Honest Conservative is an Oxymoron in Canada

 Way back in the 90s, Preston Manning admonished Reform party candidates as follows:  "Don't tell voters what you really believe, get yourself elected first" (this is a paraphrase).  That has become a mantra among conservatives since then.  

Federally, the CPC under Harper had a significant "values" caucus (read: social/religious conservatives) who badly wanted to legislate against abortion, gay rights, and women's rights.  Harper would throw them the odd bit of "red meat" - allowing a private member's bill to move along for a while - until it became apparent that if it actually got passed, the political price would be too high.  Policy books were carefully curated, and unless you had a good eye for "dog whistle" language, most people would assume that the CPC was less radical than it actually was.  Since Harper's departure in 2015, that mask has dropped, and the radicalized wing of the party has become increasingly powerful.  

Provincially, the picture is similar across the country, with some truly egregious examples emerging in the western provinces.  In Alberta, the UCP has undergone two internal coups, resulting in a party that has become increasingly radical and is legislating in a manner completely at odds with the platform they ran on in 2023.  Nobody in 2023 thought they were electing a party that would spend political capital on attacking minority rights and separatism, yet here we are.  Smith to this day denies that the party is in fact a separatist party.  

Then we come to B.C., and the crumbling edifice of a "unified" conservatism under the BC Conservative banner.  Two years ago, John Rustad led the BC Conservatives to a hair's breadth of attaining power.  When he booted Dallas Brodie from caucus for comments that most people would describe as racist, that led to the formation of OneBC, and put his leadership under threat from factions of the party who apparently felt he wasn't "conservative enough".  Eventually that led to his ouster and replacement by Kerry-Lynne Findlay after a lengthy and bitter leadership fight. 

Findlay set about engaging in one of the most blatant purity purges any conservative party has ever witnessed, resulting in the collapse of her leadership in a record setting 112 days.  This isn't an accident, and it isn't an aberration - it is exactly what you would expect when a party is made up of factions that simply don't see eye to eye on much.  Sooner or later, the most radicalized faction will agitate and organize to seize control. 

Which leads us to yesterday's revelation that the B.C. Conservatives are "in talks" with OneBC.  Now, in itself, this is not surprising - parties often discuss what they might do in scenarios where together they might be able to seize power from a rival either through cooperation or even merger.  

However, B.C. Conservative leader Lorne Doerksen made the following statement which I can only describe as ominous in the context:  

Asked about the discussions Tuesday, Doerkson said there had been “nothing formal,” while reiterating his party’s commitment to embracing conservative values.

“That’s not up for conversation,” Doerkson said at the time. “We will bring conservative values, for certain, to the people of British Columbia.” (emphasis added) 

What precisely does "conservative values" mean here?  OneBC is, to put it kindly, on the extreme end of social conservatism, with distinctly racist, anti-2SLGBTQ policies permeating the party's policies.  Lorne Doerksen's own comments should make anyone who isn't themselves a social conservative incredibly nervous: 

I was supportive of the LGBTQ community. Always have been and always will be.

SOGI [Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity education resources] has been a lightning rod for division in this province. I think that SOGI has to be removed.

and ...  

I've had friends that attended residential schools, and I have heard many stories from people that have survived those schools.

I'm absolutely supportive of our First Nations in this province.

If there has been a crime committed, then there needs to be an absolute, formal, deep investigation into what has happened here because I think all Canadians need to understand that better so that we can move forward on a better path

So, in short, anti-2SLGBTQ (because let's be honest, anyone who is bitching about SOGI is doing so because it includes that community and that gives them the squickies), and nothing like a little "soft residential school denialism" to show us the underlying racism.  Does Mr. Doerksen not recall the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and its final report?  We've had that investigation already.

Now we have the BC Conservatives playing footsie with OneBC?  That should make anyone nervous - because OneBC was formed out of "the BC Conservatives weren't radical enough for us" thinking.  

I'm not going to claim that the MLAs who left caucus under Findlay are the "reasonable ones" - I think they are the ones who were targeted by Findlay's purge for one reason or another, or they saw the political fallout of staying with Findlay on the wall and decided it would be better for their future prospects to depart.

Prior to the collapse of her leadership in September, there were already rumours of OneBC being invited to return to the BC Conservatives ... largely because KLF was already aligned with OneBC - and she was making that clear. 

Doerksen is trying to play "the reasonable one" here, while tacitly signalling to the hardliners that he's on their side.  That's the whole problem - conservatism in Canada is not a singular movement with a coherent set of beliefs.  It is a collection of groups, all with distinctly different beliefs and values fighting for control over the "blue flag".  The claim that there is "something in common" is a fantasy - the goal is power, and "leaders" emerge who will do everything they can to cobble together some kind of "alliance", only to have it fall apart in real time as they discover how radicalized some of the participants really are. 

I've watched this script play out so many times since the 1990s that the first question I ask when someone tells me that they are "a conservative" is "which faction do you follow?".  The least honest are always the ones with the most unelectable ideas. 

Calgary-Shaw By-Election: Don't Get Too Confident

 First, congratulations to newly-elected MLA Kyle Campbell.  The win was decisive enough to not need a judicial recount, and to some degree sent a message to the United Conservative Party (UCP).  

