Alberta
The Awed Couple: Can Ottawa Force Alberta To Stay In Its Lane?
Fact: Alberta and Saskatchewan were to enter Confederation in 1905 as a province named Buffalo. But Sir Wilfrid Laurier feared a landmass that big would threaten the domination of Quebec and Ontario in Canada. And so Buffalo was split into the two provinces we know today.
Of all the riddles that make up Canada’s current prime minister one of the most intriguing is how the grandson of a man, Charles-Émile Trudeau, who made his fortune in Montreal gas stations is now hellbent on destroying the same industry.
In this obsession to end fossil fuels, Trudeau does have the company of many other heirs to fortunes created by oil and its products. The ranks of Green NGOs and political movements are thick with names like Rockefeller, Getty, Morgan, Flagler and more, heirs with a guilty conscience about perceived climate-change destruction.
But while most of these families have chosen discreet roles in their quest, Trudeau’s climate infatuation has propelled him to prime minister of Canada since 2015. In that time “Sunny Ways” Justin has obsessively pursued his goal of transitioning Canada from the fossil-fuel giant to an imagined Shangri-la of gentle breezes and warm sunshine.
Nothing can shake him of his messianic role as saviour of the Frozen North. Likewise, no public disgrace or controversy can shake his loyal supporters who supported his father in the same manner. Buttressed by the lapdog NDP caucus he spouts buckets of enviro-nonsense to a docile media (which he has bribed to stay quiet).
Because subtlety is not a strong suit he even named a former Greenpeace zealot and convicted felon as his Environment minister. Which has naturally put him directly at odds with that portion of the country that exploits fossil fuels and (don’t tell anybody) floats the boat of federal budgets.
So when Justin proposed a Canadian Sustainable Jobs Act to turn energy workers into code writers and social workers by 2035 there was a degree of pushback amongst those who would lose their livelihoods. That plan was revealed last week by EnerCan (who makes up this dreck?) minister Jonathan Wilkinson.
Promising to convert Calgary’s public transit to all-electric, Wilkinson (former leader of the New Democratic Party‘s youth wing in Saskatchewan) proposed the ‘Sustainable Jobs Act’ advisory council that will provide the federal government with recommendations on how to support the Canadian workforce during transition to a ‘net-zero economy.” You can guess who’ll be on the advisory council, but don’t count on any Ford F-150 drivers.
Enter Danielle Smith, newly re-elected premier of Alberta. Smith and her advisors have declared as unworkable the federal government’s unilateral prescription for a carbon-neutral society by 2050. While they recognize the need for transition the Alberta solution is predictably less draconian than Trudeau’s Pol Pot prescription for moving the population back to a more bucolic lifestyle.
Specifically, Alberta wants “to achieve a carbon-neutral energy economy by 2050, primarily through investment in emissions-reduction technologies and the increased export of Alberta LNG to replace higher-emitting fuels internationally.” (Presumably Alberta will be joined by Saskatchewan in this pushback.)
Then came the hammer. “As the development of Alberta’s natural resources and the regulation of our energy sector workforce are constitutional rights and the responsibility of Alberta, any recommendations provided by this new federal advisory council must align with Alberta’s Emissions Reduction and Energy Development Plan.”
Translation: Federal legislation has to be in synch with provincial plans, not the other way around. In short, try to impose some Michael Mann fantasy on the province and it’s a no-go. Don’t like it? See you in court. In Alberta. Not Ottawa.
Will this constitutional gambit work? While Smith’s mandate from the recent election is hardly rock-solid, she does have the benefit of time in her four-year term. Trudeau has no such luxury, and launching a court case in Alberta would likely stretch past his mandate ending next year. Yes, the impertinence of Alberta would play well with his base in the 514/613/416. But let’s be honest, they are voting Trudeau even if he (in the words of Donald Trump) grabs them by the privates.
One thing you can be assured of when it comes to the PM. He will not be forcing any Canadian Sustainable Jobs Act on the Ontario auto industry to aid its transition to EV vehicles. There will be no helpful suggestions on the death of the automobile for the new mutlti-billion dollar VW battery plants cashing federal cheques in Windsor. He knows his voting base won’t buy it. But those Alberta saps?
The telling impact of this jurisdictional fight will be where Trudeau’s rival, Pierre Poilievre, comes down on the transition issue. With his election depending on the swaths of voters in the GTA shoulder ridings— where Trudeau’s mooting about crybaby Alberta will get a full airing— does he lend his support to Smith’s pushback?
Put simply, is backing Alberta sovereignty in the oil patch a vote-loser for a party still looking past “Hate Trudeau” as an election platform? You could see Poilievre rationalizing that he’ll get the seats in the West no matter what, so why not leave Trudeau to wrassle the Alberta bear alone?
