Alberta
Alberta passes bill banning sex ‘reassignment’ surgeries on minors

From LifeSiteNews
Tuesday, MLAs in the Alberta legislature voted 47 to 33 to pass the Health Statutes Amendment Act (HSAA), with all New Democratic Party MLAs voting against the measure.
The United Conservative Party (UCP) government of Alberta under its Premier Danielle Smith has officially passed a law banning so-called “top and bottom” surgeries for minors.
On Tuesday, MLAs in the Alberta legislature voted 47 to 33 to pass the Health Statutes Amendment Act (HSAA) into law. All far-left New Democratic Party MLAs voted against the bill, which now awaits Royal Assent which is expected in the next few days.
The new law, called Bill 26, reflects “the government’s commitment to build a health care system that responds to the changing needs of Albertans,” it said.
The bill will amend the Health Act to “prohibit regulated health professionals from performing sex reassignment surgeries on minors.”
It will also ban the “use of puberty blockers and hormone therapies for the treatment of gender dysphoria or gender incongruence” to kids 15 and under “except for those who have already commenced treatment and would allow for minors aged 16 and 17 to choose to commence puberty blockers and hormone therapies for gender reassignment and affirmation purposes with parental, physician and psychologist approval.”
Speaking of the passage of the new law, Smith said she is not concerned she may have to use additional powers, such as the province’s notwithstanding clause, to make sure the bill stays in place, given the fact that left-wing LGBT activists have promised to challenge the bill in court.
“I think that both the Charter as well as our Bill of Rights has the ability to make decisions and make policy that is convenient, that is reasonable, that is evidence-based,” said Smith in speaking to the passage of the bill.
“And I think the decisions we made are all of those things.”
Smith had earlier said about the bill that it is “important that all youth can enter adulthood equipped to make adult decisions. In order to do that, we need to preserve their ability to make those decisions, and that’s what we’re doing.”
She also, as reported by LifeSiteNews, said she would not be “bullied out of preserving our children’s choices before they make life-altering — and often irreversible — adult decisions. Nor will I allow Justin Trudeau to limit parental involvement in their child’s education.”
The passage of Bill 26 came after Alberta’s pro-life Health Minister Adriana LaGrange moved the third reading of it. She praised its passage, saying further details about how it will be enforced will be coming soon.
“Finally, amendments to the Health Professions Act would prohibit regulated health professionals from performing sex reassignment surgeries on minors and would also prohibit regulated health professionals from prescribing hormone replacement therapies, including puberty blockers, to minors for the treatment of gender dysphoria or gender incongruence,” said LaGrange.
“Through a ministerial order, we will outline exceptions for when a minor can be prescribed these medications for the treatment of gender dysphoria or gender incongruence.”
Earlier this year, the UCP government under Smith announced she would introduce strong pro-family legislation that strengthens parental rights, protects kids from life-altering surgeries as well as other extreme forms of transgender ideology.
While Smith has done well on some points, she has still been relatively soft on social issues of importance to conservatives such as abortion, and has publicly expressed pro-LGBT views, telling Jordan Peterson earlier this year that conservatives must embrace homosexual “couples” as “nuclear families.”
Alberta law banning sex reassignment surgeries has support of ‘detransitioners’
Smith’s bill banning the sexual mutilation of minors, as reported by LifeSiteNews, has found the support of an alliance for detransitioners.
There has been overwhelming evidence showing that people who undergo so-called “gender transitioning” are more likely to commit suicide than those who are not given irreversible surgery.
In addition to catering to a false reality that one’s sex can be changed, transgender surgeries and drugs have been linked to permanent physical and psychological damage, including cardiovascular diseases, loss of bone density, cancer, strokes and blood clots, and infertility.
Meanwhile, a recent study on the side effects of transgender “sex change” surgeries discovered that 81 percent of those who had undergone “sex change” surgeries in the past five years reported experiencing pain simply from normal movement in the weeks and months that followed — and that many other side effects manifest as well.
Smith’s government also passed a law banning schools from hiding a child’s pronoun changes at school that will help protect kids from the extreme aspects of the LGBT agenda.
While social conservatives have cause to celebrate in Alberta, other provinces, such as New Brunswick, are heading in the opposite direction when it comes to parental rights and gender ideology more broadly.
Alberta
Alberta’s move to ‘activity-based funding’ will improve health care despite naysayer claims

