Alberta
Alberta’s Danielle Smith announces new parental rights policy to be released this week

From LifeSiteNews
‘When it comes to the balancing of the parental rights with kids growing into adulthood, I don’t think that there’s anything wrong with parents wanting to protect their child’s innocence as long as possible on issues of sexuality,’ Danielle Smith said over the weekend.
Alberta is set to unveil new legislation to protect parental rights within the school system this week.
On January 27, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith announced that this week her United Conservative Party (UPC) will publish a new parental rights policy after promising the legislation last November.
“We’ll be releasing policy about this next week and I’m really hopeful that we can depoliticize the discussion and be thinking about the kids who are listening to us adults, talking about these issues that are impacting them and making sure we get the right balance,” Smith told the audience of her Corus radio call-in show.
Smith’s comments came in response to a caller named Linda who referenced Smith’s promises during the UPC’s annual general meeting (AGM) and questioned when Smith would introduce “an Alberta parental rights bill.”
“I want every parent listening today to hear me loud and clear. Parents are the primary caregivers and educators of their children,” Smith had promised at the AGM last November.
“Regardless of how often the extreme left undermines the role of parents, I want you to know that parental rights and choice in your child’s education is and will continue to be a fundamental core principle of this party and this government, and we will never apologize for it,” she declared.
In November, UPC members passed a slew of pro-family, medical freedom, and anti-woke policies at its AGM, including one calling for a bill to support “comprehensive parental rights” in education. While the policies are non-binding, merely serving as suggestions for the Alberta government, Smith told reporters at the time that her government does support the party’s grassroots process.
During Saturday’s show, Smith revealed that consultations have taken place about such a policy, and that new legislation will be published shortly.
“When it comes to the balancing of the parental rights with kids growing into adulthood, I don’t think that there’s anything wrong with parents wanting to protect their child’s innocence as long as possible on issues of sexuality. I think that that’s a good instinct,” she told the caller.
“But they do get to a point where they start making their own decisions and so that’s the balance that we’re trying to get to, is how do we make sure that we’re supporting children as they grow into adults to become the people they want to be, while making sure that parents also have the right to ensure that materials in education and exposure to some of these discussions happen at an age-appropriate level?” Smith questioned.
Smith’s promise comes after both Saskatchewan and New Brunswick introduced legislation to protect parental rights despite incurring the ire of many in the LGBT community.
Last September, Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe invoked his government’s notwithstanding clause to protect legislation mandating that parents be told if their child changes “genders” at school; a judge had ruled against enforcement of the law earlier that day.
The notwithstanding clause, embedded in section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, allows provinces to temporarily override sections of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to protect new laws from being scrapped by the courts.
Saskatchewan had followed the example of New Brunswick Premier Blaine Higgs, who earlier in 2023 had been condemned by LGBT activists for reviewing the province’s “gender identity” policy that allowed schools to hide students’ “transgender” status from parents.
“For [a desire to be identified with the opposite sex] purposefully to be hidden from the parents, that’s a problem,” Higgs told reporters at the time.
In early August, pro-LGBT politicians tried unsuccessfully to remove Higgs from office. Their failure led Progressive Conservative Party members to say that, despite the media backlash, Higgs has the support of the “silent majority.”
According to an August 2023 survey, 86 percent of Saskatchewan-based participants are for parental rights and support the province’s new laws.
There have also been numerous protests against the LGBT agenda in schools, including the September 2023 “Million Person March” which drew thousands of Canadians from across the country.
Alberta
Is Canada’s Federation Fair?

