Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

I'm starting to think she won't respect the 2023 election. None of these policies can be reasonably implemented in six months.

I think she's going to break convention and pull a Stelmach to extend her far-right regime.

From my link above:

A fixed election date was brought in and passed by the UCP almost a year ago in a bill introduced by then-justice minister Kaycee Madu. Madu is now deputy premier and the minister for skilled trades and professions.

The fixed date replaced decade-old legislation that called for elections within a three-month window in the spring every four years. The new law specifies voters go to the polls in a general election on the last Monday in May every four years.

It was a priority for the government, Madu told the house last Nov. 16 when speaking to the bill.

“Doing this would level the playing field for all political parties. It would remove the advantage the governing party currently has with the three-month election window and increase trust in our democratic process.”

While the date is fixed, it can’t be legally set in stone.

Alberta premiers have the option to call an election for extenuating circumstances, including if they are seeking a mandate on consequential changes or if the governing party loses a confidence vote in the house.

[Ozy_Flame]

Ah. Very cool. So very likely true then.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by Locke

Good. Its a stupid plan.

Same with controlling our own pensions. I can see some merit in the concept of controlling our own Pension Plan based on the demographics of our Province, but at the end of the day even that is harmful short-term thinking that lacks the concept of long-term consequences and vision.

We need to catapult Smith into the Sun.

I could see merit in layering on a second pension plan for Albertans, start taking payments after $65K in earnings.

But touching our CPP should be a deal breaker for everyone, it's one of the best pension plans in the world, and frankly I don't really trust the ideologs Albertans elect not to force political investment choices that would be completely bone headed with our money.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by #-3

I could see merit in layering on a second pension plan for Albertans, start taking payments after $65K in earnings.

But touching our CPP should be a deal breaker for everyone, it's one of the best pension plans in the world, and frankly I don't really trust the ideologs Albertans elect not to force political investment choices that would be completely bone headed with our money.

I mean it bears repeating that they won't be putting it into bone headed investments, they will without question, be enriching their cronies to a boggling degree.

I fully expect at this point to lose my CPP/APP to some sort of Ponzi scheme before I hit 60.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

I mean it bears repeating that they won't be putting it into bone headed investments, they will without question, be enriching their cronies to a boggling degree.

I fully expect at this point to lose my CPP/APP to some sort of Ponzi scheme before I hit 60.

Again CPP is pretty much the best run public pension funds in the world.

Currently if you have been able to max it out you are going to get ~$15,000 annually. That means if you are a couple that expects to survive 20 years of retirement you will earn $600K in CPP benefits, after paying less than $200K over your career (and they are are increasing this every year). I for one plan to make it longer than 20 years in retirement with a maxed CPP account.

And they have plenty of Money in the fund to maintain it.

APP I would really worry that a party like the UPC so believe that they are good with economic because that's common wisdom, that they would do exactly what you are describing, and would assume that magically wouldn't screw things up.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by #-3

Again CPP is pretty much the best run public pension funds in the world.

Currently if you have been able to max it out you are going to get ~$15,000 annually. That means if you are a couple that expects to survive 20 years of retirement you will earn $600K in CPP benefits, after paying less than $200K over your career (and they are are increasing this every year). I for one plan to make it longer than 20 years in retirement with a maxed CPP account.

And they have plenty of Money in the fund to maintain it.

APP I would really worry that a party like the UPC so believe that they are good with economic because that's common wisdom, that they would do exactly what you are describing, and would assume that magically wouldn't screw things up.

I’m not in favour of an APP, but the funds are managed by the government irrespective of the province or federal government. The Liberals have nothing to do with CPP, and the UCP (or NDP) would have nothing to do with the APP either. It’s professionally managed.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Slava

I’m not in favour of an APP, but the funds are managed by the government irrespective of the province or federal government. The Liberals have nothing to do with CPP, and the UCP (or NDP) would have nothing to do with the APP either. It’s professionally managed.

AIMco doesn't even need UCP interference to be disasters, they are doing that just fine on their own.

But while Mr. Kenney waits for the panel to deliver its report, which remains nearly a month overdue, he may want to reflect on recent news that AIMCo lost a reported $2.1-billion on an exotic derivatives trade that blew up in its face. Talk about spectacular performance.

