Alberta
Premier Notley easing off the brake on oil production limit
From the Province of Alberta
Province eases oil production limitsAs storage levels draw down and the value of Alberta’s oil increases, the province is increasing the limit on oil production. Premier Rachel Notley’s decision to protect the value of Alberta’s oil has been instrumental in helping reduce the amount of oil in storage, which had been nearly twice the normal level and resulted in the resources owned by all Albertans being given away for pennies on the dollar. In response to new storage data, Alberta is increasing production in February and March to 3.63 million barrels per day, which is a 75,000-barrel per day increase from the January limit of 3.56 million barrels per day.
Alberta’s goal has always been to match production levels to what can be shipped using existing pipeline and rail capacity, while encouraging a reduction in storage levels. The decision to temporarily limit oil production was applied fairly and equitably, and has been instrumental in saving jobs across the energy sector. Since the production limit was announced in December 2018, storage levels in Alberta have dropped ahead of schedule, declining by five million barrels to a total of 30 million barrels in storage. Analysis based on independent data suggests storage levels have been decreasing roughly one million barrels per week since the start of 2019 and are on track to continue clearing the storage glut that led to unprecedented discounts for Alberta oil in late 2018.
BackgroundBased on the Q1 2019 forecast of production, government announced on Dec. 2, 2018 a reduction in production of 325,000 barrels a day of raw crude oil and raw bitumen. That 325,000 bpd was established as the difference between pipeline and takeaway capacity of 3.56 million barrels a day and the Q1 2019 publicly stated industry-wide forecast production of 3.89 million barrels a day. The first 10,000 barrels per day a company produces remains exempt from any production limits, meaning 28 of over 300 producers in Alberta are subject to the production limits. Since the production limits were introduced, government has amended its formula for determining how to allocate space under the production limit. It was determined that starting in February government would use each company’s highest level of production during their best single month from November 2017 to October 2018 as its baseline production level. This was a change from the original formula where the baseline would be established on a company’s highest six-month average over the same time period. This change was made after listening to concerns from industry and advice from the Alberta Energy Regulator to better account for companies that were in the process of ramping up production as part of long-term investments in the province. |
Alberta
Alberta’s move to ‘activity-based funding’ will improve health care despite naysayer claims

From the Fraser Institute
After the Smith government recently announced its shift to a new approach for funding hospitals, known as “activity-based funding” (ABF), defenders of the status quo in Alberta were quick to argue ABF will not improve health care in the province. Their claims are simply incorrect. In reality, based on the experiences of other better-performing universal health-care systems, ABF will help reduce wait times for Alberta patients and provide better value-for-money for taxpayers.
First, it’s important to understand Alberta is not breaking new ground with this approach. Other developed countries shifted to the ABF model starting in the early 1990s.
Indeed, after years of paying their hospitals a lump-sum annual budget for surgical care (like Alberta currently), other countries with universal health care recognized this form of payment encouraged hospitals to deliver fewer services by turning each patient into a cost to be minimized. The shift to ABF, which compensates hospitals for the actual services they provide, flips the script—hospitals in these countries now see patients as a source of revenue.
In fact, in many universal health-care countries, these reforms began so long ago that some are now on their second or even third generation of ABF, incorporating further innovations to encourage an even greater focus on quality.
For example, in Sweden in the early 1990s, counties that embraced ABF enjoyed a potential cost savings of 13 per cent over non-reforming counties that stuck with budgets. In Stockholm, one study measured an 11 per cent increase in hospital activity overall alongside a 1 per cent decrease in costs following the introduction of ABF. Moreover, according to the study, ABF did not reduce access for older patients or patients with more complex conditions. In England, the shift to ABF in the early to mid-2000s helped increase hospital activity and reduce the cost of care per patient, also without negatively affecting quality of care.
