Alberta
No Matter Which Formula, Albertans Win With An Alberta Pension Plan
From the Alberta Institute
Guest Post By Lindsay Wilson
Opponents of the Alberta Pension Plan (APP) have wasted no time busting out the pitchforks, with their legacy media lapdogs hard at work toeing the line for the union big wigs and their NDP friends.
It’s merely weeks into the launch of a province-wide public consultation to educate and get feedback from Albertans on an APP and there is no shortage of Trudeau-funded media penning pieces laden with misinformation.
They’re pushing a fear-based narrative that has seniors running scared and reasonable people questioning whether the bold move isn’t a little selfish which is no different than what Quebec has been doing — quite successfully — since day one.
For us here at Alberta Proud, we not only think opting out of the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) and establishing an APP is a great idea — it’s a critical step toward more Alberta autonomy.
If we don’t, will we ever achieve much of anything in the arena of autonomy? Think about it: if we can’t win a referendum on the one thing we don’t need permission from Ottawa to do, where does that leave us?
More Alberta and Less Ottawa isn’t just a pie in the sky for us at Alberta Proud. It’s our mantra.
We genuinely believe enough is enough. It’s time for Ottawa to take a hike, including their antiquated equalization formula that you voted 62% in favour of scrapping.
We now have an opportunity to leave the CPP, in favour of a made-in-Alberta plan which must offer the same or better benefits. And it will, without question, put more money into your pocket every year as we finally won’t be overcontributing.
The newest twist in the anti-APP narrative is casting doubt on the formula the independent, government-commissioned LifeWorks report produced: that 53% of the CPP assets ($334 billion) would be owed to Alberta.
By switching to an APP, that translates to putting an additional $1,425 back into each employee’s pocket, according to LifeWorks, and when you consider the employer’s contribution, that amount is effectively doubled.
That’s a huge incentive for Alberta employers, those coming here to work and for the majority of hard-working everyday people who are drowning in this era of inflation (or #justinflation as we like to call it at Alberta Proud).
Meanwhile in the mainstream media, economist Trevor Tombe is balking at the math, claiming Albertans will be owed around one-third of what LifeWorks has assessed.
While it may seem odd everyone is arriving at different numbers, here is the kicker: even if we leave with only 17% (among the lower estimates floating around and not the 25% estimated by Tombe or the 53% estimated by LifeWorks) it’s still a better deal for Albertans.
But how, you ask? Simply put, we would finally get a break from this hidden transfer program, which is yet another way in which hardworking Albertans subsidize the rest of the country.
We have a comparatively younger population and because of this, we have paid more than we have collected. It has always been this way for us, and it doesn’t look like that will change. In the past year, a record 185,000 new Albertans moved here to work and take advantage of our low taxes and abundant opportunities. Any way you slice it, our contribution rate would fall.
Another concern is around who will manage an APP.
While the opposition is quick to point out CPP investment returns have been decent and that an APP would be best not left in the hands of AIMCo, did you know we could very well use the same pension fund manager as the CPP or another arms-length, third party?
By putting Alberta first, you will not risk your pension.
By switching to an APP, you will put more money in your pocket.
Ottawa has long turned its back on Albertans and continues to hit us with eco-radical regulations that will leave us broke and freezing in the dark. If we stay in the CPP, we are sending them a message that they can keep pushing us around, forever, no matter what they do to us.
It’s time for a change.
So, take a moment to fill out the Alberta government survey.
Send emails to your MLA, Finance Minister Nate Horner and Premier Danielle Smith. Show up to the townhalls.
Alberta’s future of more autonomy depends on all of us getting loud and Alberta Proud!
Lindsay Wilson is the President of Alberta Proud, a group of citizens concerned about Alberta’s future within Canada.
