Connect with us

News

PC Leadership Hopeful Starke Proposes Plan To Defeat NDP

Published

4 minute read

By Sheldon Spackman

One of four men seeking to lead Alberta’s PC Party to victory in the next provincial election, is proposing an alternative approach to defeating the NDP in 2019. Vermillion-Lloydminster MLA Richard Starke says he has a better option to defeat the current government in two years, rather than merging the PC’s and Wildrose as fellow leadership candidate Jason Kenney has suggested.

Starke says through a release that “Albertans tell me that they want a real change in the Alberta government but do not necessarily like the risky 5-point Unity power grab.” Adding, “Today, I am introducing a proposal that would see Progressive Conservatives and Wildrose working together on a Common Sense Plan; Alberta’s conservative parties collaborating to eliminate the risk of vote splitting in the next election. This Common Sense Plan could include:

  • Both parties would fight the 2019 election from positions of strength with a common goal – defeating the NDP.
  • Both parties would continue to work as separate but collaborating entities – two parties, two leaders, two caucuses.
  • Giving Albertans an option to ensure that there will be no splitting of conservative votes in the next election.”

Starke says Kenney’s plan to dissolve the PC’s and Wildrose and create one new right-wing party instead, is too risky. He says with the next provincial election only two years away, it’s frankly not enough time to start a new party from scratch and be ready for an election. He says his Common Sense Plan preserves two political parties that want to remain. Adding however, that the two parties still need to talk about it, which hasn’t happened yet. As far as vote splitting is concerned, Starke says “There are mechanisms that could be employed to make sure that doesn’t happen”.

Starke goes on to say “It has become apparent that the Progressive Conservative Leadership race is no longer just about selecting the best leader for the Party, but it has changed into who can defeat the NDP in 2019.  I believe strongly that Alberta needs to be governed from the centre-right, and that the NDP cannot see another term in office.”

Starke also says “One of the hallmarks of leadership is to listen, and to respond. I have been listening to Albertans who are desperate to see the end of the NDP government. But I have also listened to Progressive Conservative and Wildrose members who do not want to see their parties destroyed. Many have told me they support “unity” because they believe it is the only way to defeat the NDP.”

Starke adds, “I have stated unequivocally throughout the campaign that the 5-point Unity proposal will not work as it depends on the rushed destruction of two existing political parties and other complicated, high risk political maneuvers. It will result in a second NDP term in office. Working together in collaboration rather than competition is the most effective way to defeat the NDP while avoiding the major upheaval of both parties proposed by Jason Kenney.” The two other PC Leadership hopefuls include Byron Nelson and Stephen Khan.

A Leadership Town Hall is taking place in Grande Prairie on Friday, January 27th, with a Leadership Debate in Medicine Hat February 1st. The Leadership Convention and Vote happens in Calgary March 17th, 2017.

Follow Author

International

UK Supreme Court rules ‘woman’ means biological female

Published on

Susan Smith (L) and Marion Calder, directors of ‘For Women Scotland’ cheer as they leave the Supreme Court on April 16, 2025, in London, England after winning their appeal in defense of biological reality

From LifeSiteNews

By Michael Haynes, Snr. Vatican Correspondent

The U.K. Supreme Court has issued a ruling stating that “woman” in law refers to a biological female, and that transgender “women” are not female in the eyes of the law.

In a unanimous verdict, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom ruled today that legally transgender “women” are not women, since a woman is legally defined by “biological sex.”

Published April 16, the Supreme Court’s 88-page verdict was handed down on the case of Women Scotland Ltd (Appellant) v. The Scottish Ministers (Respondent). The ruling marks the end of a battle of many years between the Scottish government and women’s right campaigners who sought to oppose the government’s promotion of transgender ideology.

In 2018, the Scottish government issued a decision to allow the definition of “woman” to include men who assume their gender to be female, opening the door to allowing so-called “transgender” individuals to identify as women.

This guidance was challenged by women’s rights campaigners, arguing that a woman should be defined in line with biological sex, and in 2022 the Scottish government was forced to change its definition after the court found that such a move was outside the government’s “legislative competence.”

Given this, the government issued new guidance which sought to cover both aspects: saying that biological women are women, but also that men with a “gender recognition certificate” (GRC) are also considered women. A GRC is given to people who identify as the opposite sex and who have had medical or surgical interventions in an attempt to “reassign” their gender.

