Connect with us

Opinion

Should government have more power or less?

Published

5 years ago

4 minute read

I’m told a coalition government is a possibility in this election. That if the Federal Liberals don’t get quite enough votes, the NDP and Greens will prop them up, to deny the conservatives a chance to govern.

More-so, the NDP or Greens, would use this capability to their advantage, and force concessions from the Liberals on the environmental agenda and other socialist policies. We’ve seen this before, so it’s a valid concern.

I understand this tactic could embolden past supporters of those parties to stick with them, in the hopes that this situation could arise. If it did, they would exert far more power as a ‘king maker’ than their few votes ever could under normal circumstances.

This whole scenario I find truly disturbing. Not just due to the thought of ever expanding socialist policies introduced into our lives through government, but the fact that the voters have no say or input in such coalitions.

This flaw in our system of government, where parties are given such sweeping powers should never be allowed to happen. Additionally, the leadership of the nation is something that all of us should be able to directly participate in.

Perhaps the electing of a Prime Minister or Premier should be a separate vote. Those running for such leadership positions would have assembled their leadership team in advance, and created their platform. This would give us the opportunity to scrutinize our options for entire leadership teams.

They would have the opportunity to select the people they considered the best and brightest to support their platform and achieve the goals they have laid out. That leadership group would then run collectively as a team, and upon winning take that role.

There would be no more opportunity for a coalition government to be formed, because that power would no longer reside with the leaders of each of the political parties, but with the people alone. Anyone losing the leadership contest would be out completely, and unable to negotiate a power sharing deal.

The platform that the leadership team ran on would influence each individual MP/MLA, but it wouldn’t mean they are whipped, and have no voice as is sometimes the case. The leadership would now have to ensure they could count on the support of those representatives, and couldn’t take them for granted.

It seems to me that much of the political power in our Canadian systems, remains in the hands of very few. The voters have some say, but not enough.

Power is held by those who jealously guard it and do not wish to see it reduced. We should look at every possibility to put more power in the hands of the people, and have as much decision making done as close to the source of the issue at hand.

There are many examples to look at the world over. Systems that have decades of use, and we can learn from others successes and mistakes.

No matter what alternative solutions are presented to us in the future; I believe it is imperative that political power should be decentralized, as much as possible.

Related Topics:

Norm Wiebe is a local Financial Advisor and political policy enthusiast. He and his wife Lera, live in Red Deer with their two children. Norm uses facebook to promote ideas, so look for him there. https://www.facebook.com/norman.wiebe

Follow Author

More from this author
Alberta / 5 years ago

This former soldier chooses patriotism ‘and’ independence

Opinion / 5 years ago

A Future of Possibilities is on the Horizon

Alberta / 5 years ago

The Day After

Addictions

Ontario to restrict Canadian government’s supervised drug sites, shift focus to helping addicts

Published on November 21, 2024

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Doug Ford’s Progressive Conservative government tabled the Safer Streets, Stronger Communities Act that will place into law specific bans on where such drug consumption sites are located.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford is making good on a promise to close so-called drug “supervision” sites in his province and says his government will focus on helping addicts get better instead of giving them free drugs.

Ford’s Progressive Conservative government on Monday tabled the Safer Streets, Stronger Communities Act that will place into law specific bans on where such drug consumption sites are located.

Specifically, the new bill will ban “supervised” drug consumption sites from being close to schools or childcare centers. Ten sites will close for now, including five in Toronto.

The new law would prohibit the “establishment and operation of a supervised consumption site at a location that is less than 200 meters from certain types of schools, private schools, childcare centers, Early child and family centers and such other premises as may be prescribed by the regulations.”

It would also in effect ban municipalities and local boards from applying for an “exemption from the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (Canada) for the purpose of decriminalizing the personal possession of a controlled substance or precursor.”

Lastly, the new law would put strict “limits” on the power municipalities and local boards have concerning “applications respecting supervised consumption sites and safer supply services.”

“Municipalities and local boards may only make such applications or support such applications if they have obtained the approval of the provincial Minister of Health,” the bill reads.

The new bill is part of a larger omnibus bill that makes changes relating to sex offenders as well as auto theft, which has exploded in the province in recent months.

In September, Ford had called the federal government’s lax drug policies tantamount to being the “biggest drug dealer in the entire country” and had vowed to act.

In speaking about the new bill, Ontario Minister of Health Sylvia Jones said the Ford government does not plan to allow municipal requests to the government regarding supervised consumption sites.

