Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Alberta

The Government of Alberta’s Report on Their COVID-19 Pandemic Response: Bryam Bridle

Published

7 minute read

From COVID Chronicles

By Dr. Byram W. Bridle 
Dr. Bridle is an Associate Professor of Viral Immunology in the Department of Pathobiology at the University of Guelph.

It confirms big problems with public health and provides a roadmap for how to do it right the next time around; let justice and healing begin.

The Government of Alberta has released a report following an investigation into the province’s response to the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The announcement can be found in this X post from, Eric Bouchard, a member of Alberta’s legislative assembly.

The report itself can be found here.

This is a report that is well-worth reading from beginning to end. The government identified numerous major problems with the handling of the pandemic response by Alberta Health Services. It is important to note that the current government in Alberta is not responsible for how the province responded to COVID-19. That responsibility falls upon the shoulders of the previous government. Thankfully, the current government is interested in knowing the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. They also believe in being transparent with the public that they serve.

One of my biggest concerns from the report is identified in the opening letter where it states, “Our quest for answers was impeded by barriers, including reluctance from key stakeholders to engage with the Task Force’s mandate“. Shame on those involved with developing and implementing COVID-19 policies that failed to cooperate with officials from a sitting government that launched this investigation for the wellbeing of the public. The lack of transparency from whomever these key stakeholders are is unacceptable.

What I appreciate most about the report is that it is constructively critical, providing a path forward, that includes refocusing the mandate of public health services back onto the public as the primary clientele, as opposed to acting in the service of pharmaceutical companies. It serves as a blueprint to guide future responses. The path forward is based largely on traditional best practices that were established by truly following the science and forged in the successful management of historical outbreaks. It is highly reminiscent of the national pandemic response plans that existed in 2020; the ones that were supposed to be implemented for COVID-19 but that were thrown out within days of the pandemic being declared.

I can’t help but wonder how many lives could have been saved, how many hospitalizations could have been prevented, and how much healthier our population and current economies would be if this far more appropriate, science-based plan would have been implemented back in 2020.

This report from the Government of Alberta provides a precedent for the world as overwhelming numbers of people wake up and realize the need for massive reforms within public health.

Further, the report validates many of the concerns that a lot of people had about the response to COVID-19. The totality of evidence highlights how egregious it was to have vilified critical thinkers who simply wanted to engage in robust discussions out of genuine concerns for others and not fall victim to propaganda. Firing people who didn’t want to be coerced into having experimental medical interventions and debatable policies thrust upon them, de-licensing and disciplining independent-thinking health care professionals, and censoring experts under the nefarious disguise of ‘combating misinformation’ and ‘fact checking’; THEY WERE ALL EGREGIOUS WRONGS.

There should be fallout from a damning report like this. The gross mismanagement of COVID-19 has created a huge hot mess. The path forward starts with acknowledging this. Then we need to plot a course to navigate through this mess and thoroughly clean it up. These are essential if there is ever to be healing for all those that were victimized by power brokers that blindly followed propaganda and bought into the hatred and divisive tactics that were passionately modelled by the prime minister on down.

Building on this report, I am honoured to have been invited to speak at an upcoming event in Alberta. It is An Injection of Truth: Healing Humanity.

My talk will dovetail with this report from the Government of Alberta. The event is going to focus on the four pillars of healing. My presentation will start with ripping off the scab and exposing lies from public health agencies that contributed to a myriad of problems within the pandemic response. It will transition into providing some practical recommendations with respect to where we go from here.

Please consider posting your thoughts about this report in the comments section. Do you agree with aspects? Disagree with others? Were criticisms too light or too harsh? Were key issues missed? What do you think about the ideas for moving forward? This is opportunity to provide feedback. You have a sitting government that is showing a willingness to listen to all parties and perspectives. I will share feedback with the Members of the Legislative Assembly that I will be meeting in Alberta on March 3rd.


COVID Chronicles is a reader-supported publication.