Risky for sure. But if he gets the PMO seat in 2024 Poilievre can always play kiss-and-make-up later with Smith and her government. Can’t wait.
Sign up today for Not The Public Broadcaster newsletters. Hot takes/ cool slants on sports and current affairs. Have the latest columns delivered to your mail box. Tell your friends to join, too. Always provocative, always independent. https://share.hsforms.com/16edbhhC3TTKg6jAaRyP7rActsj5
Bruce Dowbiggin @dowbboy is the editor of Not The Public Broadcaster A two-time winner of the Gemini Award as Canada’s top television sports broadcaster, he’s a regular contributor to Sirius XM Canada Talks Ch. 167. Inexact Science: The Six Most Compelling Draft Years In NHL History, his new book with his son Evan, was voted the seventh-best professional hockey book of all time by bookauthority.org . His 2004 book Money Players was voted sixth best on the same list, and is available via http://brucedowbigginbooks.ca/book-personalaccount.aspx
Alberta
Chris Scott and Rebecca Ingram attempting Class Action Lawsuit against Province for COVID restrictions
Could open the door for business owners across the province to seek damages for financial losses
News release regarding this class action lawsuit from Rath & Company
Rath & Company has launched a class action lawsuit against the Province of Alberta on behalf of business owners in Alberta who faced operational restrictions due to, now deemed illegal, Public Health Orders. This lawsuit follows the recent Ingram Decision by the Calgary Court of King’s Bench, which declared that all of Dr. Hinshaw’s Public Health Orders were ultra vires, in other words illegal or not lawfully enacted. The Ingram Decision has opened the door for affected business owners to seek damages for the financial losses incurred due to the restrictions imposed by these unlawful Public Health Orders.
The lawsuit names Rebecca Ingram and Chris Scott as representative plaintiffs who suffered significant financial harm due to Dr. Hinshaw’s Public Health Orders. On February 7, 2024, the parties attended their first case conference with Justice Feasby of the Court of King’s Bench of Alberta to establish the next steps. The lawyers for the Province of Alberta made it clear that they intend to oppose the class action certification. Premier Smith has yet to comment on the government opposition to compensate individual business owners impacted by Dr. Hinshaw’s unlawful Public Health Orders.
“This marks the first of many procedural and substantive steps. This is an important case about
government actions and overreach during a time when business owners were unlawfully mandated to close their businesses at moments notice. It will give Albertans the opportunity to hold the Alberta government accountable and seek fair compensation on behalf of the many businesses impacted by Deena Hinshaw’s many unlawful decisions,” said lead counsel Jeffrey Rath.
The class action represents all impacted Alberta business owners. If you have been adversely affected and wish to join this class action lawsuit, please register by completing the online form at Business Class Action – Rath&Company (rathandcompany.com). Should the Court grant permission for this action to proceed as a “Class Action” (also known as “Certification”), you may qualify as a class member whether or not you have registered.
“In what world is it fair for small business owners to bear the financial brunt for the benefit of the entire province? Our hope is that this lawsuit brings justice to the affected business owners who suffered significant hardship and losses without justification or consideration by the province’s harsh and unilateral actions,” Mr. Rath continued.
From Rath & Company
Business Class Action Update – October 1, 2021
The Certification Hearing scheduled with Justice Feasby will be available for online viewing. Below are the details you need to join the session:
Date and Time:
- October 2 and 3, 2024, at 10:00 AM (Mountain Time, UTC-06:00)
Join Online:
- Webex Link: https://albertacourts.webex.com/meet/virtual.courtroom16
- Webinar Number: 265 095 912
- Video address: [email protected]
- Webinar Password: COURT10022024 (or use the numeric code 26878100 when dialing in)
Join by Phone:
- Dial-In Number: +1-780-851-3573 (Canada Toll – Edmonton)
- Access Code: 277 254 26969
PLEASE NOTE – Recording or rebroadcasting of this hearing is strictly prohibited.
Documents related to this matter that have been filed to date are available for viewing online – see links BELOW.
We encourage all interested parties to observe the proceedings.
Summary of the Covid Business Restrictions Class Action Lawsuit
Rath & Company has commenced a Class Action lawsuit against the provincial government of Alberta on behalf of business owners who faced operational restrictions due to Public Health Orders during the COVID-19 pandemic. This lawsuit aims to secure financial compensation for businesses in Alberta that were either fully or partially restricted by these health orders.
The legal foundation of this case is anchored in the recent Ingram decision by the Calgary Court of King’s Bench, which determined that the Public Health Orders were not enacted lawfully.
The primary plaintiffs in this lawsuit are two Alberta business owners who suffered considerable financial losses due to the imposed Public Health Orders.
This legal action represents an opportunity for business owners who were operational in Alberta from 2020 to 2022 and were impacted by these health directives.
