Alberta Election Thread - Election Day April 16 2019

[DiracSpike]

Originally Posted by stone hands

Honest, not sarcastic question for anyone who thinks a referendum on equalization payments will be successful:

what is the outcome that you see happening? Can you tell me which provinces that you think Alberta can sway, and why?

There seems to some confusion on Kenney's approach to the issue, here's the basics:

There's a clause from a Supreme Court Case of Quebec Secession in 1998 that states if a Province votes in favor of a referendum with a clear question that triggers immediate good faith negotiations on behalf of the Federal government in regards to that question. So voting on a referedum question on equalization obligates the Feds to negotiate, basically it just forces them to the table. So it's not about getting Provinces to join or lead a mutiny, just trying to make the Feds uncomfortable and make the case that if Alberta is continually unconstitutionally blocked from generating prosperity for the country we shouldn't be forced to pay disproportionately in to this program. The strong case for this for me isn't that I think or expect the formula to change, but to continue to put pressure on the Trudeau Libs of Canada's cash cow province making a stink and if they get the pipeline moving it all goes away.

Worth noting I think is that Kenney has said he's prepared in principle to do this, he's not going to come in all guns a blazing first day and start enacting all this stuff. Certainly there's some downside to enacting this too, like a lot of things the UCP have proposed like stopping gasoline shipments to BC it's a high risk high reward weapon that you only get to shoot once. The biggest downside to me is that opening equalization and the constitution could bite us in the ass and make things worse, that's certainly possible.

[Ozy_Flame]

"Raising awareness" over the sour grapes with equalization is as bad a use of tax dollars as the PPA disaster with the NDP. To Kenney's credit he hasn't spent taxpayer dollars on it yet and hopefully he changes his mind, but committing our money to fight an "awareness" battle and hoping on a prayer it leads to something is horrible, horrible misuse of public dollars. I can't believe people are buying into this tripe.

[stone hands]

Originally Posted by Weitz

I believe you get concessions long before it gets to that point.

The last thing the Feds want would be to see Alberta running that referendum, assuming it wins which I'm guessing it would, and bringing the other parties to the table to negotiate in good faith.

That isn't going to go well for anyone. Because its going to re-open a whole can of worms for Quebec and likely other provinces as well.


At the end of the day lots of people believe Alberta has gotten next to nothing from a Country it has supported for a long time. And with the new laws that are being proposed to essentially kill its main industry there is going to be an extreme amount of Anger in this province over the next 5 years especially if the Liberals win another majority.

100% of albertans think BC is being stupid and should give us access to tidewater

the problem lies in the fact that BC doesnt care, and until they care or the feds force them to care, then no number of angry albertans is going to change the current situation

likewise, 100% of albertans could think equalizaion payments are dumb, but without buyin from enough provinces, its the exact same situation we find ourselves in with pipelines

so again i ask, who are you swaying to vote yes on a "receive less in equalization payments from a province that still has the highest salaries, pays the least amount of taxes, and still has 4 provinces with higher unemployment rates"

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by rubecube

If the Conservatives win a majority in the federal election, you MIGHT see some minor concessions. Anything else and the feds likely give Alberta all the rope it needs to hang itself. I just don't see any scenario in which the two major political parties find it advantageous to torpedo their chances in the rest of the country to quell the anger in a province that holds very little sway.

Sure all might be fair points, but contrary to belief around here expect Separation to grow at an alarming level. This province isn't just going to accept the Feds torpedoing their main industry. Its just not going to happen.

I do see the Fed conservatives doing simple things like cancelling C-69 and 48 which removes a lot of this conversation.

I don't think anyone gives a #### about equalization on a real level if we can go about our business. But if you stop people from doing that the equalization is the first thing that comes up.

[DiracSpike]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

"Raising awareness" over the sour grapes with equalization is as bad a use of tax dollars as the PPA disaster with the NDP. To Kenney's credit he hasn't spent taxpayer dollars on it yet and hopefully he changes his mind, but committing our money to fight an "awareness" battle and hoping on a prayer it leads to something is horrible, horrible misuse of public dollars. I can't believe people are buying into this tripe.

You think these suits will cost $20 Billion? I think you have a horribly warped sense of how much this actually cost. Assembling a team of lawyers to work these cases seems like negligible cost to me. There's a few downsides but the cost is laughably irrelevant.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by stone hands

100% of albertans think BC is being stupid and should give us access to tidewater

the problem lies in the fact that BC doesnt care, and until they care or the feds force them to care, then no number of angry albertans is going to change the current situation

likewise, 100% of albertans could think equalizaion payments are dumb, but without buyin from enough provinces, its the exact same situation we find ourselves in with pipelines

so again i ask, who are you swaying to vote yes on a "receive less in equalization payments from a province that still has the highest salaries, pays the least amount of taxes, and still has 4 provinces with higher unemployment rates"

I don't know what you are asking because it isn't really relevant to the conversation.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

You think these suits will cost $20 Billion? I think you have a horribly warped sense of how much this actually cost. Assembling a team of lawyers to work these cases seems like negligible cost to me. There's a few downsides but the cost is laughably irrelevant.

Referendums aren't cheap. BC's most recent one cost $14.5M.

[DiracSpike]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Referendums aren't cheap. BC's most recent one cost $14.5M.

But that's nothing, in government terms. Like not even worth talking about as a downside risk.

