I suspect that whatever happens, Alberta is going to lose. Spin it as they may, the sober truth is that most Canadians, and even a majority of Albertans.......do not want Provincial politicians winning over Federal jurisdiction........or fobbing off an made in Alberta police force, pension plan or privatized health care scheme, unto those of us caught in the double edged sword of living in Alberta.
Bullying and big talk, like big hats, no cattle..........doesn't actually scare many of us for long.
Danielle Smith and the UCP are good at blowing hot air around. Their behavior is like little preschoolers who get upset when they can't have their way, and their parents have to put them in their place.
As an average Albertan, I really don’t understand what’s going on. None of us have had a chance to vote for Danielle and whatever agenda she is pushing. Although I’m fully confident most of us still won’t know until after the election campaign is done and dusted. I have a bad feeling that there is a hidden agenda...
There is an old saying that goes like this. If you give someone an inch, they will take a mile. Danielle Smith obtained her position as the UCP leader, and consequently the role of premier by a very small amount of votes. For someone to obtain that much power, from a very small segment of of Alberta's population should be very concerning. She is trying to do whatever she wants. When reality sets in, Danielle Smith will be put back in her place. Her agenda is to turn Alberta into a Republican state, but cooler and more reasonable heads will prevail, and put a stop to this. There are enough people in Canada who do not want these Trump wannabees in power. That's why the CPC has gone through three election losses, beginning in 2015. The UCP is splintering, and they will have to reinvent themselves, by changing their party name. If Danielle Smith tries to implement these neoliberal policies, like Doug Ford is doing in Ontario, the CPC will lose the fourth time around.
As I recall, comments on the ACA’s reference opinion ranged from dismissive to disparaging. A good case in point is the opinion published by Martin Olszynski in ablawg.ca:
The majority opinion concluded that the IAA is unconstitutional because the federal government is usurping provincial powers. (For the record, one judge, Justice Greckol, disagreed.) The majority opinion, wrote Olszynsksi, “is relatively difficult to follow, includes basic doctrinal errors in some parts, and ignores or strays far from precedent in others. In this and other ways, the majority’s approach is strongly reminiscent of its earlier opinion in Reference re Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act”. (The Supreme Court overturned the Alberta judges’ opinion on the carbon-tax pricing act in 2021.)
It seems even (most) Alberta justices have been infected by the sovereignty virus. Mr. Olszynski, in his conclusion, writes “Reading the majority’s opinion, there is a palpable sense of disbelief that federal environmental policies and preferences might validly affect – even contradict – provincial ones.” (Twitter translation: “Don’t you DARE tell us what to do!”) The Supreme Court has already ruled that, in matters of shared jurisdiction, the Federal government gets to have a say in matters of federal concern—even if the local yokels don’t like it.
If the Supreme Court remains unmoved by Alberta posturing, the decision will go against Alberta—again. The presence or absence of one fellow-traveller on the Bench will have little impact on others’ reading of the law.
Maybe not, David, but consider. The Feds have been content to walk softly and leave their big stick in the cloakroom--for now. But if Danielle Smith and the Take Back Alberta Party are brave enough, or dumb enough, to give Trudeau a clear target--he just might choose to fight it out. (Remember a guy named Brazeau?)
Justin Trudeau is at his best when he's got an open challenge and a visible opponent. His testimony at the Freedom Convoy inquiry is a case in point. If Smith tries to use the (unconstitutional!) Sovereignty Act, expect Trudeau to fight back fast and hard.
You might recall Brian Mulroney basically saying that Danielle Smith will not succeed here. The Sovereignty Act is not only unconstitutional, but it is also illegal, no matter how Danielle Smith tries to reword it. Danielle Smith is great at shooting her mouth off, and being a hypocrite. She tells the federal government to stay in their lane, and to butt out of Alberta's affairs (when what she is doing is violating laws and policies that fall under the domain of the federal government) but has no problems bullying municipal leaders into submission so they will support her outrageous demands. Brian Mulroney didn't have the greatest respect before, as Prime Minister, but what he is saying now is on the ball. How much will we pay for these lawsuits that Danielle Smith will be guaranteed to lose? The sooner we get her out of power, the better.