Indeed, even beyond that public and highly costly embarrassment, AIMCo hasn’t been as successful as Mr. Toews let on. “Canada boasts some of the world’s most sophisticated and best performing public investment funds, which essentially operate like Wall Street firms but siphon profits to ex-bus drivers and retired nurses," wrote Leanna Orr, in Institutional Investor. "AIMCo is not among that top tier, experts and data suggest.” While the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan produced returns of 9.8 per cent on an annualized basis over the past decade, Ms. Orr noted, AIMCo returned just 8.2 per cent.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opin...-pension-plan/

Why would any intelligent Albertan want their pension moved from one of the most competent to this? Oh, wait, they wouldn't.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Anyone here upset that the Alberta Gov't is now looking to play for orphaned well clean up? I'm not Albertan anymore but it would sure chap my ### that the companies who agreed to pay for these wells at end of life didn't uphold their end of the agreement.

Am I missing something? Seems like corporate donations to give tax breaks (meaning spending money that would've gone to the citizens) for cleaning up the mess that they promised they'd clean...

Has nothing to do with orphaned wells.

They want royalty credits for doing liability work. It would be a dumb program.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

AIMco doesn't even need UCP interference to be disasters, they are doing that just fine on their own.


https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opin...-pension-plan/

Why would any intelligent Albertan want their pension moved from one of the most competent to this? Oh, wait, they wouldn't.

Right and that’s a different discussion. They lost $2bn and that’s a big number. Of course they manage something like $165bn, so it’s not. These things hit the media and it sounds catastrophic, but it’s about position sizing.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Has nothing to do with orphaned wells.



They want royalty credits for doing liability work. It would be a dumb program.

Everything I've read suggests otherwise?


https://globalnews.ca/news/9240132/c...eanup-royalty/

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Everything I've read suggests otherwise?


https://globalnews.ca/news/9240132/c...eanup-royalty/

Your link confirms what I said. It’s a program for operating companies to get credits for royalty breaks for doing mandatory liability work. Work they are are required to do already

Orphans wells are wells the belong to defunct companies that no longer operate.

It’s a stupid program that (I hope) never comes into effect. Companies shouldn’t be rewarded for doing liability work. Especially with mandatory liability spend coming in for 2023.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Your link confirms what I said. It’s a program for operating companies to get credits for royalty breaks for doing mandatory liability work. Work they are are required to do already

Orphans wells are wells the belong to defunct companies that no longer operate.

It’s a stupid program that (I hope) never comes into effect. Companies shouldn’t be rewarded for doing liability work. Especially with mandatory liability spend coming in for 2023.

Oh that's even worse. I misunderstood that

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Oh that's even worse. I misunderstood that

Yah it’s beyond stupid.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Yah it’s beyond stupid.

That would be an egregious call giveaway when oil was $45, at $90 it's criminal

[you&me]

Originally Posted by Slava

Right and that’s a different discussion. They lost $2bn and that’s a big number. Of course they manage something like $165bn, so it’s not. These things hit the media and it sounds catastrophic, but it’s about position sizing.

Not exactly my wheelhouse, but AIMCo is pretty well regarded as far as I know.

At least they weren't in FTX

[Slava]

Originally Posted by you&me

Not exactly my wheelhouse, but AIMCo is pretty well regarded as far as I know.

At least they weren't in FTX

OTPP had/has exposure there and people aren’t happy!

AIMCO is pretty well regarded and most of the people who don’t like them base it on political views more than anything concrete. We had discussions on here about them taking over the LAPP and such a year or two ago. At the point the concern was too much exposure to energy, IIRC. I’m guessing that concern isn’t going to come up now though!

Don’t get me wrong though. The APP is stupid because the only reason to go that route is basically “Quebec does it” and “taking Ottawa out of Alberta”. I don’t agree with either of those two angles. I also think that CPPIB does just fine and why do we need our own infrastructure set for this, when there’s nothing wrong with the current system?

[#-3]

Originally Posted by Slava

I’m not in favour of an APP, but the funds are managed by the government irrespective of the province or federal government. The Liberals have nothing to do with CPP, and the UCP (or NDP) would have nothing to do with the APP either. It’s professionally managed.

That's a matter of trust, and I don't trust the UPC.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by #-3

That's a matter of trust, and I don't trust the UPC.

Sure, I get that. It’s just not how things work though. Like you might have hated Stephen Harper, or detest Justin Trudeau, or both. It has no bearing on CPP. AIMCO still did their job when the NDP was in power and if the NDP wins the next election, they’ll keep doing their thing.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by #-3

That's a matter of trust, and I don't trust the UPC.

Thats just absurd though. Bar codes are by far the most trustworthy element of retail shopping!

This is just unfounded bias by loose association!

[Yikes]

Originally Posted by Locke

Thats just absurd though. Bar codes are by far the most trustworthy element of retail shopping!

This is just unfounded bias by loose association!

Haha....very good.