

· Assembly of Treaty Chiefs: Press release on unanimous non-confidence vote in UCP government (February 26, 2026; treaty8.org and confederacy of Treaty Six Nations statements).

· CBC News: Coverage of First Nations chiefs’ non-confidence vote (February 28, 2026) and federal-provincial agreement-in-principle (March 6, 2026).

· Calgary Herald: Report on Assembly of Treaty Chiefs’ non-confidence vote (February 27, 2026).

· The Tyee: Article on Alberta First Nations chiefs calling for end to UCP government (March 5, 2026).

· Prime Minister of Canada: News release on Canada-Alberta Co-operation Agreement (March 6, 2026; pm.gc.ca).

· Alberta Legislative Assembly: Bill 1 (International Agreements Act) text and Royal Assent details (assembly.ab.ca).

· Various reports on UCP 2025 AGM resolutions (including those on UNDRIP and provincial jurisdiction; drawn from party policy declarations and media summaries).

Remember that photo? Premier Danielle Smith and the UCP team proudly declaring ‘NO TAX HIKES, PERIOD’—a core promise to protect Albertans from higher personal or business taxes.

Fast forward to Budget 2026: The province ramps up the education property tax requisition by ~$500 million province-wide, hiking rates and driving the largest single-year property tax increase in Calgary’s history. For a typical Calgary homeowner: +$340/year (a 21% jump in the provincial share). Edmonton: +$154. Municipalities are legally required to collect it, so cities like Calgary face tough choices—raise their own taxes slightly or cut services—while the province avoids calling it a ‘tax hike.’

This is classic reverse Robin Hood: Shielding top earners and corporations from direct increases, then passing the pain to homeowners, renters (via landlords), seniors, and families through property-based levies. Add in downloaded costs—like escalating municipal shares of policing (with some towns facing massive jumps)—and it’s municipalities footing the bill for provincial priorities. The promise looked great on stage, but the reality? A bait-and-switch that hits everyday Albertans hardest while claiming fiscal restraint.

A Spending Problem, Not a Revenue One:

The UCP doesn’t have a revenue problem—it has a spending problem. And that spending isn’t serving most Albertans. The math is simple: 57% of UCP MLAs are now cabinet ministers—the most bloated cabinet in Alberta’s history, and arguably the most fiscally irresponsible in decades. Back in the day, Albertans used to call outfits like this “horse thieves.”

This unchecked spending comes amid a $9.4 billion deficit, yet the government prioritizes pet projects over people.

Eroding Accountability: Hiding the Books:

Compounding this fiscal mess, the UCP is actively removing guardrails of accountability. As former UCP MLA Peter Guthrie stated recently, the government has eliminated a key legislative mechanism that allowed MLAs to demand detailed records on government spending. This hides who is being paid, how much is being spent, and whether public dollars are funding political messaging or crony contracts. Why eliminate transparency tools when Albertans deserve to know? This isn’t conservative governance—it’s cronyism that erodes public trust.

Clawing Back Support for the Disabled: AISH Under Attack:

Albertans with disabilities are bearing the brunt of these misplaced priorities. The UCP has implemented a clawback of the new federal Canada Disability Benefit (CDB), effectively reducing AISH payments by $200 per month for recipients. Starting in September 2025, the province treats the CDB as non-exempt income, deducting it dollar-for-dollar from AISH cheques, leaving recipients no better off despite the federal aid.

But it doesn’t stop there. Through Bill 12, passed in December 2025, the government is overhauling AISH into the Alberta Disability Assistance Program (ADAP), slashing monthly benefits by 10%—from $1,940 to $1,740 starting July 2026 for new applicants, with a delayed cut for existing recipients until 2028. Employment exemptions are also being gutted: personal exemptions drop significantly, and spousal exemptions fall from $2,612 to $1,500. This comes on top of a $220 monthly rent hike for AISH tenants in community housing and the removal of cost-of-living adjustments from legislation.

At a time when living costs are soaring, these changes push vulnerable Albertans deeper into poverty. Critics call it chaos and a failure to consult—disabled Albertans deserve support, not cuts.

Slashing Senior Benefits: A 9% Threshold Cut Hits Hard:

Seniors aren’t spared either. Effective July 1, 2026, the UCP is reducing the income eligibility threshold for the Alberta Seniors Benefit by 9%, dropping it from $34,770 to $32,690 for individuals and from $56,820 to $53,800 for couples. This change will disqualify thousands of low-income seniors from the monthly supplement, which maxes out at $328 for singles and $493 for couples.

The move is projected to save the province $23 million in 2026-27 and $31 million thereafter, but at what cost? Similar reductions apply to related programs like Special Needs Assistance for Seniors and the Seniors Home Adaptation and Repair Program. Premier Smith defends it as aligning with other provinces, but NDP critics argue it exacerbates affordability crises for vulnerable elders. With inflation biting, this cut erodes the quality of life for those who’ve built this province.

Bill 15: Foisting an Unwanted Provincial Police Force on Albertans:

Enter Bill 15, the Public Safety and Emergency Services Statutes Amendment Act, 2026—legislation to establish the Alberta Sheriffs Police Service (ASPS), a provincial police force no one asked for. Introduced on February 24, 2026, it enables the transfer of 1,200 sheriffs and their budget to this new Crown corporation, with about 600 undergoing just six weeks of training to become full police officers.

The government claims it modernizes policing and gives communities “choice,” but polls show majority opposition, with 52% concerned about higher costs. Budget 2026 allocates $36.9 million to ASPS, on top of existing RCMP contracts set to expire in 2032. A 2021 report estimated a full provincial service could cost $734-759 million annually, with a $366 million transition price tag—savings questionable at best.

Worse, costs are being downloaded to municipalities. Under the revised Police Funding Model, small towns (<5,000 population) will cover 22% of frontline policing costs in 2026-27, rising to 30% by 2031. For places like Jasper, this means jumping from $380,000 in 2025 to $512,000 in 2026-27, potentially reaching $1.2 million by 2030-31. Rural Municipalities of Alberta warns of “higher costs, unclear benefits, and significant uncertainty.” This is fiscal irresponsibility masquerading as public safety.

Albertans’ Clear Voice on Provincial Policing: The Numbers Speak, Despite the Biased Process and No Mandate.

Bill 16: Inserting a Middleman into Tourism, Hiking Costs for Everyone:

Finally, Bill 16, the Traveller Protection and Destination Development Act, introduced February 25, 2026, claims to protect travelers from hidden fees but effectively inserts government oversight—a middleman—into the tourism industry. It regulates destination marketing fees (DMFs), requiring designation of organizations, trustees, and associations to handle these voluntary charges, with a transition period until December 31, 2026.

While it mandates upfront disclosure of fees under amendments to the Consumer Protection Act, the real sting is in Budget 2026’s hike to the Alberta Tourism Levy (ATL) from 4% to 6%, effective April 1, 2026. This increase on hotel and motel stays is expected to generate an extra $66 million, pushing total ATL revenue to $200 million in 2026-27.Tourism Alberta’s funding stays flat at $75.25 million, meaning more levy dollars flow to general revenue rather than industry growth. Despite Alberta’s tourism booming to $15 billion in 2025, this levy hike raises prices for Albertans on staycations and tourists alike, potentially deterring visitors while adding bureaucracy through Bill 16’s designations and compliance requirements.

Not to Be Forgotten: Privatization of Public Healthcare:

The UCP’s push doesn’t stop at taxes and downloads—it’s actively eroding the foundation of universal public healthcare. Through Bill 11, the Health Statutes Amendment Act, 2025 (passed in late 2025), Alberta became the first province to legislate two-tier healthcare and allow “dual practice.” This lets physicians work in both the public system and a private-pay market simultaneously, charging patients directly (or via private insurance) for medically necessary procedures like hip, knee, or cataract surgeries while still billing the public plan.

Critics, including advocacy groups like Friends of Medicare and policy experts, warn this creates American-style two-tier care: those who can pay jump the queue, while others face longer public wait times as resources shift to profit-driven options. The bill enables unlimited private fees in some cases, opens doors to workplace private health plans, and risks pulling doctors from the public system. Premier Smith claims it reduces wait times and recruits talent, but opponents call it a direct threat to single-payer medicare—not just in Alberta, but nationwide, as other provinces could follow suit under trade pressures. Additional moves, like transferring hospital ownership via earlier legislation (e.g., Bill 55), further enable private operators to take over public facilities. This isn’t modernization; it’s privatization that prioritizes profit over equitable access.

Billions from Ottawa, But Privatization Takes Priority: The Hidden Cost to Alberta’s Public Health.

Wait There’s More. : Funding Private and Charter Schools:

While public schools grapple with overcrowding, complexity, and calls for more support, the UCP continues to disproportionately boost funding for private and charter schools. Alberta already provides one of the highest subsidy rates in Canada—70% of per-student funding for accredited independent (private) schools, plus full operational funding for charters.

In Budget 2026, amid a record $10.8 billion operational education investment (a 7% increase), the government allocates significant capital for non-public options: $90 million for independent schools to create up to 6,000 new spaces, and ongoing support for charter expansions (including one new charter project in recent announcements). The School Construction Accelerator Program now extends public dollars to private-school building for the first time, accelerating infrastructure for charters and independents while public systems face pressures from enrolment growth.

Critics, including teachers’ associations and parent groups, argue this diverts resources from universal public education—where per-student funding lags nationally—toward exclusive institutions that can select students and aren’t fully accountable to the broader community. Private subsidies have risen faster than public ones in recent years (e.g., 10.3% increases in prior budgets), fueling concerns of stratification by wealth or ability. This choice-driven approach may offer “options,” but it risks undermining equitable funding for the majority of Alberta students in public schools.

Why Alberta Should Stop Funding Private Schools: A Call for True Educational Equity!

