Alberta
Christian attorney sues Law Society of Alberta for mandating left-wing trainings
From LifeSiteNews
Robert Song likened the trainings, which push left-wing viewpoints, to what he experienced during his childhood in communist China
A Christian lawyer is suing the Law Society of Alberta for forcing members to undergo training pushing critical race theory, gender theory, and “intersectionality.”
On October 27, Alberta lawyer Roger Song filed a public-interest lawsuit against the Law Society of Alberta (LSA) after it mandated that members undergo left-wing cultural and political training.
“The Political Ideologies are wrong and destructive, do not reasonably describe reality, and do not represent a morality valuable to Canadian society,” Song argued.
According to LSA’s rulebook, updated October 5, 2023, LSA can “prescribe specific continuing professional development requirements to be completed by members, in a form and manner, as well as time frame.”
Lawyers who fail to complete the mandatory training “shall stand automatically suspended.”
The suit challenges the LSA’s authority “to compel lawyers to believe in, express affirmation of, and actively promote any political objective including the ‘Political Ideologies’” such as “critical race theory,” “gender theory,” and “intersectionality.”
The lawsuit also includes an “expert opinion” report from Dr. Joanna Williams, author of How Woke Won: The Elitist Movement That Threatens Democracy, Tolerance and Reason.
Song’s case, which is supported by the Council of Alberta Lawyers, stressed the rights of lawyers to hold and share views contrary to the LSA, a right which Song argues is protected under the Canadian Constitution.
He further pointed out that forcing lawyers to adhere to one political viewpoint would “harm the reputation of the profession as competent and loyal to the client’s legitimate interests” and “impair the ability of lawyers to fulfill their professional duties.”
“Neither the Canadian Constitution nor the laws promulgated under it are a system of ‘colonialism’, ‘whiteness’, ‘privilege’, ‘systemic discrimination’, ‘racism’, ‘liberal racism’, ‘ignorance’, ‘hate’, ‘violence’ or other such system of oppression,” he continued.
Song compared mandating lawyers embrace one political ideology to his childhood in China, where he was forced “to believe in and advance the CCP’s socialist ideology including dogmas relating to legal, historical, political, social, economic, moral, spiritual, and cultural issues.”
“Western institutions like freedom of thought, freedom of speech, and science have proven excellent systems for discovering truth and moving away from error,” he continued. “Freedom of thought and speech are necessary aspects of genuine democracy.”
Song declared that “socialism is destructive to society,” warning that “there is a significant overlap between socialism and ‘equity’ as that term is used by modern social justice movements.”
Alberta
Alberta government should eliminate corporate welfare to generate benefits for Albertans
From the Fraser Institute
By Spencer Gudewill and Tegan Hill
Last November, Premier Danielle Smith announced that her government will give up to $1.8 billion in subsidies to Dow Chemicals, which plans to expand a petrochemical project northeast of Edmonton. In other words, $1.8 billion in corporate welfare.
And this is just one example of corporate welfare paid for by Albertans.
According to a recent study published by the Fraser Institute, from 2007 to 2021, the latest year of available data, the Alberta government spent $31.0 billion (inflation-adjusted) on subsidies (a.k.a. corporate welfare) to select firms and businesses, purportedly to help Albertans. And this number excludes other forms of government handouts such as loan guarantees, direct investment and regulatory or tax privileges for particular firms and industries. So the total cost of corporate welfare in Alberta is likely much higher.
Why should Albertans care?
First off, there’s little evidence that corporate welfare generates widespread economic growth or jobs. In fact, evidence suggests the contrary—that subsidies result in a net loss to the economy by shifting resources to less productive sectors or locations (what economists call the “substitution effect”) and/or by keeping businesses alive that are otherwise economically unviable (i.e. “zombie companies”). This misallocation of resources leads to a less efficient, less productive and less prosperous Alberta.
And there are other costs to corporate welfare.
For example, between 2007 and 2019 (the latest year of pre-COVID data), every year on average the Alberta government spent 35 cents (out of every dollar of business income tax revenue it collected) on corporate welfare. Given that workers bear the burden of more than half of any business income tax indirectly through lower wages, if the government reduced business income taxes rather than spend money on corporate welfare, workers could benefit.
Moreover, Premier Smith failed in last month’s provincial budget to provide promised personal income tax relief and create a lower tax bracket for incomes below $60,000 to provide $760 in annual savings for Albertans (on average). But in 2019, after adjusting for inflation, the Alberta government spent $2.4 billion on corporate welfare—equivalent to $1,034 per tax filer. Clearly, instead of subsidizing select businesses, the Smith government could have kept its promise to lower personal income taxes.
Finally, there’s the Heritage Fund, which the Alberta government created almost 50 years ago to save a share of the province’s resource wealth for the future.
In her 2024 budget, Premier Smith earmarked $2.0 billion for the Heritage Fund this fiscal year—almost the exact amount spent on corporate welfare each year (on average) between 2007 and 2019. Put another way, the Alberta government could save twice as much in the Heritage Fund in 2024/25 if it ended corporate welfare, which would help Premier Smith keep her promise to build up the Heritage Fund to between $250 billion and $400 billion by 2050.
By eliminating corporate welfare, the Smith government can create fiscal room to reduce personal and business income taxes, or save more in the Heritage Fund. Any of these options will benefit Albertans far more than wasteful billion-dollar subsidies to favoured firms.
Authors:
Alberta
Official statement from Premier Danielle Smith and Energy Minister Brian Jean on the start-up of the Trans Mountain Pipeline
-
Education2 days ago
Support a young reader through the Tim Hortons Smile Cookie campaign
-
Business2 days ago
WEF panelist suggests COVID response accustomed people to the idea of CBDCs
-
illegal immigration2 days ago
Flight Docs Reveal Which Cities Are Receiving Migrants Under Biden’s Parole Program
-
Fraser Institute2 days ago
Canada can solve its productivity ‘emergency’—we just need politicians on board
-
Environment2 days ago
Journalism Misrepresent Climate Science
-
International2 days ago
NYPD storms protest-occupied Columbia building, several arrested
-
illegal immigration2 days ago
Oklahoma Just Became The Latest State To Take Immigration Enforcement Into Its Own Hands
-
Economy2 days ago
Today’s federal government—massive spending growth and epic betting