Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

The process hasn't stopped the UCP from trying because this is exactly what the process is built around. Members from all parties can make suggestions, share their thoughts and opinions, the public can do the same and subject matter experts can do the same. A committee reviews everything submitted and independently does what the determine to be the best approach.

So you believe elected politicians should advocate for their own survival vs what is best for Alberta? Interesting priorities to stand behind.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Anyone else see anything interesting in there?

Thanks for posting this. The only one that looked really weird to me was the new Chestermere-Strathmore boundary. They really tried hard to keep those two together and it makes for a very silly looking boundary.

[Yamer]

Trusting the process and checks & balances in place has worked great so far.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

So you believe elected politicians should advocate for their own survival vs what is best for Alberta? Interesting priorities to stand behind.

Do you not want to hear what representative from the various parties have to say about situations like this? I posted something about the number of written submissions when they were first released and while I don't want to dig around for that post it was basically an even split of submissions from right leaning politicians, former and current, and left leaning ones. They all should be free and able to share their insights and concerns and be part of the process. If there are submissions that don't reflect the needs of Albertans I trust that the committee will not act on them. The process has worked this time, it worked last time when the NDP was in power, it worked under the PCs and it will work in the future under whatever government we have.

[Fuzz]

It works as long as you can trust the politicians not to meddle in it. I don't trust the UCP, and neither should anyone who pays attention to anything.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

It's almost as if we have a functioning, non-partisan, independent process for these types of reviews and not one that allows for gerrymandering like many people keep fear mongering about.

Fearmongering - fear·mon·ger·ing - the action of deliberately arousing public fear or alarm about a particular issue.

If the UCP had just put forth suggestions and opinions then yes, labeling their critics and the concerns of people critical to the situation as fearmongering might be valid. However, the UCP tried to specifically change the rules to influence the results of the committee.

Bill 31 was a clear attempt by the UCP to change the formula.

Thankfully, the Lieutenant Governor appoints the chair of the council, who is also the tiebreaker as the other 4 members of the panel are nominated by the government and the opposition. Interesting when you think about who appointed Lakhani...

Had there been a conservative appointed LG I would be very concerned about the results of the committee.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I think the UCP are generally going to hate this. They don't get their Lethbridge butchery, Calgary gets two new ones and Edmonton gets one(Edmonton-South) that, while a large rural area, is probably still mostly populated by city folk in the north because there are no small towns in it.

Anyone else see anything interesting in there?

I think this part is super interesting. It is the right move but the UCP will absolutely hate it:

The Commission first considered how to allocate the two additional electoral divisions mandated by the Act. It is obvious that Calgary required an additional electoral division and Edmonton also required an additional electoral division. Given the population redistribution towards the two main cities, it was further decided, although with some reluctance given a desire not to take additional electoral divisions away from rural Alberta, that Calgary should in fact receive two additional electoral divisions.

The pragmatic consequence of this was the need to reduce the number of seats in the rest of Alberta by one. But population changes in Airdrie and Cochrane also made it obvious that those cities share three electoral divisions rather than two. Therefore, the remainder of Alberta required a net reduction of two seats

So no only are the cities getting the 2 new ridings but the committee did the right thing and consolidated population-light rural ridings to give another riding to the bursting cities.

This is the right result, it aligns with the data and the population numbers but the UCP will try to fight it as it eliminates one of "their" ridings.

[#-3]

That's a big change to my riding and I like it.

I was in a 50-50 riding that went UPC, were getting separated from that and merging with a community that was in 60-40 UPC riding and a new community. I think it's really hard to say what that will do the electoral lean, I'm think large chunks of Calgary will be 50-50 +/-5 next time no matter what they do here.

[Lubicon]

Overall changes seem reasonable.

Lethbridge was left alone more or less which is good.
Jasper/Banff makes sense I guess but it does seem strange to see Jasper cut off from it's nearest out of park neighbors (Hinton).
Some of the norther ridings are absolutely massive in size but what can you do. My hometown riding is like that (Peace-Notley) and that's a challenge for an MLA to represent. As and aside this riding must drive the UCP nuts in it's name alone, named after a former NDP member.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Lubicon

Overall changes seem reasonable.