For Richer For Poorer: A Tale Of Two Schools! #Alberta #YYC

Alberta Forward: Let’s Build Better Days Together:

Albertans have always thrived through challenges—with grit, innovation, community spirit, and a deep belief in fairness and opportunity for all. Yes, our cost of living has risen, and too many families feel the squeeze today. But this moment isn’t permanent. We have the talent, resources, and shared values to turn things around and create brighter, more prosperous days ahead.

Alberta Forward means choosing a different path—one that restores trust through real transparency, spends wisely on what truly matters, and protects the vulnerable instead of burdening them. It means rejecting backdoor shifts that hit homeowners, seniors, people with disabilities, and everyday families hardest. It means strengthening public healthcare so every Albertan gets timely, equitable care without opening doors to two-tier systems that favor those who can pay. It means ensuring education funding is fair and balanced, giving every child—whether in public, charter, or independent schools—the excellent opportunities they deserve without diverting resources from the majority who rely on our public system.

From smarter policing that respects community voices and budgets, to tourism policies that reinvest directly in growth and keep experiences affordable for locals and visitors alike—we can do this better. We can index supports to keep pace with costs, consult deeply with those affected, collaborate across communities, and prioritize people over pet projects or cronyism.

Better days are within reach when we demand accountability, focus on lifting everyone, and work together as proud Albertans who stand united for a strong, inclusive future. Our province has incredible potential—let’s unleash it.

What excites you most about what Alberta could become? How can we build those better days together? Share your ideas in the comments—let’s inspire each other and spark real change.

Share this if you’re ready for positive, people-first progress. Together, we can make Alberta thrive. #AlbertaForward #BetterDays #AlbertaPolitics #TakingAlbertaForward

1. Calgary Herald: “Egregious’: Calgary’s mayor reacts to provincial education tax increase” (Feb 27, 2026)

2. Global News: “Fees and taxes: How the 2026 Alberta budget may hit your wallet” (Feb 26, 2026)

3. Edmonton Journal: “Alberta Budget 2026: Education property tax hike will cost homeowners hundreds” (Feb 26, 2026)

4. Inclusion Alberta: “Alberta Disability Assistance Program (ADAP) would cut AISH by $200/month”

5. CBC News: “Advocates call on Alberta government to halt shift to new disability benefits program” (Nov 26, 2025)

6. Canada Disability Benefit: “The CDB and AISH”

7. CBC News: “Thousands of Alberta seniors to lose income supplement as province faces rising provincial deficit” (recent 2026)

8. Red Deer Advocate: “Alberta poised to make it tougher for some to get Seniors Benefit” (Mar 6, 2026)

9. Alberta.ca: “Building a modern police service” (Feb 24, 2026)

10. CBC News: “Alberta preparing to move all sheriffs to new provincial police service” (Feb 24, 2026)

11. Alberta.ca: “Protecting travellers and supporting tourism”

12. CBC News: “Alberta government aims to protect consumers from potentially misleading hotel fees with new bill” (Feb 25, 2026)

13. Peter Guthrie’s statement on Facebook: “If government spending is appropriate... why hide the records?” (recent)

14. AlbertaPolitics.ca: “When the dust settles from Danielle Smith’s cabinet shuffle, 60% of her caucus will be ministers!” (May 18, 2025)

Introduction:
As Albertans who value real progress, safety, and standing strong with Canada, we deserve honest consultations and genuine mandates for major changes like policing. The UCP government has pushed to shift away from the RCMP through processes like the 2020 Fair Deal Panel and the widely criticized 2025 Alberta Next engagement—then moved ahead with Bill 15 (the Public Safety and Emergency Services Statutes Amendment Act, 2026, introduced February 24, 2026) to transition sheriffs into the Alberta Sheriffs Police Service (ASPS) and lay groundwork for a provincial police option. Critics—including opposition parties, some conservatives, former political leaders, independent experts, and attendees (myself included)—have condemned Alberta Next town halls and surveys as predetermined exercises with built-in bias: forced propaganda-style introductory videos (often compared to high-pressure timeshare condo sales pitches), slanted questions, mandatory messaging that drew jeers, and instances where microphones were cut off for critical voices (notably a high school student shut down mid-question). These tactics, plus advancing Bill 15 legislatively without a direct referendum or clear public mandate, raise serious questions about whether this reflects Albertans’ will or a top-down agenda—especially amid rising costs and fiscal challenges.

The 2020 Fair Deal Panel Results:
The Fair Deal Panel consulted thousands through town halls, an online survey, and stakeholder sessions. Replacing the RCMP with an Alberta Police Service ranked near the bottom—second-last among priorities—with support around 35%. Most Albertans focused on economic fairness, resources, and other issues instead, showing limited interest in a major policing overhaul.

The 2025 Alberta Next Panel Results:
Despite the biased framing—mandatory propagandistic videos, moderated sessions limiting dissent, and mic cuts—the released summaries and independent data still showed persistent opposition. Government polling highlighted 52% citing higher long-term costs as their top concern (alongside startup expenses and staffing shortages), while “other/none of the above” often dominated benefits questions. Independent polls (e.g., Pollara for the National Police Federation) indicated support dropping to 31% (from 35% in 2020), with 76-80% satisfaction in RCMP areas and majority preference for improving the current system. Even within the flawed process, online responses leaned heavily against replacement—yet the panel’s final recommendations pushed forward on transitioning, and the government introduced Bill 15 to operationalize it without broader public endorsement.

Conclusion:
From 2020 to 2025, the data remains consistent: low and declining support for replacing the RCMP (35% then, ~31% now), strong concerns over costs and priorities, and a clear preference for the reliable status quo. Yet the UCP advances via legislation like Bill 15—creating pathways for a provincial police service—without a true referendum or demonstrated mandate from Albertans, even as consultations faced backlash for bias, propaganda videos, and silencing tactics. This comes on top of the recent Budget 2026, which projects a massive $9.4 billion deficit (breaking the government’s own fiscal rules, with no clear path back to balance amid lower oil prices and rising spending pressures). Spending money and time on a provincial police force is still not a priority for Albertans—especially when our cost of living has steadily risen, while our standard of living has fallen to the point that many can no longer afford the quality-of-life Albertans have enjoyed for decades.

“Albertans have had enough of this lawless government. Our cost of living has steadily risen, while our standard of living has fallen to a point that many can no longer afford the quality-of-life Albertans have enjoyed for decades.” — Andries (Andy) Sytsema

The Fox Is in the Henhouse:

Look at this cartoon: Premier Danielle Smith as the sly fox on the big screen, telling a flock of wide-eyed chickens that “the people voted for major government reform, and that’s what the people are going to get... That’s what democracy is all about.” But here’s the scary part—Albertans didn’t vote for this version of “major reform.” We didn’t sign up for biased consultations, silenced voices, predetermined outcomes, massive deficits, or a provincial police force nobody asked for. We certainly didn’t mandate top-down changes to our democracy, our courts, our pensions, or our place in Canada. When the fox declares what “democracy” means—while ignoring low poll numbers, cutting mics on critics, and rushing legislation without a fresh mandate—it’s not empowerment. It’s predation. The henhouse isn’t safer; it’s under threat. Premier Smith’s idea of democracy literally scares Albertans because it looks less like listening to the people... and more like the fox deciding what’s for dinner. Time to call an election. Let the real voice of Alberta be heard—before the fox finishes her speech.

Real forward momentum for Alberta means respecting what people say—not steering, suppressing, or bypassing it through predetermined processes and unmandated bills. Let’s prioritize safe communities, fiscal responsibility, and genuine listening to the majority. Should we demand an unbiased vote on policing changes, or refocus on what truly unites us?

Share your experiences from the town halls, surveys, or thoughts on Bill 15 and the deficit budget below—what stands out to you?

Taking Alberta Forward Reference Article👇

What Just Happened in the Alberta Legislature⁉️ A Plain-Language Explainer on the Bills the UCP Passed This Fall!

(Sources: Alberta government Fair Deal Panel report and Alberta Next summaries, CBC/Global News/Edmonton Journal coverage of town halls (including mic incidents) and Budget 2026 reporting, Pollara/NPF research 2020–2025, assembly.ab.ca Bill 15 documents, and reports on process criticisms, legislative push without referendum, and $9.4B deficit projections.)

Canada’s healthcare system is at a crossroads. While federal support through the Canada Health Transfer (CHT) provides billions in unconditional funding to provinces each year—ensuring every Canadian receives the same per-capita contribution—the real test lies in how provinces use those dollars to meet growing demands. In Alberta, rapid population growth has amplified pressures on an already strained system, yet federal transfers have risen faster than population increases. The question isn’t whether the money is arriving—it’s whether provincial priorities are truly building a stronger, more accessible public healthcare system for all Albertans, or if they’re steering us toward fragmentation and privatization that risks creating faster lanes for those who can pay.

Federal Healthcare Transfers:

Canada’s healthcare system relies heavily on federal transfers to provinces via the Canada Health Transfer (CHT) — an equal per-capita cash payment (same dollar amount per person across the country) to support provincial health systems under the Canada Health Act.

For 2025-26, the federal government is providing approximately $54.7 billion in total CHT funding nationwide (growing to ~$57.4 billion in 2026-27, with a temporary 5% boost in recent years before reverting to at least 3% tied to GDP growth).

This breaks down on a per-capita basis, meaning larger provinces receive more in absolute dollars:

• Ontario: ~$21.3 billion

• Quebec: ~$11.9 billion

• British Columbia: ~$7.5 billion

• Alberta: ~$6.6 billion (and smaller amounts for the rest, down to PEI at ~$240 million)

These are unconditional transfers — provinces have full flexibility in how they allocate the funds within their budgets.

Importantly, while the CHT is intended to support healthcare, many provinces struggle to clearly demonstrate or account for these specific federal dollars being spent directly on health services rather than being absorbed into general revenues. This raises valid questions about transparency, priorities, and whether the funding truly addresses wait times, access, and system pressures.

