Alberta
Alberta’s baby name superstar steals the show again
Olivia and Noah continue to reign as top baby names in 2023.
Olivia and Noah are once again topping the lists in Alberta, highlighting the enduring appeal of the names. Olivia maintains a record setting streak as the most popular girls name in Alberta for the 11th year in a row, while Noah remains top pick for boys’ names for a fifth consecutive year.
“Congratulations to those who welcomed a new addition to their family in 2023. Bringing a child into the world is a truly momentous occasion. Whether the name you chose was in the top 10 or one of a kind, these names are only the beginning of the endless possibilities that lie ahead for each child. I look forward to supporting this generation by ensuring Alberta remains a place where they can thrive.”
In choosing names for their new arrivals, parents appear to have found inspiration in a variety of places. Some parents may have been inspired by plants like Ivy, Rose, Juniper, Poppy, Azalea or in nature like Wren, River, Meadow and Flora.
Others may have taken a literary approach with names like Bennett, Sawyer, Juliet and Atticus or been inspired by notable names from religious texts like Eve, Noah, Mohammed and Gabriel.
As always, popular culture may have had an influence through famous musicians (Aretha, Lennon, Presley, Hendrix), athletes (Beckham, Crosby, Evander), and even fairytale princesses (Tiana, Jasmine, Aurora, Ariel, Belle).
Quick facts
- A total of 47,263 births were registered in Alberta in 2023
- Notable changes to the early 2020s lists:
- Evelyn rose to seventh place on the girls’ names list after tying for 19th place in 2022.
- Emily returned to the top 10 list for girls after taking a short break in 2021 and 2022 after a 10-year stretch in the top 10 that started in 2010.
- Violet has cracked the top 10 list for the first time in at least four decades, tying with Ava and Emily in ninth place.
- The top 10 boys’ names remain the same as last year but with a slight change in order.
- Historically, girls’ names that held the No. 1 spot for the longest consecutive time period include:
- Olivia: 11 years (2013-2023)
- Jessica: six years (1990-1995)
- Emily: five years (1998-2002)
- Historically, boys’ names that held the No. 1 spot for the longest consecutive time period include:
- Ethan: nine years (2001-2009)
- Liam: seven years (2010-2016)
- Matthew: five years (1995-1999)
- Noah: five years (2019-2023)
- Parents have up to one year to register their child’s birth. As a result, the list of 2023 baby names and birth statistics may change slightly.
Boys’ names and frequency – top 10 names 2018-23
(In brackets is the number of babies with each name)
Place | Boy Names (2023) | Boy Names
(2022) |
Boy Names (2021) | Boy Names (2020) | Boy Names (2019) | Boy Names (2018) |
1 | Noah (276) | Noah (229) | Noah (274) | Noah (239) | Noah (275) | Liam (225) |
2 | Liam (181) | Liam (176) | Jack (220) | Oliver (229) | Liam (234) | Oliver (212) |
3 | Oliver (178) | Theodore (173) | Oliver (208) | Liam (206) | Oliver (225) | Noah (199) |
4 | Theodore (173) | Oliver (172) | Liam (198) | Benjamin (182) | Ethan (213) | Ethan (188) |
5 | Jack (153) | Jack (159) | Theodore (191) | William (178) | Jack (198) | Logan (182)
Lucas (182) |
6 | Henry (146) | William (146) | William (174) | Jack (169) | William (185) | Jacob (181) |
7 | Lucas (140) | Benjamin (138) | Ethan (162) | Lucas (163) | Lucas (174) | William (178) |
Girls’ names and frequency – top 10 names 2018-2023
(In brackets is the number of babies with each name)
Place | Girl Names (2023) | Girl Names
(2022) |
Girl Names (2021) | Girl Names (2020) | Girl Names (2019) | Girl Names (2018) |
1 | Olivia (210) | Olivia (192) | Olivia (210) | Olivia (236) | Olivia (229) | Olivia (235) |
2 | Amelia (145) | Sophia (152) | Charlotte (166) | Emma (184) | Charlotte (188) | Emma (230) |
3 | Sophia
(138) |
Emma (149) | Ava (165) | Charlotte (161) | Sophia (181) | Charlotte (175) |
4 | Charlotte
(135) |
Amelia (133) | Emma (164) | Ava (159) | Emma (178) | Emily (164) |
5 | Emma (133) | Harper (125) | Amelia (161) | Sophia (151) | Ava (161) | Ava (161) |
6 | Isla (120) | Charlotte (117) | Sophia (137) | Amelia (145) | Amelia (159) | Abigail (153) |
7 | Evelyn (114) | Ava (115) | Isla (135) | Isla (133) | Emily (150) | Harper (150) |
8 | Chloe (101)
Violet (101) |
Isla (101) | Abigail (120)
Chloe (120) |
Emily (127) | Abigail (141) | Sophia (146) |
9 | Ava (99) Emily (99) |
Lily (100) | Evelyn (119) | Lily (123) | Hannah (137) | Amelia (145) |
10 | Hannah (98)
Hazel (98) |
Chloe (92) | Aria (112) | Abigail (114) | Elizabeth (124) | Elizabeth (130) |
Related information
Alberta
Alberta mother accuses health agency of trying to vaccinate son against her wishes
From LifeSiteNews
Alberta Health Services has been accused of attempting to vaccinate a child in school against his parent’s wishes.
On November 6, Alberta Health Services staffers visited Edmonton Hardisty School where they reportedly attempted to vaccinate a grade 6 student despite his parents signing a form stating that they did not wish for him to receive the vaccines.
