Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Alberta

EXCLUSIVE: Alberta Bill of Rights draft affirms parental authority over children

Published

5 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

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.’

The United Conservative Party government of the province of Alberta is anticipated to soon introduce a new “Bill of Rights,” a current draft of which includes a provision that would cement parental rights as “God-given.”

LifeSiteNews was recently provided exclusive access to a draft version of the “Alberta Bill of Rights” from a source well connected with the ruling United Conservative Party (UCP). 

Included in the draft bill is a section titled, “Freedom of parents to make informed decisions concerning the health, education, welfare and upbringing of their children.” 

The text of the draft version, which is still subject to change, reads that the “Government of Alberta, on behalf of its citizens,” must acknowledge that the “freedom of parents to raise their children is sui generis – independent from legislation, not flowing from it – it precedes government.” 

“It is a government’s duty to respect that familial boundary until children reach the age of majority. Parents have an obligation to provide for the basic health, education, and welfare of their child as they exercise custody and authority,” reads the bill. 

The text then reads that the “state shall not target parents nor interfere with parental rights on the basis of religious or social standing, nor on the basis of fiscal status provided that parents are demonstrably providing for the necessities of their children.” 

“No officer or agency of the government, including any subdivisions, shall infringe on a parent’s freedoms except as demonstrably necessary on a case-by-case basis as provided by law, such steps to be narrowly tailored to meet a compelling government interest by the least restrictive means,” it states.  

“Remedial provisions shall be provided for the intentional interference of parental freedoms by governments, organizations or individuals.” 

The text concludes with a sentence affirming that “Family is in the best interests of a child.”

It is expected that the UCP government in Alberta will introduce its new “Bill of Rights” this fall. The bill contains a slew of pro-freedom proposals, including, as reported by LifeSiteNews, enshrining the “right to life” into law, including from “conception, gestation in the womb.”  

The bill also includes, as reported by LifeSiteNews, a section that guarantees each citizen has the “right” to medical “informed consent” as well as the “right” to “refuse vaccinations.” 

While the UCP source told LifeSiteNews that the draft version of the bill is subject to change, the source also said it is hoped by all of those who worked on it that the final version will not include many changes.  

It is not yet clear just how much of the bill has the support of Alberta Premier Danielle Smith, leader of the UCP. She promised last year, as reported by LifeSiteNews, to enshrine into “law” protections for people in her province who choose not to be vaccinated as well as strengthen gun rights and safeguard speech by beefing up the provincial Bill of Rights. 

She has also said that parents should be primary caregivers of their children, and earlier this year announced what is the strongest pro-family legislation in Canada, protecting kids from life-altering so-called “top and bottom” surgeries as well as other forms of transgender ideology.

However, Smith’s view on the traditional nuclear family is at odds with the views of many conservatives, including many who support the UCP. As reported by LifeSiteNews last month, Smith noted, in a wide-ranging interview with Jordan Peterson, that conservatives should “modernize” their view of what the nuclear family looks like, including homosexuals “couples” seeking to obtain children.

Alberta

Median workers in Alberta could receive 72% more under Alberta Pension Plan compared to Canada Pension Plan

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill and Joel Emes

Moving from the CPP to a provincial pension plan would generate savings for Albertans in the form of lower contribution rates (which could be used to increase private retirement savings while receiving the same pension benefits as the CPP under the new provincial pension), finds a new study published today by the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think-tank.

“Due to Alberta’s comparatively high rates of employment, higher average incomes, and younger population, Albertans would pay a lower contribution rate through a separate provincial pension plan while receiving the same benefits as under the CPP,” said Tegan Hill, director of Alberta policy at the Fraser Institute and co-author of Illustrating the Potential of an Alberta Pension Plan.

Assuming Albertans invested the savings from moving to a provincial pension plan into a private retirement account, and assuming a contribution rate of 5.85 per cent, workers earning the median income in Alberta ($53,061 in 2025) could accrue a stream of retirement payments totalling $454,741 (pre-tax)—a 71.6 per cent increase from their stream of CPP payments ($264,968).

