Canada’s Premiers beginning to back Canadian energy

News release from Project Confederation

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith was on a mission last week and had three things on her mind: energy, energy, energy.

The interesting thing is, many of the other provinces now seem to be on the same page too.

Energy is a policy area that has always been a flashpoint for trouble for the federal government and we’ve seen an ever-increasing number of disputes developing in recent years, deteriorating interprovincial relations and creating constitutional struggles.

The most recent argument started last Friday when Premier Smith met with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in Calgary to talk about – you guessed it! – energy policy.

Trudeau has announced several ambitious climate policies that will drive energy costs up.

These include aggressive net-zero emissions electricity targets that are going to make power at least 40% more expensive, cost $52 billion for infrastructure alone, and another $35 billion in economic activity.

They’ve also announced an emissions cap on the oil and gas sector in western Canada – which is effectively a production cap, limiting the ability of producers to up their production in order to meet rising global demand.

Smith isn’t going along with these destructive policies.

Natural resource development is the sole jurisdiction of the provinces, not the federal government, and Smith says that Alberta will not be a doormat for federal climate policies that are going to decimate its economy.

She made it clear she will do whatever is necessary to protect Alberta’s interests.

After this bout with Trudeau, she headed out to Winnipeg for the 2023 Summer Meeting of Canada’s Premiers.

Once again, Smith hammered on Ottawa’s aggressive targets and the impact they will have on the economies of the federation – not just Alberta.

Next, she headed to the LNG2023 Conference in Vancouver, looking to establish new export markets for Alberta’s Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) – a major source of tension between the federal government and the provinces.

Smith pointed out that Western Canada wants the ability to export LNG to fulfill rising global demand, a resource that Canada has in abundance:

“With the right infrastructure in place, Western Canada would become a sought-after supplier for both Asia and Europe.”

Notably, federal Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson didn’t even show up to the conference, instead sending Tourism Minister Randy Boissonnault.

Perhaps most importantly though, Alberta no longer stands alone.

The federal government has intruded so much into provincial jurisdiction on so many issues, that more and more provinces are pushing back.

At the start of her trip, Smith predicted that she would have a few allies.

“I can tell you the thing that has surprised me the most is that it doesn’t matter what political stripe the premiers have, every single one of them is frustrated with federal interference into their business,” she said.

She was right.

The Council of Premiers made it clear that they weren’t happy being force-fed aggressive deadlines that were going to decimate the Canadian economy.

Scott Moe, Premier of Saskatchewan, publicly called out the Prime Minister and Steven Guilbeault, federal Minister of Environment and Climate Change, tweeting:

“If it wasn’t clear before, it is now. The Trudeau government doesn’t want to just reduce emissions in our energy sector, they want to completely shut down our energy sector.”

Blaine Higgs, the Premier of New Brunswick added:

“It just seems to be a pile-on of additional costs, Let’s get some recognition for the impact this is having on everyday lives.”

Even David Eby’s NDP government in British Columbia is joining in and are looking at ways to grow LNG exports with the recent establishment of a task force with a mandate to explore export expansion opportunities.

If there is one thing that this past week and a half did demonstrate is that when it comes to energy, the provinces have never been more united against a federal government that continues to overstep its jurisdictional boundaries.

This level of agreement amongst premiers is a major step forward, and it demonstrates that common ground can be found between provinces when it comes to federal overreach.

It is also important because it demonstrates that the rest of the country is getting fed up with the never-ending climate brigade taking shot after shot after shot at the energy industry without addressing the impact energy has on affordability.

Some time ago, we launched a campaign to Stand Up for Alberta Energy.

If you agree with our work in this area, and want to get more involved with the campaign, please join the campaign here:

JOIN THE CAMPAIGN

Related Topics:#AlbertaEnergy #EmissionsCap #FederalClimatePolicies #NetZero #PremierDanielleSmith #PremierScottMoe #ProjectConfederation feature

Up Next

Hydroponic greenhouses becoming more popular in the North, but have limitations

Don't Miss

Health Minister Adriana LaGrange charged with extensive to do list

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

It’s Time To Stop Church Arsons And What Fuels Them

DEI / 12 hours ago

University System of Georgia to ban DEI, commit to neutrality, teach Constitution

Censorship Industrial Complex / 15 hours ago

G20’s Online Speech Clampdown Calls Set To Ignite Free Speech Fears

Alberta

Alberta mother accuses health agency of trying to vaccinate son against her wishes

Published on November 22, 2024

Todayville

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

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.

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

Published on November 21, 2024

Todayville

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.