The Alberta Story:

Alberta’s population exploded 15% from 2019 to 2025 (4.37M to ~5.03M), fueled by migration and growth. Federal Canada Health Transfer (CHT) funding kept pace—and then some: up ~41% over the period (from ~$4.68B in 2019-20 to ~$6.60B in 2025-26), delivering the same equal per-capita support as every province. Real federal dollars per Albertan have risen, even as population surged faster than national averages.

But provincial infrastructure and resources? Not so much. CIHI reports show hospital beds and staffing grew slower than population (e.g., beds up ~4% vs. 13% pop growth 2014-2023 nationally, with similar pressures in AB). Real per-capita hospital spending in Alberta declined ~4% from 2014-2023 in some analyses, and recent growth (e.g., ~3-4% in key areas) often lags behind population + inflation + aging needs. Diagnostic and other services haven’t scaled fast enough, fueling wait times and ER strains.

In all honesty, priorities appear shifted: instead of ramping up public capacity to match demand, the focus has been on fragmenting the system through privatization. This includes expanding chartered surgical facilities (CSFs), outsourcing more procedures (public payments to private clinics up dramatically), and passing Bill 11 (2025) to enable dual practice—letting doctors’ toggle between public and private-pay work. Taxpayer funds support these private expansions and contracts, often at higher per-procedure costs (e.g., hips/knees double in private settings per critics), potentially creating faster access for those who pay while public queues lengthen.

In the end, the data tells a clear story: federal transfers to Alberta have not only kept pace but exceeded the province’s ~15% population surge from 2019 to 2025, delivering a ~41% increase in CHT funding and higher real per-capita support than before. Ottawa is holding up its end of the bargain under the Canada Health Act’s principles of universality and accessibility.

What’s urgently needed now is greater provincial accountability and a renewed commitment to scaling public infrastructure—more hospital beds, staffing, diagnostics, and community services—to match demand driven by growth, aging, and post-pandemic backlogs. Instead of diverting resources into higher-cost private models that may benefit a few while lengthening public queues, Alberta should prioritize transparent tracking of federal dollars, evidence-based investments in the public system, and safeguards against two-tier access.

Albertans deserve a healthcare system that lives up to its promise: timely, equitable care for everyone, not experiments that erode the public foundation. Transparency on spending, stronger public builds, and a focus on people over profits—these are the paths forward.

What do you think? Should we push for binding reporting on how CHT funds are used, or stricter rules on privatization? Share your thoughts below—let’s keep the conversation going on building a healthier Alberta for all. #AlbertaHealthcare #CanadaHealthTransfer #PublicPolicy #HealthcareAccess #AlbertaPolitics

The End

Albertans, our headwaters and Rockies are under threat from new coal mining. Join us to stand up for clean water, protect our drinking sources, wildlife, and future generations. Singer Corb Lund’s citizen initiative needs your voice—let’s hit those signatures and ban new coal in the Eastern Slopes!

Event Details:
📅 Saturday, February 28, 2026
🕛 12:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.
📌 4777 130 Ave SE, Calgary,
📌 Southtrail Shopping Centre (4889 130th Ave. SE) – North of Marks Work Wearhouse, just West of the Tesla charging stations. Easy parking and accessible spot!

Come out, learn more about why #WaterNotCoal matters, chat with fellow supporters, and sign the official petition. Bring friends and family—every signature counts toward the 177,732 needed by June 10!

Important Signing Info:

• This is a legal citizen initiative petition under Alberta’s rules: Signatures must be in person on official forms—no online or mail-in options.

• As a signer, you must be an Alberta resident and show government-issued ID with your physical address in Alberta (e.g., driver’s license, Alberta ID card) to verify eligibility.

Let’s protect what matters most—our water is life! See you there.
Share this widely! #WaterNotCoal #ProtectAlbertaWater #NoNewCoal #AlbertaForward waternotcoal.ca for more events and info.

❤️ “I believe we should love our neighbours more than our government. We don’t get to choose our neighbours, but we do get to choose how we treat them—with respect, kindness, and freedom for all. As a proud Canadian, I stand by these words from former Prime Minister John Diefenbaker: 'I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.' That’s the Alberta—and Canada—I want to see moving forward.”

As an Albertan who loves this province and this country, I’ve watched with growing alarm as Premier Danielle Smith’s United Conservative Party (UCP) pivots from welcoming newcomers as a “tremendous blessing” to blaming them for every fiscal woe. This isn’t just political opportunism—it’s a calculated playbook drawn from extreme right-wing strategies like Project 2025, pre-Brexit anti-immigrant campaigns, and the UCP’s own separatist leanings via the Alberta Prosperity Project (APP). By stoking fears about immigration, Smith is deflecting from her government’s mismanagement while appealing to a White Christian nationalist base that dreams of a more authoritarian, exclusionary future. This rhetoric risks pushing Alberta toward Christo-fascism, where “Judeo-Christian” values are weaponized to justify division, control, and even separation from Canada. In this post, we’ll break it down: the flip-flop, the referendum, the opposition, the real fiscal culprits, and the dangerous ideological ties binding it all together.

Section 1: The Flip-Flop – From “Blessing” to Burden:

Just two years ago, on April 29, 2024, Danielle Smith celebrated Alberta’s population boom of over 202,000 people, declaring, “We expect that newcomers will continue flooding into Alberta. It’s a tremendous blessing.” Surrounded by smiling faces in a promotional graphic, she positioned the province as a magnet for growth, even pushing to double Alberta’s federal immigration allotment. Fast-forward to her February 20, 2026, televised address, and the tune has changed dramatically. Now, immigrants—particularly non-permanent residents like temporary foreign workers, students, and asylum seekers—are scapegoats for overcrowded schools, hospitals, and a ballooning deficit. Smith claims nearly 600,000 newcomers since 2020 have overwhelmed infrastructure, ignoring that this growth includes interprovincial migrants and natural increases, and that her own policies fueled it.

“Danielle Smith’s 2024 letter to Trudeau: Demanded Ottawa DOUBLE Alberta’s immigration spots (20k+ annually) + 10k more for Ukrainians to fix ‘critical labour shortages’ and grow our economy.

2026 reality: Blames Trudeau’s ‘open-border disaster’ for the exact influx straining services, announces Oct referendum to LIMIT immigration, restrict newcomer access to health/education/social supports.

Set-up complete: Lobby for more when Big Oil and the Oligarchy needs workers, then scapegoat Ottawa and immigrants’ when the bill hits working families. UCP classic—top vs. bottom, not left vs. right. While we’re divided, pockets get picked.”

This reversal isn’t accidental. It’s straight out of the Brexit playbook, where politicians hyped immigration as an economic boon until it became politically expedient to frame it as a threat to “British values” and services. Similarly, Smith’s rhetoric echoes the “great replacement theory” peddled in pre-Brexit campaigns and MAGA circles—a far-right conspiracy claiming elites are engineering demographic shifts to erode white, Western culture. Her executive director, Bruce McAllister, amplified this with a social media post questioning imports from “nations with failed systems” while praising “Judeo-Christian heritage,” drawing accusations of borderline racism. Critics like immigration lawyer Raj Sharma see shades of Brexit and Trump in these words, warning they stoke division without evidence.

The numbers tell a different story. Permanent immigrants totaled around 318,000 from 2020–2025, plus 88,000 net interprovincial migrants, for about 406,000—far short of Smith’s 600,000 claim, which inflates by including temporary residents. But as economists note, newcomers contribute through taxes and labor, boosting GDP in sectors like energy and construction. The real issue? Alberta’s growth outpaced infrastructure investment under the UCP, not because of immigrants, but due to fiscal choices we’ll explore later.

Section 2: The Referendum – Overstepping Boundaries to Divide and Conquer:

Smith’s solution? An October 19, 2026, referendum with nine questions: five on immigration restrictions and four on constitutional reforms for more provincial autonomy. The immigration proposals include Alberta taking control to prioritize “economic migrants,” a 12-month residency wait for social supports, fees for non-permanent residents’ health and education, and limiting services until newcomers “contribute sufficiently.” These echo Quebec’s model but go further, potentially infringing on federal jurisdiction under Section 95 of the Constitution Act, 1867, and Charter rights like equality (Section 15) and security of the person (Section 7).

The constitutional questions—abolishing the Senate, provincial judge appointments, opting out of federal programs with compensation, and prioritizing provincial laws—require national amendments under the 7/50 formula, making them largely symbolic. Analysts call this a “separatist agenda in disguise,” designed to rally the UCP base and provoke Ottawa, much like Brexit’s referendum weaponized anti-EU sentiment. Political scientist Duane Bratt warns it could “gut Canada,” undermining unity. Indigenous leaders decry potential overrides of Section 35 treaty rights in resource disputes.

This isn’t about sustainability—Smith admits she can’t quantify savings. It’s about division, mirroring Brexit’s false promises of reclaimed sovereignty and funds for services. Post-Brexit, the UK faced economic contraction and labor shortages; Alberta risks the same if it deters immigrants vital to its economy.

Section 3: Voices of Dissent – Experts, Faith Leaders, and Analysts Push Back:

The backlash has been swift and broad. Immigration experts like Peter Veress of Vermax Group call the referendum “misguided,” warning it could worsen labor shortages and deter investment. Lawyers Richard Kurland and Randy Hahn note feasibility issues without federal cooperation, especially for refugees. Economists emphasize newcomers’ net contributions, countering Smith’s “drain” narrative.

Faith leaders, often from immigrant communities, condemn the uncompassionate tone. The United Church of Canada’s Chinook Winds Region issued an open letter calling the proposals “invalid” and urging welcome for strangers, per biblical teachings. Groups like Moms Against Racism highlight dog-whistle rhetoric targeting people of color (POC). McAllister’s “Judeo-Christian” comments drew rebukes for hypocrisy, given Alberta’s diverse history.

