Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[para transit fellow]

https://twitter.com/TheBreakdownAB/s...-fd5Vllvw&s=19

[chedder]

Originally Posted by para transit fellow

https://twitter.com/TheBreakdownAB/s...-fd5Vllvw&s=19

Dis you see her fake crying in her press conference? She is truly unstable.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by GGG

It should be a strange or uncommon thing to identify with a political party. That’s a really weird way of identifying yourself. In a healthy democracy you’d vote for the party / Representative that best represents the policies you want to see advanced.

The conservatives might typically do that for you but it’s still wierd to start from a baseline of I’m conservative.

I remember when my dad basically taught me this and that we were conservative and who liberals were… and I told him then that it didn’t make any sense to me. That’s how you define yourself? It sounded stupid to me while I was dressed up like a power ranger and arguing about the WWF being real. Can we stop the ####ing nonsense already?

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by curves2000

iggy_oi was indicating something about identity politics since I personally consider myself a conservatives voter, as if that's a strange or uncommon thing.

Just because something is common doesn’t make it sensible.

It would be as if I thought it was unusual for people to identify as a Liberal, NDP or progressive voter.

Maybe you should reconsider that position because it’s just as ridiculous.

He prefers to vote on policy but you don't vote on policy in Canada, you may vote for a platform but regardless, your still a voter/supporter of a specific party or political direction.

Actually we do vote on policy. There’s nothing stopping a party from having similar policies as another, nor is there anything that prevents a party from changing their political direction. Blindly voting for a party regardless of their policies is the quickest way to ensure that that party won’t adapt and represent you to the best of their abilities because they don’t ever have to worry about losing your vote.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Just because something is common doesn’t make it sensible.



Maybe you should reconsider that position because it’s just as ridiculous.



Actually we do vote on policy. There’s nothing stopping a party from having similar policies as another, nor is there anything that prevents a party from changing their political direction. Blindly voting for a party regardless of their policies is the quickest way to ensure that that party won’t adapt and represent you to the best of their abilities because they don’t ever have to worry about losing your vote.

I think the problem is that you are talking about deciding your vote based on policy, which is clear to most people, but curves is confused and thinks you mean casting a vote on individual policies.

Which brings in the question of what context he’s using identity politics in, because it’s probably not in the same way you meant it or most people understand it.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by curves2000

iggy_oi was indicating something about identity politics since I personally consider myself a conservatives voter, as if that's a strange or uncommon thing.

It would be as if I thought it was unusual for people to identify as a Liberal, NDP or progressive voter.

He prefers to vote on policy but you don't vote on policy in Canada, you may vote for a platform but regardless, your still a voter/supporter of a specific party or political direction.

But you do vote on that, unless you're completely uneducated about what anyone on the ballot stands for. You're voting the person that you think will carry out what you feel most aligns with your needs or philosophies based on their platform, previous history, or the policies they've indicated they want to push through. Why would you vote any differently than that?

I don't know if you're trying to argue semantics here or what.

[FlameOn]

Another wonderful Danielle Smith idea, she's looking at getting rid of/phasing out the Regulated Rate Option for energy in Alberta "to improve the affordability and price stability for fixed income Albertans". I hate the doublespeak that is used here. Looks like some exec is looking for a new private jet this year.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...erta-1.6781057

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by FlameOn

Another wonderful Danielle Smith idea, she's looking at getting rid of/phasing out the Regulated Rate Option for energy in Alberta "to improve the affordability and price stability for fixed income Albertans". I hate the doublespeak that is used here. Looks like some exec is looking for a new private jet this year.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...erta-1.6781057

I don't see that as doublespeak, it's just usual pandering, but sure is weird to hear about government curtailment of market forces for a conservative government.

If the government hadn't stepped in and capped the RRO, you'd be seeing some dire consequences for some poorer folk. And all they've done is kick the pain and political football down the road because now those overages are coming due and there's going to be high rates to be paid.

The trouble of course is I'm not sure what the default option will be

[Torture]

Originally Posted by FlameOn

Another wonderful Danielle Smith idea, she's looking at getting rid of/phasing out the Regulated Rate Option for energy in Alberta "to improve the affordability and price stability for fixed income Albertans". I hate the doublespeak that is used here. Looks like some exec is looking for a new private jet this year.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...erta-1.6781057

That'll work well for people that don't qualify for a fixed rate because of credit ratings, etc and are on RRO because it's their only option.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Torture

That'll work well for people that don't qualify for a fixed rate because of credit ratings, etc and are on RRO because it's their only option.

But will they legislate prices then? I'm not sure how regulations the deregulated industry will work. Default is monthly fixed?

[Faust]

Establishment vs 'Take Back' insurgent: UCP's civil war spills into Alberta's election

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...ndre-1.6780248

[Wastedyouth]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

This is the same Rebecca Schulz who in her time as Minister of children’s services complained when the federal government was giving our province money to reduce the costs of child care?

The same Rebecca Schulz who couldn’t follow her parties own COVID restrictions?

The same Rebecca Schulz who’s campaign team dumps boxes full of pamphlets on the doorsteps of constituents who say they’re not going to vote for her?

Seems as though your judgement may be a little skewed on this as I have little hope that she will make a positive contribution going forward in any role she takes in government, but hey let’s reward her with another term to make sure she qualifies for her pension.

I tried to google these items, but didnt find much info.

I am not saying they didn't happen, they are just news to me.

My comments on Rebecca are on her current role as Minister of Municipal Affairs and my interactions with her since.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

I tried to google these items, but didnt find much info.

