Opinion
NDP and Greens formed government in B.C. The Alberta Liberals and the Alberta Party will merge? For 2019 election all four parties should merge in Alberta.
The 30th general election of Alberta, Canada, will elect members to the Legislative Assembly of Alberta. It will take place on or before May 31, 2019.
We currently have the Alberta New Democratic Party in government. They went from being an opposing party with the Liberals and the Wildrose parties against the ruling conservative dynasty to forming government in 2015. What do we know?
From wikipedia;
The Alberta New Democratic Party or Alberta NDP is a social-democratic political party in Alberta, Canada, which succeeded the Alberta section of the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation and the even earlier Alberta wing of the Canadian Labour Party and the United Farmers of Alberta. From the mid-1980s to 2004, the party abbreviated its name as the “New Democrats” (ND).
The party achieved Official Opposition status in the Legislative Assembly of Alberta from 1986 to 1993. It was swept out of the legislature in 1993 and spent the next two decades in the political wilderness. While it managed to get back into the legislature in 1997, it never won more than four seats. Its time on the fringe of Alberta politics ended in the 2015 provincial election, when it won 54 of the 87 seats in the legislature to form the government of Alberta for the first time. Until 2015, Alberta had been the only province in western Canada—the party’s birthplace—where the NDP had never governed at the provincial level.
Not a lot there, and little about mission and visions on their website. The election is in 19 months so we may learn more about their plans for the future. The Calgary Herald has a poll that shows that if the election was held today, the United Conservative Party would handily win.
How does a former fringe party which campaigns on the left and centre combat the right wing remnants of the former conservative dynasty? Here’s an idea, unite the left and centre parties.
In British Columbia the NDP and the Greens have a union in government. The Alberta Party and the Alberta Liberal Party are almost a union in almost every way except by formality. Why not merge?
Let us look at the Alberta Party, the Alberta Liberal Party and the Alberta Green Party, their missions and see if there is any common ground. I think there is but it is up to politicians to decide to work together or go their separate ways.
Starting with the Alberta Party;
From Wikipedia:
The Alberta Party, formally the Alberta Party Political Association, is a political party in the province of Alberta, Canada. The party describes itself as a centrist and pragmatic party that is not dogmatically ideological in its approach to politics.
For most of its history the Alberta Party was a right-wing organization, until the rise of the Wildrose Alliance as Alberta’s main conservative alternative to the governing Progressive Conservatives attracted away the Alberta Party’s more conservative members. This left a small rump of more left-wing members in control of the Alberta Party. In 2010 the Alberta Party board voted to merge with Renew Alberta, a progressive group that had been organizing to form a new political party in Alberta. The Alberta Party thus shed its conservative past for a more centrist political outlook. The party has been cited in The Globe and Mail and The Economist as part of the break in one-party politics in Alberta.
From The Alberta Party website;
Vision;
We will form a government committed to diversity, integrity, transparency and collaboration. As leaders of positive change, we value inclusiveness, ideas over ideologies, and champion economic, environmental and social responsibility.
Mission
We will:
Model responsible and ethical government.
Generate and implement practical, constructive solutions through listening, citizen engagement, evidence-based policy and building common ground.
Tackle tough issues facing Albertans by examining root causes and maintaining a long-term view of prosperity and sustainability.
Act as guardians of the public interest.
Conduct ourselves in an open, transparent and accountable manner.
Steadfastly refuse to engage in short-sighted, politically motivated, partisan politics.
Provide economic, environmental and social leadership in order to benefit Alberta, Canada and the world.
The Alberta Party is committed to building a policy framework that is based on the following six key values:
1) Prosperity
We believe that private enterprise and entrepreneurship are the keys to our economic success. The government should foster an environment which facilitates economic investment, reduces red tape and encourages creativity.
2) Fiscal Responsibility
We believe that government must use public dollars as effectively and efficiently as possible. The government should balance the books and set aside money for a rainy day. This is best accomplished through long-term planning, common sense and transparency.
3) Social Responsibility
We believe every Albertan deserves the opportunity to succeed. Our government should aspire to provide excellent and innovative public education, public health care, and infrastructure, as well as a compassionate helping hand in times of need. We believe this can be accomplished through responsible use of public funds.
4) Sustainability
We believe that sustainability must be a core value of government. Rethinking unsustainable practices, making strategic investments in research and technology, and implementing smart policy choices will protect and enhance our environment for future generations.