From the Fraser Institute
After the Smith government recently announced its shift to a new approach for funding hospitals, known as “activity-based funding” (ABF), defenders of the status quo in Alberta were quick to argue ABF will not improve health care in the province. Their claims are simply incorrect. In reality, based on the experiences of other better-performing universal health-care systems, ABF will help reduce wait times for Alberta patients and provide better value-for-money for taxpayers.
First, it’s important to understand Alberta is not breaking new ground with this approach. Other developed countries shifted to the ABF model starting in the early 1990s.
Indeed, after years of paying their hospitals a lump-sum annual budget for surgical care (like Alberta currently), other countries with universal health care recognized this form of payment encouraged hospitals to deliver fewer services by turning each patient into a cost to be minimized. The shift to ABF, which compensates hospitals for the actual services they provide, flips the script—hospitals in these countries now see patients as a source of revenue.
In fact, in many universal health-care countries, these reforms began so long ago that some are now on their second or even third generation of ABF, incorporating further innovations to encourage an even greater focus on quality.
For example, in Sweden in the early 1990s, counties that embraced ABF enjoyed a potential cost savings of 13 per cent over non-reforming counties that stuck with budgets. In Stockholm, one study measured an 11 per cent increase in hospital activity overall alongside a 1 per cent decrease in costs following the introduction of ABF. Moreover, according to the study, ABF did not reduce access for older patients or patients with more complex conditions. In England, the shift to ABF in the early to mid-2000s helped increase hospital activity and reduce the cost of care per patient, also without negatively affecting quality of care.
Multi-national studies on the shift to ABF have repeatedly shown increases in the volume of care provided, reduced costs per admission, and (perhaps most importantly for Albertans) shorter wait times. Studies have also shown ABF may lead to improved quality and access to advanced medical technology for patients.
Clearly, the naysayers who claim that ABF is some sort of new or untested reform, or that Albertans are heading down an unknown path with unmanageable and unexpected risks, are at the very least uninformed.
And what of those theoretical drawbacks?
Some critics claim that ABF may encourage faster discharges of patients to reduce costs. But they fail to note this theoretical drawback also exists under the current system where discharging higher-cost patients earlier can reduce the drain on hospital budgets. And crucially, other countries have implemented policies to prevent these types of theoretical drawbacks under ABF, which can inform Alberta’s approach from the start.
Critics also argue that competition between private clinics, or even between clinics and hospitals, is somehow a bad thing. But all of the developed world’s top performing universal health-care systems, with the best outcomes and shortest wait times, include a blend of both public and private care. No one has done it with the naysayers’ fixation on government provision.
And finally, some critics claim that, under ABF, private clinics will simply focus on less-complex procedures for less-complex patients to achieve greater profit, leaving public hospitals to perform more complex and thus costly surgeries. But in fact, private clinics alleviate pressure on the public system, allowing hospitals to dedicate their sophisticated resources to complex cases. To be sure, the government must ensure that complex procedures—no matter where they are performed—must always receive appropriate levels of funding and similarly that less-complex procedures are also appropriately funded. But again, the vast and lengthy experience with ABF in other universal health-care countries can help inform Alberta’s approach, which could then serve as an example for other provinces.
Alberta’s health-care system simply does not deliver for patients, with its painfully long wait times and poor access to physicians and services—despite its massive price tag. With its planned shift to activity-based funding, the province has embarked on a path to better health care, despite any false claims from the naysayers. Now it’s crucial for the Smith government to learn from the experiences of others and get this critical reform right.
2025 Federal Election
Group that added dozens of names to ballot in Poilievre’s riding plans to do it again

From LifeSiteNews
The ‘Longest Ballot Committee’ is looking to run hundreds of protest candidates against Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre in an upcoming by-election in the Alberta.
A group called the “Longest Ballot Committee” is looking to run hundreds of protest candidates against Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre in an upcoming by-election in the Alberta Battle River–Crowfoot riding, just like they did in his former Ottawa-area Carelton riding in last week’s election.
The Longest Ballot Committee is a grassroots group that packs ridings with protest candidates and is looking to place 200 names in the Battle River–Crowfoot riding. The riding was won by Conservative-elect MP Damien Kurek who garnered over 80 percent of the vote, but has since said he is going to vacate his seat to allow Poilievre to run a by-election and reclaim his seat in Parliament in a Conservative-safe area.
In an email to its followers, the committee said “dozens and dozens” of volunteers are ready to sign up as candidates for the yet-to-be-called by-election. The initiative follows after the group did the same thing in Poilievre’s former Carelton riding which he lost last Monday, and which saw voters being given an extremely long ballot with 90 candidates.
The group asked people who want to run to send them their legal name and information by May 12, adding that if about 200 people sign up they will “make a long ballot happen.”
-
Daily Caller2 days ago
Misguided Climate Policies Create ‘Real Energy Emergency’ And Permit China To Dominate US
-
International2 days ago
Ice Surprises – Arctic and Antarctic Ice Sheets Are Stabilizing and Growing
-
Alberta2 days ago
Energy projects occupy less than three per cent of Alberta’s oil sands region, report says
-
Energy2 days ago
Carney’s energy superpower rhetoric falls flat without policy certainty
-
Energy2 days ago
Oil tankers in Vancouver are loading plenty, but they can load even more
-
2025 Federal Election1 day ago
Group that added dozens of names to ballot in Poilievre’s riding plans to do it again
-
Alberta2 days ago
Charges laid in record cocaine seizure
-
COVID-192 days ago
Study finds nearly half of ‘COVID deaths’ had no link to virus