I find it pretty hard to believe that you couldn’t find much information about the daycare funding. The other two items were obviously personal interactions I’ve had so are unlikely to pop up on a google search.

I am not saying they didn't happen, they are just news to me.

We’ll at least now you know

My comments on Rebecca are on her current role as Minister of Municipal Affairs and my interactions with her since.

You said she was one of the best Municipal Affairs ministers of the past 10 years based on her being in the role less than 5 months. I’d be interested to know how long you’ve been in your position and how many other municipal affairs ministers you’ve dealt with so we can quantify the validity of that statement and why it would “set back” municipal affairs 12-18 months by removing someone who would have only been in the role for 7 months by the time the election roles around.

[Wastedyouth]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

If you're in Municipal politics, what is your opinion on the UCP downloading costs to municipalities in the last four years, particularly on smaller towns and communities that can't afford the extra burden? For example the ongoing ambulance availability crisis? What is it about their governing style that gives you hope?

And I'm curious why you think Rebecca Schulz has been great?

Finally I can gather my thoughts after a long weekend of hockey!

My opinion on the downloading is:

Its ####ing annoying. And it will only continue in the future as they continue to cut grant funding but increase downloading. But I don't foresee that changing with the NDP. It's a trend among all provincial parties to to continue to download responsibility.

This Provincial Police Force will be the next broken "we won't download this onto municipalities" broken promise from the current regime. It is one reason I hope the NDP get a majority this spring as I believe that the plan will be scrapped and no more time or money wasted on such a stupid idea that no one rurally supports (We voted overwhelmingly at the RMA for a motion in support of the RCMP).

Schulz has done a great job of communicating with our municipality specifically on the challenges with the current ICF legislation and open to discussions with the RMA and rural municipalities on creating a dialogue with stakeholders on changing the legislation to create more harmonious negotiations between urban and rural muncipalities. This is something the previous two ministers were not willing to touch with a 15 foot pole. Their response was "you just figure it out, the legislation is what it is". Which has led to multiple long drawn out law suits and judicial reviews province wide on ICFs.

Is she perfect? No. No one is. But I see positives in her current interactions with us.

I want to reiterate again, I am NOT a UCP supporter, my posts aren't done to try to convince you or anyone that the UCP are a good party or even the ones who I am hoping are in the majority after this election. I support the MLA of my area and don't think a new NDP MLA would bring much more to our region. But if they wanted to discuss what they could bring to earn my vote, I am all ears.

I suspect an NDP majority this spring might solve a few issues coming down the line for the province, but I also will just roll with the punches if they don't!

[Ozy_Flame]

Thank you for your response, much appreciated.

[Wastedyouth]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

I find it pretty hard to believe that you couldn’t find much information about the daycare funding. The other two items were obviously personal interactions I’ve had so are unlikely to pop up on a google search.



We’ll at least now you know



You said she was one of the best Municipal Affairs ministers of the past 10 years based on her being in the role less than 5 months. I’d be interested to know how long you’ve been in your position and how many other municipal affairs ministers you’ve dealt with so we can quantify the validity of that statement and why it would “set back” municipal affairs 12-18 months by removing someone who would have only been in the role for 7 months by the time the election roles around.

Comments and opinions from the returning Councillors I work with and the Councillor i replaced on my current experiences with her and her admin.

That statement might have been a bit bold. But I have had multiple interactions with her that make me think she is going to do a good job, if she continues past this spring.

I believe it will set back municipal affairs only because when there is a party changeover with agendas so dramatically different such as the NDP and UCP, it causes shifts in funding. progress on projects and initiatives stall or disappear, etc etc.

That comment was more in regards to a changing of the guard at a provincial level than of Rebecca herself.

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by Faust

Establishment vs 'Take Back' insurgent: UCP's civil war spills into Alberta's election

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...ndre-1.6780248

Wouldn't it be great if an Alberta version of the LIncoln Project on twitter became a thing and split the vote on the right? Maybe call it the Lougheed Project.

[Lubicon]

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

Finally I can gather my thoughts after a long weekend of hockey!

My opinion on the downloading is:

Its ####ing annoying. And it will only continue in the future as they continue to cut grant funding but increase downloading. But I don't foresee that changing with the NDP. It's a trend among all provincial parties to to continue to download responsibility.

This Provincial Police Force will be the next broken "we won't download this onto municipalities" broken promise from the current regime. It is one reason I hope the NDP get a majority this spring as I believe that the plan will be scrapped and no more time or money wasted on such a stupid idea that no one rurally supports (We voted overwhelmingly at the RMA for a motion in support of the RCMP).

Anything is possible with the UCP but they are providing Grande Prairie funding to cover the cost of stitching to a City Police force from the RCMP (covering about 50% of the cost if I understand).

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Lubicon

Anything is possible with the UCP but they are providing Grande Prairie funding to cover the cost of stitching to a City Police force from the RCMP (covering about 50% of the cost if I understand).

The UCP are using our tax dollars to do it becuase it benefits their narrative of kicking the RCMP out of Alberta. This was a gleeful opportunity for the UCP, and they jumped at it.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

The UCP are using our tax dollars to do it becuase it benefits their narrative of kicking the RCMP out of Alberta. This was a gleeful opportunity for the UCP, and they jumped at it.

The thing that bothers me the most about this is when the conversion is done, they'll boast about how successful of a program is, but responsiveness to crime rates and improvements to some of Grand Prairie's most dire crime issues (and even marginal issues) will not be known without ample sample data which will take some time.

Get ready to hear about how amazing Grand Prairie is and how the rest needs to be applied to the rest of the province during the election, even if there's little to no primary data to back it up.