Alberta Conservatives pass slew of anti-woke, pro-medical freedom policies at annual meeting

UCP members voted to ‘protect an individual’s right to informed consent decisions regarding their own body.’

Over 3,800 grassroots members of Alberta’s ruling United Conservative Party (UCP) voted to pass a slew of pro-family, medical freedom, and anti-woke policies at its annual general meeting over the weekend, including one calling for a bill to support “comprehensive parental rights” in education.

In total, UCP members debated some 51 resolutions, with 30 of them pertaining to official party policy, on November 3 and 4 at the AGM, which took place in Calgary. The resolutions are non-binding.

Most important, UCP members voted to “protect an individual’s right to informed consent decisions regarding their own body.”

“No government, business, corporation, entity, non-profit, or any other organization, institution or society has the right to mandate, force, or coerce an individual into a medical intervention or procedure, regardless of the societal benefit or otherwise,” resolution four reads.

This resolution pertains to how COVID jabs were pushed on the population without proper consent taking place in many instances, such as when workplace jab mandates were enacted.

The many pro-medical freedom resolutions came about after former leader of the party and Alberta Premier Jason Kenney backtracked and enacted COVID vaccine passports in the province for a time, as well as allow health officials to enact jabs mandates for staff. This resulted in him eventually being turfed as party leader, with Danielle Smith taking his place.

Other votes in favor of medical freedom included UCP party members voting to “Protect an individual’s right to free expression” and as well as “Protect a medical practitioner’s right to research, speak, and write; and protect Medical Doctors and all healthcare professionals from having their licenses to practice threatened for publicly expressing professional medical opinions in any public setting.”

Resolution 16, which calls for the party to “enshrine the doctor-patient relationship” by “protecting Alberta physicians from undue third-party interference,” was also passed by members.

Smith, who now leads the UCP and is Alberta’s Premier, told reporters that her government is not bound to follow the UCP’s decision should the motion be passed but noted she does support the party’s grassroots process.

In a speech to delegates to start the AGM, Smith made it clear she stands with parental rights, saying to delegates, “I want every parent listening today to hear me loud and clear: parents are the primary caregivers and educators of their children.”

Later in the day, UCP members voted in favor of a resolution mandating parental consent for children to “change” their pronouns at school.

Resolution 8, which passed, read that the UCP should “require teachers, schools, and school boards to obtain the written consent of the parent/guardian of a student under the age of 16 prior to changing the name and/or pronouns used by the student.”

The rationale behind the passing of this resolution reads, “Conservative governments of Saskatchewan and New Brunswick recently implemented the requirements for parental consent for schools to use an alternate name or pronoun for a student.”

“Parents, not schools, are the legal guardians of their children. As was noted by Saskatchewan Education Minister Dustin Duncan, schools require a signed permission slip to take children on a field trip so it’s unclear why schools should not require parental consent for identification changes. Schools should not be in the business of going behind parents’ backs.”

UCP members also passed resolution 17, which calls for the party to support a comprehensive Bill of “Parental Rights which ensures that all legislation will recognize and support parents’ rights to be informed of and in charge of all decisions to do with all services paid for by the province, including education and health care.”

Party members also passed resolution 20, which calls for the party to ban pornographic materials from being allowed to be used by teachers.

“The United Conservative Party believes that the Government of Alberta should … h) Ensure that teachers, schools, school boards, and third parties providing services to kindergarten to Grade 12 schools do not provide access to materials of a sexual, racist, or abusive nature, including, but not limited to: books, handouts, online materials, and live events that are not part of the Alberta Program of Studies,” the resolution reads.

In September, Smith refused to expel a caucus member who attended the Million Person March against LGBT indoctrination, adding that she is “sympathetic to parents” who do not want their kids taught explicit sexual content in school.

UCP members call for party to ‘oppose’ expansion of euthanasia

At its AGM, UCP members also passed a resolution calling for the party to stop the expansion of legal euthanasia.