“Municipalities and organizations like public health units have to first come to the province because we don’t want them bypassing and getting any federal approval for something that we vehemently disagree with,” Jones told the media on Monday.

She also clarified that “there will be no further safe injection sites in the province of Ontario under our government.”

Ontario will instead create 19 new intensive addiction recovery to help those addicted to deadly drugs.

Alberta and other provinces have had success helping addicts instead of giving them free drugs.

As reported by LifeSiteNews, deaths related to opioid and other drug overdoses in Alberta fell to their lowest levels in years after the Conservative government began to focus on helping addicts via a recovery-based approach instead of the Liberal-minded, so-called “safe-supply” method.

Despite public backlash with respect to supervised drug consumption sites, Health Canada recently approved 16 more drug consumption sites in Ontario. Ford mentioned in the press conference that each day he gets “endless phone calls about needles being in the parks, needles being by the schools and the daycares,” calling the situation “unacceptable.”

The Liberals claim their “safer supply” program is good because it is “providing prescribed medications as a safer alternative to the toxic illegal drug supply to people who are at high risk of overdose.”

However, studies have shown that these programs often lead an excess of deaths from overdose in areas where they are allowed.

While many of the government’s lax drug policies continue, they have been forced to backpedal on some of their most extreme actions.

After the federal government allowed British Columbia to decriminalize the possession of hard drugs including heroin, cocaine, fentanyl, meth and MDMA beginning January 1, 2023, reports of overdoses and chaos began skyrocketing, leading the province to request that Trudeau re-criminalize drugs in public spaces.

A week later, the federal government relented and accepted British Columbia’s request.

Continue Reading

Alberta

Alberta’s fiscal update projects budget surplus, but fiscal fortunes could quickly turn

Published on November 21, 2024

By

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill

According to the recent mid-year update tabled Thursday, the Smith government projects a $4.6 billion surplus in 2024/25, up from the $2.9 billion surplus projected just a few months ago. Despite the good news, Premier Smith must reduce spending to avoid budget deficits.

The fiscal update projects resource revenue of $20.3 billion in 2024/25. Today’s relatively high—but very volatile—resource revenue (including oil and gas royalties) is helping finance today’s spending and maintain a balanced budget. But it will not last forever.

For perspective, in just the last decade the Alberta government’s annual resource revenue has been as low as $2.8 billion (2015/16) and as high as $25.2 billion (2022/23).

And while the resource revenue rollercoaster is currently in Alberta’s favor, Finance Minister Nate Horner acknowledges that “risks are on the rise” as oil prices have dropped considerably and forecasters are projecting downward pressure on prices—all of which impacts resource revenue.

In fact, the government’s own estimates show a $1 change in oil prices results in an estimated $630 million revenue swing. So while the Smith government plans to maintain a surplus in 2024/25, a small change in oil prices could quickly plunge Alberta back into deficit. Premier Smith has warned that her government may fall into a budget deficit this fiscal year.

This should come as no surprise. Alberta’s been on the resource revenue rollercoaster for decades. Successive governments have increased spending during the good times of high resource revenue, but failed to rein in spending when resource revenues fell.

Previous research has shown that, in Alberta, a $1 increase in resource revenue is associated with an estimated 56-cent increase in program spending the following fiscal year (on a per-person, inflation-adjusted basis). However, a decline in resource revenue is not similarly associated with a reduction in program spending. This pattern has led to historically high levels of government spending—and budget deficits—even in more recent years.

Consider this: If this fiscal year the Smith government received an average level of resource revenue (based on levels over the last 10 years), it would receive approximately $13,000 per Albertan. Yet the government plans to spend nearly $15,000 per Albertan this fiscal year (after adjusting for inflation). That’s a huge gap of roughly $2,000—and it means the government is continuing to take big risks with the provincial budget.

Of course, if the government falls back into deficit there are implications for everyday Albertans.

When the government runs a deficit, it accumulates debt, which Albertans must pay to service. In 2024/25, the government’s debt interest payments will cost each Albertan nearly $650. That’s largely because, despite running surpluses over the last few years, Albertans are still paying for debt accumulated during the most recent string of deficits from 2008/09 to 2020/21 (excluding 2014/15), which only ended when the government enjoyed an unexpected windfall in resource revenue in 2021/22.

According to Thursday’s mid-year fiscal update, Alberta’s finances continue to be at risk. To avoid deficits, the Smith government should meaningfully reduce spending so that it’s aligned with more reliable, stable levels of revenue.

Author:

Tegan Hill
Continue Reading

Trending

X