Political analysts see pure deflection. Mount Royal University’s Lori Williams says blaming immigrants “doesn’t hold water.” NDP’s Rakhi Pancholi accuses Smith of “stoking hatred” to distract from affordability and health care. Former deputy premier Thomas Lukaszuk calls it scapegoating, likening it to past UCP targets like unions and judges. Reports of rising racism—harassment, slurs, and “go back” shouts—tie directly to this rhetoric, per the Canadian Anti-Hate Network.

Section 4: The Real Culprit – Fiscal Mismanagement and Corruption Under the UCP:

Immigration isn’t the problem; UCP governance is. Alberta’s population grew by ~600,000 since 2020 (reaching over 5 million by late 2025), but deficits arise from spending twice as fast as under the NDP, despite tripled royalties. Examples abound: bloated contracts, ideological boondoggles like the Alberta Pension Plan and provincial police (costing billions), corruption scandals including AHS procurement irregularities ($500M+ in private health deals tied to NHL perks), Turkish Tylenol waste, and RCMP probes. Severance for fired executives and bets like $1.5B on Keystone XL add up. Smith’s budget needs $75/barrel oil to balance—risky and unsustainable.

This mirrors Brexit’s diversion: blame outsiders for self-inflicted wounds. Analysts note Smith’s pre-budget address used immigration as a smokescreen for these failures.

Context Articles via Taking Alberta Forward:

A Shell Game of Deceit: How BRIK & APMC Are Milking Alberta Taxpayers Dry to Subsidize American Big Oil.

Alberta’s Hidden $3.5–4.5 Billion Handout to Oil & Gas in 2025: Why Taxpayers Are Footing the Bill While Services Suffer!

Section 5: The Bigger Picture – Project 2025, Brexit, and the March Toward Christo-Fascism:

This isn’t isolated—it’s part of a playbook blending Project 2025’s authoritarian blueprint, Brexit’s populist division, and the APP’s separatist push. Smith met Heritage Foundation reps (Project 2025 architects) post-2024 US election and visited Trump’s Mar-a-Lago in 2025. APP leaders met Trump officials multiple times, seeking US recognition for an independent Alberta. Their fiscal plan promises tax-free prosperity via oil, ignoring climate realities. Smith walks a “tightrope” but enables separatists, lowering referendum thresholds via Bill 14.

Context Article via Taking Alberta Forward:

Alberta’s UCP: Importing Trumpism, Project 2025, and Christian Nationalism North of the Border.

James Talarico Delivers Sermon Against Christian Nationalism

Christo-fascism lurks beneath: an ideology fusing fascism with Christianity, emphasizing moral hegemony, patriarchal families, and authoritarianism. UCP policies—anti-LGBTQ laws, book bans (often targeting queer themes), and rhetoric from groups like Take Back Alberta—echo this. APP’s Mitch Sylvestre endorses “replacement theory,” fearing non-white, non-Christian immigration. This imports US Christo-fascism from Project 2025, which uses coded Christian language for exclusionary policies. In Canada, it manifests as efforts to impose “Christian values” via politics, as seen in UCP’s anti-trans bills and separatist town halls.

Conclusion: Time to Stand United Against Division

Dr. Raj Sherman, a former Alberta MLA, Associate Health Minister, emergency physician, and healthcare advocate.

“Immigrants did not break Alberta’s healthcare system or tear up family doctor contracts. They did not close hospital beds or cancel planned hospital capacity. They did not under build housing, assisted living, long-term care, or schools. They did not dismantle community care. Politicians did.”

Danielle Smith’s immigration crackdown isn’t about fixing finances—it’s a Trojan horse for separatism, imported extremism, and Christo-fascist ideals that threaten Alberta’s inclusive future. By echoing Project 2025’s power grabs, Brexit’s fearmongering, and the APP’s independence fantasies, the UCP risks tearing Canada apart while enriching insiders. We’ve seen the fallout in the UK and US: economic pain, social fractures, and eroded rights. Albertans deserve better—transparent governance, investment in services, and policies that welcome contributions from all. Let’s reject this playbook: recall UCP MLAs, demand accountability, and stand with Canada. Share this post, join the conversation, and let’s take Alberta forward, not backward.

The Honourable Rachel Notley, former Premier of Alberta.

“First they came for the trans people. Then they came for the unionized workers. Next it was judges. Now it’s immigrants. If you think that you or someone you love won’t be next, you’re sorely mistaken.

UCP voter, NDP voter, pro-environment, pro-business, rich or poor—these things don’t matter. What matters is that we have the moral strength to call out this vile divisive tactic by this premier.

Our schools are not struggling because there are too many English language learners. Our schools are struggling because the UCP funds education at the lowest rate in Canada. Yet if even one in ten Albertans buys into Smith’s tactic of blaming each-other, my heart hurts at the prospect of a child being sent into school holding this kind of hate for their schoolmates.

Danielle Smith and her government are responsible for a litany of failures in healthcare, education, and the economy. The Premier is sowing hate and division to distract from the fact that her government is the real culprit. Albertans should not be fooled by this cowardly strategy.

There is only one vote I want. It’s called an election. Then we can rid our province of the worst premier and the worst government in the history of Alberta.”

• CBC News on referendum questions and Smith’s address.

• Paul Wells Substack on the nine questions.

• Global News and Edmonton Journal on McAllister’s comments and immigration proposals.

• Statistics Canada and Alberta Economic Dashboard on population estimates (2020–2025 growth to over 5 million)

• The Tyee, National Observer, and PressProgress on separatist town halls, replacement theory, and APP activities

• DeSmog and Daveberta on Project 2025 meetings and UCP separatist ties

• Various outlets (CTV, National Post, Calgary Herald) on federal responses, expert critiques, and fiscal mismanagement details

The End

Embracing the Freeze: Canada’s Winter Wonders at -25° C

As the mercury dips to -25°C, many might retreat indoors, but not Canadians. We thrive in the chill, turning frozen landscapes into playgrounds of adventure and community. From coast to coast to coast, outdoor winter activities bind us together, showcasing our resilience and love for the great outdoors. Whether it’s skiing down powdery slopes, lacing up for pond hockey, or simply building snowmen with the kids, these pursuits remind us why winter is a season to celebrate. Join me as we tour each province and territory, highlighting the unique ways Canadians make the most of the cold.

Let's come together to honour Alberta's strength and contributions while standing united as Canadians! See you there—let's make it a memorable day for our province and our country!

Alberta: Rocky Mountain Thrills:

In my home province of Alberta, winter is synonymous with epic outdoor escapades. We hit the slopes for downhill skiing at Banff or Jasper, glide across frozen ponds for classic hockey games, and rocket down hills on toboggans. Families craft snowmen and snow angels in backyards or parks, but that’s just the start. Venture out for snowshoeing through Banff National Park’s trails, ice climbing frozen waterfalls in Jasper, or dog sledding in the Rockies with a steaming cup of hot chocolate. Ice fishing on Abraham Lake, cross-country skiing at Canmore Nordic Centre, snowmobiling mountain paths, and fat tire biking in Kananaskis round out the fun. Alberta’s winters build character—and unforgettable memories.

British Columbia: Coastal and Mountain Magic:

BC’s diverse terrain offers a winter mix that’s hard to beat. Downhill skiing and snowboarding dominate at Whistler Blackcomb or Big White, while storm watching in Tofino provides a dramatic coastal twist. For thrill-seekers, heli-skiing in the backcountry or dog sledding in the Okanagan awaits. Snowshoeing in Garibaldi Park, ice skating on Vancouver’s outdoor rinks, cross-country skiing in Mount Revelstoke, and fat biking along Whistler trails keep the energy high. Even in milder coastal areas, the snow-capped mountains call us outside.

Manitoba: Prairie Power Plays:

Manitoba’s vast open spaces shine in winter. Snowkiting on frozen lakes harnesses the wind for exhilarating rides, while ice fishing on Lake Winnipeg draws anglers bundled against the cold. Cross-country skiing in Riding Mountain National Park, skating along Winnipeg’s Red River trails, and snowmobiling in the Interlake region are staples. Building snow forts or igloos adds a creative flair, and for a unique experience, guided polar bear viewing in Churchill (early winter) connects us to the wild north.

New Brunswick: Atlantic Adventures:

New Brunswick’s snowy forests and coasts buzz with activity. Tobogganing in Kouchibouguac National Park, ice skating on Fredericton’s trails, and snowshoeing in Fundy National Park are family favorites. Explore ice caves like the Midland ones, cross-country ski in the Appalachians, or snowmobile extensive trails. Winter bird watching along the Bay of Fundy offers a peaceful contrast to the adrenaline.

Newfoundland and Labrador: Rugged Resilience:

In this eastern outpost, winters are raw and rewarding. Snowshoeing in Gros Morne National Park, ice fishing on bays, and cross-country skiing in Terra Nova keep us moving. Tobogganing coastal hills, dog sledding in Labrador, winter hiking to Signal Hill, and crafting snow sculptures during festivals embody the spirited Newfoundland way.

Nova Scotia: Maritime Merriment:

Nova Scotia blends seaside charm with snowy pursuits. Ice skating at Halifax’s Emera Oval, snowshoeing in Cape Breton Highlands, and tobogganing at Citadel Hill are highlights. Ice fishing in the Annapolis Valley, winter surfing for the bold, hiking the icy Cabot Trail, and sledding at Martock make every day an adventure.

Ontario: Urban to Wilderness Wonders:

Ontario’s range from city vibes to wild escapes fuels winter joy. Skate the world’s largest outdoor rink on Ottawa’s Rideau Canal, ice fish on Lake Simcoe, or ski at Blue Mountain. Explore Lake Superior’s ice caves, snowshoe in Algonquin Park, toboggan in Toronto’s High Park, and cross-country ski in the Laurentians—proving winter unites us all.

