• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

All Things AB Separatism (split fm Liberal Minority Government 2025 - ???)

Many outbreaks appear to be centred around religious communities like the Mennonite and Amish. It was the cause in Texas and Ontario. As well, I believe many immigrants, legal and illegal, aren’t vaccinated or screened when they enter the country.
Wow, that roughly 0.5% of Alberta's population has had quite a medical impact.
 
We could, if we chose, require proof of vaccination as a border control for any non-citizens or to be eligible for any period of work or study.

Generally, we treat everyone equally (no wonder others have this impression of Canadians being nice). If a citizen/PR is not required to show proof of vaccination to enter the country, then newcomers who cross the border with the intent to remain (hopefully in a legal status) would be in the same boat as everyone else, having to abide by the vaccination policies of the province in which they reside. Canada (the federal entity), while making recommendations about vaccines, does not implement vaccine programs, that's a provincial responsibility. They set both the schedule (not sure if there are any provinces that have any mandatory ones) as well as provide the vaccines (without additional cost). There are differences among the provinces on what they require/provide. Obviously, since we are discussing this in a thread about Alberta.

To add to the discussion, try this link to a study about why (and why not) immigrants are, or are not, vaccinated prior to coming to Canada and some of the factors that contribute to their participation in vaccination programs once here.


Since one of the cohorts that the study looked at were Nigerian immigrants, it amused me since my GP is Nigerian (a prince of a fellow). I was in to see him a couple of weeks ago for my annual and in his usual thorough manner reviewed my vaccinations.
 
Generally, we treat everyone equally (no wonder others have this impression of Canadians being nice). If a citizen/PR is not required to show proof of vaccination to enter the country, then newcomers who cross the border with the intent to remain (hopefully in a legal status) would be in the same boat as everyone else, having to abide by the vaccination policies of the province in which they reside. Canada (the federal entity), while making recommendations about vaccines, does not implement vaccine programs, that's a provincial responsibility. They set both the schedule (not sure if there are any provinces that have any mandatory ones) as well as provide the vaccines (without additional cost). There are differences among the provinces on what they require/provide. Obviously, since we are discussing this in a thread about Alberta.

To add to the discussion, try this link to a study about why (and why not) immigrants are, or are not, vaccinated prior to coming to Canada and some of the factors that contribute to their participation in vaccination programs once here.


Since one of the cohorts that the study looked at were Nigerian immigrants, it amused me since my GP is Nigerian (a prince of a fellow). I was in to see him a couple of weeks ago for my annual and in his usual thorough manner reviewed my vaccinations.
Sure, but it’s absolutely fair game to apply public health criteria to entry controls for those who don’t have an inherent right to enter the country. Having or promptly getting the full course of normal vaccines is a reasonable requirement for those looking to immigrate or temporarily study/work.
 
So turns out 7 of 11 members of the Alberta next panel all are major UCP donors. Talk about stacking the deck, on top of that UCP members have been getting advanced tickets to the town halls. Seems like a echo chamber mostly, that said I've heard some critical voices have popped up in Edmonton and other areas.
 
So turns out 7 of 11 members of the Alberta next panel all are major UCP donors. Talk about stacking the deck, on top of that UCP members have been getting advanced tickets to the town halls. Seems like a echo chamber mostly, that said I've heard some critical voices have popped up in Edmonton and other areas.

You were expecting something different? Like . . . impartiality ?
 
You were expecting something different? Like . . . impartiality ?
Honestly, from the government? No, I find it hilarious she thinks she can run a police force and a pension plan when she can't even run an ambulance service, schools, or social services.
 
So turns out 7 of 11 members of the Alberta next panel all are major UCP donors. Talk about stacking the deck, on top of that UCP members have been getting advanced tickets to the town halls. Seems like a echo chamber mostly, that said I've heard some critical voices have popped up in Edmonton and other areas.
To be scrupulously fair, partisan packing of committees is hardly a UCP-only thing. STILL bad optics, but ....

More on brand for this gov

Alberta Premier Smith demands apology from fire-stricken town of Jasper

Seems Club Fed (involved because of the national park area involved) may have also been less than satisfied with the 2024 effort, it seems ;)

Jasper's report attached.
 

Attachments

No mention of the special interests that kiboshed Parks Canada’s ability to reduce fuels?

As I’ve written about before, the tourism industry and some locals have fought Parks Canada anytime they wanted to modestly manage forest fuels in the mountain parks. They light their hair on fire at any prospect of additional smoke in the valley or scarring of the landscape and the effects that may have had on tourism. As a result, the Parks Canada head-shed would get gun-shy about proposing more comprehensive fuel management schemes. Then when the devastating fire happens that Parks Canada tried warning everyone about happens, everyone points their fingers at Parks Canada demanding to know why they didn’t do anything.
 
Tired of everything, two former UCP MLAs, currently independents have officially revived the Progressive conservative party of Alberta.


This very well could cause a shift in AB politics if they get traction from those who are fed up with Smith but dont want to vote NDP.

And in the machinations of Alberta politics, the latest ploy to revive at least the title of "Progressive Conservative".



But before high-fiving and breaking out the generic sparkling wine masquerading as champers . . .
 
No mention of the special interests that kiboshed Parks Canada’s ability to reduce fuels?

As I’ve written about before, the tourism industry and some locals have fought Parks Canada anytime they wanted to modestly manage forest fuels in the mountain parks. They light their hair on fire at any prospect of additional smoke in the valley or scarring of the landscape and the effects that may have had on tourism. As a result, the Parks Canada head-shed would get gun-shy about proposing more comprehensive fuel management schemes. Then when the devastating fire happens that Parks Canada tried warning everyone about happens, everyone points their fingers at Parks Canada demanding to know why they didn’t do anything.
To be fair to Jasper National Park...

