Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by curves2000

Perhaps I didn't explain well or caving isn't the right word. In my opinion and others routed in logic, if a man is interested in women and is in a position where money, power, status and more is and there is plenty of women around, sooner or later you date, sleep with, settle down with one. It's 100% logical. If you aren't seen with women in that capacity, perhaps you aren't interested. Realistically how many years and decades can you go on without someone, anybody you come across peaking your interest?

I am just speculating of course but people in the public eye have speculation about their personal lives all the time.

Is this a modern-day version of the "the birds and the bees"?

[puffnstuff]

Someone really needs to put a bigger rock on top of the rock chandler keeps crawling out from underneath of.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by MoneyGuy

I’ll disagree and opine that he should be able to run again. He’ll lose anyway; we hope.

Just went by the golf course him and his 4 village idiots are holding a session. It looks packed.

My fear is with Chalmers sticking his nose in again and with Dean they will split the vote allowing Colvin win.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by curves2000

Perhaps I didn't explain well or caving isn't the right word. In my opinion and others routed in logic, if a man is interested in women and is in a position where money, power, status and more is and there is plenty of women around, sooner or later you date, sleep with, settle down with one. It's 100% logical. If you aren't seen with women in that capacity, perhaps you aren't interested. Realistically how many years and decades can you go on without someone, anybody you come across peaking your interest?

I am just speculating of course but people in the public eye have speculation about their personal lives all the time.

I was just taking issue with you using the word ‘caving’ as it frames relationships in a very adversarial manner. Its plays on misogynistic tropes of women trapping men.

I agree with your general statement that most regular people especially those with good careers and opportunities will usually end up in a long term relationship. I think speculating on why someone isn’t in a long term relationship is a little gross.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Canadian Energy Centre: Millions of dollars unaccounted for.

Danielle Smith: "Hold my children's formula off-brand Turkish liquid Tylenol."

[powderjunkie]

I think it is important to recognize that the UCP reversed course on something unpopular and non-sensical, and for that they deserve absolutely zero credit.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

I think it is important to recognize that the UCP reversed course on something unpopular and non-sensical, and for that they deserve absolutely zero credit.

UCP: Do something stupid.

Albertans: Backlash.

UCP: Repeal or soften that stupid thing, then tell everyone how they care and how great they are.

[Fuzz]

No, no, those were Kenney's things. Marlaina handles stuff differently. It's like a whole new party, really. Only she can fix the mistakes of the past.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

I think it is important to recognize that the UCP reversed course on something unpopular and non-sensical, and for that they deserve absolutely zero credit.

I’m on team give them some credit but should be asking what are the current other boondoggles in progress and how do you prevent future ones.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by GGG

I’m on team give them some credit but should be asking what are the current other boondoggles in progress and how do you prevent future ones.

Why any credit? She could have shuttered it at any time, and waited until just now.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Wormius

Why any credit? She could have shuttered it at any time, and waited until just now.

I have a gut feeling the kicker was it had something to do with the upcoming federal greenwashing law and the War Room being a private corporation, particularly the timing of this amalgamation.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Wormius

Why any credit? She could have shuttered it at any time, and waited until just now.

Because it is objectively good policy. So on the pro list you add got rid of the CEC. That doesn’t replace the con had the CEC waste money for two years and the audit trail for it is terrible. But it does at an item to the pro list.

The question is why wouldn’t you give them some credit for doing it. In fact I’d argue by posting something along the lines of yeah the CEC is finally gone indirectly gives credit to them for doing it as you are celebrating a positive change.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by GGG

Because it is objectively good policy. So on the pro list you add got rid of the CEC. That doesn’t replace the con had the CEC waste money for two years and the audit trail for it is terrible. But it does at an item to the pro list.

The question is why wouldn’t you give them some credit for doing it. In fact I’d argue by posting something along the lines of yeah the CEC is finally gone indirectly gives credit to them for doing it as you are celebrating a positive change.

Because as others have said, you simply can’t put in place stuff that is objectively bad and then expect a pat on the back when you reverse. Were you applauding when they removed funding for the low income transit passes and then reversed course?

It’s “good” they did, but they shouldn’t be applauded at all for it.

They shouldn’t have created the war room in the first place, but it would have cost them nothing to have gotten rid of the war room as soon as Smith took the reins, rather than nickel and diming over things like the low income passes.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Wormius

Because as others have said, you simply can’t put in place stuff that is objectively bad and then expect a pat on the back when you reverse. Were you applauding when they removed funding for the low income transit passes and then reversed course?