Prince Edward Island: Island Idylls:

PEI’s gentle winters invite cozy outdoor fun. Ice skating in Charlottetown, snowshoeing coastal trails in PEI National Park, and tobogganing rolling hills are simple pleasures. Cross-country skiing at Brookvale, ice fishing in Malpeque Bay, winter beach walks, and ocean-view snowmen capture the island’s serene spirit.

Quebec: Vive l’Hiver!:

Quebec’s French flair infuses winter with vibrancy. Electric fat biking in Mont-Tremblant, ice climbing in the Laurentians, and cross-country skiing in Mont-Orford are must-dos. Dog sledding in Saguenay, tobogganing at the Plains of Abraham, ice skating in Montreal’s Bonsecours Basin, and the Quebec Winter Carnival’s ice canoe races turn cold into celebration.

Saskatchewan: Wide-Open Winters:

Saskatchewan’s prairies offer boundless freedom. Snowshoeing bison paths in Wanuskewin Heritage Park, ice fishing on Last Mountain Lake, and cross-country skiing in Cypress Hills are invigorating. Snowmobiling trails, skating in Saskatoon, winter hiking in Prince Albert National Park, and building igloos in fields embrace the expansive landscape.

Northwest Territories: Northern Lights and Nights:

In the NWT, extreme winters spark magic. Celebrate the Inuvik Sunrise Festival with fireworks post-polar night, ice fish or dog sled in Yellowknife, and snowmobile under the aurora. It’s a testament to northern grit.

Nunavut: Arctic Authenticity:

Nunavut’s tundra calls for traditional pursuits. Ice fishing in Iqaluit, snowshoeing or cross-country skiing the vast expanses, and dog sledding with Inuit guides honor ancient ways in modern winters.

Yukon: Frontier Freedom:

Yukon’s wild heart beats strong in winter. Dog sledding in Whitehorse, snowshoeing under northern lights, and ice climbing or skiing in Kluane National Park deliver pure adventure.

In every corner of this vast nation, Canadians don’t just endure winter—we embrace it. Layer up, step out, and create your own frozen tales.

As Former Prime Minister John Diefenbaker said:

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.”

If you’re enjoying this content, subscribe to my Substack (Free) for more on taking Alberta—and Canada—forward!

The End

As Canadians, we’re no strangers to the promise of pipelines fueling our economy, especially here in Alberta. But the Trans Mountain Expansion (TMX) project has turned into a frustrating saga of delays, massive cost overruns, and what feels like a shell game where taxpayers keep losing. Owned by the federal government since 2018, TMX was supposed to boost oil exports to the West Coast, creating jobs and revenue. Instead, it’s become a black hole for public funds, with interim tolls that don’t cover costs and ongoing negotiations that leave shippers—many controlled by American oil giants—paying far less than they should. No wonder enthusiasm for yet another pipeline to the coast is waning; why pour more money into a system where foreign interests pick our pockets?

Additional Articles via Taking Alberta Forward:

🛢️The Trans Mountain Toll Tug-of-War: Who’s Paying for the $28.8 billion Overruns? 🛢️

Alberta’s Hidden $3.5–4.5 Billion Handout to Oil & Gas in 2025: Why Taxpayers Are Footing the Bill While Services Suffer!

In this article, I’ll break down the mess using facts from regulatory filings, independent analyses, and recent updates to show how we’ve ended up subsidizing the oil industry to the tune of billions. It’s time for transparency and accountability—let’s make sense of it all.

The Ballooning Costs: From Promise to $35 Billion Burden:

The TMX project started with high hopes. Approved in 2016 and purchased by the Trudeau government for $4.5 billion in 2018 to “ensure it gets built,” the expansion aimed to triple capacity from 300,000 to nearly 900,000 barrels per day. But regulatory hurdles, protests, and construction challenges ballooned costs to around $34–$35 billion by completion in 2024.

Under the original tolling framework (pre-2018, approved by regulators), shippers were supposed to cover a portion of “uncapped” costs—about $9 billion in overruns—through higher tolls. The rest? Absorbed by the government, meaning you and me. Over 70% of these overruns are ineligible for recovery, leaving taxpayers on the hook for $25–$26 billion outright. This isn’t just bad luck; it’s due to poor management and underestimation, turning TMX into one of Canada’s most expensive infrastructure fiascos.

The Toll Dispute: Interim Rates vs. Full Recovery:

Operations kicked off in May 2024, but shippers aren’t paying the full freight—literally. The Canada Energy Regulator (CER) approved interim tolls in late 2023, around $11–$12 per barrel for committed shippers (higher for spot users). These allow billing while final rates are hashed out, but they’re far below the $24–$25 per barrel needed for full cost recovery.

Shippers, including Canadian heavyweights like Cenovus and Canadian Natural Resources, plus American players like ConocoPhillips and Imperial Oil, argue the overruns were “unreasonable” and that higher tolls would make Canadian oil uncompetitive. They’re pushing back, claiming the pipeline’s economics don’t justify the hike. Meanwhile, Trans Mountain Corporation (TMC, government-owned) wants to recoup more to ease the taxpayer load.

This dispute has real consequences:

Low tolls mean partial revenue, with the shortfall covered by public debt servicing and foregone recovery. If negotiations favor shippers, taxpayers could eat an extra $11 billion.

Taxpayer Subsidies: Billions in the Red:

Here’s where the “shell game” really shines. While negotiations drag on, interim tolls persist, creating an implicit subsidy to the oil sector. Independent estimates peg the lifetime taxpayer exposure at $9–$19 billion, or even $40 billion including financing perks. For 2025 alone, prorated figures suggest hundreds of millions to low billions in effective subsidies, with one analysis noting a $166 million loss in the first half when full debts are factored in.

TMC touts “profits” and $1.7 billion returned to government in 2025 via dividends and fees, but that’s accounting smoke and mirrors—ignoring the massive underlying debt. The government’s plan to sell TMX is stalled by this uncertainty, leaving us holding the bag longer. And with American-controlled firms among the shippers, it feels like we’re subsidizing U.S. profits at Canadian expense.

The Negotiation Standoff: Paused but Not Resolved:

As of February 2026, talks between TMC and shippers are “active,” but the CER has paused its regulatory proceeding multiple times—at the parties’ request—to allow negotiations. The latest extension, granted February 11, requires an update by April 17, 2026. If a deal is struck, it could be retroactive to May 2024, potentially clawing back underpayments and reducing subsidies. But no agreement yet, and shippers support the delays.

This limbo deters full pipeline usage and complicates divestment. Meanwhile, TMX is already eyeing further expansions (e.g., adding pump stations for 360,000 more barrels per day by 2027), raising questions about repeating the cycle.

Why Another Pipeline? Waning Interest and Lessons Learned:

Canadians, especially in Alberta, support energy development, but TMX’s troubles explain the apathy toward more West Coast projects. With existing pipelines nearing capacity and oil production rising, the need is there—but not if it means more taxpayer bailouts for cost overruns and sweetheart deals for Big Oil. American influence in the sector (via shippers like BP and Conoco) amplifies the sense that profits flow south while risks stay here.

Environmental concerns, Indigenous opposition, and global shifts to renewables add layers, but the core issue is fiscal: Why build more when the current one’s a money pit?

Conclusion: Time to End the Game and Protect Taxpayers:

The TMX shell game exposes a flawed system where government ownership shields shippers from full costs, leaving average Canadians subsidizing an industry that should stand on its own. With billions already sunk and more at risk, we need a resolution that prioritizes recovery—higher tolls, retroactive if needed—and a swift sale to private hands under strict terms.

As Albertans and Canadians, let’s demand better: Transparent negotiations, independent audits, and policies that put taxpayers first. If TMX teaches us anything, it’s that pipelines can drive prosperity—but only without the deceit.

• Canada Energy Regulator (CER) – Trans Mountain Pipeline Final Interim Tolls Update (February 11, 2026): https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/en/about/news-room/whats-new/2026/trans-mountain-pipeline-final-interim-tolls-update.html

• CER – Trans Mountain Application for Interim Tolls: https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/en/applications-hearings/view-applications-projects/trans-mountain-application-interim-tolls

• International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) – Assessment of Fossil Fuel Subsidies in Canada: Trans Mountain Pipeline (2024/2025 updates): https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2024-09/fossil-fuel-subsidies-trans-mountain-pipeline.pdf

• IISD – Is a New Oil Pipeline in Canada’s National Interest? (December 2025): https://www.iisd.org/articles/deep-dive/new-oil-pipeline-canadas-national-interest

• Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) – Trans Mountain Expansion Pipeline Project Financial Issues (September 2025): https://ieefa.org/sites/default/files/2025-09/TransMountainPipelineFactSheet2025%20(2).pdf

• IEEFA – Canada Should Learn From the Trans Mountain Expansion Pipeline’s Fiscal Issues (September 2025): https://ieefa.org/resources/canada-should-learn-trans-mountain-expansion-pipelines-fiscal-issues

• Trans Mountain Corporation – Q3 2025 Results (November 2025): https://www.transmountain.com/news/trans-mountain-reports-q3-2025-results

• Trans Mountain Corporation – Q3 2025 Financial Fact Sheet: https://docs.transmountain.com/Corporate-Reports/2025-Q3-Financial-Fact-Sheet_FINAL.pdf

• The Globe and Mail – Trans Mountain pipeline on track to funnel $1.7-billion into federal coffers (November 2025): https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-trans-mountain-pipeline-on-track-to-funnel-17-billion-into-federal

Dear Friends and Fellow Albertans and Canadians,

Water is life, and Alberta’s headwaters in the Eastern Slopes must be protected from open-pit coal mining that threatens our rivers, drinking water, wildlife, and way of life. That’s why we’re standing up with the Water Not Coal citizen initiative petition – and the launch events are happening this weekend!

