Alberta Election Thread - Election Day April 16 2019

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

This legal battle will be nothing more than another financial drain on our economy and take our politicians focus off of, you know, actually finding ways to improve life in Alberta.

Didn't Alberta lose $2 billion dollars when the NDP sued itself in the rush to enact the "Social License no Pipeline" TM carbon tax on our economy?

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by chemgear

Didn't Alberta lose $2 billion dollars when the NDP sued itself in the rush to enact the "Social License no Pipeline" TM carbon tax on our economy?

Hey, reading is hard.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by chemgear

Didn't Alberta lose $2 billion dollars when the NDP sued itself in the rush to enact the "Social License no Pipeline" TM carbon tax on our economy?

Sure did, but that's another topic from a government about to be ousted. Kenney will have to clean that up as best as he can.

Now, how about the plan from our next government to pursue unwinnable legal action against Canada on a number of fronts? And will we get value for our tax dollars going toward these fights and how likely are we paying for a fleeting "feel good" moment that will go absolutely nowhere?

Seems like Jason should find some money for "Ministry of Lawsuits and Legal Challenges".

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by chemgear

Didn't Alberta lose $2 billion dollars when the NDP sued itself in the rush to enact the "Social License no Pipeline" TM carbon tax on our economy?

This cannot be emphasized and screamed from the roof tops enough. Complete and utter incompetence.

https://calgaryherald.com/news/hemst...3-510ab4cdcc95

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Sure did, but that's another topic from a government about to be ousted. Kenney will have to clean that up as best as he can.

Now, how about the plan from our next government to pursue unwinnable legal action against Canada on a number of fronts? And will we get value for our tax dollars going toward these fights and how likely are we paying for a fleeting "feel good" moment that will go absolutely nowhere?

Seems like Jason should find some money for "Ministry of Lawsuits and Legal Challenges".

“Unwinnable”

[monkeyman]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Sure did, but that's another topic from a government about to be ousted. Kenney will have to clean that up as best as he can.

Now, how about the plan from our next government to pursue unwinnable legal action against Canada on a number of fronts? And will we get value for our tax dollars going toward these fights and how likely are we paying for a fleeting "feel good" moment that will go absolutely nowhere?

Seems like Jason should find some money for "Ministry of Lawsuits and Legal Challenges".

Not that he would take it, but I'm sure the NDP could recommend a BC law firm to represent Alberta.
They also know of a good Ontario company if anyone needs their light bulbs changed.

[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?

[Weitz]

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?

If Transmountain is cancelled/permanently delayed, then the outcome is to put pressure on the Feds and demand concessions on a ton of stuff ala Quebec.

Currently 57% of Albertans want a referendum on it, I don't think its so they can say its fair.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Weitz

If Transmountain is cancelled/permanently delayed, then the outcome is to put pressure on the Feds and demand concessions on a ton of stuff ala Quebec,

We have no leverage. Quebec does.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Weitz

If Transmountain is cancelled/permanently delayed, then the outcome is to put pressure on the Feds and demand concessions on a ton of stuff ala Quebec,

Right, but how do you propose to make that happen? You need other provinces on your side to make a change to the formula. I think SK will obviously throw their hat in, and maybe ON and BC, but the rest of the country is likely going to vote against anything that sees them get a smaller piece of the pie.

[Lubicon]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Pretty sure 7 of 10 provinces would need to agree to that change in formula. Do we have 7 provinces willing to go along with the bread and butter province wanting to pay less? I feel like Doug Ford's Ontario would go with it, but most others would reject, and it would be all for not, and a waste of time and money.

That's really irrelevant as to the objective of what the UCP may be considering. The point is to force a discussion on the entire program, right now that is a complete non-starter with the Feds. Also to draw attention to the unintended consequences of the program.

Originally Posted by rubecube

I wonder how a court that can't decide what "meaningful consultation" looks like is going to decide what "negotiating in good faith" looks like. Also, this could very well be a "careful what you wish for" situation. If equalization gets opened up, it's not just Alberta who will get to submit proposals and it'd be a very easy route for the Liberals to throw some red meat to their supporters in Quebec, BC, and the Atlantic provinces.

The Supreme Court has already ruled on that IIRC and they have stated the Feds must open up a dialogue. What constitutes 'good faith' is also largely irrelevant as again the whole point of this is to force the issue into the spotlight.

[stone hands]

Originally Posted by Weitz

If Transmountain is cancelled/permanently delayed, then the outcome is to put pressure on the Feds and demand concessions on a ton of stuff ala Quebec.

Currently 57% of Albertans want a referendum on it, I don't think its so they can say its fair.

That doesnt even remotely begin to answer my question

How does a referendum help? What provinces are you going to convince to reduce albertas equalization payments

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Lubicon

That's really irrelevant as to the objective of what the UCP may be considering. The point is to force a discussion on the entire program, right now that is a complete non-starter with the Feds. Also to draw attention to the unintended consequences of the program.

The Supreme Court has already ruled on that IIRC and they have stated the Feds must open up a dialogue. What constitutes 'good faith' is also largely irrelevant as again the whole point of this is to force the issue into the spotlight.

Ah, so it's a "raising awareness" campaign. Seems like a great use of resources.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Even though it has no chance of doing anything, I think it's important to waste money to find out if Albertans would rather have more money or less money.

[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.

[rubecube]

The plan pretty much looks like this:

Step 1: Hold referendum on equalization payments
Step 2: Use referendum results to force the feds to open dialogue on equalization payments
Step 3: ???
Step 4: Reduced equalization payments

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by Weitz

If Transmountain is cancelled/permanently delayed, then the outcome is to put pressure on the Feds and demand concessions on a ton of stuff ala Quebec.

Currently 57% of Albertans want a referendum on it, I don't think its so they can say its fair.

What pressure?

Let’s say the referendum succeeds. It gets taken to the Feds and they get the required 7 province 50% support and equalization is removed from the constitution.

The Feds now have 18 billion to do with what they please. Hell, they could continue paying equalization exactly the same way as now if they wanted to. Or give it 100% to Quebec.

This money won’t magically return to Alberta. Ottawa probably won’t reduce taxes because they no longer “have” to pay out equalization.

[iggy_oi]

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?

My guess is that the other provinces will ask Kenney why they should change the equalization formula that was put in place by the federal government Kenney served under

[Roughneck]

It's important to remember that the federal government pays out equalization payments, but they don't collect equalization payments. They aren't tabulated then the feds ask Alberta for a cheque, they aren't something it's in the power of the province to withhold either. They're given out from federal tax dollars. Equalization is just a formula used to standardize that transfer of funds. You could eliminate equalization, but still end up with the same redistribution of tax dollars (or even worse from Alberta's perspective).

Kenney knows this, and his party didn't do anything to make the formula better for Alberta either, so what makes him think a referendum will change that? Also, is he really prepared to make Scheer answer questions on equalization while trying to win seats outside of Alberta in an upcoming federal election knowing full well the answers Albertans will want to hear will only hurt his chances?

[rubecube]

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.

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.