Alberta
Fans of Flames and Oilers go to familiar response: “Fire the Coach!”

Officially, the National Hockey League season is over for the only two teams this province really cares about. While survivors prepare for action in Round Two of the Stanley Cup playoffs, both the Edmonton Oilers and the Calgary Flames are setting up what should be fascinating games of chop and change.
The final on-ice breath for 2020 took place after the Dallas Stars humbled Calgary 7-3 to win their best-of-seven series in six games. Days earlier, the Edmonton Oilers were outworked and outscored in a five-game loss to the Chicago Black Hawks.
Promptly, supporters of both teams fell to the oldest response in the Dedicated Fan yearbook: fire the coach.
Dave Tippett was singled out because he juggled some lines. Truly, his Oilers were not good enough at forward, on defence or in goal. Interim Flames head coach Geoff Ward drew immediate criticism on Thursday for replacing Cam Talbot with an ice-cold David Rittich in the early stages of the Stars’ record-setting offensive burst following their early 3-0 deficit. Talbot gave up three goals on only eight shots, but Ritich’s immediate performance was even worse.
Before the sixth and decisive game, Ward expressed optimism about his team’s future. “This is more relentless, more prepared, a better team” than the group that faded badly as a playoff top seed a year ago, he said. Well, for the first 20 minutes, he was absolutely correct. Fan frustration will not force any changes behind the bench. On the ice is entirely different. Goaltending, for example, is a serious concern in both centres.
Edmonton’s pair, Mikko Koskinen and Mike Smith are 32 and 38, respectively. At the very least, a reliable young netminder is required. Talbot, widely inconsistent before being traded to Calgary for Koskinen two years ago, shone through most of the playoffs for the Flames this season and drew solid support from teammates Sean Monahan and Mikael Backlund after Thursday’s shoddy start.
Monahan’s generous view did not detract from the likelihood that the veteran winger, in common with linemate Johnny Gaudreau, is sure to be prominent in trade talks, starting almost immediately.
Captain and key defenceman Mark Giordano, 35, finally showed signs of age. Partner T.J. Brodie, 29, would attract serious offers if general manager Brad Treliving put him on the market.
Good news for Calgary is that on-ice leader Matt Tkachuk has shown no sign of abandoning his fiery style. He was sadly missed after suffering an apparent concussion in Game Two. The seasoned Backlund, and youngsters Andrew Mangiapane, Dillon Dube and Sam Bennett are set for solid futures up front.
In Edmonton, the question about offence is simple: who will play with Connor McDavid on one line and Leon Draisaitl on another? Third- and fourth-liners on the 2020 roster will have plenty of company looking for jobs next year.
At this point, Edmonton lags behind its provincial rivals in at least one important area. It must be remembered that the Flames won their so-called elimination round by defeating a strong (but injured) group of Winnipeg Jets. The Oilers, who would mortgage the future of the entire Icer District for a brilliant young defender such as Miro Heiskanen of Dallas, Cale Makar of Colorado or Quinn Hughes of Vancouver (all still active in playoffs) have no such victory as a building block at this point.
Alberta
Anholt tabbed to lead Canada’s world junior squad after success with U18 team

Canada celebrates the win over Finland IIHF World Junior Hockey Championship gold medal game action in Edmonton on Saturday August 20, 2022. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jason Franson
Calgary – Peter Anholt has been tasked with helping Canada win a third straight world junior hockey championship after two successful seasons leading the country’s under-18 program.
Anholt, who heads the front office of the Western Hockey League’s Lethbridge Hurricanes, is one of three Canadian Hockey League general managers tabbed by Hockey Canada to oversee its men’s under-17, under-18 and under-20 programs in 2023-24.
He takes over the world junior program from Ottawa 67’s GM James Boyd, who helped Canada win two titles over the span of six months.
Canada beat Finland 3-2 in overtime to win the 2022 championship in Edmonton, which was held in August after being postponed from its traditional December/January slot due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Canadians repeated with a 3-2 overtime win over Czechia on Jan. 5 in Halifax.
The 2024 world junior championship begins Dec. 26 in Goteborg, Sweden.
Hockey Canada also announced Wednesday that Dave Brown of the Ontario Hockey League’s Erie Otters will guide the men’s under-17s this season, while Cam Russell of the Quebec Major Junior Hockey League’s Halifax Mooseheads will take over Anholt’s former position with the U18 team.
The three will work alongside Hockey Canada’s hockey operations staff as part of the organization’s “Program of Excellence” management group.
Duties include assisting with player and coach selection, and providing input during camps and tournaments.
Brown will lead the U17 team through the 2023 World Under-17 Hockey Challenge. Canada lost 2-1 to the United States in the final of last year’s event in Langley and Delta, B.C.
Russell, meanwhile, will look to help Canada to a second consecutive Hlinka Gretzky Cup title. Canada won its 23rd gold medal at the best-on-best U18 tournament last year in Red Deer, Alta., with Anholt at the helm.
Canada did not participate in the 2021 event due to the pandemic, but won that year’s U18 worlds.
“All three individuals bring a wealth of CHL experience to our program,” Scott Salmond, Hockey Canada senior vice-president of hockey operations, said in a statement. “We look forward to having them work alongside our athletes and staff while leading our men’s national teams next season.”
This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 22, 2023.
Alberta
Hearings begin before Supreme Court on federal environmental impact assessment law

