Alberta
Trudeau is punishing Albertans this Autumn

From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation
Author: Kris Sims
The colder weather is here. Albertans are making dinners and heating our homes against the chill this Autumn.
Nourishing and normal things, such as preparing a holiday meal and staying warm, are now financially punishable offenses.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s two carbon taxes make driving to work, buying food and heating our homes cost much more.
As one of the Trudeau government consultants that drafted the legislation stated, the carbon tax is meant to “punish the poor behaviour of using fossil fuels.”
The first carbon tax adds 14 cents per litre of gasoline and 17 cents per litre of diesel. This costs about $10 extra to fill up a minivan and about $16 extra to fill up a pickup truck.
The carbon tax on diesel costs truckers about $160 extra to fill up the tanks on big-rig trucks.
The second carbon tax is a government fuel regulation that fines companies for the carbon in fuels. Those costs are passed down to drivers at the pump.
Trudeau fashioned his second carbon after British Columbia’s. B.C. drivers have been paying two carbon taxes for years, and it’s a key reason why they pay the highest fuel prices in North America, usually hovering at about $2 per litre. Trudeau wants to make Vancouver gas prices as commonly Canadian as maple syrup.
Trudeau imposed his second carbon tax this Canada Day. It’s not clear yet how much the second carbon tax costs for a litre of gasoline and diesel in Alberta. In Atlantic Canada, the second carbon tax tacks an extra four to eight cents per litre of fuel.
That big tax bill is only getting bigger because Trudeau is cranking up his carbon tax every year for the next seven years.
By 2030, Trudeau’s two carbon taxes will cost an extra 55 cents per litre of gasoline and 77 cents per litre of diesel, plus GST. Filling up a big rig truck with diesel will cost about $760 extra.
In seven years, average Albertans will pay more than $3,300 per year because of Trudeau’s two carbon taxes even after rebates.
Ordinary people pay Trudeau’s carbon taxes every day. So do truckers. So do farmers.
Remember the Thanksgiving turkey? Turkeys eat grain which is hit by the carbon tax when it goes through the grain dryer. Turkeys are raised in heated barns, which is carbon taxed, and the trucks hauling them from the slaughterhouse to the grocery store get carbon taxed, too. That’s how the carbon tax makes food cost more.
The Parliamentary Budget Officer reports the carbon tax will cost Canadians farmers close to $1 billion by 2030.
But it’s not just transportation and food that gets hit with the Trudeau’s carbon tax.
Home heating is punished too. The current carbon tax costs 12 cents extra per cubic metre of natural gas, 10 cents extra per litre of propane and 17 cents extra per litre of furnace oil.
An average Alberta home uses about 2,800 cubic metres of natural gas per year, so the carbon tax will cost them about $337 extra to heat their home. Costs are similar for propane and furnace oil.
Home heating is essential for a place like Alberta.
Punishing Canadians with a carbon tax is pointless and unfair.
It’s pointless because the carbon tax won’t fix climate change. As the PBO has noted, “Canada’s own emissions are not large enough to materially impact climate change.”
It’s unfair because ordinary people who are driving to work, buying food for their families and heating their homes are backed into a corner. Carbon tax cheerleaders tell them to “switch.”
Switch to what?
What abundant, reliable, affordable alternative energy source is available to Albertans? This isn’t like choosing between paper or plastic bags, this is about surviving the winter and affording food, or not.
Albertans should not be punished for staying warm and feeding our families.
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
Carney’s energy superpower rhetoric falls flat without policy certainty
-
Energy2 days ago
Oil tankers in Vancouver are loading plenty, but they can load even more
-
2025 Federal Election2 days 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 Election2 days ago
Carney says Liberals won’t make voting pact with NDP
-
Autism1 day ago
NIH, CMS partner on autism research