Multi-national studies on the shift to ABF have repeatedly shown increases in the volume of care provided, reduced costs per admission, and (perhaps most importantly for Albertans) shorter wait times. Studies have also shown ABF may lead to improved quality and access to advanced medical technology for patients.
Clearly, the naysayers who claim that ABF is some sort of new or untested reform, or that Albertans are heading down an unknown path with unmanageable and unexpected risks, are at the very least uninformed.
And what of those theoretical drawbacks?
Some critics claim that ABF may encourage faster discharges of patients to reduce costs. But they fail to note this theoretical drawback also exists under the current system where discharging higher-cost patients earlier can reduce the drain on hospital budgets. And crucially, other countries have implemented policies to prevent these types of theoretical drawbacks under ABF, which can inform Alberta’s approach from the start.
Critics also argue that competition between private clinics, or even between clinics and hospitals, is somehow a bad thing. But all of the developed world’s top performing universal health-care systems, with the best outcomes and shortest wait times, include a blend of both public and private care. No one has done it with the naysayers’ fixation on government provision.
And finally, some critics claim that, under ABF, private clinics will simply focus on less-complex procedures for less-complex patients to achieve greater profit, leaving public hospitals to perform more complex and thus costly surgeries. But in fact, private clinics alleviate pressure on the public system, allowing hospitals to dedicate their sophisticated resources to complex cases. To be sure, the government must ensure that complex procedures—no matter where they are performed—must always receive appropriate levels of funding and similarly that less-complex procedures are also appropriately funded. But again, the vast and lengthy experience with ABF in other universal health-care countries can help inform Alberta’s approach, which could then serve as an example for other provinces.
Alberta’s health-care system simply does not deliver for patients, with its painfully long wait times and poor access to physicians and services—despite its massive price tag. With its planned shift to activity-based funding, the province has embarked on a path to better health care, despite any false claims from the naysayers. Now it’s crucial for the Smith government to learn from the experiences of others and get this critical reform right.
2025 Federal Election
Group that added dozens of names to ballot in Poilievre’s riding plans to do it again

From LifeSiteNews
The ‘Longest Ballot Committee’ is looking to run hundreds of protest candidates against Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre in an upcoming by-election in the Alberta.
A group called the “Longest Ballot Committee” is looking to run hundreds of protest candidates against Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre in an upcoming by-election in the Alberta Battle River–Crowfoot riding, just like they did in his former Ottawa-area Carelton riding in last week’s election.
The Longest Ballot Committee is a grassroots group that packs ridings with protest candidates and is looking to place 200 names in the Battle River–Crowfoot riding. The riding was won by Conservative-elect MP Damien Kurek who garnered over 80 percent of the vote, but has since said he is going to vacate his seat to allow Poilievre to run a by-election and reclaim his seat in Parliament in a Conservative-safe area.
In an email to its followers, the committee said “dozens and dozens” of volunteers are ready to sign up as candidates for the yet-to-be-called by-election. The initiative follows after the group did the same thing in Poilievre’s former Carelton riding which he lost last Monday, and which saw voters being given an extremely long ballot with 90 candidates.
The group asked people who want to run to send them their legal name and information by May 12, adding that if about 200 people sign up they will “make a long ballot happen.”
-
International2 days ago
Ice Surprises – Arctic and Antarctic Ice Sheets Are Stabilizing and Growing
-
Alberta2 days ago
Energy projects occupy less than three per cent of Alberta’s oil sands region, report says
-
Energy2 days ago
Oil tankers in Vancouver are loading plenty, but they can load even more
-
Energy2 days ago
Carney’s energy superpower rhetoric falls flat without policy certainty
-
2025 Federal Election1 day ago
Group that added dozens of names to ballot in Poilievre’s riding plans to do it again
-
Alberta2 days ago
Charges laid in record cocaine seizure
-
2025 Federal Election1 day ago
Carney says Liberals won’t make voting pact with NDP
-
conflict2 days ago
WATCH: U.S. ending bombing campaign on Yemeni militant group