If you are among those affected and are interested in joining this class action lawsuit as a member of the group, we invite you to register with us. To do so, please complete our intake form.
This is an intake form for use by our legal team. Information provided in this form will be used to assist us in moving the Class Action case forward.
If the Court permits the action to proceed as a “Class Action” (this is called “Certification”), you may be a Class Member. You will receive a notice if the action is Certified that will explain your rights as a Class Member.
Please Complete this Form to the best of your ability and it will be sent directly to: [email protected]
To Review the Class Action Documents Click Here:
- Notice of Application
- Business Class Action Statement of Claim
- Business Class Action Plaintiffs Brief
- Business Class Action Provinces Brief
- Business Class Action Plaintiffs Reply
- Affidavit of Rebecca Ingram
- Affidavit of Christopher Scott
- Affidavit of Dana Hogemann – Senior
- Assistant Deputy Minister, Treasury Board Secretariat
- Affidavit of Andy Ridge – Incident Commander of the Emergency Operations Centre with the Ministry of Health
- Affidavit and Expert Report of Randy Popik – Chartered Accountant at Kingston Ross Pasnak LLP
- Affidavit and Expert Report of Christopher Cotton – Professor of Economics at Queen’s University
- Scott Transcript
- Ridge Undertaking
- Ridge Transcript
- Cotton Undertaking
- Cotton Transcript
- Popik Undertaking
- Popik Transcript
- Ingram Transcript
- Eberle-Morris Transcript
- Hogemann Transcript
- Ingram Decision
Covid Business Losses Class Action Intake Form
Business Class Action Update – October 1, 2024
The Certification Hearing scheduled with Justice Feasby will be available for online viewing. Below are the details you need to join the session:
Date and Time:
- October 2 and 3, 2024, at 10:00 AM (Mountain Time, UTC-06:00)
Join Online:
- Webex Link: https://albertacourts.webex.com/albertacourts/j.php?MTID=m178603e16b482202c28d98b5ad6c9ffa
- Webinar Number: 2772 542 6969
- Webinar Password: COURT10022024 (or use the numeric code 26878100 when dialing in)
Join by Phone:
- Dial-In Number: +1-780-851-3573 (Canada Toll – Edmonton)
- Access Code: 277 254 26969
PLEASE NOTE – Recording or rebroadcasting of this hearing is strictly prohibited.
We have uploaded the
We have uploaded the Transcripts and Undertaking. Specifically, on the website you can now find the:
Business Class Action Update – June 21, 2024
The government of Alberta has taken the position of opposing the certification of our proposed class action. As a result, we must go to court to get the lawsuit “certified” as a class action – this is known as the certification hearing.
The certification hearing is scheduled for October 2 and 3, 2024, before Justice Feasby. The following schedule has been agreed to leading up to the certification hearing:
- April 12, 2024 – Plaintiffs to file and serve their Notice of Application and any evidence for the certification hearing
- April 26, 2024 – Any cross examination on the plaintiffs’ material to be completed
- May 10, 2024 – Any undertakings arising from the cross examination to be answered
- June 7, 2024 – Defendants to file and serve any evidence in response
- June 21, 2024 – Any cross examination on the defendant’s material to be completed
- July 19, 2024 – Any undertakings arising from the cross examination to be answered
- August 9, 2024 – Plaintiffs’ written brief to be filed and served
- September 13, 2024 – Defendant’s written brief in response to be filed and served
- September 27, 2024 – Plaintiffs’ reply brief, if any, to be filed and served
- October 2 and 3, 2024 – Certification Hearing
We have uploaded the Plaintiffs Notice of Application and evidence in support as well as the government of Alberta’s evidence on our website. Specifically, on the website you can now find the:
- Notice of Application
- Affidavit of Rebecca Ingram
- Affidavit of Christopher Scott
- Affidavit of Dana Hogemann – Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Treasury Board Secretariat
- Affidavit of Andy Ridge – Incident Commander of the Emergency Operations Centre with the Ministry of Health
- Affidavit and Expert Report of Randy Popik – Chartered Accountant at Kingston Ross Pasnak LLP
- Affidavit and Expert Report of Christopher Cotton – Professor of Economics at Queen’s University
- Business Class Action Brief
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a Class Action Lawsuit?
What is certification?
The court must first assess whether the claim should be advanced in the form of a class action. The court will consider whether the claim shows an appropriate cause of action, an identifiable class of persons, and issues that are shared in common. The court will also determine whether a class action is a preferable procedure, and whether there is an appropriate representative plaintiff. If the class action is certified by the court, the representative plaintiff or plaintiffs will advance the case on behalf of all class members.
Am I a class member?
When a class action is certified, a definition of the class is provided. If you are an individual class member meeting the class description, then you do not need to sign up to be part of the class action – you are automatically included.
Do I have to pay to be part of the class action?