5) Democracy
We believe that public business should be conducted in public. Government should ensure that the legislative process is open, fair, transparent and inclusive of the people it governs. Our government should foster debate, actively engage citizens, and make itself accountable to the people it serves.
6) Quality of life
We believe that a great quality of life requires strong communities. Through support of recreation, sports, arts and culture, government can help to build strong and vibrant communities.
Let us look at the Alberta Liberal Party;
From Wikipedia;
The Alberta Liberal Party is a provincial political party in Alberta, Canada. Founded in 1905, it was the dominant political party until the 1921 election, with the first three provincial Premiers being Liberals. Since 1921, it has formed the official opposition in the Legislative Assembly of Alberta several times, most recently from 1993 until 2012.
From the Alberta Liberal Party website;
The Alberta Liberal Party has been working for Albertans since 1905 and we believe that we must champion our strong values in government. We are fiscally-prudent, a party that proudly supports socially progressive change, and that cares deeply about our stewardship of the environment. We believe that it is our duty to run effective and efficient governments, that respects the autonomy of the individual, and that safeguards the environment. This way we build both a strong society and a vibrant economy.
1) Equal Opportunity
Liberals oppose both privilege and prejudice. Everyone should have as equal as possible an opportunity to participate in society, enjoying equal rights and freedoms, and sharing responsibilities.
2) Free Enterprise
Alberta Liberals have faith in the free enterprise system. Through it, the widest number of opportunities are provided, the greatest number of needs are satisfied, and initiative is most rewarded. Nevertheless, the market system is not perfect. The government has a role to play in preventing exploitation, protecting consumers and preserving the environment. Government also has a role to play in facilitating economic development and competition, and serving public needs which the private sector cannot or will not meet.
3) Fiscal Responsibility
Alberta Liberals believe that government has an obligation to manage the affairs of the province in a prudent and responsible manner. Wasteful spending threatens essential government programs such as health care and education for today’s constituents, and fairness dictates that future generations not be burdened with our debts.
4) Environmental Responsibility
Alberta Liberals believe that the protection of the environment is essential to the longterm health of our planet and ourselves, and to our quality of life. Environmental policy must look beyond a traditional view of economics to reflect the cultural and spiritual importance of the environment in our lives. Responsible policy-makers must consider the environment a sacred trust.
5) Change
Liberals have always been reformers. We seek to improve the system as we search for ways of improving the human condition. We are not afraid to initiate change. Without compromising our principles, our search for solutions is driven not by rigid ideology but by the question, “What is best?”
Thirdly let us look at the Green Party of Canada;
From Wikipedia;
The Green Party of Alberta is a registered political party in Alberta, Canada, that is allied with the Green Party of Canada, and the other provincial Green parties. The party was registered by Elections Alberta on December 22, 2011, to replace the deregistered Alberta Greens, and ran its first candidates for office in the 2012 provincial election under the name Evergreen Party of Alberta. The party changed its name to “Green Party of Alberta” on November 1, 2012.
From Green Party of Alberta website;
Mission
To participate in Alberta electoral politics with the aim of having such a provincial government come to power;
To educate Albertans as to the need for a government committed to Green principles
The Green Party of Alberta is committed to the 6 principles of the world-wide Green Party movement:
1) Ecological wisdom
Human beings are part of the natural world and we respect the specific value of all forms of life.
2)Non-violence
We are committed to non-violence and cooperation between states, inside societies and between individuals
3) Participatory democracy
In a healthy democracy all citizens have the right to express their views and are able to directly participate in the environmental, economic, social and political decisions which affect their lives
4) Respect for diversity
We honour all forms of diversity – for example, racial, linguistic, ethnic, sexual, religious and spiritual – within the context of individual responsibility toward all beings.
5) Social justice
We honour all forms of diversity – for example, racial, linguistic, ethnic, sexual, religious and spiritual – within the context of individual responsibility toward all beings.
6) Sustainability
We recognize the limited scope for the material expansion of society within the biosphere and the need to maintain biodiversity through the sustainable use of renewable resources.
Each of the party has differences in goals and priorities but they have enough similarities. Is it enough to form a coalition or corroborative government? Can they step away from egos and work together to offer an option to the United Conservative Party? Will we be sliding into another 40 year conservative dynasty? We will find out in May 2019.
By Gwyn Morgan
Mark Carney was supposed to be the adult in the room. After nearly a decade of runaway spending under Justin Trudeau, the former central banker was presented to Canadians as a steady hand – someone who could responsibly manage the economy and restore fiscal discipline.
