Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by puffnstuff

"The most significant change would remove a mandatory requirement that the commission consider municipal boundaries when drawing electoral lines in major municipalities.
Alignment between a provincial electoral boundary and a municipal boundary would become one of several optional considerations for the commission, under the bill."

What they tabled in the bill, ignoring municipal boundaries, they want to add more rural voters to muni districts, likely in the hopes that it affects the outcome positively for the ucp. Maybe thats the scheme?

Is this a change? I thought rural/urban ridings already exist. I remember there being a lot of chatter about one of the new SW Edmonton ridings and it being mostly rural. Also St Albert or something up in northern Edmonton.

[puffnstuff]

The part where it says the 'most significant change' is a hint...

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by puffnstuff

The part where it says the 'most significant change' is a hint...

It would be nice if a link was provided to the full article and motion to get a better sense of all the context.

[puffnstuff]

Did i get hired to google for you?

But here, while its easy to do for yourself, heres 2 links

https://edmontonjournal.com/news/pol...ncial-election

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmon...tion-1.7374605

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by puffnstuff

Did i get hired to google for you?

But here, while its easy to do for yourself, heres 2 links

https://edmontonjournal.com/news/pol...ncial-election

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmon...tion-1.7374605

I really don't see anything in those articles being raised as completely out of line and even the NDP critic who was quoted in the articles doesn't seem to be sounding alarm bells. They are adding two seats because of population growth and making it possible for some urban ridings to pick up bedroom communities to balance the numbers. They talk about Calgary and Chestermere and it doesn't seem unreasonable to draw a riding that includes parts of east Calgary and Chestermere if it makes sense for balancing populations.

[troutman]

Update - already 15,000 people have signed the petition to Protect the Eastern Slopes. Keep pushing!

https://saveourslopes.ca/

[blender]

Originally Posted by troutman

Update - already 15,000 people have signed the petition to Protect the Eastern Slopes. Keep pushing!

https://saveourslopes.ca/

Done. Thank you

[MissTeeks]

Elections Alberta fines Take Back Alberta.

https://calgary.citynews.ca/2025/02/...tions-alberta/

The body that oversees provincial election spending and voting rules has fined the group, and its founder David Parker, for a range of violations from breaking fundraising rules to improper bookkeeping.

The seven fines totaling $112,500 against Take Back Alberta include accepting contributions from outside Alberta and Canada and circumventing election advertising spending limits.

[aaronck]

Originally Posted by missteeks

elections alberta fines take back alberta.

https://calgary.citynews.ca/2025/02/...tions-alberta/

https://twitter.com/user/status/1748418543467786419

https://twitter.com/user/status/1727918164145496449

[Fuzz]

Lock him up!

[KelVarnsen]

Marlaina will try to pardon him

[powderjunkie]

Amazing to have a persecution complex where conservatives have reigned for 50 of the last 54 years.

[The Big Chill]

The daycare subsidy change is not going over well with a lot of people. On the surface it just looks like the process is being simplified, but the result is lower income families will be paying more and higher income families will be paying less then they currently do. Well done UCP once again..

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by The Big Chill

The daycare subsidy change is not going over well with a lot of people. On the surface it just looks like the process is being simplified, but the result is lower income families will be paying more and higher income families will be paying less then they currently do. Well done UCP once again..

Well it's the wealthy whites in the cities that keep them in power, so it is well done from their concern

[Locke]

Originally Posted by The Big Chill

The daycare subsidy change is not going over well with a lot of people. On the surface it just looks like the process is being simplified, but the result is lower income families will be paying more and higher income families will be paying less then they currently do. Well done UCP once again..

Can you expand a little more? I just recently had a family of 2 teachers ask me if they should use the subsidized Day care or a local dayhome and looking at their incomes and the test-schedule it didnt look like they even qualified, or, if they did it would have been of minimal benefit at best.

If you can even find one to get into.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by The Big Chill

The daycare subsidy change is not going over well with a lot of people. On the surface it just looks like the process is being simplified, but the result is lower income families will be paying more and higher income families will be paying less then they currently do. Well done UCP once again..

UCP, working towards equality. Why should poor people get a leg up? The wealthy need subsidies too, they earned them more than anyone else. They need to locate their boot straps and stop complaining.

[edslunch]

Is that a feature of the Federal daycare funding agreement or is it up to each province to design their own program? I would imagine provinces are free to offer subsidies at least?

[The Big Chill]

Originally Posted by Locke

Can you expand a little more? I just recently had a family of 2 teachers ask me if they should use the subsidized Day care or a local dayhome and looking at their incomes and the test-schedule it didnt look like they even qualified, or, if they did it would have been of minimal benefit at best.

If you can even find one to get into.

Previously there was a grant that everyone qualifies for regardless of income at any licensed day care or home. In addition to that there was a subsidy you could apply for based on income. They are now getting rid of the subsidy portion and just doing a flat rate for everybody. That new flat rate works out to be a higher number for lower income families who qualified for the full subsidy, and a lower number for higher income families who partially qualified or didn’t qualify at all.

A family of two teachers will now pay 350ish per month per kid, whereas before they would have paid more due to not qualifying for that full subsidy.

[sa226]

There used to be the main grant that went straight to the daycare that essentially everyone qualified for. Additionally there was a subsidy that lower income families could apply for.

Now it's basically just one big grant.

In a way the UCP was fixing a problem. The problem was that they are incompetent at accounting and administering funds. Day cares that relied on the grant were not reliably receiving it. So their business cash flow was causing a lot of problems for the viability of their business. So this was the UCPs solution.

Sent from my SM-S918W using Tapatalk

[The Big Chill]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Is that a feature of the Federal daycare funding agreement or is it up to each province to design their own program? I would imagine provinces are free to offer subsidies at least?

I believe it’s federal money and the provinces decide how to run the program, but I am not certain about those exact details.