I suspect that whatever happens, Alberta is going to lose. Spin it as they may, the sober truth is that most Canadians, and even a majority of Albertans.......do not want Provincial politicians winning over Federal jurisdiction........or fobbing off an made in Alberta police force, pension plan or privatized health care scheme, unto those of us caught in the double edged sword of living in Alberta.
Bullying and big talk, like big hats, no cattle..........doesn't actually scare many of us for long.
Danielle Smith and the UCP are good at blowing hot air around. Their behavior is like little preschoolers who get upset when they can't have their way, and their parents have to put them in their place.
As an average Albertan, I really don’t understand what’s going on. None of us have had a chance to vote for Danielle and whatever agenda she is pushing. Although I’m fully confident most of us still won’t know until after the election campaign is done and dusted. I have a bad feeling that there is a hidden agenda...
There is an old saying that goes like this. If you give someone an inch, they will take a mile. Danielle Smith obtained her position as the UCP leader, and consequently the role of premier by a very small amount of votes. For someone to obtain that much power, from a very small segment of of Alberta's population should be very concerning. She is trying to do whatever she wants. When reality sets in, Danielle Smith will be put back in her place. Her agenda is to turn Alberta into a Republican state, but cooler and more reasonable heads will prevail, and put a stop to this. There are enough people in Canada who do not want these Trump wannabees in power. That's why the CPC has gone through three election losses, beginning in 2015. The UCP is splintering, and they will have to reinvent themselves, by changing their party name. If Danielle Smith tries to implement these neoliberal policies, like Doug Ford is doing in Ontario, the CPC will lose the fourth time around.
As I recall, comments on the ACA’s reference opinion ranged from dismissive to disparaging. A good case in point is the opinion published by Martin Olszynski in ablawg.ca:
https://ablawg.ca/2022/05/24/carbon-tax-redux-a-majority-of-the-alberta-court-of-appeal-opines-that-the-impact-assessment-act-is-unconstitutional/
The majority opinion concluded that the IAA is unconstitutional because the federal government is usurping provincial powers. (For the record, one judge, Justice Greckol, disagreed.) The majority opinion, wrote Olszynsksi, “is relatively difficult to follow, includes basic doctrinal errors in some parts, and ignores or strays far from precedent in others. In this and other ways, the majority’s approach is strongly reminiscent of its earlier opinion in Reference re Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act”. (The Supreme Court overturned the Alberta judges’ opinion on the carbon-tax pricing act in 2021.)
It seems even (most) Alberta justices have been infected by the sovereignty virus. Mr. Olszynski, in his conclusion, writes “Reading the majority’s opinion, there is a palpable sense of disbelief that federal environmental policies and preferences might validly affect – even contradict – provincial ones.” (Twitter translation: “Don’t you DARE tell us what to do!”) The Supreme Court has already ruled that, in matters of shared jurisdiction, the Federal government gets to have a say in matters of federal concern—even if the local yokels don’t like it.
If the Supreme Court remains unmoved by Alberta posturing, the decision will go against Alberta—again. The presence or absence of one fellow-traveller on the Bench will have little impact on others’ reading of the law.
Mr. Trudeau doesn’t look ready for a constitutional fight just now, but that won’t affect a Supreme Court decision.
Maybe not, David, but consider. The Feds have been content to walk softly and leave their big stick in the cloakroom--for now. But if Danielle Smith and the Take Back Alberta Party are brave enough, or dumb enough, to give Trudeau a clear target--he just might choose to fight it out. (Remember a guy named Brazeau?)
Justin Trudeau is at his best when he's got an open challenge and a visible opponent. His testimony at the Freedom Convoy inquiry is a case in point. If Smith tries to use the (unconstitutional!) Sovereignty Act, expect Trudeau to fight back fast and hard.
You might recall Brian Mulroney basically saying that Danielle Smith will not succeed here. The Sovereignty Act is not only unconstitutional, but it is also illegal, no matter how Danielle Smith tries to reword it. Danielle Smith is great at shooting her mouth off, and being a hypocrite. She tells the federal government to stay in their lane, and to butt out of Alberta's affairs (when what she is doing is violating laws and policies that fall under the domain of the federal government) but has no problems bullying municipal leaders into submission so they will support her outrageous demands. Brian Mulroney didn't have the greatest respect before, as Prime Minister, but what he is saying now is on the ball. How much will we pay for these lawsuits that Danielle Smith will be guaranteed to lose? The sooner we get her out of power, the better.