This is not the overwhelming victory that it should have been.  Voters did not turn out in large numbers, and while a 500 vote margin is large enough to avoid a judicial recount, it's not anywhere near what should have been the case if people were actually paying attention to what is going on in Alberta politics. 

You can fully expect the UCP to argue a few things here: 

1. It's a by-election, and the turnout is so low as to really mean it was just angry NDPers who came out in numbers.
2. The vote was "split" because the Progressive Tory Party (PTP) garnered nearly 1,000 votes - stealing victory from the UCP

It's the latter argument that is more insidious because it presupposes that the existence of the PTP is invalid, and they should all be part of the UCP.  They will use this to attempt to undermine the PTP between now and next election. 

The logic will be something along the lines of "voting for the UCP will ensure the continuance of the conservative dominion over Alberta", and that "voting for the PTP is essentially voting for the NDP, and we cannot have the NDP in power ever again".  

Unite The Right Logic

The error in that logic is the supposition that conservatism is somehow a monolith.  In reality, as we are seeing in both BC and Federally, the language of "unite the right" is really a code phrase for a "takeover from within" of a party by its most radicalized socially conservative fringe groups.  

Federally, it's been a long, slow burn with the Conservative Party of Canada (CPC).  The "unite the right" campaign began in the late 1990s and culminated in the merger of the Reform Alliance and Progressive Conservative parties under Stephen Harper's control.  I say control because while Harper was leader of the CPC, he was very careful to keep the social conservative wing carefully constrained so that the public wouldn't freak out at some of their more radical policies.  Since Harper stepped aside after losing the Federal Election in 2015, we have seen the CPC move ever further right, with increasingly radical socially-conservative policies become part of the policy book at each convention, and leaders that seem more willing than Harper to adopt those policies themselves.   That's a long burn - 25 years - but it was only that long because of Harper's tenure at the helm - had a leader with less focus on power been in charge, I would probably have been writing this kind of argument by 2015. 

The BC Conservatives have been speed running this same script.  The BC Conservatives ejected Rustad after the party narrowly lost the 2024 election.  The first half of 2026 was a leadership campaign which ultimately led to the election of Kerry-Lynne Findlay - who has made it very clear she is aligned with the more radicalized socially conservative wing of the party.  Rustad was already aligned, although somewhat more careful about what he said, Findlay is far more direct about it.  The BC Conservatives went from at least seemingly mainstream to radicalized in less than a year.  Since becoming leader, 9 MLAs have departed the BC Conservative caucus.  

The UCP suffers from a similar problem, with internal coups having resulted in the party going from "newly united" to radicalized in less than 10 years.  COVID no doubt played a role in that, but it's not hard to look at the party as it was in 2017 and what it looks like now and see that Danielle Smith is clearly beholden to a small, but organized and vocal group of radicals.  

In short, the "united front" of conservatives is not really what it claims to be.  It's a front for the movement's most extreme beliefs to take precedence.  

Upcoming Electoral Moments In Alberta

The Referendums

In just over a month, Alberta voters will vote in a series of 10 referendum questions - all of which are basically separatist propaganda questions.  If current polling is any indication, these questions should all go down to a pretty nasty defeat.  Of course, that supposes that a significant percentage of eligible voters actually vote.  It is not clear to me at all that will be the case.  

I fully expect Smith to ignore the results of the referendum and simply forge ahead with next steps.  Not because she has any mandate to do so, but because her career depends on that happening.

2027 Election

Next year's election is another matter entirely.  First, this fall is when Smith's second "Electoral District Commission" will release its revised electoral map.  Expect this to contain a significant amount of "gerrymandering" in the form of ridings on the edges of major urban centres being carved into "rurban ridings", and ridings where the UCP sees themselves at risk being creatively rearranged so that they are absorbed into safer ridings.  

Additionally, the UCP will probably step up its campaign against both the PTP and the NDP. 

Closing Thoughts 

The upshot here is that while the by-election in Calgary-Shaw is a definite win for people who are angry with the UCP, we need to recognize that we are not dealing with a party that cares one whit about "democratic mandates", and will push through whatever it feels like.  

Opponents of the UCP and the separatist movement in Alberta need to continue to organize and get their message out there.  Not just during campaign periods.  

Journalists Missing The Picture

I woke up this morning to CBC's Jason Markusoff and The Toronto Star's Richard Warnica talking about Alberta separatism on the Front Burner podcast.  As I listened to the discussion, I found myself getting increasingly angry at the fact that neither of the two speakers seemed to have a clue what is really going on, and were "puzzled" by the apparent lack of a full throated federalist campaign against the separatists.

There is an answer here, and it's not the one you think it is.  If you are expecting a "Federal Prime Minister vs Separatist Premier" grudge match as we've seen in past Quebec referendums, you're misunderstanding the picture on the ground in Alberta. 

The Formation of The UCP Sowed The Seeds of Its Failure

When Jason Kenney created the UCP he set up the preconditions for the party to get to where it is today, and its eventual demise.  What do I mean by this?  Kenney may have believed that he could control the extreme elements in the UCP in much the same way that Harper did so as leader of the CPC. 

