Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Alberta

Premier Smith to Ottawa: Alberta can’t afford thousands of asylum seekers right now

Published

5 minute read

From Free Alberta Strategy

For decades, Canada’s immigration policies were uncontroversial – parties across the spectrum maintained generally sensible policies.

But the current government in Ottawa has ditched this consensus, and the public mood is turning fast.

A large influx of newcomers has put a significant strain on public services and the housing market across the country.

Alberta, in particular, is feeling the strain, as our province receives both a disproportionately large share of the immigrants arriving in Canada, as well as by far the largest number of people moving between provinces.

Earlier this year, the Alberta government reported that in the year from April 2023 to April 2024, Alberta’s population had grown a record 4.11%, representing 204,677 people.

This is by far the highest annual growth rate in the country, outpacing second-place Ontario by nearly a full percentage point.

Importantly, international migration is responsible for about 68% of the increase, interprovincial migration is responsible for about 25%, and just 8% is caused by natural increase.

Another area of immigration that has significantly increased in Alberta is asylum seekers, which have more than doubled from 5,076 per year to 11,292 per year.

Of course, this represents just a small portion of the overall immigration to Alberta, and Alberta actually accepts a much smaller share of asylum seekers (about 5% of the total) compared with our population (about 12% of Canada).

But, Ottawa is now pushing to change this – they want provinces like Alberta to accept more of their “fair share” of asylum seekers – despite the fact that Alberta already receives more than its “fair share” of other types of immigrants.

Federal Immigration Minister Marc Millers says the federal government anticipates full cooperation from all provinces and territories as it strives for a fair and sustainable approach to managing the influx.

He says the federal government has “levers that we need to push and pull” when it comes to enticing provinces to agree to their terms:

“The reality is that Quebec and Ontario are facing disproportionate pressures, compared to any other province in the country – as they have been welcoming the majority of asylum seekers,” says the Minister.

“We will have proper incentives for those willing to welcome asylum seekers, and will take a holistic view with regards to other immigration programs based on participation – as this is work we cannot do alone, nor unilaterally. All options remain on the table.”

In other words, the federal government is once again planning on spending more of our tax dollars to effectively bribe the provinces’ to go along with their policies.

This idea isn’t new – Quebec has already urged the Trudeau government to disperse asylum-seekers more evenly across the provinces.

Premier Smith, however, is saying no:

“Section 95 of the Constitution is clear – immigration is an area of shared authority between the federal government and the provinces.”

“We are informing the Government of Canada that until further notice, Alberta is not open to having these additional asylum seekers settled in our province,” she added.

“We simply cannot afford it.”

Maybe, when the full details of the federal government’s plan are made public, the numbers will stack up.

But, based on past precedent, it seems unlikely.

More likely, this is just another agreement with the federal government that Alberta can’t afford to make.

Time and time again, we’ve seen the federal government approach the provincial government with a deal that – in Ottawa’s view – is good for the province.

We know, as we’ve seen with the nationalized childcare fiasco, that these deals very rarely work out for Alberta.

The Free Alberta Strategy continues to be Alberta’s shield against federal overreach, ensuring that Albertans remain in control of our future.

This issue is just the latest battle in which our unwavering defence of our provinces’ best interests can make a real difference.

If you believe in defending Alberta from Ottawa, join us!

Your contribution will help ensure that the Free Alberta Strategy has the resources and voice it needs to push back. 

Donate today to stand up for Alberta’s sovereignty and sustainability!

Alberta

The beauty of economic corridors: Inside Alberta’s work to link products with new markets

Published on

From the Canadian Energy Centre

Q&A with Devin Dreeshen, Minister of Transport and Economic Corridors

Devin Dreeshen, Alberta’s Minister of Transportation
and Economic Corridors.

CEC: How have recent developments impacted Alberta’s ability to expand trade routes and access new markets for energy and natural resources?

Dreeshen: With the U.S. trade dispute going on right now, it’s great to see that other provinces and the federal government are taking an interest in our east, west and northern trade routes, something that we in Alberta have been advocating for a long time.

We signed agreements with Saskatchewan and Manitoba to have an economic corridor to stretch across the prairies, as well as a recent agreement with the Northwest Territories to go north. With the leadership of Premier Danielle Smith, she’s been working on a BC, prairie and three northern territories economic corridor agreement with pretty much the entire western and northern block of Canada.

There has been a tremendous amount of work trying to get Alberta products to market and to make sure we can build big projects in Canada again.

CEC: Which infrastructure projects, whether pipeline, rail or port expansions, do you see as the most viable for improving Alberta’s global market access?

Dreeshen: We look at everything. Obviously, pipelines are the safest way to transport oil and gas, but also rail is part of the mix of getting over four million barrels per day to markets around the world.