Members voted for the party to “Oppose the federal expansion of Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) qualifying criteria to include those suffering solely from mental illness and oppose the future legalization of MAiD as a care option for minor children.”

The resolution also calls for the party to “establish protocols for provincial implementation of the federally legalized MAiD program,” wherein healthcare workers in “any facility” shall not be allowed to “present or promote MAiD to a patient as a care option.”

“The procedure must be considered a tragic last resort and only be discussed with a patient of legal age upon request by said patient or their proxy,” the resolution reads.

“Individual healthcare workers and private hospice facilities must have their rights to freedom of conscience honored when deciding to participate in administering MAiD.”

On March 9, 2024, euthanasia in Canada, or MAiD as it is known, will expand to include those suffering solely from mental illness. Pro-life advocates and Conservative MPs have called for this expansion to be stopped.

When it came to issues of free speech, UCP members voted to “ban post-secondary institutions from using race as a factor in any admissions program or procedure,” along with voting to “protect an individual’s right to free expression.”

Also passed was a resolution calling to ensure the post-secondary institutions be “places of free thought and learning of employable skills by eliminating all Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) offices at all public universities, colleges, technical institutes, and trades schools and all adult education institutions.”

“They are not places for indoctrination of identity politics, reverse racism, or radicalization. Any postsecondary institution that maintains a DEI office, policy, or equivalent shall lose government financial support,” the resolution reads.

Additionally, the party also passed resolutions calling for it to support the use of “cash” as a payment method to be protected and to “oppose” the promotion of “digital currency.”

UCP members also voted to protect Alberta’s autonomy from federal government overreach by passing resolution 1, which calls for the party to “defend Alberta’s economy and autonomy by opposing all attempts by the Federal government to impose net zero by 2035.”

Alberta has repeatedly promised to place the interests of their people above Prime Minister Justin Trudeau government’s “unconstitutional” demands while consistently reminding the federal government that their infrastructures and economies depend upon oil, gas, and coal.

Related Topics:#AnthonyMurdoch #LifeSiteNews #UCPAGM

Up Next

The federal government just did the bare minimum to improve intergovernmental coordination on housing

Don't Miss

Will U.S. streaming companies play ball with the CRTC?: Peter Menzies

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Canadians will soon be versed in massive West Coast LPG mega-project

Daily Caller / 38 mins ago

Tom Homan Predicts Deportation Of Most Third World Migrants Over Risks From Screening Docs

Artificial Intelligence / 57 mins ago

‘Trouble in Toyland’ report sounds alarm on AI toys

Alberta

Keynote address of Premier Danielle Smith at 2025 UCP AGM

Published on November 30, 2025

Todayville

From the YouTube Channel of Rebel News

Alberta

Net Zero goal is a fundamental flaw in the Ottawa-Alberta MOU

Published on November 30, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Jason Clemens and Elmira Aliakbari

The challenge of GHG emissions in 2050 is not in the industrial world but rather in the developing world, where there is still significant basic energy consumption using timber and biomass.

The new Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the federal and Alberta governments lays the groundwork for substantial energy projects and infrastructure development over the next two-and-a-half decades. It is by all accounts a step forward, though, there’s debate about how large and meaningful that step actually is. There is, however, a fundamental flaw in the foundation of the agreement: it’s commitment to net zero in Canada by 2050.

The first point of agreement in the MOU on the first page of text states: “Canada and Alberta remain committed to achieving net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.” In practice, it’s incredibly difficult to offset emissions with tree planting or other projects that reduce “net” emissions, so the effect of committing to “net zero” by 2050 means that both governments agree that Canada should produce very close to zero actual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Consider the massive changes in energy production, home heating, transportation and agriculture that would be needed to achieve this goal.

So, what’s wrong with Canada’s net zero 2050 and the larger United Nations’ global goal for the same?