Instead, Carney has taken Trudeau’s recklessness and dialled it up. His government’s recently released spending plan shows an increase of 8.5 percent this fiscal year to $437.8 billion. Add in “non-budgetary spending” such as EI payouts, plus at least $49 billion just to service the burgeoning national debt and total spending in Carney’s first year in office will hit $554.5 billion.
Even if tax revenues were to remain level with last year – and they almost certainly won’t given the tariff wars ravaging Canadian industry – we are hurtling toward a deficit that could easily exceed 3 percent of GDP, and thus dwarf our meagre annual economic growth. It will only get worse. The Parliamentary Budget Officer estimates debt interest alone will consume $70 billion annually by 2029. Fitch Ratings recently warned of Canada’s “rapid and steep fiscal deterioration”, noting that if the Liberal program is implemented total federal, provincial and local debt would rise to 90 percent of GDP.
This was already a fiscal powder keg. But then Carney casually tossed in a lit match. At June’s NATO summit, he pledged to raise defence spending to 2 percent of GDP this fiscal year – to roughly $62 billion. Days later, he stunned even his own caucus by promising to match NATO’s new 5 percent target. If he and his Liberal colleagues follow through, Canada’s defence spending will balloon to the current annual equivalent of $155 billion per year. There is no plan to pay for this. It will all go on the national credit card.
This is not “responsible government.” It is economic madness.
And it’s happening amid broader economic decline. Business investment per worker – a key driver of productivity and living standards – has been shrinking since 2015. The C.D. Howe Institute warns that Canadian workers are increasingly “underequipped compared to their peers abroad,” making us less competitive and less prosperous.
The problem isn’t a lack of money; it’s a lack of discipline and vision. We’ve created a business climate that punishes investment: high taxes, sluggish regulatory processes, and politically motivated uncertainty. Carney has done nothing to reverse this. If anything, he’s making the situation worse.
Recall the 2008 global financial meltdown. Carney loves to highlight his role as Bank of Canada Governor during that time but the true credit for steering the country through the crisis belongs to then-prime minister Stephen Harper and his finance minister, Jim Flaherty. Facing the pressures of a minority Parliament, they made the tough decisions that safeguarded Canada’s fiscal foundation. Their disciplined governance is something Carney would do well to emulate.
Instead, he’s tearing down that legacy. His recent $4.3 billion aid pledge to Ukraine, made without parliamentary approval, exemplifies his careless approach. And his self-proclaimed image as the experienced technocrat who could go eyeball-to-eyeball against Trump is starting to crack. Instead of respecting Carney, Trump is almost toying with him, announcing in June, for example that the U.S. would pull out of the much-ballyhooed bilateral trade talks launched at the G7 Summit less than two weeks earlier.
Ordinary Canadians will foot the bill for Carney’s fiscal mess. The dollar has weakened. Young Canadians – already priced out of the housing market – will inherit a mountain of debt. This is not stewardship. It’s generational theft.
Some still believe Carney will pivot – that he will eventually govern sensibly. But nothing in his actions supports that hope. A leader serious about economic renewal would cancel wasteful Trudeau-era programs, streamline approvals for energy and resource projects, and offer incentives for capital investment. Instead, we’re getting more borrowing and ideological showmanship.
It’s no longer credible to say Carney is better than Trudeau. He’s worse. Trudeau at least pretended deficits were temporary. Carney has made them permanent – and more dangerous.
This is a betrayal of the fiscal stability Canadians were promised. If we care about our credit rating, our standard of living, or the future we are leaving our children, we must change course.
That begins by removing a government unwilling – or unable – to do the job.
Canada once set an economic example for others. Those days are gone. The warning signs – soaring debt, declining productivity, and diminished global standing – are everywhere. Carney’s defenders may still hope he can grow into the job. Canada cannot afford to wait and find out.
The original, full-length version of this article was recently published in C2C Journal.
Gwyn Morgan is a retired business leader who was a director of five global corporations.
Over the past few years, I’ve had canvassers coming to my home in Toronto on behalf of a wide range of non-profits – including hospitals and mental health and homeless support organizations. The fundraisers all “wear” a noticeable post secondary student vibe. That’s hardly news.
But curiously, no matter what they’re collecting for, every last one of them uses the exact same methodology. That is, they refuse to take a one-time donation, instead insisting I sign up for six (not seven, and definitely not five) monthly payments. They don’t want me donating online through the organization’s website (explaining that they wouldn’t get credit for that). They do expect me to enter my basic information on a high-end tablet they’re carrying. When that’s done, they’ll use their smartphones to make a call to a remote agent who would take my financial information.