Alberta
Alberta government’s plan will improve access to MRIs and CT scans
From the Fraser Institute
By Nadeem Esmail and Tegan Hill
The Smith government may soon allow Albertans to privately purchase diagnostic screening and testing services, prompting familiar cries from defenders of the status quo. But in reality, this change, which the government plans to propose in the legislature in the coming months, would simply give Albertans an option already available to patients in every other developed country with universal health care.
It’s important for Albertans and indeed all Canadians to understand the unique nature of our health-care system. In every one of the 30 other developed countries with universal health care, patients are free to seek care on their own terms with their own resources when the universal system is unwilling or unable to satisfy their needs. Whether to access care with shorter wait times and a more rapid return to full health, to access more personalized services or meet a personal health need, or to access new advances in medical technology. But not in Canada.
That prohibition has not served Albertans well. Despite being one of the highest-spending provinces in one of the most expensive universal health-care systems in the developed world, Albertans endure some of the longest wait times for health care and some of the worst availability of advanced diagnostic and medical technologies including MRI machines and CT scanners.
Introducing new medical technologies is a costly endeavour, which requires money and the actual equipment, but also the proficiency, knowledge and expertise to use it properly. By allowing Albertans to privately purchase diagnostic screening and testing services, the Smith government would encourage private providers to make these technologies available and develop the requisite knowledge.
Obviously, these new providers would improve access to these services for all Alberta patients—first for those willing to pay for them, and then for patients in the public system. In other words, adding providers to the health-care system expands the supply of these services, which will reduce wait times for everyone, not just those using private clinics. And relief can’t come soon enough. In Alberta, in 2024 the median wait time for a CT scan was 12 weeks and 24 weeks for an MRI.
Greater access and shorter wait times will also benefit Albertans concerned about their future health or preventative care. When these Albertans can quickly access a private provider, their appointments may lead to the early discovery of medical problems. Early detection can improve health outcomes and reduce the amount of public health-care resources these Albertans may ultimately use in the future. And that means more resources available for all other patients, to the benefit of all Albertans including those unable to access the private option.
Opponents of this approach argue that it’s a move towards two-tier health care, which will drain resources from the public system, or that this is “American-style” health care. But these arguments ignore that private alternatives benefit all patients in universal health-care systems in the rest of the developed world. For example, Switzerland, Germany, the Netherlands and Australia all have higher-performing universal systems that provide more timely care because of—not despite—the private options available to patients.
In reality, the Smith government’s plan to allow Albertans to privately purchase diagnostic screening and testing services is a small step in the right direction to reduce wait times and improve health-care access in the province. In fact, the proposal doesn’t go far enough—the government should allow Albertans to purchase physician appointments and surgeries privately, too. Hopefully the Smith government continues to reform the province’s health-care system, despite ill-informed objections, with all patients in mind.
Alberta
Canada’s heavy oil finds new fans as global demand rises
From the Canadian Energy Centre
By Will Gibson
“The refining industry wants heavy oil. We are actually in a shortage of heavy oil globally right now, and you can see that in the prices”
Once priced at a steep discount to its lighter, sweeter counterparts, Canadian oil has earned growing admiration—and market share—among new customers in Asia.
Canada’s oil exports are primarily “heavy” oil from the Alberta oil sands, compared to oil from more conventional “light” plays like the Permian Basin in the U.S.
One way to think of it is that heavy oil is thick and does not flow easily, while light oil is thin and flows freely, like fudge compared to apple juice.
“The refining industry wants heavy oil. We are actually in a shortage of heavy oil globally right now, and you can see that in the prices,” said Susan Bell, senior vice-president of downstream research with Rystad Energy.
A narrowing price gap
Alberta’s heavy oil producers generally receive a lower price than light oil producers, partly a result of different crude quality but mainly because of the cost of transportation, according to S&P Global.
The “differential” between Western Canadian Select (WCS) and West Texas Intermediate (WTI) blew out to nearly US$50 per barrel in 2018 because of pipeline bottlenecks, forcing Alberta to step in and cut production.
