Connect with us

News

Veer, Notley & Dreeshen React To Trump Victory In U.S. Election

Published

8 years ago

5 minute read

dreeshenearl_cpcrachel-notleymayor-tara-veer-outdoors-2014-598x400

By Sheldon Spackman

Well it actually came true. Donald Trump is now President-Elect of the United States and will be America’s 45th President.

The celebrity businessman, reality T.V. star and one of the most politically incorrect politicians in history, surprised many by winning the 2016 U.S. Election over Democrat rival Hillary Clinton, 276 electoral votes to 218.

Global stock markets and U.S. stock futures initially plunged on the news, reflecting investor concern over what a Trump presidency might mean for the economy and trade. Trump has vowed to repeal Barack Obama’s landmark health care law, revoke America’s nuclear agreement with Iran and rewrite important trade deals with other countries, particularly Mexico and Canada.

It now remains to be seen exactly how the Trump Presidency will affect Canada but uncertainty and a wait and see attitude will likely be the norm until further developments unfold.

Red Deer – Mountainview Conservative M.P. Earl Dreeshen was in the U.S. during the election to observe and learn more about the electoral system in the United States. He says considering how decentralized the system is, it still works amazingly well to tabulate all of those votes in such a short period of time.

As for the Trump victory, Dreeshen says perhaps American politicians have misjudged the realities of the U.S. working class. However, he adds that Canada now has to “remain positive and continue to be a strong partner with the U.S., while working hard to maintain the relationship between the two countries.” Dreeshen says “we have to respect the U.S. voters decision and as a Conservative Party opposition, put pressure on the Canadian Government to ensure that security and economic growth are priorities moving forward.”

Premier Rachel Notley offered this statement to the media regarding Trump’s victory:

“I would like to extend the congratulations of the people of Alberta to President-elect Donald Trump for his victory last night.

“The United States is Alberta’s most significant energy market. We will be working closely with our energy industry to see if new opportunities to grow that relationship now lie before us under a new U.S. Administration.

“It is also true that the U.S. is now an energy exporter as well as a market for energy. Therefore we must continue to work to diversity Canada’s energy markets, and to build trading relationships with more than one buyer. For that reason, a Canadian pipeline to tidewater remains an important priority for Alberta.

“It also makes sense – in Canada and all around the world – to act on climate change, to phase out coal pollution, and to phase in clean renewable energy. The Government of Alberta is going to continue with our climate change leadership plan, including our program to assist trade-exposed industries.

“Finally, we will work closely with the Government of Canada and with other provinces to defend Canadian interests during any review of our trading arrangements with the United States, including any review or renegotiation of NAFTA.

“Let me conclude by saying that Secretary Hillary Clinton’s historic candidacy for the U.S. Presidency inspired women and girls all around the world. Old barriers are coming down. But much still remains to be done, to grow and improve the role, rights and opportunities for women and minorities in a more equal and inclusive society.

“And that work will continue to be a priority for our government here in Alberta.”

Red Deer Mayor Tara Veer says from a City standpoint, they will be closely watching the Trump government’s public policies and the possible impacts they could have on Red Deer, the Province of Alberta and ultimately all of Canada. Adding, “we will take a wait and see mode and reserve any judgement until we see how relations between the two countries evolve with Trump as President, specifically in regards to trade negotiations and economic development.”

You can click here to watch Donald Trump’s Victory speech:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owuq_An4cnk

Hillary Clinton shared these thoughts on Wednesday:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSPBjOnHTaM

(Photo courtesy of the Associated Press)

Related Topics:

Follow Author

More from this author
Business / 10 mins ago

Broken ‘equalization’ program bad for all provinces

Addictions / 2 hours ago

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

Alberta / 5 hours ago

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

Business

Broken ‘equalization’ program bad for all provinces

Published on November 21, 2024

By

From the Fraser Institute

By Alex Whalen  and Tegan Hill

Back in the summer at a meeting in Halifax, several provincial premiers discussed a lawsuit meant to force the federal government to make changes to Canada’s equalization program. The suit—filed by Newfoundland and Labrador and backed by British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Alberta—effectively argues that the current formula isn’t fair. But while the question of “fairness” can be subjective, its clear the equalization program is broken.

In theory, the program equalizes the ability of provinces to deliver reasonably comparable services at a reasonably comparable level of taxation. Any province’s ability to pay is based on its “fiscal capacity”—that is, its ability to raise revenue.

This year, equalization payments will total a projected $25.3 billion with all provinces except B.C., Alberta and Saskatchewan to receive some money. Whether due to higher incomes, higher employment or other factors, these three provinces have a greater ability to collect government revenue so they will not receive equalization.