“It is clear they do not prioritize parental rights, and in not doing so, they traumatize students,” the boy’s mother Kerri Findling told the Counter Signal.
During the school visit, AHS planned to vaccinate sixth graders with the HPV and hepatitis B vaccines. Notably, both HPV and hepatitis B are vaccines given to prevent diseases normally transmitted sexually.
Among the chief concerns about the HPV vaccine has been the high number of adverse reactions reported after taking it, including a case where a 16 year-old Australian girl was made infertile due to the vaccine.
Additionally, in 2008, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration received reports of 28 deaths associated with the HPV vaccine. Among the 6,723 adverse reactions reported that year, 142 were deemed life-threatening and 1,061 were considered serious.
Children whose parents had written “refused” on their forms were supposed to return to the classroom when the rest of the class was called into the vaccination area.
However, in this case, Findling alleged that AHS staffers told her son to proceed to the vaccination area, despite seeing that she had written “refused” on his form.
When the boy asked if he could return to the classroom, as he was certain his parents did not intend for him to receive the shots, the staff reportedly said “no.” However, he chose to return to the classroom anyway.
Shortly after, he was called into the office and taken back to the vaccination area. Findling said that her son then left the school building and braved the sub-zero temperatures to call his parents.
Following his parents’ arrival at the school, AHS claimed the incident was a misunderstanding due to a “new hire,” attesting that the mistake would have been caught before their son was vaccinated.
“If a student leaves the vaccination center without receiving the vaccine, it should be up to the parents to get the vaccine at a different time, if they so desire, not the school to enforce vaccination on behalf of AHS,” Findling declared.
Findling’s story comes just a few months after Alberta Premier Danielle Smith promised a new Bill of Rights affirming “God-given” parental authority over children.
A draft version of a forthcoming Alberta Bill of Rights provided to LifeSiteNews includes a provision beefing up parental rights, declaring the “freedom of parents to make informed decisions concerning the health, education, welfare and upbringing of their children.”
Alberta
Alberta’s fiscal update projects budget surplus, but fiscal fortunes could quickly turn
From the Fraser Institute
By Tegan Hill
According to the recent mid-year update tabled Thursday, the Smith government projects a $4.6 billion surplus in 2024/25, up from the $2.9 billion surplus projected just a few months ago. Despite the good news, Premier Smith must reduce spending to avoid budget deficits.
The fiscal update projects resource revenue of $20.3 billion in 2024/25. Today’s relatively high—but very volatile—resource revenue (including oil and gas royalties) is helping finance today’s spending and maintain a balanced budget. But it will not last forever.
For perspective, in just the last decade the Alberta government’s annual resource revenue has been as low as $2.8 billion (2015/16) and as high as $25.2 billion (2022/23).
And while the resource revenue rollercoaster is currently in Alberta’s favor, Finance Minister Nate Horner acknowledges that “risks are on the rise” as oil prices have dropped considerably and forecasters are projecting downward pressure on prices—all of which impacts resource revenue.
In fact, the government’s own estimates show a $1 change in oil prices results in an estimated $630 million revenue swing. So while the Smith government plans to maintain a surplus in 2024/25, a small change in oil prices could quickly plunge Alberta back into deficit. Premier Smith has warned that her government may fall into a budget deficit this fiscal year.
This should come as no surprise. Alberta’s been on the resource revenue rollercoaster for decades. Successive governments have increased spending during the good times of high resource revenue, but failed to rein in spending when resource revenues fell.
Previous research has shown that, in Alberta, a $1 increase in resource revenue is associated with an estimated 56-cent increase in program spending the following fiscal year (on a per-person, inflation-adjusted basis). However, a decline in resource revenue is not similarly associated with a reduction in program spending. This pattern has led to historically high levels of government spending—and budget deficits—even in more recent years.
Consider this: If this fiscal year the Smith government received an average level of resource revenue (based on levels over the last 10 years), it would receive approximately $13,000 per Albertan. Yet the government plans to spend nearly $15,000 per Albertan this fiscal year (after adjusting for inflation). That’s a huge gap of roughly $2,000—and it means the government is continuing to take big risks with the provincial budget.
Of course, if the government falls back into deficit there are implications for everyday Albertans.
When the government runs a deficit, it accumulates debt, which Albertans must pay to service. In 2024/25, the government’s debt interest payments will cost each Albertan nearly $650. That’s largely because, despite running surpluses over the last few years, Albertans are still paying for debt accumulated during the most recent string of deficits from 2008/09 to 2020/21 (excluding 2014/15), which only ended when the government enjoyed an unexpected windfall in resource revenue in 2021/22.
According to Thursday’s mid-year fiscal update, Alberta’s finances continue to be at risk. To avoid deficits, the Smith government should meaningfully reduce spending so that it’s aligned with more reliable, stable levels of revenue.
Author:
-
Business2 days ago
CBC’s business model is trapped in a very dark place
-
Censorship Industrial Complex2 days ago
Congressional investigation into authors of ‘Disinformation Dozen’ intensifies
-
Alberta2 days ago
Alberta government announces review of Trudeau’s euthanasia regime
-
Alberta1 day ago
Alberta fiscal update: second quarter is outstanding, challenges ahead
-
Business1 day ago
Trump’s government efficiency department plans to cut $500 Billion in unauthorized expenditures, including funding for Planned Parenthood
-
Brownstone Institute18 hours ago
First Amendment Blues
-
Crime1 day ago
Mexican cartels are a direct threat to Canada’s public safety, and the future of North American trade
-
Bruce Dowbiggin2 days ago
The Pathetic, Predictable Demise of Echo Journalism