So far this year, the differential has narrowed to as little as US$10 per barrel, averaging around US$12, according to GLJ Petroleum Consultants.
“The differential between WCS and WTI is the narrowest I’ve seen in three decades working in the industry,” Bell said.
Trans Mountain Expansion opens the door to Asia
Oil tanker docked at the Westridge Marine Terminal in Burnaby, B.C. Photo courtesy Trans Mountain Corporation
The price boost is thanks to the Trans Mountain expansion, which opened a new gateway to Asia in May 2024 by nearly tripling the pipeline’s capacity.
This helps fill the supply void left by other major regions that export heavy oil – Venezuela and Mexico – where production is declining or unsteady.
Canadian oil exports outside the United States reached a record 525,000 barrels per day in July 2025, the latest month of data available from the Canada Energy Regulator.
China leads Asian buyers since the expansion went into service, along with Japan, Brunei and Singapore, Bloomberg reports. 
Asian refineries see opportunity in heavy oil
“What we are seeing now is a lot of refineries in the Asian market have been exposed long enough to WCS and now are comfortable with taking on regular shipments,” Bell said.
Kevin Birn, chief analyst for Canadian oil markets at S&P Global, said rising demand for heavier crude in Asia comes from refineries expanding capacity to process it and capture more value from lower-cost feedstocks.
“They’ve invested in capital improvements on the front end to convert heavier oils into more valuable refined products,” said Birn, who also heads S&P’s Center of Emissions Excellence.
Refiners in the U.S. Gulf Coast and Midwest made similar investments over the past 40 years to capitalize on supply from Latin America and the oil sands, he said.
While oil sands output has grown, supplies from Latin America have declined.
Mexico’s state oil company, Pemex, reports it produced roughly 1.6 million barrels per day in the second quarter of 2025, a steep drop from 2.3 million in 2015 and 2.6 million in 2010.
Meanwhile, Venezuela’s oil production, which was nearly 2.9 million barrels per day in 2010, was just 965,000 barrels per day this September, according to OPEC.
The case for more Canadian pipelines
Worker at an oil sands SAGD processing facility in northern Alberta. Photo courtesy Strathcona Resources
“The growth in heavy demand, and decline of other sources of heavy supply has contributed to a tighter market for heavy oil and narrower spreads,” Birn said.
Even the International Energy Agency, known for its bearish projections of future oil demand, sees rising global use of extra-heavy oil through 2050.
The chief impediments to Canada building new pipelines to meet the demand are political rather than market-based, said both Bell and Birn.
“There is absolutely a business case for a second pipeline to tidewater,” Bell said.
“The challenge is other hurdles limiting the growth in the industry, including legislation such as the tanker ban or the oil and gas emissions cap.”
A strategic choice for Canada
Because Alberta’s oil sands will continue a steady, reliable and low-cost supply of heavy oil into the future, Birn said policymakers and Canadians have options.
“Canada needs to ask itself whether to continue to expand pipeline capacity south to the United States or to access global markets itself, which would bring more competition for its products.”
-
Crime2 days agoPublic Execution of Anti-Cartel Mayor in Michoacán Prompts U.S. Offer to Intervene Against Cartels
-
Environment2 days agoThe era of Climate Change Alarmism is over
-
Aristotle Foundation2 days agoB.C. government laid groundwork for turning private property into Aboriginal land
-
Justice2 days agoA Justice System That Hates Punishment Can’t Protect the Innocent
-
Alberta1 day agoCanada’s heavy oil finds new fans as global demand rises
-
Business1 day agoCarney government should retire misleading ‘G7’ talking point on economic growth
-
Censorship Industrial Complex1 day agoPro-freedom group warns Liberal bill could secretly cut off Canadians’ internet access
-
Daily Caller1 day agoNigeria Would Welcome US Intervention In Massacre Of Christians By Islamic Terror Groups