Put differently, under the CPP, a median worker receives a total of $264,968 in retirement income over their life. If an Alberta worker saved the difference between what they pay now into the CPP and what they would pay into a new provincial plan, the income they would receive in retirement increases. If the contribution rate for the new provincial plan was 5.85 per cent—the lower of the available estimates—the increase in retirement income would total $189,773 (or an increase of 71.6 per cent).

If the contribution rate for a new Alberta pension plan was 8.21 per cent—the higher of the available estimates—a median Alberta worker would still receive an additional $64,672 in retirement income over their life, a marked increase of 24.4 per cent compared to the CPP alone.

Put differently, assuming a contribution rate of 8.21 per cent, Albertan workers earning the median income could accrue a stream of retirement payments totaling $329,640 (pre-tax) under a provincial pension plan—a 24.4 per cent increase from their stream of CPP payments.

“While the full costs and benefits of a provincial pension plan must be considered, its clear that Albertans could benefit from higher retirement payments under a provincial pension plan, compared to the CPP,” Hill said.

Illustrating the Potential of an Alberta Pension Plan

  • Due to Alberta’s comparatively high rates of employment, higher average incomes, and younger population, Albertans would pay a lower contribution rate with a separate provincial pension plan, compared with the CPP, while receiving the same benefits as under the CPP.
  • Put differently, moving from the CPP to a provincial pension plan would generate savings for Albertans, which could be used to increase private retirement income. This essay assesses the potential savings for Albertans of moving to a provincial pension plan. It also estimates an Albertan’s potential increase in total retirement income, if those savings were invested in a private account.
  • Depending on the contribution rate used for an Alberta pension plan (APP), ranging from 5.85 to 8.2 percent, an individual earning the CPP’s yearly maximum pensionable earnings ($71,300 in 2025), would accrue a stream of retirement payments under the total APP (APP plus private retirement savings), yielding a total retirement income of between $429,524 and $584,235. This would be 22.9 to 67.1 percent higher, respectively, than their stream of CPP payments ($349,545).
  • An individual earning the median income in Alberta ($53,061 in 2025), would accrue a stream of retirement payments under the total APP (APP plus private retirement savings), yielding a total retirement income of between $329,640 and $454,741, which is between 24.4 percent to 71.6 percent higher, respectively, than their stream of CPP payments ($264,968).

 

Tegan Hill

Director, Alberta Policy, Fraser Institute
Joel Emes

Joel Emes

Senior Economist, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Alberta

Alberta ban on men in women’s sports doesn’t apply to athletes from other provinces

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Alberta’s Fairness and Safety in Sport Act bans transgender males from women’s sports within the province but cannot regulate out-of-province transgender athletes.

Alberta’s ban on gender-confused males competing in women’s sports will not apply to out-of-province athletes.

In an interview posted July 12 by the Canadian Press, Alberta Tourism and Sport Minister Andrew Boitchenko revealed that Alberta does not have the jurisdiction to regulate out-of-province, gender-confused males from competing against female athletes.

“We don’t have authority to regulate athletes from different jurisdictions,” he said in an interview.

Ministry spokeswoman Vanessa Gomez further explained that while Alberta passed legislation to protect women within their province, outside sporting organizations are bound by federal or international guidelines.

As a result, Albertan female athletes will be spared from competing against men during provincial competition but must face male competitors during inter-provincial events.

In December, Alberta passed the Fairness and Safety in Sport Act to prevent biological men who claim to be women from competing in women’s sports. The legislation will take effect on September 1 and will apply to all school boards, universities, as well as provincial sports organizations.

The move comes after studies have repeatedly revealed what almost everyone already knew was true, namely, that males have a considerable advantage over women in athletics.

Indeed, a recent study published in Sports Medicine found that a year of “transgender” hormone drugs results in “very modest changes” in the inherent strength advantages of men.

Additionally, male athletes competing in women’s sports are known to be violent, especially toward female athletes who oppose their dominance in women’s sports.

In February, Andres ranted about why men should be able to compete in women’s competitions, calling for “the Ontario lifter” who opposes this, apparently referring to powerlifter April Hutchinson, to “die painfully.”

Interestingly, while Andres was suspended for six months for issuing death threats, Hutchinson was suspended for two years after publicly condemning him for stealing victories from women and then mocking his female competitors on social media. Her suspension was later reduced to a year.

Continue Reading

Trending

X