Harper allowed the extremist factions in the CPC to exist and even to have something of a voice in the party, but at the moment that a given push looked like it would have a political cost for him, he would shut it down.  This was done through a combination of tools - Harper exercised considerable personal control over the party apparatus.  That meant that in large part, if you kept him happy, your career was secure.  The leader's office had the power to quash constituency decisions such as new nominees, and the "public face" of the party was carefully protected.  So, while the extremist wings of the CPC could make a certain level of noise - it was never enough to do more than keep their followers believing the party was aligned with them.  

However, Harper was able to do this because the Federal CPC is a much bigger entity than the UCP in Alberta - and although the Prairie Reform rump of the party clearly dominates it today, the party needs votes from outside the Prairies in order to have any hope of ever forming government.  Harper understood this, and was very careful to keep the extremes in check even though his own leadership depended on them. 

A party of the scale of the UCP is a much different animal, and that's where Kenney's choices failed. 

An Exhausting Week In Alberta Politics

This week has been a whirlwind in politics, especially in Alberta. On Thursday, the Premier of Alberta announced what I can only call a farce of a referendum on separating Alberta from Canada.  Then the next day, Premier Smith started talking about rewriting S35 of The Constitution.  

The referendum question Smith proposes is annoying in its obfuscating language, and I think Albertans should be incredibly angry about it.  The question reads: 

“Should Alberta remain a province of Canada or should the Government of Alberta commence the legal process required under the Canadian Constitution to hold a binding provincial referendum on whether or not Alberta should separate from Canada?”

Reasonably intelligent readers should have already noticed this isn't a "yes/no" kind of question, it's actually two conflicting questions slammed together.  Rumour has it this will be a "select option A or option B" thing on the ballot, but that is still misleading and disingenuous because the second option actively contemplates separation, while simultaneously trying very hard not to look like it does.

Separatists Lose In Court

Alberta's rump of separatists suffered a major setback last week, when a judge overturned the Chief Electoral Officer of Alberta (CEO-A) decision that set the signature gathering process for the "Stay Free Alberta" petition.   If you're interested, the full ruling is here (warning: it's lengthy, and full of legal technical language).

I'm not going to spend a pile of time here dissecting the ruling - while I understand most of what's written in it (I think), a deep dive would be tedious and relatively uninteresting.  At the end of it all, the ruling has the net effect of rendering the entire signature gathering process that has gone on since January this year to be a legal fiction which "never happened".  

How does that work?  Central to the judge's ruling is the declaration that the decision of the CEO-A to grant the petition was "unreasonable", and that the crown had failed to execute any kind of consultation with affected First Nations, therefore the decision itself was quashed.  In doing so, the judge effectively turned the next 4 months of signature gathering into a legal ghost - the paper exists, but the authorization to gather those signatures doesn't and therefore the signatures themselves cannot be considered. 

This is unlikely to be the last we hear of this nonsense though.  

What Exactly Does The Alberta UCP Mean By "Neutrality" In Schools?

 When the Alberta government tabled Bill 25 last week, they made much ado about "bias" in the classroom - complaining that teachers were "telling students what to think", and engaging in "ideology".  Anytime a politician starts yammering on about "those guys are engaging in ideology", you should be suspicious.  When it's a UCP politician, we should absolutely suspect that this is far more insidious.   

Smith Attempting To Rule By Decree

Under Danielle Smith, Alberta is rapidly being transformed into a place where there are no guardrails on the exercise of power.  In this sitting of the legislature, the government has introduced a pile of legislation that in one way or another is a massive attack on everything from basic rights to division of powers in the Constitution. 

Consider the following: 

Bill 18 - "Safeguards for Last Resort Termination of Life Act"

Imposes arbitrary limitations on MAiD by abusing the Health Professions act to impose hard restrictions on practitioners, creating ethical double-binds and imposing "mandatory sanctions" which effectively turn regulators into policing bodies. 

Bill 23 - "Justice Statutes Amendment Act, 2026"

Not only does this once again rewrite the rules for citizen initiatives (what is this - the third go-around for the UCP?), and allows the government to simply sit on, or ignore petitions it doesn't like.  

The bill also includes prohibitions on AI-generated "deepfakes" that go after politicians (fair enough - to a point), but it is so broad that it gives the government the power to go after people for parody and other long held "acceptable use" expression.  This will have a chilling effect on free speech, particularly during elections.

Bill 24 - "An Act to Remove Politics and Ideology from Classrooms and Amend the Education Act, 2026"

Again, this is another censorship bill.  Now the government is going to dictate to teachers what topics they can talk about.  If the government decides that a topic is "too political" (whatever that means), they can order teachers not to talk about it.  We all know what this really is - it's an import of the US "Don't Say Gay" legislation - although it's been broadly written so the UCP can simply write new regulations for anything they decide they don't like.  

Expect it to be used to attack 2SLGBTQ topics first (gotta keep the SoCons happy), followed by abortion, feminism, trade unions, and other subjects that conservatives have come to hate.

Bill 25 - "Immigration Oversight Act"

This is part of the government's attack on immigration.  In this case, it creates impediments to workers moving from other provinces by indirectly imposing controls on the hiring of foreign workers by Alberta companies.

The law is clearly designed to undermine the Federal legislation around immigrant workers, and tries to impose some bizarre "Alberta Standard".  