It’s “good” they did, but they shouldn’t be applauded at all for it.

They shouldn’t have created the war room in the first place, but it would have cost them nothing to have gotten rid of the war room as soon as Smith took the reins, rather than nickel and diming over things like the low income passes.

Yeah I think I did say basically the same thing. They are idiots for doing this but at least they listened to feedback. We probably had this exact same exchange.

You saying it’s “good” they did it is applauding them for it. It’s not much more than the sound of one hand clapping but your are acknowledging the government did something “good”

[puffnstuff]

Talking to the Calgary Chamber of Commerce,
Smith plans to use the Heritage Savings Fund for "de risking projects" that businesses are "finding difficult to be able to get financing".

That is insane. What happened to the importance of growing that fund?
If banks or VC wont lend businesses money no way in the world should that fund be used that way. Seems grifty as well, who decides which business gets it, how big of a ucp donor do they have to be?

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by GGG

Yeah I think I did say basically the same thing. They are idiots for doing this but at least they listened to feedback. We probably had this exact same exchange.

You saying it’s “good” they did it is applauding them for it. It’s not much more than the sound of one hand clapping but your are acknowledging the government did something “good”

I dunno, did they listen to feedback? The ffedback has been around for years. We don't know why they decided to do this, and why now. So I'm not giving credit for anything with so much unknown, because I don't trust this government farther than Tiny Tim could throw them.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by puffnstuff

Talking to the Calgary Chamber of Commerce,
Smith plans to use the Heritage Savings Fund for "de risking projects" that businesses are "finding difficult to be able to get financing".

That is insane. What happened to the importance of growing that fund?
If banks or VC wont lend businesses money no way in the world should that fund be used that way. Seems grifty as well, who decides which business gets it, how big of a ucp donor do they have to be?

Speaking of dumb ideas to add to the cons list. This is such terrible policy. We are not only have a mandate to invest locally. We also are going to only pick marginal ideas that aren’t viable to attract their own capital. These are Grants not investments.

This sounds like the Sask NDP investing in potatoes. It didn’t go well.

[Fuzz]

It’s official now: Calgary Herald political columnist Don Braid has breathlessly reported, to paraphrase the headline on the column he posted yesterday, that it was the threat of federal fines that pushed the Alberta Energy War Room into the government fold.


The subhead on Mr. Braid’s story continued: “The main reason is federal Bill C-59, which has passed third reading in the House of Commons and is now before the Senate.”

https://albertapolitics.ca/2024/06/s...-the-war-room/


It seems if you are looking to give anyone credit for the War Room shuttering, it should be the NDP. Thanks NDP!

[Ozy_Flame]

Good article by Max Fawcett about the reality of the War Room getting sucked into Smith's government. As I suspected too, Fawcett surmizes the federal greenwashing law does play a role here, and as par for the course Smith and her circus are aggrandizing Bill C-59.

National Observer: Alberta's war room waves the white flag

Premier Danielle Smith made that abundantly clear in her comments about the transition of the war room’s assets into her intergovernmental affairs department. “We’re in a time where the federal government is attempting to make the promotion of Alberta’s energy industry illegal with Bill C-59,” she said. Calgary Herald columnist Don Braid dutifully carried this water in his latest column, writing that “Bill C-59 is appallingly undemocratic and an affront to free speech. It imposes huge penalties on companies and entities that praise environmental and climate improvements in the industry.”

Alas, none of this is actually true. Bill C-59, which the government describes as “an act to implement certain provisions of the fall economic statement,” includes a small section that adds a new form of “reviewable conduct” to the Competition Act’s existing provisions for entities that make false or misleading statements to consumers. As the Department of Justice says in an explantory note on the proposed change, “the amendments would add to the existing section dealing with representations to the public, a new form of reviewable conduct: a statement, warranty or guarantee of a product’s benefits for protecting the environment or mitigating the environmental and ecological effect of climate change that is not based on an adequate and proper test.”

Translation: it would require anyone claiming a clear environmental benefit to backstop it with real evidence. The extent to which Alberta’s government is overreacting here is a massive tell, one that shows just how invested it is in keeping the waters around the oil and gas industry’s climate and other environmental impacts sufficiently muddied.

[BigThief]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

https://albertapolitics.ca/2024/06/s...-the-war-room/


It seems if you are looking to give anyone credit for the War Room shuttering, it should be the NDP. Thanks NDP!

Farkas was on CBC Radio this morning warning of what a dangerous bill this was and saying the War Room didn't end on it's own merit, only due to this bill.