[stone hands]

My point:

A referendum that has no chance of actually accomplishing anything is a waste of time and money

Please help sway my opinion as to how it wouldn't be a waste of money. Which provinces would we be able to sway to make it a majority vote to agree to change the equalization payment setup in canada

because if the answer is "maybe ontario and saskatchewan and nobody else" then its simply not pragmatic to even waste your time with this, and does nothing except waste tax dollars(the main reason we are so adamant on throwing out the current admin)

[PsYcNeT]

"Gotta spend money to make money" - Fiscal Conservatives, probably

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by stone hands

My point:

A referendum that has no chance of actually accomplishing anything is a waste of time and money

Please help sway my opinion as to how it wouldn't be a waste of money. Which provinces would we be able to sway to make it a majority vote to agree to change the equalization payment setup in canada

because if the answer is "maybe ontario and saskatchewan and nobody else" then its simply not pragmatic to even waste your time with this, and does nothing except waste tax dollars(the main reason we are so adamant on throwing out the current admin)

You realize this is a referendum in Alberta right?

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

You think these suits will cost $20 Billion? I think you have a horribly warped sense of how much this actually cost. Assembling a team of lawyers to work these cases seems like negligible cost to me. There's a few downsides but the cost is laughably irrelevant.

Who's talking about $20 billion? The fact that we are essentially gambling and will be spending millions to do so in both direct and indirect cost (e.g. direct lawyer costs, bureaucratic productivity man hours, opportunity cost spent governing) is probably going to climb.

This strategy is effectively playing Roulette with our taxpayer money and betting on 00, and we have one shot.

I'll give Kenney all kinds of credit if somehow this all comes together and we get back $20 billion for Alberta. That is just such pie-in-the-sky crap and we're all going to find that out very soon.

For Kenney's sake, I hope Scheer gets into power and the Conservatives bend over backwards to service Alberta's ridiculous demands.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Sure all might be fair points, but contrary to belief around here expect Separation to grow at an alarming level. This province isn't just going to accept the Feds torpedoing their main industry. Its just not going to happen.

I do see the Fed conservatives doing simple things like cancelling C-69 and 48 which removes a lot of this conversation.

Cancelling those bills won't do anything to resolve the duty to consult issue that the FCA ruled on.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by stone hands

My point:

A referendum that has no chance of actually accomplishing anything is a waste of time and money

Please help sway my opinion as to how it wouldn't be a waste of money. Which provinces would we be able to sway to make it a majority vote to agree to change the equalization payment setup in canada

because if the answer is "maybe ontario and saskatchewan and nobody else" then its simply not pragmatic to even waste your time with this, and does nothing except waste tax dollars(the main reason we are so adamant on throwing out the current admin)

Actually, given Ontario and Saskatchewan, along with Alberta, make up three of the five have provinces in the country and represent over half of the population of the country, if they rallied with Alberta on a need for lower equalization payments, it would put Ottawa in a bind. It's not enough to force a strict constitutional change, but it does create a lot of leverage.

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Referendums aren't cheap. BC's most recent one cost $14.5M.

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

But that's nothing, in government terms. Like not even worth talking about as a downside risk.

EDIT: Haha, I'm having drinks and totally fat fingered typed on the phone.

####, we could literally do over a hundred referendums with the $2,000,000,000 that the NDP blasted itself with on just that one instance of suing themselves.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Who's talking about $20 billion? The fact that we are essentially gambling and will be spending millions to do so in both direct and indirect cost (e.g. direct lawyer costs, bureaucratic productivity man hours, opportunity cost spent governing) is probably going to climb.

This strategy is effectively playing Roulette with our taxpayer money and betting on 00, and we have one shot.

I'll give Kenney all kinds of credit if somehow this all comes together and we get back $20 billion for Alberta. That is just such pie-in-the-sky crap and we're all going to find that out very soon.

For Kenney's sake, I hope Scheer gets into power and the Conservatives bend over backwards to service Alberta's ridiculous demands.

Ha ridiculous. Ok.


Regardless none of this happens till after the Federal election anyway. The 2 main bills that will put this sort of thing in motion aren't expected to be able to make it into law before the election.

[stone hands]

Originally Posted by Weitz

You realize this is a referendum in Alberta right?

when this unanimously passes in alberta, and we get all of the premiers in a room to talk about equalization payments, who is going to agree to change anything

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Cancelling those bills won't do anything to resolve the duty to consult issue that the FCA ruled on.

Ok. Not really sure how that applies but care to elaborate? Unless you think the duty to consult equals a veto. I agree proper consultation should be done.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

"Raising awareness" over the sour grapes with equalization is as bad a use of tax dollars as the PPA disaster with the NDP. To Kenney's credit he hasn't spent taxpayer dollars on it yet and hopefully he changes his mind, but committing our money to fight an "awareness" battle and hoping on a prayer it leads to something is horrible, horrible misuse of public dollars. I can't believe people are buying into this tripe.

Really??? Do you think Jason Kenney going to spend over $2 billion or anything approaching the materially of the NDP cockups fighting these things in the court?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

But that's nothing, in government terms. Like not even worth talking about as a downside risk.

I agree, but you see how hypocritical fiscal conservatives come across when they say things like this, right? This is essentially someone who makes $100k/year dropping $50/month on lottery tickets. It's not a big dent but it's still money that could probably be spent better elsewhere.