Over and above that, we have a Premier who seems all too willing to limit the rights of those she "disagrees" with, and willing to move the goalposts for those she favours (e.g. Alberta Separatists).  This isn't an accident. It's intentional, and it's meant to tie things up in the courts for years to come.  

Every piece of legislation I've enumerated here can be challenged on constitutional grounds ranging from unreasonable infringements on rights to breaches of the powers of the province.  The goal is to drive wedges into the bedrock of Canadian law by directly challenging The Constitution and demanding that it be changed to suit her desires.  

If you don't think you've seen this before, I invite you to consider the approach that the GOP has taken for _AT LEAST_ the least 26 years in the United States.  Obstruct everything your political rivals propose, and when you do gain power, do everything you can to polarize things further.  I could make longer ranging arguments here, but I think if you start with GWB's presidency and the approach taken to everything by the GOP then, and roll forward through the GOP's approach to both Obama and Biden, I think the pattern is clear enough.  Smith is engaging in very similar strategies here.

Smith's approach is basically daring the Federal Government to challenge her directly, which she will immediately weaponize by claiming the mean old Feds are trying to strangle Alberta.  It's a lie, and she knows it - but she has the backing of enough of Alberta's idiot class to make it a viable political strategy. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now She Wants To Amend The Constitution

 So, having had her public temper tantrum over appointing judges, Smith now wants to amend the Constitution so that the decision about who gets to sit as a judge is made by her alone. 

To be abundantly clear - painfully so - this is a power grab.  Worse, given Smith's track record, this would ultimately turn out to be nothing less than the politicization of the judiciary.  

She claims that Alberta doesn't have a say in appointing judges to the senior courts in Alberta.  This is false - Alberta very much has a seat at the table, but the political seat at the table is not the controlling seat, and that's what Smith is actually upset about.  

Danielle Smith Just Forced Detransition On Trans Youth In Alberta

Last night, the UCP slammed down the Notwithstanding Clause to bolster its anti-transgender legislation.

I'm not going to spend my time talking about my objections to Bill 9 and Bills 26, 27, and 29.  I've talked about that extensively in this space already.  This is an abuse of power on the part of the UCP, and it is profoundly harmful legislation on many different levels. 

However, I want to bring to your attention the behaviour of the UCP in pushing Bill 9 through the legislature. 

In fairness to the author of the above words, I have anonymized the image as much as possible.  There are two things I want to emphasize because they speak to the intent of the UCP government in passing this legislation:  

First, it is beyond appalling to me that a government passing legislation which arbitrarily revokes rights guaranteed under The Charter cannot even be bothered to be present in the legislature during time allocated to debate.  All but a couple of UCP MLAs left the Chamber until the vote.  At this point, this isn't a debate, it's theatre.  The UCP is at best going through the "procedural motions" (don't get me started on the use of time allocation to limit debate), while it slams through some of the most serious legislation a government can execute.  

Besides scheduling the debate for late night hours when few people are likely to watch, and severely restricting the time available to debate this matter, the government chose to play games with the debate, so that their legislators wouldn't have to hear and process the legitimate discussion of the consequences of their actions.  Albertans should be offended. 

Then, as if to add insult to injury, the government clearly gave instructions to Legislature security personnel to "make sure nothing happened in the public gallery".  This is an act of intimidation, and one that should concern every citizen of Alberta.  The UCP has already shown itself to be shockingly thin-skinned and petty, resorting to retribution when criticized.  To engage the staff of the Legislature in being part of their political theatre and to clearly intimidate members of the public sitting in the gallery during second reading is a sign that Smith and the UCP have no respect for democracy, or the citizens of this province. 

Governments Seizing Powers They Have No Right To

In Alberta recently the UCP government has written a number of laws which undermine the role of the courts as a check on power.  There are several strategies that are being deployed, and all of them ultimately attempt to make it impossible for citizens who are affected by these laws to access any kind of remediation for the harms done by the law. 

There are several strategies in play that we need to talk about.  Some of them I have already talked about in considerable depth here, the others I have not addressed yet, and this post will serve as a jumping off point for thinking about these things.   

The strategies that are being used are: 

1. The Notwithstanding Clause
2. Final Decision Rests With The Minister
3. Self-Indemnification Clauses 

May I Introduce The Phrase "Ultra Vires"?

Alberta plans to invoke its "Sovereign Alberta" legislation as part of "fighting back" against federal firearms legislation that bans firearms that are commonly seen as "military-style".  As the first application of the "Sovereign Alberta in a United Canada" legislation, you can expect to hear a lot about this subject in the coming months.  

I'm not going to opine on the merits of the federal legislation/regulations at issue here.  Gun control and rights around firearms in general are contentious at the best of times, and I think that people who are on either side of the issue already have their opinions and arguments set out.  

This post is going to be about the "Sovereign Alberta" legislation and what it purports to do.

The UCP Is Not A Reasonable Party

 So, Danielle Smith was booed at the UCP annual convention last night.  Why?  Because she signed a deal with Ottawa.  Nobody should be surprised by this - least of all Danielle Smith.  

I'm not going to analyze the "MOU" that was signed in this post - that's a topic for another post when I have some time to digest the implications of that deal.  This is about the UCP and the fundamental nature of the party.  