The beauty of economic corridors is that it’s a swath of land that can have any type of utility in it, whether it be a roadway, railway, pipeline or a utility line. When you have all the environmental permits that are approved in a timely manner, and you have that designated swath of land, it politically de-risks any type of project.

CEC: A key focus of your ministry has been expanding trade corridors, including an agreement with Saskatchewan and Manitoba to explore access to Hudson’s Bay. Is there any interest from industry in developing this corridor further?

Dreeshen: There’s been lots of talk [about] Hudson Bay, a trade corridor with rail and port access. We’ve seen some improvements to go to Churchill, but also an interest in the Nelson River.

We’re starting to see more confidence in the private sector and industry wanting to build these projects. It’s great that governments can get together and work on a common goal to build things here in Canada.

CEC: What is your vision for Alberta’s future as a leader in global trade, and how do economic corridors fit into that strategy?

Dreeshen: Premier Smith has talked about C-69 being repealed by the federal government [and] the reversal of the West Coast tanker ban, which targets Alberta energy going west out of the Pacific.

There’s a lot of work that needs to be done on the federal side. Alberta has been doing a lot of the heavy lifting when it comes to economic corridors.

We’ve asked the federal government if they could develop an economic corridor agency. We want to make sure that the federal government can come to the table, work with provinces [and] work with First Nations across this country to make sure that we can see these projects being built again here in Canada.

Continue Reading

2025 Federal Election

Next federal government should recognize Alberta’s important role in the federation

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill

With the tariff war continuing and the federal election underway, Canadians should understand what the last federal government seemingly did not—a strong Alberta makes for a stronger Canada.

And yet, current federal policies disproportionately and negatively impact the province. The list includes Bill C-69 (which imposes complex, uncertain and onerous review requirements on major energy projects), Bill C-48 (which bans large oil tankers off British Columbia’s northern coast and limits access to Asian markets), an arbitrary cap on oil and gas emissions, numerous other “net-zero” targets, and so on.

Meanwhile, Albertans contribute significantly more to federal revenues and national programs than they receive back in spending on transfers and programs including the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) because Alberta has relatively high rates of employment, higher average incomes and a younger population.

For instance, since 1976 Alberta’s employment rate (the number of employed people as a share of the population 15 years of age and over) has averaged 67.4 per cent compared to 59.7 per cent in the rest of Canada, and annual market income (including employment and investment income) has exceeded that in the other provinces by $10,918 (on average).

As a result, Alberta’s total net contribution to federal finances (total federal taxes and payments paid by Albertans minus federal money spent or transferred to Albertans) was $244.6 billion from 2007 to 2022—more than five times as much as the net contribution from British Columbians or Ontarians. That’s a massive outsized contribution given Alberta’s population, which is smaller than B.C. and much smaller than Ontario.

Albertans’ net contribution to the CPP is particularly significant. From 1981 to 2022, Alberta workers contributed 14.4 per cent (on average) of total CPP payments paid to retirees in Canada while retirees in the province received only 10.0 per cent of the payments. Albertans made a cumulative net contribution to the CPP (the difference between total CPP contributions made by Albertans and CPP benefits paid to retirees in Alberta) of $53.6 billion over the period—approximately six times greater than the net contribution of B.C., the only other net contributing province to the CPP. Indeed, only two of the nine provinces that participate in the CPP contribute more in payroll taxes to the program than their residents receive back in benefits.

So what would happen if Alberta withdrew from the CPP?

For starters, the basic CPP contribution rate of 9.9 per cent (typically deducted from our paycheques) for Canadians outside Alberta (excluding Quebec) would have to increase for the program to remain sustainable. For a new standalone plan in Alberta, the rate would likely be lower, with estimates ranging from 5.85 per cent to 8.2 per cent. In other words, based on these estimates, if Alberta withdrew from the CPP, Alberta workers could receive the same retirement benefits but at a lower cost (i.e. lower payroll tax) than other Canadians while the payroll tax would have to increase for the rest of the country while the benefits remained the same.

Finally, despite any claims to the contrary, according to Statistics Canada, Alberta’s demographic advantage, which fuels its outsized contribution to the CPP, will only widen in the years ahead. Alberta will likely maintain relatively high employment rates and continue to welcome workers from across Canada and around the world. And considering Alberta recorded the highest average inflation-adjusted economic growth in Canada since 1981, with Albertans’ inflation-adjusted market income exceeding the average of the other provinces every year since 1971, Albertans will likely continue to pay an outsized portion for the CPP. Of course, the idea for Alberta to withdraw from the CPP and create its own provincial plan isn’t new. In 2001, several notable public figures, including Stephen Harper, wrote the famous Alberta “firewall” letter suggesting the province should take control of its future after being marginalized by the federal government.

The next federal government—whoever that may be—should understand Alberta’s crucial role in the federation. For a stronger Canada, especially during uncertain times, Ottawa should support a strong Alberta including its energy industry.

Continue Reading

Trending

X