The Supreme Court of Canada is pictured in Ottawa on Friday, March 3, 2023. Arguments are underway in a long-awaited case over the federal Impact Assessment Act. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick
Ottawa (CP) – Federal lawyers defended the government’s Impact Assessment Act in the Supreme Court of Canada on Tuesday as a two-day hearing started to determine the future of how the country weighs the environmental costs of economic development.
Several of the seven-member panel of justices hearing the appeal of an Alberta decision that found the act unconstitutional quizzed Ottawa’s representatives about whether the legislation is too broad.
Justice Malcolm Rowe said the act allows Ottawa to use narrow concerns over matters such as fisheries to gain control over a wide variety of unconnected issues.
“The feds get their hook in under some head of power and once the hook is in, they can use that for any purpose they want,” he said.
That was one of the main concerns expressed by Alberta when it asked the province’s Appeal Court for a reference on the issue.
The arguments the top court is hearing are a reference case only and its ruling will only be advisory.
Rowe said the act gives Ottawa the power to use areas of federal jurisdiction to force unconnected policies on other governments.
“Isn’t the (assessment) decision really not based on the impact on federal jurisdiction, which is fish or birds or whatever, it’s the broad policy of the government of Canada used in a discretionary way to say thumbs up or thumbs down on any project they want anywhere in the country?”
No, said federal lawyer Chris Rupar. He said the act forces governments to look at both positive and negative effects of a development and decide whether, on balance, it’s in the public interest.
“There may be an effect which is negative, but there could also be other effects,” he said. “The whole picture has to be taken into account in the public interest.”
Rupar said it’s not unusual for environmental assessment legislation to address a broad range of issues. Alberta’s provincial version of such legislation does, he said.
Rupar said the federal law contains safeguards to ensure that it only captures development proposals that would generate “significant “impacts.
“It’s not all projects or physical activities that are covered,” he said. “There are thresholds.”
Judicial review remains open to proponents that feel their project was wrongly reviewed, he said.
Dayna Anderson, Rupar’s co-counsel, argued the legislation is needed to ensure national consistency in environmental standards.
Disallowing the bill, she said, “would create provincial enclaves and completely and totally immunize provincial resource development from federal regulation in any area, no matter the magnitude of the federal effects it would cause.”
The law was defended by 11 interveners from environmental and Indigenous groups. Several pointed out there’s a long string of precedents giving the federal government the right to make national environmental rules.
“Alberta and the interveners in support of its position would have this court upend decades of settled law,” said Anna Johnston of the West Coast Environmental Law Association.
Others pointed out the law lives up to Canada’s responsibility to Indigenous people.
“It would be both illogical and perverse if Parliament could control or limit Indigenous people — their rights and interests — but didn’t have the ability to protect those rights and interests,” said Mae Price, representing Alberta’s Mikisew Cree First Nation.
John Gailus, representing the Lummi First Nation in British Columbia, argued the act is “empowering” for Indigenous people because it allows for the consideration of cumulative effects of development.
Joseph Castrilli of the Canadian Environmental Law Association said the law complements the federal carbon price, which the Supreme Court has already supported, as well as laws controlling toxic substances.
He argued the federal government’s power to regulate trade and commerce also makes the law constitutional. Creating what he called “pollution havens” in one province can harm the others, Castrilli said.
“Intra-provincial activity capable of causing adverse interprovincial and international environmental and economic effects does affect trade and commerce because it can harm trade and commerce.”
The hearing is expected to go through Wednesday, when opponents of the bill are to address the court. Eight out of 10 provinces oppose the act, as well as other groups including the Indian Resource Council and the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 21, 2023.
— By Bob Weber in Edmonton
-
Top Story CP1 day ago
CP NewsAlert: Income tax cuts and big drop in GDP growth in Quebec budget
-
Top Story CP2 days ago
Canada’s annual inflation rate cooled in February
-
Alberta1 day ago
2022 World Senior Men’s gold medalist rink and Cheryl Bernard among teams at Senior Curling Championships at Red Deer’s Pidherney Centre this week
-
Top Story CP2 days ago
Trudeau chief of staff Katie Telford to testify on foreign interference at committee
-
Brownstone Institute1 day ago
Eye Protection Wasn’t Misdirection
-
Alberta2 days ago
Alberta program trains rural health-care workers in supporting sex assault victims
-
Alberta1 day ago
Flames bounce back with 5-1 victory over Ducks
-
Alberta2 days ago
The USMCA’s self-destruct button: review clause conjures fears of 2018 all over again