Alberta
Political parties will be part of municipal elections in Edmonton and Calgary pilot projects
Strengthening Alberta’s local elections
Alberta’s government is introducing legislation to ensure Albertans can rely on transparent, free and fair elections, and municipally-elected officials have clearer accountability measures.
In a democratic society, Albertans expect their local elections to be free and fair, and their elected officials to be held to account by clear rules that govern their local councils. The Municipal Affairs Statutes Amendment Act proposes amendments to the Local Authorities Election Act (LAEA) and the Municipal Government Act (MGA) to add greater transparency to local election processes and ensure local councils and elected officials continue to remain accountable to the citizens who elected them.
“Our government is committed to strengthening Albertans’ trust in their local governments and the democratic process that elects local leaders. The changes we are making increase transparency for Alberta voters and provide surety their votes will be counted accurately. We know how important local democracy is to Albertans, and we will work with local authorities to protect and enhance the integrity of local elections.”
Local Authorities Election Act
Albertans expect free and fair elections and that’s why it’s important we strengthen the rules that govern local elections. To strengthen public trust in local elections, Alberta’s government will eliminate the use of electronic tabulators and other automated voting machines. All Albertans should be able to trust the methods and results of local elections; requiring all ballots to be counted by hand, clarifying rules and streamlining processes for scrutineers will provide voters greater assurance in the integrity of the results.
All eligible Albertans should be able to vote in local elections without impediment. Alberta’s government will limit the barriers for eligible voters to cast a ballot by expanding the use of special ballots. Currently, special ballots can only be requested for very specific reasons, including physical disability, absence from the municipality, or for municipal election workers. By expanding the use of special ballots, the government is encouraging more voter participation.
Amendments in the Municipal Affairs Statutes Amendment Act would increase transparency in local elections by enabling political parties at the local level. Political parties would be enabled in a pilot project for Edmonton and Calgary. The act will not require candidates to join a political party in order to run for a local or municipal office, but will create the opportunity to do so.
In addition, proposed changes to the Local Authorities Election Act would allow municipalities the option to require criminal record checks for local candidates, thus increasing transparency and trust in candidates who may go on to become elected officials.
Municipal Government Act
The role of an elected official is one with tremendous responsibility and expectations. Changes proposed to the Municipal Government Act (MGA) will strengthen the accountability of locally elected officials and councils. These include requiring mandatory orientation training for councillors, allowing elected officials to recuse themselves for real or perceived conflicts of interest without third-party review and requiring a councillor’s seat to become vacant upon disqualification.
If passed, the Municipal Affairs Statutes Amendment Act will also unlock new tools to build affordable and attainable housing across Alberta. Proposed amendments under the MGA would also create more options for municipalities to accelerate housing developments in their communities. Options include:
- Exempting non-profit, subsidized affordable housing from both municipal and education property taxes;
- Requiring municipalities to offer digital participation for public hearings about planning and development, and restricting municipalities from holding extra public hearings that are not already required by legislation; and
- Enabling municipalities to offer multi-year residential property tax exemptions.
Municipal Affairs will engage municipalities and other partners over the coming months to hear perspectives and gather feedback to help develop regulations.
Quick facts
- The LAEA establishes the framework for the conduct of elections in Alberta municipalities, school divisions, irrigation districts and Metis Settlements.
- The MGA establishes the rules governing the conduct of local elected officials once on council, as well as the overall administration and operation of municipal authorities in Alberta, including any policy those authorities may wish to implement.
Related information
From the Fraser Institute
By Matthew Lau
To understand Ottawa’s negative impact on Alberta’s economy and living standards, juxtapose two recent pieces of data.
First, in July the Trudeau government made three separate “economic development” spending announcements in Alberta, totalling more than $80 million and affecting 37 different projects related to the “green economy,” clean technology and agriculture. And second, as noted in a new essay by Fraser Institute senior fellow Kenneth Green, inflation-adjusted business investment (excluding residential structures) in Canada’s extraction sector (mining, quarrying, oil and gas) fell 51.2 per cent from 2014 to 2022.
The productivity gains that raise living standards and improve economic conditions rely on business investment. But business investment in Canada has declined over the past decade and total economic growth per person (inflation-adjusted) from Q3-2015 through to Q1-2024 has been less than 1 per cent versus robust growth of nearly 16 per cent in the United States over the same period.
For Canada’s extraction sector, as Green documents, federal policies—new fuel regulations, extended review processes on major infrastructure projects, an effective ban on oil shipments on British Columbia’s northern coast, a hard greenhouse gas emissions cap targeting oil and gas, and other regulatory initiatives—are largely to blame for the massive decline in investment.
Meanwhile, as Ottawa impedes private investment, its latest bundle of economic development announcements underscores its strategy to have government take the lead in allocating economic resources, whether for infrastructure and public institutions or for corporate welfare to private companies.
Consider these federally-subsidized projects.
A gas cloud imaging company received $4.1 million from taxpayers to expand marketing, operations and product development. The Battery Metals Association of Canada received $850,000 to “support growth of the battery metals sector in Western Canada by enhancing collaboration and education stakeholders.” A food manufacturer in Lethbridge received $5.2 million to increase production of plant-based protein products. Ermineskin Cree Nation received nearly $400,000 for a feasibility study for a new solar farm. The Town of Coronation received almost $900,000 to renovate and retrofit two buildings into a business incubator. The Petroleum Technology Alliance Canada received $400,000 for marketing and other support to help boost clean technology product exports. And so on.
When the Trudeau government announced all this corporate welfare and spending, it naturally claimed it create economic growth and good jobs. But corporate welfare doesn’t create growth and good jobs, it only directs resources (including labour) to subsidized sectors and businesses and away from sectors and businesses that must be more heavily taxed to support the subsidies. The effect of government initiatives that reduce private investment and replace it with government spending is a net economic loss.