Come out to sign, learn more, and connect with others who care about our province’s future:

· Lethbridge Petition Launch
Nikka Yuko Japanese Garden
Friday, February 20
4:00 pm – 8:00 pm MST

· Calgary Petition Launch
Alexandra Centre Society
Saturday, February 21
1:00 pm – 5:00 pm MST

· Edmonton Petition Launch
Orange Hall Strathcona
Sunday, February 22
Time: 12:00 pm – 4:00 pm MST

The petition is already collecting signatures and gaining momentum across Alberta! To find a signing location near you, head to:
waternotcoal.ca/sign-the-petition

Important update on signing requirements:
As this is a formal citizen initiative under Alberta’s rules, signers must be Alberta residents (typically 18+). A new requirement for proof of residency is now in effect at many events – please bring valid ID showing your Alberta address (e.g., driver’s licence, utility bill, or government ID) to verify eligibility and ensure your signature counts. This helps maintain the integrity of the petition process.

Peter Lougheed’s visionary 1976 Coal Policy set a high bar for protecting our environment – a legacy we must uphold today:

· “No development will be permitted unless the Government is satisfied that it may proceed without irreparable harm to the environment and with satisfactory reclamation of any disturbed land.”
– A Coal Development Policy for Alberta (1976)

· The policy emphasized that “neither exploration nor development will be permitted in areas where the environment and plant and animal life cannot be properly protected and where reclamation of any disturbed land is not possible.”

These principles guided Alberta for decades, prioritizing water, watersheds, and quality of life over short-term gains. Let’s honor that wisdom and send a clear message: Water Not Coal!”

Taking Alberta Forward – We Stand With #Canada! Come join us – your signature and voice matter. Spread the word, bring friends, and let’s protect what matters most.

For more details, updates, or to volunteer: Visit waternotcoal.ca

See you there! #WaterNotCoal #ProtectOurWater #AlbertaForward

#ForeverCanadian

Updated Post:

No, signers of recall petitions in Alberta should not be particularly worried about their personal information being broadly released or misused. The Recall Act and Elections Alberta’s implementation include strong privacy protections designed to safeguard signers while allowing legitimate verification.

The Recall Act protects your privacy — explicitly.
Section 45(3) states:
“Despite subsection (2), the Chief Electoral Officer shall not make available for public inspection any petition signature sheets submitted under this Act.”

Here’s a clear breakdown of why signers can feel reasonably secure:

• Sensitive personal details are protected by default: When a completed petition is submitted to Elections Alberta, residential addresses and contact information (phone or email) on petition documents are obscured or redacted to protect privacy. This is explicitly stated in Elections Alberta’s official Recall FAQs: “Residential address and contact information (phone or email) must be obscured from public inspection.” Signature sheets themselves are never made public—only authorized parties (the petition proponent/team and Elections Alberta staff) can view them for verification purposes.

• Signature sheets are not available for public inspection: Unlike other petition documents (notices of intent, applications, and CFO documentation), which may be available for public inspection for one year after submission during regular office hours at Elections Alberta, signature sheets are explicitly not made available for viewing, publishing, copying, or any other access. The FAQs state: “Important: This does NOT include petition signature sheets. Signature sheets will not be made available for viewing, publishing, copying, or made otherwise available to anyone. Only the petition proponent and their team and Elections Alberta staff may view the signature sheets for the purposes outlined in the Act.” Viewers of the limited public documents must sign a declaration limiting use to permitted purposes under the Recall Act (e.g., no harassment, marketing, or unrelated uses).

• Strict penalties for misuse: The Recall Act prohibits unauthorized collection, use, or disclosure of personal information collected during the process. Violations are offences with potential penalties (including fines). Organizers are required to handle data securely during collection and submit everything to Elections Alberta upon completion—copies must be destroyed afterward with affidavits confirming compliance.

• Information goes directly to Elections Alberta: Petition organizers and canvassers collect signatures under strict rules, but once submitted, all sheets go to Elections Alberta (a public body bound by privacy laws like FOIP) for verification. They contact a sample of signers using the provided info solely to confirm validity—no broader release occurs. This mirrors safeguards in regular elections and voter processes.

In short, the system balances public accountability (e.g., checking for fraud via limited document access) with strong privacy protections to prevent risks like doxxing, spam, or harassment. These rules comply with Alberta’s privacy framework and are clearly outlined on Elections Alberta’s site to build trust in the process.

My parents were children in the Netherlands during the German occupation—I won’t go into the painful details, as they’re too hard to revisit. One of the very first lessons they taught me was to never give in to fear or allow myself to be silenced.

I have a great-niece who is on the autism spectrum. She graduated through our public education system, and right now, she’s terrified—like so many others living on AISH and Alberta’s most vulnerable. I spoke with her about those fears and reassured her that I will never stop fighting for her rights and freedoms—ever. That promise extends to every one of them.

As Mahatma Gandhi wisely observed, “The true measure of any society can be found in how it treats its most vulnerable members.” When I read the misinformation in yesterday’s press release, it made my blood boil. The Recall Act is not some arbitrary document; it is the law of Alberta. I am 100% confident that the information collected by our team will be handled securely and in full compliance with privacy requirements. I will not let my great-niece, those living on AISH, Alberta’s most vulnerable—or anyone else—down by allowing UCP operatives’ narratives to undermine this legitimate democratic process.

I will continue advocating for my great-niece, for those living on AISH, for the unheard voices across Alberta, and for all Albertans. We won’t back down.

Sign with confidence—your information stays secure. Let’s keep pushing for accountability in Alberta! (For the most up-to-date details, check Elections Alberta’s Recall FAQs directly: Elections Alberta

I founded Taking Alberta Forward in 2022 as a dedicated social media presence to counter the misinformation flooding in when groups like ‘Take Back Alberta’ emerged. As an active member of AB Resistance and a leader in the Recall Ric McIver campaign (http://recall-mciver.ca) in Calgary-Hays, I’m passionate about holding our leaders accountable. I’ll be sharing some of the in-depth research I’ve done exposing the Government of Alberta’s ‘say one thing (blame Ottawa), do another (be the problem)’ approach to governance. This is an important discussion on transparency, integrity, and real change for our province. Hope to see you tune in—join live here: Reclaiming Alberta Report Excited to chat and connect!

I was born and raised in Calgary, Alberta, in the community of Ogden—at that time a small town on the outskirts of the city. I graduated in 1983 from the Southern Alberta Institute of Technology (SAIT) with an Honors Diploma as a Survey Technologist.

My career spans over 42 years in the oil and gas industry, with a strong focus on pipelines across Canada’s upstream, midstream, and major transmission projects. Starting as a survey assistant and advancing through roles like Field Surveyor, Survey Coordinator, and Pipeline Manager at companies including Nova Gas Transmission, TC Energy, Midwest Surveys, WSP, Caltech Surveys, Millennium Geomatics, and McElhanney, I specialized in pipeline route selection, pre-legal and engineering surveys, construction as-built surveys, integrity digs, depth-of-cover surveys, and facility surveys. I led major expansions like Keystone, Energy East, Coastal GasLink, and others, while managing teams, ensuring safety leadership, developing innovative survey methodologies, and driving business development and quality assurance in challenging terrains.

Now, I’m passionate about civic engagement and accountability. Through my initiative Taking Alberta Forward (which I founded in 2022), I advocate for transparency, integrity, and justice in our government. This includes supporting citizen-led efforts like recalls for change, countering misinformation, and promoting a stronger, fairer Alberta within a united Canada. I stand firmly for community values, loving our neighbors more than any government structure, and pushing for real progress that puts people first. I’m excited to chat about all of it today!

We stand for:

· Universal public healthcare that is accessible, adequately funded, and focused on the well-being of all Albertans, without compromise.

· Robust public education that equips every child with the tools for success, prioritizing public schools as the cornerstone of an informed and inclusive society.

· Advocacy for Alberta’s most vulnerable, ensuring no one is left behind through policies that protect and uplift those facing hardship.

· Fiscal responsibility grounded in excellent public policy—smart investments, evidence-based decisions, and sustainable management that serve the long-term interests of our province and its people.

· Transparency and integrity in government, where leaders are held to the highest standards, decisions are open to scrutiny, and trust is earned through action.

· Justice for all Albertans, upholding the rule of law with no one above it—ensuring fairness, equality, and due process for every individual.

We proudly stand with Canada, rejecting divisive populism and embracing a positive, unifying vision that moves Alberta forward together. Integrity over ideology. People over politics. Progress for all.

The End! #ableg $abpoli #cdnpoli #IAmAlbertan #IAmCanadian #ForeverCanadian #Alberta #Canada #yyc #Calgary

From the campaign’s latest updates (as of early February 2026 on waternotcoal.ca and related sources), the status remains Awaiting Petition Issuing. Elections Alberta approved and published the revised Citizen Initiative Application/Notice of Initiative Petition on January 28, 2026 (with the official notice around January 27). That’s the key approval step cleared after the Bill 14 reset.

The final issuance from Elections Alberta is what’s needed next—it’ll trigger:

· Mailing out official canvasser badges (yours included, once your Form 1403 review is finalized by the team).

· Starting the signature collection phase (in-person only on official forms, typically with a 4-month window to gather the required ~177,732 valid signatures from eligible Albertans).

You’ll be hitting the trail soon, meeting folks who already agree: the majority of Albertans have been saying “Water Not Coal” loud and clear for nearly six years. They’re standing up to protect our headwaters, ranchlands, wildlife, clean drinking water, and way of life in Alberta from new open-pit coal mines in the Eastern Slopes/Rockies.

With your training done, you’ll be out there connecting with neighbors, families, and communities who share that view—turning widespread support into the signatures that can force real, lasting protection into law.

Hang tight just a little longer—the team’s reviewing submissions like yours, and badges should roll out quickly once issuance happens (some updates suggest around mid-February or soon after). In the meantime:

· Keep an eye on your email (and spam) for confirmation from the Water Not Coal team on your canvasser status.