Formation of the UCP

The UCP is not a "reasonable party", and it was never intended to be. The UCP arose not from the PCs, but from most radicalized wings of the Wildrose Party - the ones who remained after the disastrous floor crossing that Smith and Prentice engineered in 2015.  That was always the foundation group.  Then Kenney spent much of 2016-17 cobbling together an "alliance" of PCs upset that they lost the 2015 election, and a collection of increasingly radicalized groups including known neo-nazi groups, separatists, and the usual assortment of religious extremist groups and so on.  

Now, while I don't count Kenney among the separatist and neo-nazi types, his own background is hardly one of moderation.  He learned to stow his worst instincts in the mill of Ottawa politics, where moderation is an absolute because you won't get very far if you piss off various major factions.  Kenney himself comes straight out of the Prairie Reform movement, and his entry into politics had a lot to do with a stint as an anti-abortion activist in a US college.  He is rumoured to be connected to the hardline Catholic group Opus Dei.  His opposition to gay marriage was vocal and persistent, even after the fight was long lost. 

Naively, Kenney believed that he could do the same thing his buddy Harper had done federally - hold them together with a combination of identity politics and an iron fist.   That fell apart when the COVID pandemic hit, and suddenly the necessities of governing required Kenney to act pragmatically, rather than ideologically.  

Instead of acting decisively on the pandemic, Kenney waffled about attempting to both assuage the fears of everyday Albertans who were looking at what was happening in China, Italy, and other countries with horror, and simultaneously trying to keep a base of party members who had swallowed the paranoid conspiracy theories around COVID.  

Make no mistake, Kenney gave oxygen to conspiracy theorists and other radicalized types by providing direct support to the "Yellow Vest Convoy" (remember that?), and then tacit (and back channel) support to the "protestors" who occupied the Coutts border crossing as part of the larger "Convoy Protest" in Ottawa.

Kenney's Downfall

What Kenney no doubt tried to frame as "pragmatic governance" didn't mollify the radicalized types in his party like David Parker, who set about engineering Kenney's ouster in late 2022, paving the way for Danielle Smith to take over with the backing of Take Back Alberta and others. 

As he was exiting his role as party leader, Kenney darkly quipped about "the lunatics are taking over".  He was correct, but in doing so was ignoring his own role in their power in the party.  Whether he admits it or not, he gave the extremists a political home, and then fed them. 

Remember his threats about "Alberta Separatism" in 2019?  2019 Jason Kenney saw these people as tools he could control and manipulate the way that Harper did.  He misunderstood the dangers that giving extremists a voice carries in politics.  Extremists - and yes, I include Manning-era Reform backers in this group - don't want to listen, and they resent any effort to reason with them.  They're convinced they know the answers already.  

Kenney the political organizer met his match in David Parker - also a political organizer.  Kenney's miscalculation cost him his opportunity to step back into Federal politics with a reputation in CPC circles as an organizer who knows what he's doing, and with "cred" having been a "successful premier".  Kenney didn't fight back publicly against Parker's paranoid conspiracy theory laden activism.  Instead he tried to play things through the back channels of the party - a party which he constructed, but also that had the very internal weaknesses that had plagued Kenney's efforts in Ottawa.  

He acquired the nickname "Bumbles" in conservative Ottawa circles for the inevitable fumbles and overplays that seemed to follow him.  That same blindness to optics, and a belief that he could lie his way out of anything, ultimately came at a very high price for Kenney as Parker organized a backroom ouster right under Kenney's nose by leveraging paranoid conspiracy theories left and right. 

Kenney's UCP was fundamentally a vehicle for Kenney to ride back into federal politics, and hopefully the Prime Minister's offices.  From that perspective, the UCP was little more than a cynical creation of a man driven not by ideology, but by power.  Kenney was an opportunist, but he was also bounded by his experiences in Ottawa.  He wasn't a good premier per se, but he wasn't the authoritarian we see in Smith.

The Rise of Smith's UCP

In the wake of Kenney's ouster at the 2022 AGM, who should emerge as a replacement for Kenney but none other than Danielle Smith.  Smith's political history is one of making a bigger mess every time she surfaces.  Her first foray into elected politics was as a Trustee for the Calgary Board of Education (CBE).  That was cut short when the province stepped in and dissolved the board because of the levels of dysfunction and conflict that Smith herself played a central role in creating. 

Smith would disappear from elected politics for a while, surviving as a columnist for the Calgary Herald - writing such illuminating works as arguing that there might actually be benefits to smoking, among other gems of wisdom.  She would return to elected politics by becoming the leader of the Wildrose Party in 2010 - only to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in the 2012 election.  This was followed by a disastrous floor crossing exercise in 2014, which torpedoed her support. 

Again, Smith left elected politics, this time becoming a lobbyist for the energy industry, and sometime talk radio host.  

I'm sure you see the pattern by now - every time Smith gets involved in elected politics, she makes decisions which are horribly detrimental to those around her.  In this respect, "Smith's UCP" really isn't her party.  It's the party of malcontents like David Parker and TBA, with Smith as the "useful idiot" figurehead.   

Smith's UCP (or perhaps more accurately TBA's UCP) is clearly authoritarian - and not in a good way.  Smith and her government are ignoring Albertan's voices and concerns, plowing ahead with an agenda which they actively avoided campaigning on during the 2023 election cycle.  