David Clinton
Contrasting the principle of equalization with the execution
Quebec – as an example – happens to be sitting on its own significant untapped oil and gas reserves. Those potential opportunities include the Utica Shale formation, the Anticosti Island basin, and the Gaspé Peninsula (along with some offshore potential in the Gulf of St. Lawrence).
So Quebec is effectively being paid billions of dollars a year to not exploit their natural resources. That places their ostensibly principled stand against energy resource exploitation in a very different light.
You’ll need to search long and hard to find a Canadian unwilling to help those less fortunate. And, so long as we identify as members of one nation¹, that feeling stretches from coast to coast.
So the basic principle of Canada’s equalization payments – where poorer provinces receive billions of dollars in special federal payments – is easy to understand. But as you can imagine, it’s not easy to apply the principle in a way that’s fair, and the current methodology has arguably lead to a very strange set of incentives.
According to Department of Finance Canada, eligibility for payments is determined based on your province’s fiscal capacity. Fiscal capacity is a measure of the taxes (income, business, property, and consumption) that a province could raise (based on national average rates) along with revenues from natural resources. The idea, I suppose, is that you’re creating a realistic proxy for a province’s higher personal earnings and consumption and, with greater natural resources revenues, a reduced need to increase income tax rates.
But the devil is in the details, and I think there are some questions worth asking:
- Whichever way you measure fiscal capacity there’ll be both winners and losers, so who gets to decide?
- Should a province that effectively funds more than its “share” get proportionately greater representation for national policy² – or at least not see its policy preferences consistently overruled by its beneficiary provinces?
The problem, of course, is that the decisions that defined equalization were – because of long-standing political conditions – dominated by the region that ended up receiving the most. Had the formula been the best one possible, there would have been little room to complain. But was it?
For example, attaching so much weight to natural resource revenues is just one of many possible approaches – and far from the most obvious. Consider how the profits from natural resources already mostly show up in higher income and corporate tax revenues (including income tax paid by provincial government workers employed by energy-related ministries)?
And who said that such calculations had to be population-based, which clearly benefits Quebec (nine million residents vs around $5 billion in resource income) over Newfoundland (545,000 people vs $1.6 billion) or Alberta (4.2 million people vs $19 billion). While Alberta’s average market income is 20 percent or so higher than Quebec’s, Quebec’s is quite a bit higher than Newfoundland’s. So why should Newfoundland receive only minimal equalization payments?
To illustrate all that, here’s the most recent payment breakdown when measured per-capita:
![]() |
For clarification, the latest per-capita payments to poorer provinces ranged from $3,936 to PEI, $1,553 to Quebec, and $36 to Ontario. Only Saskatchewan, Alberta, and BC received nothing.
And here’s how the total equalization payments (in millions of dollars) have played out over the past decade:
Is energy wealth the right differentiating factor because it’s there through simple dumb luck, morally compelling the fortunate provinces to share their fortune? That would be a really difficult argument to make. For one thing because Quebec – as an example – happens to be sitting on its own significant untapped oil and gas reserves. Those potential opportunities include the Utica Shale formation, the Anticosti Island basin, and the Gaspé Peninsula (along with some offshore potential in the Gulf of St. Lawrence).
So Quebec is effectively being paid billions of dollars a year to not exploit their natural resources. That places their ostensibly principled stand against energy resource exploitation in a very different light. Perhaps that stand is correct or perhaps it isn’t. But it’s a stand they probably couldn’t have afforded to take had the equalization calculation been different.
Of course, no formula could possibly please everyone, but punishing the losers with ongoing attacks on the very source of their contributions is guaranteed to inspire resentment. And that could lead to very dark places.
Note: I know this post sounds like it came from a grumpy Albertan. But I assure you that I’ve never even visited the province, instead spending most of my life in Ontario.
Which has admittedly been challenging since the former primer minister infamously described us as a post-national state without an identity.
Subscribe to The Audit.
For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
Alberta
Big win for Alberta and Canada: Statement from Premier Smith

Premier Danielle Smith issued the following statement on the April 2, 2025 U.S. tariff announcement:
“Today was an important win for Canada and Alberta, as it appears the United States has decided to uphold the majority of the free trade agreement (CUSMA) between our two nations. It also appears this will continue to be the case until after the Canadian federal election has concluded and the newly elected Canadian government is able to renegotiate CUSMA with the U.S. administration.
“This is precisely what I have been advocating for from the U.S. administration for months.
“It means that the majority of goods sold into the United States from Canada will have no tariffs applied to them, including zero per cent tariffs on energy, minerals, agricultural products, uranium, seafood, potash and host of other Canadian goods.
“There is still work to be done, of course. Unfortunately, tariffs previously announced by the United States on Canadian automobiles, steel and aluminum have not been removed. The efforts of premiers and the federal government should therefore shift towards removing or significantly reducing these remaining tariffs as we go forward and ensuring affected workers across Canada are generously supported until the situation is resolved.
“I again call on all involved in our national advocacy efforts to focus on diplomacy and persuasion while avoiding unnecessary escalation. Clearly, this strategy has been the most effective to this point.
“As it appears the worst of this tariff dispute is behind us (though there is still work to be done), it is my sincere hope that we, as Canadians, can abandon the disastrous policies that have made Canada vulnerable to and overly dependent on the United States, fast-track national resource corridors, get out of the way of provincial resource development and turn our country into an independent economic juggernaut and energy superpower.”
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
Poilievre To Create ‘Canada First’ National Energy Corridor
-
International2 days ago
FREE MARINE LE PEN!’: Trump defends French populist against ‘lawfare’ charges
-
Automotive2 days ago
Dark Web Tesla Doxxers Used Widely-Popular Parking App Data To Find Targets, Analysis Shows
-
COVID-191 day ago
Maxime Bernier slams Freedom Convoy leaders’ guilty verdict, calls Canada’s justice system ‘corrupt’
-
Business2 days ago
Will Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’ Tariffs End In Disaster Or Prosperity?
-
Censorship Industrial Complex1 day ago
China announces “improvements” to social credit system
-
Carbon Tax1 day ago
The book the carbon taxers don’t want you to read
-
International1 day ago
Germany launches first permanent foreign troop deployment since WW2