The preferred mechanism would be prescribed burns...and they did conduct many low intensity burns primarily north of the community.

Unfortunately due to the challanges and risk of prescribe burns this was not an option on the west side or east side to the same degree....which is why they brought in commercial scale logging to address areas adjacent to the community. This was done on the NW side of town and when the project proposal first came in we were in dis-belief that it was even being considered.. But not only was it considered it was also completed prior to the fire.

Of course the work done was not everywhere....and the fire started south of the town where treatments were not done.

1.5 months before the fire I was there in the same area as the fire to the south...and just shook my head at how impossible the task was when the entire valley was full of dead material...much of it on slopes you can't operate on well.

There is also a whole federal issue on the economic draw and budget implications of tourism vs. expenditures. A significant portion of the National Park budget comes from tourism dollars primarily in Jasper, Banff and Pacific Rim (by Tofino on Vancouver Island). In fact Jasper and Banff represent over a third of the total park visitors in the county (6.5 million visitors vs 15.1 million in all parks natationally). National Parks Statistics in Canada | Made in CA
So any impact to the tourism dollars is not just an impact to that park but also a potential impact to all other parks in the country as revenue changes.

And hence why it's so...fun?...to go fight fires in the National Parks. Land tenure, national budget implications, high risk areas, and political infighting. One fire I'm glad I didn't go to.
 
To be fair to Jasper National Park...

The preferred mechanism would be prescribed burns...and they did conduct many low intensity burns primarily north of the community.

Unfortunately due to the challanges and risk of prescribe burns this was not an option on the west side or east side to the same degree....which is why they brought in commercial scale logging to address areas adjacent to the community. This was done on the NW side of town and when the project proposal first came in we were in dis-belief that it was even being considered.. But not only was it considered it was also completed prior to the fire.

Of course the work done was not everywhere....and the fire started south of the town where treatments were not done.

1.5 months before the fire I was there in the same area as the fire to the south...and just shook my head at how impossible the task was when the entire valley was full of dead material...much of it on slopes you can't operate on well.

There is also a whole federal issue on the economic draw and budget implications of tourism vs. expenditures. A significant portion of the National Park budget comes from tourism dollars primarily in Jasper, Banff and Pacific Rim (by Tofino on Vancouver Island). In fact Jasper and Banff represent over a third of the total park visitors in the county (6.5 million visitors vs 15.1 million in all parks natationally). National Parks Statistics in Canada | Made in CA
So any impact to the tourism dollars is not just an impact to that park but also a potential impact to all other parks in the country as revenue changes.

And hence why it's so...fun?...to go fight fires in the National Parks. Land tenure, national budget implications, high risk areas, and political infighting. One fire I'm glad I didn't go to.

Meanwhile, Jasper vs. Smith...

Jasper mayor stands by critical wildfire report, expects no bad blood with province​



The mayor of Jasper says he stands by a report commissioned by his town that criticizes Premier Danielle Smith’s government response to a wildfire that destroyed a third of the Rocky Mountain community.
70c8fc80

Smith has demanded the report, issued last week, be retracted and that the town issue an apology.

“We don’t doubt the report at all,” Jasper Mayor Richard Ireland told reporters at a news conference with officials Monday.

 
And in the machinations of Alberta politics, the latest ploy to revive at least the title of "Progressive Conservative".



But before high-fiving and breaking out the generic sparkling wine masquerading as champers . . .
The move to work with the AB party comes from the UCP filing a ceasefire and desist over the PC name to them. Idk if the actually have the legal right to do so but thats politics in AB right now
 
The move to work with the AB party comes from the UCP filing a ceasefire and desist over the PC name to them. Idk if the actually have the legal right to do so but thats politics in AB right now

Making use of loopholes (imprecise languages?) in Alberta election law to register a political party (or change the name of an existing party) with a name that would be easier to sell to voters is one thing. It's another thing if it's a couple of MLAs booted from the party under which they gained their seats being recruited(?) by the interim(?) leader of the Alberta Party and making pronouncements about rebranding with the suggestion that the AB Party will be more of a reflection of them (they would be, after all, the only party members with seats in the legislative assembly). Being that it is "politics in AB right now", I have misgivings about the ultimate motive of any current or former UCP MLA.

I once had (high) hopes for the AB Party. But that was back when Greg Clark was leader (and the only AB Party member to be elected under their banner). When he was running in the 2015 provincial election (that's the one in which Notley's NDP formed government) I had the opportunity to have a long conversation with him on my stoop. He actually had to work to get my vote. I was impressed with what he had to say, his vision for the party, his manner and his performance in the Assembly. Unfortunately, one fallout of that election was the forming of the UCP. Like these two MLAs who are now trying to find a home, there was a migration of some disaffected PCs to the AB Party following the formation of the UCP, with the odd UCP MLA moving to join them due to internal squabbles (so UCP infighting is not new). The follow-on effect of this (supposedly - wink, wink, nudge, nudge) was a slight shift to the right, the easing of Clark out of the leadership and former PCs having a greater hand in directing the fortunes of the party. They've since have had no electoral success.

Like the Canadian Future Party on the national stage, the AB Party was a good concept attempting to introduce a more collegial and pragmatic approach to politics and providing a home for centrists (or those willing to think centrist) of all stripes. However, I don't think voters will respond.
 
One of the separation questions making it's way through the referendum process.


 
Back
Top