More pointedly, the government has taken the approach that their first legislative priority is based on whatever the party slid into the "party platform" during the last AGM.  This was made abundantly clear in 2024 when Smith announced a series of legislation attacking the transgender community.  That was definitely not a matter on the election agenda, and outside of the queer community, I'm pretty sure that most people were stunned by it.  

Then, let's look at their approach to "negotiating" with teachers.  Instead of negotiating, the UCP legislated them back to work (a perfectly common approach).  However, the legislation was very telling.  Instead of committing to binding arbitration, the government simply legislated a contract that had been overwhelmingly rejected twice by teachers, and then slammed the door on any kind of "labour action" by invoking the Notwithstanding Clause (S33) in The Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  

Meanwhile, they are actively tearing apart the healthcare system, without the consent of Alberta voters.  This dismantling is again, largely driven by the manufactured outrage of TBA and its leadership in the wake of the COVID pandemic.  Policy driven by anger, or other emotions, is seldom "good policy", similarly, policy which is not carefully moderated by pragmatic consideration is also going to be bad policy.  It's not new in Alberta that there has been a faction that wants to align the province with US policy on many fronts (usually with the greatest amount of cruelty possible).  

Past governments have carefully avoided following those pressures, knowing full well that such things are contrary to the broader values of Albertans.  Not the UCP.  The UCP forges ahead in the most violent way possible - taking a wrecking ball to the infrastructure of civil society, and using moral panics like their attacks on transgender people as a distraction.  

This is not a party that actually supports individual freedom, it is now a party that supports "freedom for me, not for thee" - if they don't "approve" of your particular brand of freedom (e.g. being transgender), well - expect them to legislate it away from you and then tell you that it's their right do so.  

Smith herself may or may not be an "authoritarian", or she may simply be their "useful idiot" who is willingly standing in front of the public and doing as she is told.  It doesn't really matter - either way, she has cast her lot with people who ARE authoritarians, and have decided that instead of having a discussion with Albertans, they are going to seize power and impose their will on the rest of us. 

There is no reasoning with the UCP in its current form.  The best we can hope for is that they continue to break into factions fighting over control of the party.  Hopefully those factional squabbles will eventually tear the party apart, as it should have done once the project Kenney set the party up for collapsed on itself. 

Bill 9 and Smith's Justification For Invoking S33

 Over at the Government of Alberta website, we have the government's propaganda piece trying to justify using S33 to stomp all over the rights of transgender Albertans, their parents, and women in Alberta sport.

I will put screen captures of the whole page at the bottom ... just in case the UCP decides to disappear this link.  

As you might expect, it's largely a load of bollocks with a side order of moral panic thrown in.  Let's talk about that for a moment, because Albertans deserve far better from our government than this. 

An Open Letter To Premier Smith

Dear Premier Smith, 

It wasn't that long ago that you were standing at the podium telling us that Bills 26, 27, and 29 were so well crafted that you were certain that they would prevail in scrutiny before the courts.  Today, you stood up and told Albertans that these laws were so vital and important that you were going to invoke The Notwithstanding Clause (S33) to bring them into force.  

What changed? 

It wasn't the content of your hateful legislation - I read Bill 9 - it didn't do anything except add in the invocation of S33 to each of them.  So, your legislation didn't change, nor did the intent behind that legislation.  I don't think we need to kid ourselves about the intent either.  

Was it your rabid base of TBAers getting restive because the court cases were taking longer than their pathetic attention spans?  Or did you need another distraction from the blatant corruption and mismanagement that your government has been foisting on Alberta since you became Premier?

Frankly, I don't really care.  You just abused S33 again - proving that your oh-so-heartfelt concerns about "parliamentary sovereignty" are little more than a power grab - one where you put yourself in the position of arbiter of who gets rights in this province, who gets their freedoms stripped from them, and who is considered a valid citizen of not only Alberta, but in fact Canada.  

Fuck you, Danielle.  Do the province two favours:  retract Bill 9, and resign.  Alberta deserves so much better than a wannabe dictator who sees Canada's Constitution and The Charter of Rights and Freedoms as an obstacle to be ignored.  

- A Citizen of Canada

Reserve Powers, The Notwithstanding Clause, and Unjust Laws

Since the Smith-led UCP government in Alberta saw fit to invoke The Notwithstanding Clause (S33) of The Charter of Rights and Freedoms (The Charter) to order teachers back to work (Bill 2), I have seen some discussion in various forums arguing that once S33 is invoked, there is very little anybody can do.  

I propose that this is not entirely true.  Certainly, Bill 2 imposes onerous, if not excessive, fines for any "labour action" over the next 4 years which would make most teachers hesitant to act directly, like all of us, they have families to support and generally have to pay the bills, the penalties aimed at the ATA are clearly designed to bankrupt the ATA very quickly.  

I've argued in other posts that Bill 2 is exceptionally bad legislation, and as such presents a clear danger to Canadian democracy and our legal system.  It is not the only legislation that the UCP has passed which is of dubious value, but it finally seems to have galvanized people's attention on the potential for abusing S33.  

Broadly speaking, I contend that laws which require the government to invoke S33 should be subject to much greater scrutiny, for the government's invocation of S33 is essentially an admission that the law not only curtails rights guaranteed under The Charter, but that they acknowledge that the law would not stand scrutiny with respect to The Reasonability Clause (S1).  In other words, the application of S33 must be of the most urgent nature, and for circumstances that the government could not reasonably mitigate with other statutory tools.  