Let’s first understand the global context of GHG reductions based on a recent study by internationally-recognized scholar Vaclav Smil. Two key insights from the study. First, despite trillions being spent plus international agreements and regulatory measures starting back in 1997 with the original Kyoto agreement, global fossil fuel consumption between then and 2023 increased by 55 per cent.

Second, fossil fuels as a share of total global energy declined from 86 per cent in 1997 to 82 per cent in 2022, again, despite trillions of dollars in spending plus regulatory requirements to force a transition away from fossil fuels to zero emission energies. The idea that globally we can achieve zero emissions over the next two-and-a-half decades is pure fantasy. Even if there is an historic technological breakthrough, it will take decades to actually transition to a new energy source(s).

Let’s now understand the Canada-specific context. A recent study examined all the measures introduced over the last decade as part of the national plan to reduce emissions to achieve net zero by 2050. The study concluded that significant economic costs would be imposed on Canadians by these measures: inflation-adjusted GDP would be 7 per cent lower, income per worker would be more than $8,000 lower and approximately 250,000 jobs would be lost. Moreover, these costs would not get Canada to net zero. The study concluded that only 70 per cent of the net zero emissions goal would be achieved despite these significant costs, which means even greater costs would be imposed on Canadians to fully achieve net zero.

It’s important to return to a global picture to fully understand why net zero makes no sense for Canada within a worldwide context. Using projections from the International Energy Agency (IEA) in its latest World Energy Outlook, the current expectation is that in 2050, advanced countries including Canada and the other G7 countries will represent less than 25 per cent of global emissions. The developing world, which includes China, India, the entirety of Africa and much of South America, is estimated to represent at least 70 per cent of global emissions in 2050.

Simply put, the challenge of GHG emissions in 2050 is not in the industrial world but rather in the developing world, where there is still significant basic energy consumption using timber and biomass. A globally-coordinated effort, which is really what the U.N. should be doing rather than fantasizing about net zero, would see industrial countries like Canada that are capable of increasing their energy production exporting more to these developing countries so that high-emitting energy sources are replaced by lower-emitting energy sources. This would actually reduce global GHGs while simultaneously stimulating economic growth.

Consider a recent study that calculated the implications of doubling natural gas production in Canada and exporting it to China to replace coal-fired power. The conclusion was that there would be a massive reduction in global GHGs equivalent to almost 90 per cent of Canada’s total annual emissions. In these types of substitution arrangements, the GHGs would increase in energy-producing countries like Canada but global GHGs would be reduced, which is the ultimate goal of not only the U.N. but also the Carney and Smith governments as per the MOU.

Finally, the agreement ignores a basic law of economics. The first lesson in the very first class of any economics program is that resources are limited. At any given point in time, we only have so much labour, raw materials, time, etc. In other words, when we choose to do one project, the real cost is foregoing the other projects that could have been undertaken. Economics is mostly about trying to understand how to maximize the use of limited resources.

The MOU requires massive, literally hundreds of billions of dollars to be used to create nuclear power, other zero-emitting power sources and transmission systems all in the name of being able to produce low or even zero-emitting oil and gas while also moving to towards net zero.

These resources cannot be used for other purposes and it’s impossible to imagine what alternative companies or industries would have been invested in. What we do know is that workers, entrepreneurs, businessowners and investors are not making these decisions. Rather, politicians and bureaucrats in Ottawa and Edmonton are making these decisions but they won’t pay any price if they’re wrong. Canadians pay the price. Just consider the financial fiasco unfolding now with Ottawa, Ontario and Quebec’s subsidies (i.e. corporate welfare) for electric vehicle batteries.

Understanding the fundamentally flawed commitment to Canadian net zero rather than understanding a larger global context of GHG emissions lays at the heart of the recent MOU and unfortunately for Canadians will continue to guide flawed and expensive policies. Until we get the net zero policies right, we’re going to continue to spend enormous resources on projects with limited returns, costing all Canadians.