To receive posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Alberta

Calls for a new pipeline to the coast are only getting louder

Published on

From Resource Works

Alberta wants a new oil pipeline to Prince Rupert in British Columbia.

Calls on the federal government to fast-track new pipelines in Canada have grown. But there’s some confusion that needs to be cleared up about what Ottawa’s intentions are for any new oil and gas pipelines.

Prime Minister Carney appeared to open the door for them when he said, on June 2, that he sees opportunity for Canada to build a new pipeline to ship more oil to foreign markets, if it’s tied to billions of dollars in green investments to reduce the industry’s environmental footprint.

But then he confused that picture by declaring, on June 6, that new pipelines will be built only with “a consensus of all the provinces and the Indigenous people.” And he added: “If a province doesn’t want it, it’s impossible.”

And BC Premier David Eby made it clear on June 2 that BC doesn’t want a new oil pipeline, nor does it want Ottawa to cancel the related ban on oil tankers steaming through northwest BC waters. These also face opposition from some, but not all, First Nations in BC.

Eby’s energy minister, Adrian Dix, also gave thumbs-down to a new oil pipeline, but did say BC supports expanding the capacity of the existing Trans Mountain TMX oil pipeline, and the dredging of Burrard Inlet to allow bigger oil tankers to load Alberta oil from TMX at the port of Vancouver.

While the feds sort out what their position is on fast-tracking new pipelines, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith leaped on Carney’s talk of a new oil pipeline if it’s tied to lowering the carbon impact of the Alberta oilsands and their oil.

She saw “a grand bargain,” with, in her eyes, a new oil pipeline from Alberta to Prince Rupert, BC, producing $20 billion a year in revenue, some of which could then be used to develop and install carbon-capture mechanisms for the oil.

She noted that the Pathways Alliance, six of Canada’s largest oilsands producers, proposed in 2021 a carbon-capture network and pipeline that would transport captured CO₂ from some 20 oilsands facilities, by a new 400-km pipeline, to a hub in the Cold Lake area of Alberta for permanent underground storage.

Preliminary estimates of the cost of that project run up to $20 billion.

The calls for a new oil pipeline from Bruderheim, AB, to Prince Rupert recall the old Northern Gateway pipeline project that was proposed to run from Alberta to Kitimat, BC.

That was first proposed by Enbridge in 2008, and there were estimates that it would mean billions in government revenues and thousands of jobs.

In 2014, Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper approved Northern Gateway. But in 2015, the Federal Court of Appeal overruled the Harper government, ruling that it had “breached the honour of the Crown by failing to consult” with eight affected First Nations.

Then the Liberal government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who succeeded Harper in 2015, effectively killed the project by instituting a ban on oil tanker traffic on BC’s north coast shortly after taking office.

Now Danielle Smith is working to present Carney with a proponent and route for a potential new crude pipeline from Alberta to Prince Rupert.

She said her government is in talks with Canada’s major pipeline companies in the hope that a private-sector proponent will take the lead on a pipeline to move a million barrels a day of crude to the BC coast.

She said she hopes Carney, who won a minority government in April, will make good on his pledge to speed permitting times for major infrastructure projects. Companies will not commit to building a pipeline, Smith said, without confidence in the federal government’s intent to bring about regulatory reform.

Smith also underlined her support for suggested new pipelines north to Grays Bay in Nunavut, east to Churchill, Manitoba, and potentially a new version of Energy East, a proposed, but shelved, oil pipeline to move oil from Alberta and Saskatchewan to refineries and a marine terminal in the Maritimes.

The Energy East oil pipeline was proposed in 2013 by TC Energy, to move Western Canadian crude to an export terminal at St. John, NB, and to refineries in eastern Canada. It was mothballed in 2017 over regulatory hurdles and political opposition in Quebec.

A separate proposal known as GNL Quebec to build a liquefied natural gas pipeline and export terminal in the Saguenay region was rejected by both federal and provincial authorities on environmental grounds. It would have diverted 19.4 per cent of Canadian gas exports to Europe, instead of going to the US.