Women Scotland Ltd appealed this new guidance. At first it was rejected by inner courts, but upon their taking the matter to the Supreme Court in March last year, the nation’s highest judicial body took up the case.

Today, with the ruling issued against transgender ideology, women’s campaigners are welcoming the news as a win for women’s safety.

“A thing of beauty,” praised Lois McLatchie Miller from the Alliance Defending Freedom legal group.

“Victory,” commented Charlie Bently-Astor, a prominent campaigner for biological reality against the transgender movement, after she nearly underwent surgical transition herself at a younger age.

“After 15 years of insanity, the U.K. Supreme Court has ruled that men who say they are ‘trans women’ are not women,” wrote leader of the Christian political movement David Kurten.

Leader of the Conservative Party – the opposition to the current Labour government – Kemi Badenoch welcomed the court’s ruling, writing that “saying ‘trans women are women’ was never true in fact and now isn’t true in law, either.”

 

Others lamented the fact that the debate even was taking place, let alone having gone to the Supreme Court.

“What a parody we live in,” commented Reform Party candidate Joseph Robertson.

Rupert Lowe MP – who has risen to new prominence in recent weeks for his outspoken condemnation of the immigration and rape gang crisis – wrote, “Absolute madness that we’re even debating what a woman is – it’s a biological fact. No amount of woke howling will ever change that.”

However, the Supreme Court did not wish to get pulled into siding with certain arguments, with Lord Hodge of the tribunal stating that “we counsel against reading this judgment as a triumph of one or more groups in our society at the expense of another. It is not.”

The debate has taken center stage in the U.K. in recent years, not least for the role played by the current Labour Prime Minister Keir Starmer. Starmer himself has become notorious throughout the nation for his contradictions and inability to answer the question of what a woman is, having flip-flopped on saying that a woman can have a penis, due to his support for the transgender movement.

At the time of going to press, neither Starmer nor his deputy Angela Rayner issued a statement about the Supreme Court ruling. There has been no statement issued from the Scottish government either, nor from the office of the first minister.

Transgender activists have expectedly condemned the ruling as “a disgusting attack on trans rights.” One leading transgender campaigner individual told Sky News, “I am gutted to see the judgement from the Supreme Court which ends 20 years of understanding that transgender people with a GRC are able to be, for all intents and purposes, legally recognized as our true genders.”

Continue Reading

International

Tulsi Gabbard tells Trump she has ‘evidence’ voting machines are ‘vulnerable to hackers’

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Stephen Kokx

Last month, Trump signed an executive order directing federal election-related funds to be conditioned on states “complying with the integrity measures set forth by Federal law, including the requirement that states use the national mail voter registration form that will now require proof of citizenship.”

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard announced during a Cabinet meeting last week at the White House that voting machines across the U.S. are not secure.

“We have evidence of how these electronic voting systems have been vulnerable to hackers for a very long time, and vulnerable to exploitation to manipulate the results of the votes being cast,” she said about a half hour into the meeting.

 

Gabbard’s remarks confirm what millions of Americans have long suspected about elections across the U.S.

President Donald Trump himself has maintained skepticism of current voting methods and has called for paper ballots to prevent cheating.

MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell was one of only a few voices to publicly argue that voting machines, like those run by Dominion and Smartmatic which were used during the 2020 presidential election, were compromised. GOP Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor-Greene took to X to praise the businessman after Gabbard made her remarks.

“Mike Lindell along with MANY others vindicated!!” she exclaimed on X. “Another conspiracy theory being proven right! Guess what Democrats already knew this and publicly talked about it in 2019! And then lied and lied and lied!!!”

 

Last month, Trump signed an executive order directing federal election-related funds to be conditioned on states “complying with the integrity measures set forth by Federal law, including the requirement that states use the national mail voter registration form that will now require proof of citizenship.”

Congress has also taken steps to ensure election integrity by voting on the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act (also known as the SAVE Act) last week. Dubbed “controversial” by the media and left-wing groups, the common sense bill would require persons to show proof of citizenship before voting. The House approved the measure 220-208 with four Democrats in support. The bill now heads to the Senate where it will face an uphill battle for the required 60 votes. Republicans currently have a 53 seat majority.

Continue Reading

Trending

X