I only completed the process once – for the Hospital for Sick Children (SickKids) in Toronto. But that was mostly because, at the time, they were in the middle of quite literally saving my granddaughter’s life. I couldn’t very well say no.
Because of the paranoia that comes with my background in IT systems administration, I generally don’t participate, explaining that I never share financial information on a call I didn’t initiate. At the same time, these campaigns are not fraudulent and, with the possible exception of UNICEF, they all represent legitimate organizations. Nevertheless, they all come with the clear fingerprints of a third-party, for-profit company. Which makes me curious.
After a little digging, it became clear that a company called Globalfaces Direct was the most likely employer of the face-to-face (F2F) canvassers I’m seeing. It’s also obvious that those canvassers are paid at least partially through revenue-based commissions.
Estimating how much of your donations are actually used for charitable work can be difficult. For once thing, in the case of SickKids, it’s not even clear which organization the money is going to. There at least three related non-profit accounts registered with CRA: The Hospital for Sick Children, The Hospital for Sick Children Foundation, and the SickKids Charitable Giving Fund.
But even where there isn’t such ambiguity we have only limited visibility into an organization’s finances. Covenant House, for instance, issued receipts for $26 million in donations for 2024, but there’s no way to know how much of that came through Globalfaces Direct F2F campaigns. And there’s certainly no public record indicating how much of that $26 million was spent on commissions and overhead. CRA filings for Covenant House do report fundraising costs of $9.4 million in 2024, which was 22 percent of their total spending and 32 percent of all donations.
It’s likely that their $9.4 million in fundraising costs includes Globalfaces Direct’s canvasser commissions and overhead costs. But those are only some of the costs – which likely include events, direct mail, and other in-house efforts. In fact, it’s not unreasonable to assume that only 20-30 percent of each dollar raised through F2F canvassing is actually spent on charity work.
From the perspective of the non-profit, hiring F2F companies can generate new sources of stable, long-term income that would have been otherwise unattainable. Especially if the F2F agreement specifies withholding a percentage of what’s collected rather than charging a flat fee, then a non-profit has nothing to lose. Why wouldn’t SickKids or Covenant House sign up for that?
Of course, a lot of that will depend on how you think about the numbers. Taken as a whole, an organization that spends just 32 percent of their donations on fundraising activities is well within CRA guidelines: “Fundraising is acceptable unless it is a purpose of the charity (a collateral non-charitable purpose).” But if we just looked at the money raised through a F2F campaign, that percentage would likely be a lot higher.
Similarly, CRA also expects that: “Fundraising is acceptable unless it delivers a more than incidental private benefit.” In other words, if a private company like Globalfaces Direct were to realize financial gain that’s “more than incidental”, it might fail to meet CRA guidelines.
Unfortunately, there’s no easy way for donors to assess the numbers on those terms. So regular people who prefer to direct as much of their donation as possible to the actual cause will generally be far better off donating through an institution’s website or, even better, through a single CRA-friendly aggregator like CanadaHelps.org.
But it would be nice if CRA reporting rules clearly broke those numbers down so we could judge for ourselves.
Before Trudeau average annual immigration was 617,800. Under Trudeau number skyrocketted to 1.4 million annually
FDA requires new warning on mRNA COVID shots due to heart damage in young men
Blackouts Coming If America Continues With Biden-Era Green Frenzy, Trump Admin Warns
Canada’s euthanasia regime is already killing the disabled. It’s about to get worse
-
Fraser Institute1 day ago
Before Trudeau average annual immigration was 617,800. Under Trudeau number skyrocketted to 1.4 million annually
-
MAiD1 day ago
Canada’s euthanasia regime is already killing the disabled. It’s about to get worse
-
Frontier Centre for Public Policy1 day agoNew Book Warns The Decline In Marriage Comes At A High Cost
-
Business1 day agoPrime minister can make good on campaign promise by reforming Canada Health Act
-
Addictions1 day ago‘Over and over until they die’: Drug crisis pushes first responders to the brink
-
International1 day agoChicago suburb purchases childhood home of Pope Leo XIV
-
Daily Caller1 day agoUSAID Quietly Sent Thousands Of Viruses To Chinese Military-Linked Biolab
-
illegal immigration2 days agoICE raids California pot farm, uncovers illegal aliens and child labor