· Check Water Not Coal updates regularly for when it flips from “Awaiting Petition Issuing” to active collection.

· Build some early buzz if you like—chat with friends, family, or locals about why this matters (water security for our communities, preserving Alberta’s natural heritage)—it amps up the momentum even before official signatures start.

You’re jumping in at the perfect moment and doing crucial work to safeguard what makes Alberta special. Can’t wait for you to hit the trail and start racking up those signatures—the Rockies and future generations will thank you!

Alberta forward, we stand with #Canada—stronger when our water and land are protected. Let me know the second you get that badge or any team update! What’s got you most pumped about getting out there canvassing? #WaterNotCoal #ableg #abpoli #cdnpoli #WaterIsLife #yyc #Calgary #Alberta #Canada #NoToCoal

The End

As a proud Albertan dedicated to taking our province forward while standing with all of Canada, I just turned in my batch of signatures today—536 in total—for the Alberta Funds Public Schools citizen initiative. It might seem humble, but each one came with a heartfelt story: parents frustrated by overcrowded classrooms, teachers stretched thin without adequate resources, and community members who believe our tax dollars should build a stronger public system for everyone. With the petition deadline looming on February 11, 2026, and over 89,950 signatures collected so far toward the required 177,732, this movement is gaining momentum. It’s time to spotlight why ending public funding for accredited independent (private) schools isn’t just fair—it’s necessary. Drawing from our Alberta context, comparisons to Tennessee’s controversial voucher program, and the core principles of equity, here are three key reasons we need change.

1. Public Schools Serve All Children—No Questions Asked—While Private Schools Select Their Students.

At the heart of this debate is a simple truth: public schools are open to every child, regardless of background, ability, or family circumstances. They don’t turn away students with special needs, behavioral challenges, or those who can’t afford extras. Private schools, on the other hand, can—and often do—select who they admit, creating exclusive environments that cater to specific demographics, faiths, or socioeconomic groups. That’s their prerogative as private institutions, but it shouldn’t come at the expense of public taxpayers.

For Richer For Poorer: A Tale Of Two Schools! #Alberta #YYC

In Alberta, we’re already spending between $295 million and $461 million annually to subsidize these independent schools at about 70% of the per-student public rate. With around 48,000 students enrolled (plus 8,000 in private early childhood services), this funding diverts resources from a public system that educates over 94% of our kids. As one meme circulating online aptly puts it: “Public schools accept all children. No questions asked. Private schools select their children. That’s why they are private. Public tax dollars should support ONLY public schools. Private money should pay for private schools.” The stories I heard while gathering signatures echo this—families in underfunded public schools sharing tales of outdated textbooks and ballooning class sizes, all while private options get a taxpayer boost to maintain their selectivity.

2. This Funding Model Acts as a Wealth Transfer to the Affluent, Undermining Equity.

Critics in both Alberta and beyond rightly call these subsidies a “reverse Robin Hood” scheme, taking from the many to benefit the few. In Alberta, independent school families often have above-average incomes, and while some argue it’s a cost-saving measure (30% less per student than full public funding), the reality is that it props up choices for those who can already afford tuition top-ups—often $8,000 or more per year. Polls show a majority of Albertans would vote to end this in a referendum, reflecting widespread frustration amid teacher strikes and resource shortages in public education.

Look to Tennessee for a stark parallel under Governor Bill Lee’s Education Freedom Scholarship (EFS) program, launched in 2025. Their universal vouchers—worth $7,295 USD per student—have been slammed as a blatant wealth transfer. Early data reveals 65-75% of recipients were already in private schools, with benefits skewing to affluent urban counties where household incomes exceed $170,000. Over 50,000 applications poured in for just 20,000 spots in the first year, costing taxpayers $144 million initially, with proposals to double it pushing toward $300 million. Tennessee Democrats and public education advocates label it “government welfare for the wealthy,” diverting funds from struggling public schools to subsidize the elite. Alberta’s model may be partial, but the principle is the same: why should working-class taxpayers foot the bill for selective systems that don’t serve everyone?

3. Vouchers and Subsidies Don’t Expand Access—They Exacerbate Inequality.

Proponents claim these programs broaden choices, but evidence suggests otherwise. In Tennessee, the EFS prioritizes lower-income families for half the scholarships (up to 300% of federal free/reduced lunch guidelines), yet the universal half lacks income tracking, leading to opacity and favoritism toward the well-off. Rural areas suffer most, as private schools are scarce there, meaning tax dollars flow to urban elites. Projections warn of billion-dollar long-term costs, sparking lawsuits over constitutionality and equity.

Alberta faces similar risks: our independent schools are growing (up from 41,000 students a few years ago), but they’re concentrated in cities and often faith-based or specialized, leaving rural and diverse communities behind. Charter schools (fully public but independent) serve only 11,000-12,000 more, yet the overall diversion weakens the public core. The personal stories from my signature drive highlight this—immigrant families, single parents, and those with kids needing extra support all stressed how public schools are their lifeline, not a “choice” they can opt out of. Ending subsidies wouldn’t displace students overnight (as Minister Nicolaides warns), but it would refocus billions on a system that truly includes all.

In conclusion, as we push toward that February 11 deadline for the Alberta Funds Public Schools petition, let’s remember: education is a public good, not a private perk. My 536 signatures represent real Albertans demanding better—join us by signing at abfundspublicschools.ca or attending events like those in Wainwright this weekend. If we hit the threshold, MLAs could trigger a referendum, giving us a direct say. Tennessee’s voucher pitfalls show what happens when we prioritize “choice” over equity; Alberta can lead by funding public schools fully and fairly. Together, we’re taking Alberta forward—for every child, no exceptions. What stories would you share? Let’s keep the conversation going in the comments.

The End!

Mission Statement:

Taking Alberta Forward is committed to building a stronger, fairer Alberta for every resident—rooted in compassion, accountability, and shared prosperity.

We stand for:

• Universal public healthcare that is accessible, adequately funded, and focused on the well-being of all Albertans, without compromise.

• Robust public education that equips every child with the tools for success, prioritizing public schools as the cornerstone of an informed and inclusive society.

• Advocacy for Alberta’s most vulnerable, ensuring no one is left behind through policies that protect and uplift those facing hardship.

• Fiscal responsibility grounded in excellent public policy—smart investments, evidence-based decisions, and sustainable management that serve the long-term interests of our province and its people.

• Transparency and integrity in government, where leaders are held to the highest standards, decisions are open to scrutiny, and trust is earned through action.

• Justice for all Albertans, upholding the rule of law with no one above it—ensuring fairness, equality, and due process for every individual.

We proudly stand with Canada, rejecting divisive populism and embracing a positive, unifying vision that moves Alberta forward together. Integrity over ideology. People over politics. Progress for all.

#TakingAlbertaForward #PeopleOverPolitics #abpoli #StandWithCanada #ableg #abpoli #cdnpoli #AlbertaIsCanada #CanadaIsAlberta #IAmAlbertan #IAmCanadian #ForeverCanadian

The End

Introduction:

The Trans Mountain Expansion (TMX) pipeline, now fully operational since May 2024, was meant to boost Canada’s oil export capacity and energy security. Instead, it’s become a flashpoint over massive cost overruns—from an original ~$7.4 billion estimate to over $34–35.6 billion today—and who should bear the burden.

At the heart of the issue: toll rates charged to shippers (mostly major oil producers) for moving crude from Alberta to BC’s coast. The Canada Energy Regulator (CER) approved interim tolls in 2023 (effective since startup), but the push for final interim rates has stalled. In October 2025, the CER paused the entire hearing process at Trans Mountain’s request (with shipper support) to allow private negotiations toward a settlement. An update on those talks was due today, February 6, 2026—but as of early morning, nothing public has emerged yet.

This isn’t just about pipeline math. It’s a debate over subsidies, taxpayer exposure, competitiveness for Canadian oil, and whether public ownership means Canadians subsidize Big Oil. Here’s a breakdown of the key points.

Key Point 1: Cost Per Kilometer – TMX vs. Coastal GasLink: A Stark Comparison:

Both the Trans Mountain Expansion (TMX) and Coastal GasLink (CGL) pipelines were constructed during overlapping periods (major work 2019–2024), facing similar British Columbia challenges: rugged mountains, river crossings, extreme weather, Indigenous consultations and opposition, regulatory hurdles, protests, labor shortages, supply chain issues, and COVID-19 disruptions.

Yet their final costs per kilometer show a significant difference:

• TMX Expansion:

  • Length: Approximately 980 km of new pipeline added (twinning the existing 1,150–1,183 km route from Edmonton, AB to Burnaby, BC).

  • Total final cost: ~$34 billion CAD.

  • Cost per km: ~$34.7 million CAD.

  • Key factors driving higher costs: Oil pipeline design (thicker walls, some heating requirements, stricter spill prevention); prolonged federal/regulatory delays (including court challenges and government buyout); extensive work in urban/protected areas near Burnaby; longer overall timeline with multiple cost escalations.

• Coastal GasLink (CGL):

  • Length: 670 km full route (from near Dawson Creek to Kitimat, BC).

  • Total final cost: ~$14.5 billion CAD (confirmed in late 2024 upon commercial in-service).

  • Cost per km: ~$21.6 million CAD.

  • Key factors: Natural gas pipeline (generally lighter infrastructure); private ownership (TC Energy-led, with partners); shorter route; fewer federal ownership complications, though still faced overruns from similar external pressures.

• Overall comparison: TMX ended up about 60% more expensive per kilometer than CGL, despite shared timelines, terrain, and disruption types.

• Both projects saw major overruns (TMX ~6x original ~$5–7B estimate; CGL ~2.3x original ~$6.2–6.6B), but TMX’s escalation was steeper—raising questions about government-led vs. private-led project management, oil vs. gas infrastructure differences, and unique political pressures.