As 20th-century business and economics journalist Henry Hazlitt put it, the case for government directing investment (instead of the private sector) relies on politicians and bureaucrats—who did not earn the money and to whom the money does not belong—investing that money wisely and with almost perfect foresight. Of course, that’s preposterous.
Alas, this replacement of private-sector investment with public spending is happening not only in Alberta but across Canada today due to the Trudeau government’s fiscal policies. Lower productivity and lower living standards, the data show, are the unhappy results.
Author:
From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
By Ray McGinnis
Anthony Olienick and Chris Carbert are on trial for conspiracy to commit murder and firearms charges in relation to the Coutts Blockade into mid-February 2022. In opening her case before a Lethbridge, AB, jury on July 11, Olienick’s lawyer, Marilyn Burns stated “This is a political, criminal trial that is un Canadian.” She told the jury, “You will be shocked, and at the very least, disappointed with how Canada’s own RCMP conducted themselves during and after the Coutts protest,” as she summarized officers’ testimony during presentation of the Crown’s case. Burns also contended that “the conduct of Alberta’s provincial government and Canada’s federal government are entwined with the RCMP.” The arrests of the Coutts Four on the night of February 13 and noon hour of February 14, were key events in a decision by the Clerk of the Privy Council, Janice Charette, and the National Security Advisor to the Prime Minister, Jody Thomas, to advise Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to invoke the Emergencies Act. Chief Justice Paul Rouleau, in submitting his Public Order Emergency Commission Report to Parliament on February 17, 2023, also cited events at the Coutts Blockade as key to his conclusion that the government was justified in invoking the Emergencies Act.
Justice David Labrenz cautioned attorney Burns regarding her language, after Crown prosecutor Stephen Johnson objected to some of the language in the opening statement of Olienick’s counsel. Futher discussion about the appropriateness of attorney Burns’ statement to the jury is behind a publication ban, as discussions occurred without the jury present.
Justice Labrenz told the jury on July 12, “I would remind you that the presumption of innocence means that both the accused are cloaked with that presumption, unless the Crown proves beyond a reasonable doubt the essential elements of the charge(s).” He further clarified what should result if the jurors were uncertain about which narrative to believe: the account by the Crown, or the account from the accused lawyers. Labrenz stated that such ambivalence must lead to an acquittal; As such a degree of uncertainty regarding which case to trust in does not meet the “beyond a reasonable doubt” threshold for a conviction.”
On July 15, 2024, a Lethbridge jury heard evidence from a former employer of Olienicks’ named Brian Lambert. He stated that he had tasked Olienick run his sandstone quarry and mining business. He was a business partner with Olienick. In that capacity, Olienick made use of what Lambert referred to as “little firecrackers,” to quarry the sandstone and reduce it in size. Reducing the size of the stone renders it manageable to get refined and repurposed so it could be sold to buyers of stone for other uses (building construction, patio stones, etc.) Lambert explained that the “firecrackers” were “explosive devices” packaged within tubing and pipes that could also be used for plumbing. He detailed how “You make them out of ordinary plumbing pipe and use some kind of propellant like shotgun powder…” Lambert explained that the length of the pipe “…depended on how big a hole or how large a piece of stone you were going to crack. The one I saw was about six inches long … maybe an inch in diameter.”
One of Olienick’s charges is “unlawful possession of an explosive device for a dangerous purpose.” The principal evidence offered up by RCMP to the Crown is what the officers depicted as “pipe bombs” which they obtained at the residence of Anthony Olienick in Claresholm, Alberta, about a two-hour drive from Coutts. Officers entered his home after he was arrested the night of February 13, 2022. Lambert’s testimony offers a plausible common use for the “firecrackers” the RCMP referred to as “pipe bombs.” Lambert added, these “firecrackers” have a firecracker fuse, and in the world of “explosive” they are “no big deal.”
Fellow accused, Chris Carbert, is does not face the additional charge of unlawful possession of explosives for a dangerous purpose. This is the first full week of the case for the defence. The trial began on June 6 when the Crown began presenting its case.
Ray McGinnis is a Senior Fellow with the Frontier Centre for Public Policy who recently attended several days of testimony at the Coutts Two trial.
The Media Refuses to Accept Covid Reality
Ignore climate-obsessed propagandists and enjoy your summer
Hawley: Whistleblowers say Trump’s security detail was unprepared, inexperienced
Out soon? Biden faces growing calls to withdraw 2024 White House bid
Welcome to “Oil & Gas Silencing” Bill C-59: Where Trudeau’s Science Court Rules, Not Real People With Real Science
Jordan Peterson interviews Alberta Premier Danielle Smith
‘Really, Really Difficult’: Bureaucrats Worry Behind Closed Doors They’ll Be Sent Packing Under Trump
-
International20 hours agoSecret Service Repeatedly Rejected Offers To Use Drones At Deadly Trump Rally, Whistleblower Says
-
Alberta1 day ago
‘Fireworks’ As Defence Opens Case In Coutts Two Trial
-
Business1 day agoEstonia’s solution to Canada’s stagnating economic growth
-
International20 hours agoHouse Passes Bipartisan Resolution Establishing Trump Assassination Attempt Task Force
-
Bruce Dowbiggin12 hours agoGarbage In, Garbage Out: The Democrats 2024 Election Coup
-
COVID-191 day agoLeaked documents: German gov’t lied about shots preventing COVID, knew lockdowns did more harm than good
-
Business1 day agoFederal government seems committed to killing investment in Canada
-
International1 day agoSwitzerland’s new portable suicide ‘pod’ set to claim its first life ‘soon’