However, contrary to the intent of the program, as recently as 2021, equalization program costs increased despite a decline in the fiscal capacity of oil-producing provinces such as Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Newfoundland and Labrador. In other words, the fiscal capacity gap among provinces was shrinking, yet recipient provinces still received a larger equalization payment.

Why? Because a “fixed-growth rule,” introduced by the Harper government in 2009, ensures that payments grow roughly in line with the economy—even if the gap between richer and poorer provinces shrinks. The result? Total equalization payments (before adjusting for inflation) increased by 19 per cent between 2015/16 and 2020/21 despite the gap in fiscal capacities between provinces shrinking during this time.

Moreover, the structure of the equalization program is also causing problems, even for recipient provinces, because it generates strong disincentives to natural resource development and the resulting economic growth because the program “claws back” equalization dollars when provinces raise revenue from natural resource development. Despite some changes to reduce this problem, one study estimated that a recipient province wishing to increase its natural resource revenues by a modest 10 per cent could face up to a 97 per cent claw back in equalization payments.

Put simply, provinces that generally do not receive equalization such as Alberta, B.C. and Saskatchewan have been punished for developing their resources, whereas recipient provinces such as Quebec and in the Maritimes have been rewarded for not developing theirs.

Finally, the current program design also encourages recipient provinces to maintain high personal and business income tax rates. While higher tax rates can reduce the incentive to work, invest and be productive, they also raise the national standard average tax rate, which is used in the equalization allocation formula. Therefore, provinces are incentivized to maintain high and economically damaging tax rates to maximize equalization payments.

Unless premiers push for reforms that will improve economic incentives and contain program costs, all provinces—recipient and non-recipient—will suffer the consequences.

Authors:

Alex Whalen  and Tegan Hill
Continue Reading

National

Liberals, NDP admit closed-door meetings took place in attempt to delay Canada’s next election

Published on November 12, 2024

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Pushing back the date would preserve the pensions of some of the MPs who could be voted out of office in October 2025.

Aides to the cabinet of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau confirmed that MPs from the Liberal and New Democratic Party (NDP) did indeed hold closed-door “briefings” to rewrite Canada’s elections laws so that they could push back the date of the next election.

The closed-door talks between the NDP and Liberals confirmed the aides included a revision that would guarantee some of its 28 MPs, including three of Trudeau’s cabinet members, would get a pension.

Allen Sutherland, who serves as the assistant cabinet secretary, testified before the House of Commons affairs committee that the changes to the Elections Act were discussed in the meetings.

“We attended a meeting where the substance of that proposal was discussed,” he said, adding that his “understanding is the briefing was primarily oral.”

According to Sutherland, as reported by Blacklock’s Reporter, it was only NDP and Liberal MPs who attended the secret meetings regarding changes to Canada’s Elections Act via Bill C-65, An Act to Amend the Canada Elections Act before the bill was introduced in March.

As reported by LifeSiteNews before, the Liberals were hoping to delay the 2025 federal election by a few days in what many see as a stunt to secure pensions for MPs who are projected to lose their seats. Approximately 80 MPs would qualify for pensions should they sit as MPs until at least October 27, 2025, which is the newly proposed election date. The election date is currently set for October 20, 2025.

Sutherland noted when asked by Conservative MP Luc Berthold that he recalled little from the meetings, but he did confirm he attended “two meetings of that kind.”

“Didn’t you find it unusual that a discussion about amending the Elections Act included only two political parties and excluded the others?” Berthold asked.

Sutherland responded, “It’s important to understand what my role was in those meetings which was simply to provide background information.”

“My role was to provide information,” replied Sutherland, who added he could not provide the exact dates of the meetings.

MPs must serve at least six years to qualify for a pension that pays $77,900 a year. Should an election be called today, many MPs would fall short of reaching the six years, hence Bill C-65 was introduced by the Liberals and NDP.

The Liberals have claimed that pushing back the next election date is not over pensions but due to “trying to observe religious holidays,” as noted by Liberal MP Mark Gerretsen.

“Conservatives voted against this bill,” Berthold said, as they are “confident of winning re-election. We don’t need this change.”

Trudeau’s popularity is at a all-time low, but he has refused to step down as PM, call an early election, or even step aside as Liberal Party leader.

As for the amendments to elections laws, they come after months of polling in favour of the Conservative Party under the leadership of Pierre Poilievre.

A recent poll found that 70 percent of Canadians believe the country is “broken” as Trudeau focuses on less critical issues. Similarly, in January, most Canadians reported that they are worse off financially since Trudeau took office.

Additionally, a January poll showed that 46 percent of Canadians expressed a desire for the federal election to take place sooner rather than the latest mandated date in the fall of 2025.

Continue Reading

Trending

X