Lethbridge was left alone more or less which is good.
Jasper/Banff makes sense I guess but it does seem strange to see Jasper cut off from it's nearest out of park neighbors (Hinton).
Some of the norther ridings are absolutely massive in size but what can you do. My hometown riding is like that (Peace-Notley) and that's a challenge for an MLA to represent. As and aside this riding must drive the UCP nuts in it's name alone, named after a former NDP member.

Do you think that bothers them more or less than having an NDP elected in Calgary-Klein?

[puffnstuff]

"In Alberta, foreign entities (non-Canadians or foreign-controlled companies) generally face restrictions on owning certain types of land, especially prime agricultural and rural lands, under the Foreign Ownership of Land Regulations"

Minister of Service Alberta and Red Tape Reduction is waiving most of the restrictions for foreign ownership of land regulations for new data centers and electrical grid infrastructure, as well as canola oil extraction.

https://www.alberta.ca/release.cfm?x...25B08E0F3DDB11

Wheres the water for these coming from?

[Fuzz]

But I thought prime agricultural land can't be wasted? or is that only for solar?

[Fuzz]

Beacon (American owned company)is planning a 4.5GW "hyperscale" AI data centre on 2,500+ acres. It looks like they have 5 locations. One north, west, and south of Edmonton, one west of Calgary, and one near High River(water!). The only one with cost is High River, so perhaps that's the one furthest along.
https://beaconaicenters.com/

https://majorprojects.alberta.ca/det...ence-Hub/11493
https://majorprojects.alberta.ca/det...ence-Hub/11491
https://majorprojects.alberta.ca/det...ence-Hub/11494

https://majorprojects.alberta.ca/det...ence-Hub/11492

https://majorprojects.alberta.ca/det...ence-Hub/11490

[CFO]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Beacon (American owned company)is planning a 4.5GW "hyperscale" AI data centre on 2,500+ acres. It looks like they have 5 locations. One north, west, and south of Edmonton, one west of Calgary, and one near High River(water!). The only one with cost is High River, so perhaps that's the one furthest along.
https://beaconaicenters.com/

https://majorprojects.alberta.ca/det...ence-Hub/11493
https://majorprojects.alberta.ca/det...ence-Hub/11491
https://majorprojects.alberta.ca/det...ence-Hub/11494

https://majorprojects.alberta.ca/det...ence-Hub/11492

https://majorprojects.alberta.ca/det...ence-Hub/11490

It's all fluff so far.

[CactusJack]

Originally Posted by puffnstuff

Wheres the water for these coming from?

There’s new water legislation coming in this sitting of the legislature. Reduction of red tape and easier access to water…

[puffnstuff]

Yeah and also transfers between basins...which water experts/biologists say is a bad idea

[puffnstuff]

Posted this in the strike thread but it should be here too

https://imgur.com/a/PHGlGts

She really has no core values at all, just a leaf in the wind

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by CFO

It's all fluff so far.

I thought you were retiring.

[Looch City]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I thought you were retiring.

Looks like he's in forced temporary retirement now lol. Thank you mods.

[troutman]

https://leger360.com/in-the-news-gov...-october-2025/

Voting Intentions Tighten Between UCP and NDP: If a provincial election were held today, the United Conservative Party would capture 44% of the vote among decided voters, compared to 39% for the Alberta NDP. The Alberta Liberal Party follows with 9%, while the Green Party and Alberta Party receive 3% and 2%, respectively. Support for the UCP has gradually declined since the start of the year, while NDP support has edged upward, narrowing the gap between the two leading parties.

Leader Favourability Shifts: Views of Alberta’s political leaders have shifted this wave. Naheed Nenshi is now the most favourably viewed leader, with 43% of Albertans expressing a positive opinion of him. Danielle Smith’s favourability has declined to 38%, down six points since May. Nearly half of Albertans (47%) report that their opinion of the Premier has worsened over the past six months, reflecting a softening in personal approval.