Premier Smith Blinks On Banning Books

 So, late yesterday, Premier Sith Smith blinked on her ban of 2SLGBTQ books from schools.   I have opinions.  This follows on the heels of the Edmonton Public School Board (EPSB) publishing a rather lengthy list of books that would have to be banned based on the province's guidelines. Of course, Premier Smith got upset that not only did the book include 2SLGBTQ titles, but also included Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" (among others).  Clearly, she says, the school boards didn't understand the intent of the Government's guidelines.  

A Week In Alberta Politics

 Alberta’s politics are an awful mess right now, and this past week has been quite a spectacle even for Alberta. 

Devin Dreeshen kicked things off by making a fuss over bike lanes in Calgary (and Edmonton, no doubt). To put it bluntly, Dreeshen is a privileged little twit that lives out in rural Alberta - he has no experience with urban planning whatsoever, much less has he ever lived in a major urban area for any length of time.  He has no clue about what it takes to get around in Calgary or Edmonton.  He needs to leave the municipalities alone on this one. 

Then we move to newly-minted “Municipal Affairs Minister” Dan Williams, who saw fit to come out with guns blazing over city hall implementing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion policies.  Ah yes, the wonderful world of “merit hiring” - which is really a code phrase for there being a shocking number of fragile white men who are utterly terrified that someone who is not white might actually be their equal.  We’ll come back to this in a bit, because just when you think the week’s done, the UCP gets worse.

Yesterday, Education Minister Nicolaides decided it was a good time to roll out what amounts to a book ban in school libraries. In spite of the minister's claims to the contrary, this is really a ban on 2SLGBTQ material in school libraries.  Back in May, when the minister foreshadowed this action, it was pretty clear that this was based on a bunch of "Parents Groups" borrowing from a moral panic strategy that has already played out in the United States.  Of course, the proposed list of books comes from a number of US conservative aligned sources. 

None of this should surprise us - the Canadian Social Conservative movement is tightly enmeshed with its American counterpart, and at least in Alberta, they are practically drooling over the prospect of having a government so cowed by the fact that they ejected former Premier Jason Kenney a couple of years ago that they think they can push their extreme agenda even further.  It doesn't matter what Danielle Smith thinks or believes - she's shown that she kowtows to the loudest, most obnoxious voices in her party. 

Where is all this going?  Backwards for the most part.  Like her attack on transgender people started in January 2024, this is all about rolling back rights, access, and equity.  The UCP wants all them damned queers back in the closet.  The smaller the closet, the better, and they don't care who they trample in the process.  

But, it doesn't stop there.  There is a whole host of "SoCon" hobby horse issues - and it doesn't stop at abortion either - although LaGrange is obviously chuckling with glee as she tears our healthcare system apart at the seams - breaking it so badly that I suspect healthcare in Alberta will look increasingly like "if you aren't wealthy, you're screwed" - Alabama will look amazing.  

Going after trans youth was the "thin edge of the wedge" in the UCP's strategy.  Trans youth have the least voice politically, and even less resources to fight back with.  The government engaged in performative "consultation", but excluded voices of trans kids, their parents, and the people who actually provide treatment.  

Then they came along with a ban on trans women in sports.  Again, they listened to a small group of people who loudly proclaim that having trans women in sport is somehow "unfair", but ignored the voices of trans women, and any evidence that challenges the assumption that trans women have "automatic advantages" athletically because at some point their bodies may have produced testosterone.  The resulting policy is far reaching, and unreasonable to say the least. 

The recent "book ban" policy is clearly built on similar grounds.  When you look at it objectively, it's about erasing 2SLGBTQ voices from school libraries.  Did the government engage in meaningful consultation?  No.  They consulted with Action4Canada and a couple of other known anti-2SLGBTQ groups who helpfully provided them with book lists from similar campaigns in the US.  The "public consultation" was such an obvious "push poll" designed to provoke outrage it wasn't even worthy of being considered a fig leaf of consultation. 

Can you see the wedge being hammered in even further?  

If you think this government is going to stop at attacking trans people and library books in schools, I have news for you.  Williams' shot at "DEI" is a warning - they are coming after everything.   Think that you lost out in a job hiring process to a "diversity hire"?  Cool, they'll back you.  Do I expect them to go after the Alberta Human Rights Commission?  Absolutely - they are going to make it just about impossible to make a successful complaint if you aren't white, male, Christian, and wealthy.  

As for women's issues?  Well - get used to having to fight for everything from health care to voting, because that's on the agenda too. There is no shortage of religious hardliners who want to make it impossible for women to vote, and the fight over abortion is always about bodily autonomy. 

The point here is that Alberta is the beachhead in Canada for this extremist influence coming up from the US.  If we don't stand against it now, we're all screwed.  

Alberta's Anti-Trans Legislation

So, now that the UCP has rolled out their anti-trans legislation, we can take a long look at it.  Yesterday, they tabled 3 related bills and earlier in the week they tabled their amendments to the "Alberta Bill of Rights".  I'm not the fastest read of law, and I suspect that some of the legislation has been created to tangle the courts up.  So ... this is probably part 1 of a series.  