• Implications: CGL’s lower per-km cost helped it reach in-service without the same intense ongoing subsidy debates, while TMX’s higher burden fuels arguments over taxpayer exposure and efficiency in public infrastructure.

This side-by-side highlights the real-world risks of major energy builds in Canada—and why outcomes can vary so much even under comparable conditions.

Alberta’s Natural Gas Powerhouses: The Top 10 Producers and Who Really Owns Them?

Key Point 2: The Current Interim Tolls – What Shippers Are Actually Paying:

• Benchmark toll: Approximately $11.46 per barrel for firm shippers with 15-year contracts moving under 75,000 bpd from Edmonton to Burnaby (fixed component ~$10.88, variable ~$0.58 for ops/power).

• These rates, set preliminarily by the CER in November 2023, follow the original 2013 shipper agreement methodology.

• They’re in effect now and can be adjusted retroactively once final interim tolls are decided.

• Spot/uncommitted shippers pay higher, but firm shippers (holding ~80% capacity) dominate the conversation.

These tolls are lower than what a private pipeline might charge to cover full costs and returns—analysts estimate they’re roughly half a market-rate level, creating an implicit subsidy.

Key Point 3: The Proposed (and Disputed) Final Tolls:

• Trans Mountain’s application seeks to reflect actual as-built costs (~$34–35.6 billion), sticking to the 2013 formula.

• This could push the benchmark toll higher if full overruns pass through—shippers fear it would make rates uncompetitive (potentially $15–20+/bbl in worst-case scenarios, vs. Enbridge Mainline or Keystone at ~$5–7/bbl).

• Shippers argue many overruns were avoidable and shouldn’t be fully allocated to them under the original agreements.

• The CER hearing (originally set for November 2025) is paused indefinitely for commercial talks—no new date set.

• If no settlement, the CER will still decide “just and reasonable” tolls, potentially in late 2026 or 2027.

Key Point 4: The Major Players – Top Intervening Producers and Their Ownership/Control:

The 13 firm service shippers (mostly large oil sands producers and marketers) hold ~80% of TMX capacity and intervene collectively in the CER proceeding (RH-002-2023) for final interim tolls. They file joint letters supporting negotiations and push for lower, more competitive rates. No major public divergences exist among them on toll positions—they act as a unified bloc.

Here are the top five by Canadian oil sands/production prominence, with their primary ownership or controlling interest (publicly traded companies with institutional-heavy ownership; percentages from recent 13F/SEDAR filings, e.g., Q3/Q4 2025 data):

• Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNRL) – Canada’s largest oil producer (1.5 million bpd total, heavy oil sands focus including Horizon mine, Primrose thermal, and Athabasca assets).

  
  Primary ownership/control: Widely held public company; no single controlling shareholder. Top institutional holders include Capital World Investors (9.8–10%), Royal Bank of Canada (6.4%), Capital Research Global Investors (5.3%), Vanguard (~4–5%), and others (institutional ownership ~75–84%; insiders ~2%). Independent Canadian-led company.

• Suncor Energy Inc. – Second-largest (800,000 bpd, with major oil sands operations like Firebag, Fort Hills, and Syncrude).

  
  Primary ownership/control: Publicly traded; dispersed institutional ownership. Top holders: Royal Bank of Canada (5.6%), Vanguard (4.6–4.7%), Elliott Investment Management (4.4%), Artisan Partners (2.8%), Bank of Montreal (2.6–2.7%). No majority controller; activist interest noted from Elliott.

• Cenovus Energy Inc. – Third-largest (800,000 bpd pre-recent acquisitions; boosted post-MEG Energy buy in late 2025, with Christina Lake, Foster Creek, and Sunrise SAGD projects).

  
  Primary ownership/control: Publicly traded; institutional dominance. Top holders: Capital World Investors (8.3%), Capital Research Global Investors (5.7–6%), Vanguard (3.2–3.4%), Capital International Investors (~2.8%). No single controlling interest (institutional ~55–62%; insiders ~29% but dispersed).

• Imperial Oil Limited – Fourth-largest (~450,000 bpd, with Kearl (70.96% operated), Cold Lake, and Syncrude interests).

  
  Primary ownership/control: Majority-controlled subsidiary of ExxonMobil Corporation (U.S.), which holds ~69.6% stake. ExxonMobil exerts controlling influence over strategy and operations; remaining shares publicly traded with institutional holders.

• ConocoPhillips Canada – Top-10 player (~200,000 bpd in Canada, primarily from 100% owned/operated Surmont SAGD project in Athabasca; recent milestones include 500 million barrels cumulative in 2025 and ongoing pad developments).

  
  Primary ownership/control: Wholly owned Canadian subsidiary of ConocoPhillips (NYSE: COP), a U.S.-based independent exploration and production company. Full control rests with parent ConocoPhillips (publicly traded, institutional ownership dominant; no single majority holder beyond dispersed shareholders).

These producers are deeply invested in Alberta’s oil sands and rely on TMX for export access (especially to Asia via tidewater). Their unified stance in the toll dispute reflects shared concerns over rate competitiveness vs. U.S. pipelines like Enbridge or Keystone. Ownership structures show a mix: mostly independent Canadian firms with heavy American institutional investment, plus one major U.S.-controlled entity (Imperial) and a U.S. subsidiary (ConocoPhillips Canada).

🛢️A Shell Game of Deceit: How BRIK & APMC Are Milking Alberta Taxpayers Dry to Subsidize American Big Oil🛢️

Key Point 5: The Subsidy Question – Are Canadian Taxpayers Footing the Bill?

• Federal government owns Trans Mountain (via Crown corp)—funded the project directly (~$35B+).

• Under the formula: Shippers bear 30% of overruns ($9–10B uncapped), government/Trans Mountain absorbs 70% ($19B capped).

• Reports (e.g., IEEFA, IISD) estimate ongoing subsidies to shippers/producers of $9–19B over the pipeline’s life—through lower-than-market tolls, debt absorption, or foregone returns.

• Critics call it a fossil fuel subsidy benefiting Alberta producers while taxpayers cover overruns private investors wouldn’t tolerate.

• Proponents argue it’s strategic infrastructure for energy security and economic benefits.

Key Point 6: What’s Next – The February 6 Update and Beyond:

• Negotiations continue; update due February 6, 2026 (today)—watch CER’s REGDOCS portal or Trans Mountain site for filings.

• Shippers can restart the hearing anytime; no settlement means CER ruling later.

• Broader context: Government plans to sell Trans Mountain eventually—clear tolls could boost sale value, but uncertainty lingers.

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC on behalf of Trans Mountain Pipeline L.P. (collectively, “Trans Mountain”)

Conclusion:

The TMX toll dispute underscores deeper tensions in Canada’s energy landscape: heavy public investment in fossil fuel infrastructure, questions of cost accountability, and the push for global competitiveness in oil exports amid shifting ownership dynamics.

A key reality is the significant American control over Alberta’s oil sands. Recent analyses (2025 reports from groups like Canadians for Tax Fairness and others) show that the “Big Four” producers—Canadian Natural Resources, Cenovus Energy, Imperial Oil (ExxonMobil subsidiary), and Suncor—collectively represent about 80% of Canadian oil sands production and are on average 73% foreign-owned, with 60% American-owned. Canadian investors hold just 27% of these giants. Broader Canadian fossil fuel companies see U.S. equity ownership at around 59% (up from prior years), meaning a large share of profits from oil sands activity flows south through dividends and buybacks rather than staying in Canada to reinvest or benefit workers and taxpayers. This dynamic raises questions about whose interests truly drive expansion decisions—especially when major intervenors in the TMX toll talks include U.S.-controlled or heavily U.S.-influenced firms like Imperial Oil and ConocoPhillips Canada.

In the interim, Canadian taxpayers face ongoing risks from the TMX project itself. With the pipeline’s costs ballooning to ~$34–35 billion (far beyond original estimates), current interim tolls do not fully recover these overruns. Reports from the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) and others estimate effective subsidies to oil shippers/producers ranging from CAD $8.7–18.8 billion over the pipeline’s life (or up to ~$1,255 per household), with some analyses suggesting taxpayer exposure could exceed $25 billion when including indirect costs and foregone returns. The federal government, as owner via a Crown corporation, absorbs much of the burden—potentially through debt write-offs or reduced sale value when privatization eventually occurs. The paused CER toll proceeding (update due February 6, 2026, but no major public resolution noted as of early today) leaves uncertainty: if no settlement raises rates enough, taxpayers continue subsidizing discounted transport for producers, many with substantial American ownership.

Looking ahead, the pattern must not repeat. No public money should fund additional pipelines to the coast. Recent discussions (e.g., the 2025 Canada-Alberta MOU on a potential new west coast line for up to 1 million bpd to Asia) emphasize private sector construction and financing, with Indigenous co-ownership opportunities—but experts warn no private investors have stepped forward without government backstops for overruns, as seen with TMX. If American (or other) oil & gas companies want another pipeline to access new markets, they must fund it privately through market-driven investment. Any approval should rest strictly on facts—economic viability, environmental impacts, Indigenous rights, and genuine private risk-taking—without taxpayer guarantees or subsidies that shift costs to Canadians.

Whether a TMX toll settlement emerges soon or the CER intervenes, the outcome will influence not just who pays for past overruns (shippers, taxpayers, or a blend) but also Alberta’s economy, national energy policy, and Canada’s position in a transitioning world. Public funds built TMX to support energy security and exports; future infrastructure should stand on its own merits in the market, not on public bailouts. What do you think—is this a fair reflection of priorities, or does it highlight the need for stronger safeguards against foreign profit extraction and taxpayer exposure? Share your thoughts below, and stay tuned as details (including any February 6 update) continue to unfold.

The End!

#EndCorporateWelfare #IAmAlberta #IAmCanadian #ForeverCanadian #oilandgas #ableg #abpoli #cdnpoli #AlbertaForward