Now Quebec’s environment minister Benoit Charette says his government would be prepared to take another look at both projects.

The Grays Bay idea is to include an oil pipeline in a corridor that would run from northern BC to Grays Bay in Nunavut. Prime Minister Carney has suggested there could be opportunities for such a pipeline that would carry “decarbonized” oil to new markets.

There have also been several proposals that Canada should build an oil pipeline, and/or a natural gas pipeline, to the port of Churchill. One is from a group of seven senior oil and gas executives who in 2017 suggested the Western Energy Corridor to Churchill.

Now a group of First Nations has proposed a terminal at Port Nelson, on Hudson Bay near Churchill, to ship LNG to Europe and potash to Brazil. And the Manitoba government is looking at the idea.

“There is absolutely a business case for sending our LNG directly to European markets rather than sending our natural gas down to the Gulf Coast and having them liquefy it and ship it over,” says Robyn Lore of project backer NeeStaNan. “It’s in Canada’s interest to do this.”

And, he adds: “The port and corridor will be 100 per cent Indigenous owned.”

Manitoba Premier Wab Kinew has suggested that the potential trade corridor to Hudson Bay could handle oil, LNG, hydrogen, and potash slurry. (One obvious drawback, though, winter ice limits the Hudson Bay shipping season to four months of the year, July to October.)

All this talk of new pipelines comes as Canada begins to look for new markets to reduce reliance on the US, following tariff measures from President Donald Trump.

Alberta Premier Smith says: “I think the world has changed dramatically since Donald Trump got elected in November. I think that’s changed the national conversation.”

And she says that if Carney wants a true nation-building project to fast-track, she can’t think of a better one than a new West Coast oil pipeline.

“I can’t imagine that there will be another project on the national list that will generate as much revenue, as much GDP, as many high paying jobs as a bitumen pipeline to the coast.”

Now we need to know what Mark Carney’s stance on pipelines really is: Is it fast-tracking them to reduce our reliance on the US? Or is it insisting that, for a pipeline, “If a province doesn’t want it, it’s impossible.”

Continue Reading

Alberta

Central Alberta MP resigns to give Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre a chance to regain a seat in Parliament

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Conservative MP Damien Kurek stepped aside in the Battle River-Crowfoot riding to allow Pierre Poilievre to enter a by-election in his native Alberta.

Conservative MP Damien Kurek officially resigned as an MP in the Alberta federal riding of Battle River-Crowfoot in a move that will allow Conservative Party of Canada leader Pierre Poilievre to run in a by-election in that riding to reclaim his seat in Parliament.

June 17 was Kurek’s last day as an MP after he notified the House Speaker of his resignation.

“I will continue to work with our incredible local team to do everything I can to remain the strong voice for you as I support Pierre in this process and then run again here in Battle River-Crowfoot in the next general election,” he said in a statement to media.

“Pierre Poilievre is a man of principle, character, and is the hardest working MP I have ever met,” he added. “His energy, passion, and drive will have a huge benefit in East Central Alberta.”

Kurek won his riding in the April 28 election, defeating the Liberals by 46,020 votes with 81.8 percent of the votes, a huge number.

Poilievre had lost his Ottawa seat to his Liberal rival, a seat that he held for decades, that many saw as putting his role as leader of the party in jeopardy. He stayed on as leader of the Conservative Party.

Poilievre is originally from Calgary, Alberta, so should he win the by-election, it would be a homecoming of sorts.

It is now up to Prime Minister of Canada Mark Carney to call a by-election in the riding.

Despite Kurek’s old seat being considered a “safe” seat, a group called the “Longest Ballot Committee” is looking to run hundreds of protest candidates against Poilievre in the by-election in the Alberta Battle River–Crowfoot riding, just like they did in his former Ottawa-area Carleton riding in April’s election.

Continue Reading

Trending

X