Alberta
The Most Expensive Campaign Promise Ever – Explainer

This article was submitted by Peter McCaffrey, President 0f the Alberta Institute
Over the coming weeks, I’ll be analyzing some of the big policy announcements that the major parties in the Alberta election make.
So, today, we’re going to kick things off with a look at an issue that made headlines yesterday – electricity policy.
I know, I can almost see your eyes glaze over through your webcam, but bear with me – this is important!
Last March, Justin Trudeau announced the release of the federal government’s “2030 Emissions Reduction Plan: Canada’s Next Steps for Clean Air and a Strong Economy”.
Who could be opposed to Clean Air and a Strong Economy, right?
The devil, as always, was in the details and, in this case, the details are called the “Clean Electricity Regulations”.
The federal government has been talking for some time about “transitioning” Canada’s entire electricity sector to being “net-zero” (ie: no net carbon emissions) by 2050.
The “Clean Electricity Regulations”, though, are the federal government’s plan to speed up this transition and require the provinces to have net-zero electricity grids by 2035 instead.
Now, for some provinces, that won’t actually be too challenging, as they already generate the vast majority of their electricity from Hydro.
But for Alberta (and Saskatchewan), it will be practically impossible – and insanely expensive.
That hasn’t stopped Rachel Notley and the NDP from promising to follow the federal government’s lead and do it, though.
So, let’s take a deep dive into exactly why this policy could be so harmful to Alberta.
First, in Alberta, about 85% of electricity on the commercial market comes from non-renewable resources.
That means that, in order to achieve net-zero here, we’d have to rebuild almost literally the entirety of our electricity market in the next 12 years.
If that sounds expensive to you – you’d be right!
In July 2020, when the federal government first started floating this idea, the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) wrote a report that calculated that transitioning Alberta to a net-zero electricity grid by 2035 would cost $52 billion in additional capital investments and generation operating costs.
Yes, you read that right – $52 billion.
And, to be clear, that $52 billion isn’t the entire price of transitioning to net-zero – that would be much more – the $52 billion is just the extra price of doing it faster, by 2035 instead of 2050!
Next, fast forward to yesterday, and a new report was been released that assesses those direct capital and infrastructure costs calculated by AESO, and works out what the additional indirect economic harm to Alberta would be of being forced to make this rapid transition.
This new report was written by a group called Navius, who are traditionally seen as a left-leaning environmental economic research group, and even they say that the indirect impacts to Alberta’s economy will be enormous – $35 billion – and that’s before they even account for inflation.
So, now, thanks to these two reports, we know exactly what the federal government’s 2035 net-zero electricity grid plan will cost Alberta.
$52 billion in direct costs to upgrade and build infrastructure, plus at least $35 billion in indirect economic costs, for a total of at least $87 billion.
And, as I mentioned before, Rachel Notley and the NDP are fully on board.
They aren’t advertising their support, of course.
Just like with the carbon tax in 2015, they aren’t campaigning on this policy, and they haven’t mentioned it on their website or included it in their campaign material.
But, at a private NDP event last year and in a few occasional tweets, Rachel Notley has confirmed that the NDP is committed to this idea.
And, just like in 2015 with the carbon tax, they’re hoping Albertans won’t notice until after the election.
Let’s be clear, though – a policy of implementing a net-zero electricity grid by 2035 makes the carbon tax look like a bargain by comparison.
The carbon tax costs Albertans about $2 billion.
Don’t get me wrong, that’s a huge amount of money.
But $87 billion (or more) over just 12 years is more than $7 billion a year.
I really worry that people don’t understand just how much money we’re talking about here.
It’s an absolutely insane amount.
Let’s try to put it into scale…
$87 billion is more than the entire Alberta government budget ($63 billion).
$87 billion is 48 times the cost of the Red Deer Hospital.
$87 billion is 290 times as much as the province’s “controversial” Calgary arena investment.
$87 billion would pay for the salaries of every single nurse in Alberta for 70 years.
One more… just for fun…
$87 billion would buy a Tesla Model 3 for literally every household in the province.
Yes, seriously – you get a Tesla, you get a Tesla, everyone gets a Tesla!
This is honestly such an insane amount of money that I’m genuinely not even sure that the NDP realizes exactly what they’ve committed to here.
“Never has a politician committed to a policy that would cost this much to implement. This is not only unrealistic, but it is dangerous to the long-term health and viability of our economy,” said UCP Candidate Brian Jean.
It is the single biggest election promise in Alberta history, and it’s not even close.
Thankfully, here at the Alberta Institute, our team is working hard to assess and analyze campaign promises to make sure that you have the facts at your fingertips, and that you’re fully aware of just how much our politician’s promises are going to cost you.
I’d love to be able to bring you more of this type of analysis, so if you support our work, please help us continue to provide you with the level of in-depth policy research by making a donation to support our work:
The Alberta Institute is an independent, libertarian, public policy think tank that aims to advance personal freedom and choice in Alberta.
Founded in 2018, we work to develop and promote solutions to a wide range of municipal, provincial, and federal public policy issues in a strictly non-partisan way.
Our solutions are informed by our belief in a free and open society built on individual rights, private property, peace, voluntaryism, free markets, free minds, free trade, free movement, self-ownership, and reason.
We promote these beliefs through a wide variety of activities and actions, including research, data analysis, publications, newsletters, advocacy, events, conferences, and more.
Independence:
The Alberta Institute’s work is funded by thousands of small-dollar donors from across Alberta who believe in – and wish to support – our mission.
We don’t accept any government funding – and we never will – because we think Albertans should be free to choose, for themselves, which organizations to support.
The donations we receive from our supporters allow us to hire dedicated research staff and volunteer coordinators, publish and promote our findings, host events to help get the message out and connect with the community, offer internships and other opportunities to young Albertans, and much more.
We also depend on our grassroots volunteers, spread across nearly every community in the Province, to help with our mission of advancing personal freedom and choice across Alberta.
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.”
-
Business2 days ago
Carney pivots from anti American campaign, embracing US and hailing Trump as “transformational president”
-
Daily Caller2 days ago
Misguided Climate Policies Create ‘Real Energy Emergency’ And Permit China To Dominate US
-
International1 day ago
Ice Surprises – Arctic and Antarctic Ice Sheets Are Stabilizing and Growing
-
Business2 days ago
Reality check—Canadians are not getting an income tax cut
-
Alberta2 days ago
Bonnyville RCMP targeted by suspect driving a trackhoe – Update
-
Alberta1 day ago
Energy projects occupy less than three per cent of Alberta’s oil sands region, report says
-
Energy2 days ago
Carney’s energy superpower rhetoric falls flat without policy certainty
-
Energy1 day ago
Oil tankers in Vancouver are loading plenty, but they can load even more