From LifeSiteNews
The proposed legislation is the first of its kind in Canada and may set a precedent other provinces will follow.
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith has finally unveiled the promised legislation restricting sex-change surgeries and puberty blockers for minors. The legislation will include:
- Licensed doctors are prohibited from performing sex change surgeries on youth under 18 in Alberta.
- Puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones will be prohibited for minors under the age of 16 unless the minors have already begun taking those drugs.
- Those “born biologically male” (that is, males) will be prohibited from competing against women and girls in competitive sports.
- Parental opt-in will be required for “each instance” a teacher wishes to discuss gender identity, sexual orientation, or human sexuality.
- Parental notification is required for “socially transitioning” a student — that is, changing a student’s given name or pronouns. 16- and 17-year-olds are still allowed to decide to change their name or pronouns in school, but parents must be notified.
Premier Smith detailed her plans in a long video posted to X, noting that “In less than a month, our UCP government will introduce critical legislation to ensure that children wait until adulthood before making decisions to physically alter their bodies for gender transition. We will also strengthen parental rights within our education system regarding this issue and ensure that women and girls can compete in female-only sports divisions.”
In less than a month, our UCP government will introduce critical legislation to ensure that children wait until adulthood before making decisions to physically alter their bodies for gender transition. We will also strengthen parental rights within our education system regarding… pic.twitter.com/tamjNDzcex
— Danielle Smith (@ABDanielleSmith) October 1, 2024
This news is incredibly significant for several reasons. Most important, it is a Canadian first. Other provinces have passed parental rights policies and made parental notification for “social transitioning” mandatory, but none have yet gone so far as to restrict sex-change surgeries or puberty blockers. In the time since Smith announced her plan to propose this legislation, the UK’s Labour Government and the high court has upheld the UK’s ban on puberty blockers, with the National Health Service condemning the practice and firmly rebutting the idea that such legislation causes suicidal ideation in trans-identified youth.
Smith also has shown willingness to actually push back against the disgusting accusations that immediately came her way. When Marci Ien, the MP for Toronto Centre and Minister for Women and Gender Equality and Youth, claimed that Smith was “targeting trans youth” and that she would be “hurting” kids, Smith posted an article from the National Post titled “‘How will I come back from this?’: Detransitioners abandoned by medical and trans communities” and subtitled “They were irreversibly altered by mastectomies, hormone therapies when they were teens. What happens when they want their bodies back?”
“Do you mean children going through this, Marci Ien?” Smith asked. That is precisely the right response — pointing out that it is trans activists and their political enablers who pose a danger to the bodies of gender dysphoric children. It is also interesting to note that Smith used the phrase “gender reassignment surgery” in her posts and video rather than the trans-activist-approved “gender affirmation surgery,” which most media outlets and LGBT activist politicians use. Considering how carefully Smith and her caucus have approached this issue, that choice of words does not seem like an accident — they have chosen not to use language that implicitly affirms the premises of trans activists.
Not all of the responses were vitriolic. David Staples of the Edmonton Journal noted that Smith may be leading the way: “How long before all other Canadian provinces adopt similar rules around gender policy as Alberta? No more than 5 years? Many European countries leading the way here, Alberta following a sane and humane path.” Staples is correct. Trans activists have been steadily losing control of the narrative in a number of European countries, and the consensus that sterilizing and medicalizing gender dysphoric children is a medical scandal is growing. Canada has long been a holdout. I suspect history will look kindly on what Danielle Smith is doing here.
EXCLUSIVE: Investment Giants Leveraged Red State Universities’ Endowment Funds To Back Anti-Oil Agenda, Report Finds
‘We just hand out pills’, father of overdose victim tells MPs about safer supply programs
Argentina President Javier Milei rejects UN’s ‘socialist’ ‘Pact for the Future’
Any Downturn in Alberta’s Economy Would Inevitably Drag Canada’s Down With It
Backlash To Woke Corporations
Calgary pastor Derek Reimer acquitted of charges related to drag queen story hour protest
The Carbon Tax ship is sinking
-
Business2 days agoSome dockworkers earn more than $400,000 a year
-
Crime2 days agoEXCLUSIVE: GOP Rep Demands Answers From FBI Over ‘Misguided’ Crime Stats
-
Crime2 days agoBukele Defends El Salvador’s Gang Reforms
-
Alberta1 day agoProvince will not allow liquor sales in Alberta grocery and convenience stores
-
International1 day agoRescue group issues warning to Jews, Americans over potential terrorist threats
-
illegal immigration1 day agoCartels, UN, and NGOs Fuel U.S. Border Crisis – A Report from Colombia
-
Addictions1 day agoB.C. mayors voice discontent over province’s response to drug crisis
-
conflict2 days agoIsrael Reportedly Warned Iran It Would Strike Nuclear Sites If It Was Attacked, Officials Say