Anyways, let's dive in.

The UCP AGM Resolutions - Part 2

 Yesterday, I talked about how fully 1/3 of the resolutions in the upcoming UCP AGM were distinctly anti-transgender.  Today, I want to look at the picture that the overall resolutions document paints about the UCP in its current form. 

Broadly speaking, the policy resolutions fall into a few big categories:  (Note: I have summarized the resolution in my own words - so you'll find a significant amount of snark in there)

Separatist / Ottawa Is Evil Grievances

Resolution #5 - Ban carbon taxes 

Resolution #6 - Ottawa is asserting too much control over Alberta  

Resolution #10 - Ban on agreements with Ottawa by organizations that exist under the jurisdiction of the Alberta government.  (Expansion of the "municipalities can't take money from Ottawa w/out Alberta government approval)  

Resolution #15 - Alberta has to have control over immigration (honorary additional placement under racism - because we all know that this is about keeping Alberta white too) 

Resolution #21 - Alberta should further distance itself from Ottawa (go Separatists!) 

Conspiracy Theories / Hate Mongering / Racism

Resolution #1 - Eliminate Diversity Equity and Inclusion

Resolution #2 - Banning transgender women from washrooms/change rooms/etc. 

Resolution #4 - Banning minors from "sexually explicit performances" (e.g. Drag events?)

Resolution #7 - Parental rights (anti-trans/anti-2SLGBTQ)

Resolution #8 - Parental rights / parents dictate curriculum

Resolution #12 - CO2 is really good for us!  

Resolution #13 - Elected officials should not engage with WHO, WEF, or the UN (apparently) 

Resolution #14 - Defund treatment for transgender people  

Resolution #15 - Alberta has to have control over immigration (honorary additional placement under racism - because we all know that this is about keeping Alberta white too)  

Resolution #16 - There can only be two sexes!!!!  

Resolution #19 - Protect crown lands from seizure by the UN(? - clearly aimed at aboriginal rights, so it goes under racism.)  

Resolution #23 - Hold the AHRC accountable for the decisions they make (Because apparently religious freedoms are being suppressed?) 

Resolution #25 - No digital ID!!! (Uh - okay - why?)

Resolution #27 - No vouching for other voters!  (because electoral fraud is rampant? I guess?)

Resolution #31 - DEI is evil and it creates reverse racism!

Resolution #32 - Force the so-called "Chicago Principles" on universities (because they're too left wing, donchaknow!)

Cheap Political Shots At Opponents

Resolution #2 - Banning Unions from donating monies to political parties 

Resolution #24 - The ATA is too powerful, so membership should be optional 

Resolution #34 - Recall should be easier to accomplish! (Because they couldn't overthrow Gondek last winter) 

Possibly Reasonable Stuff

Resolution #9 - Disclosure of funding sources for groups lobbying / protest against the government (This one also has tinges of conspiracy theory)

Resolution #11 - Utility Fees  

Resolution #17 - Force municipal plebiscites on land use changes (might be reasonable - but I doubt it)

Resolution #18 - Hey, we should do something about getting better at managing our forests and dealing with fires. (Ya think?!) 

Resolution #20 - Eliminate retention bonuses in the government bureaucracy.  (Watch the exodus as long term staffers up and leave for private sector roles that pay better...)

Resolution #21 - Promoting trades and technical training in schools. (could be reasonable, although we know conservatives hate education in colleges and universities ... so ...)   

Resolution #26 - We need to train more doctors in Alberta (No argument there - but don't bank on them hanging about afterwards any longer than they have to) 

Resolution #28 - Ban cell phones in schools. (Ill informed at best, unrealistic in any real sense) 

Resolution #29 - Rejig the food supply system to suit small production farms (Sure?  Realistic? Nope)

Resolution #30 - Modify the flat tax structure (a bit - not nearly enough) 

Resolution #33 - Landowner Rights - basically let's hamstring any kind of development or change by giving landowners a complete veto - that'll go well. 

Resolution #35 - Build reservoirs to ensure a dependable water supply (sure ... but let's ignore the pollution that strip mining mountains is going to create?) 

About 1/3 of these resolutions are topics that I would say are "legitimate matters of policy" - which is to say that it might be possible to have a meaningful and fulsome debate around the merits of the position being taken.  The rest is either thinly veiled separatist rhetoric, or nonsense that is rooted in hate, fear, and ignorance.  Think about that for a moment:  2/3 of the resolutions have nothing to do with reasonable and legitimate matters of government.  

In the world of conspiracy theories and suchlike, the resolutions are outright attacks on "out groups" (them who isn't us - basically), whether that is attacking transgender people or First Nations doesn't matter.  Attacking DEI is basically a claim of "reverse racism" (which isn't a thing - bias against minorities most definitely is).  Throw in a few random grievances about "free speech", and you have a good picture of what is going on here. 

The UCP isn't a party interested in making Alberta "better".  This is a party that is interested in suppressing those it dislikes, poking a stick in Ottawa's eye at every opportunity, and generally being difficult on everything else.  What does pass for serious(-ish) policy topics are often overly simplistic solutions to problems that are guaranteed to either fail or be impractical to implement.  

This is a party that has been overtaken by single-issue zealots who have agreed to mutual support as long as they don't have to compromise anything with the target of their ire.