Connect with us

Opinion

NDP and Greens formed government in B.C. The Alberta Liberals and the Alberta Party will merge? For 2019 election all four parties should merge in Alberta.

Published

14 minute read

The 30th general election of Alberta, Canada, will elect members to the Legislative Assembly of Alberta. It will take place on or before May 31, 2019.
We currently have the Alberta New Democratic Party in government. They went from being an opposing party with the Liberals and the Wildrose parties against the ruling conservative dynasty to forming government in 2015. What do we know?

From wikipedia;
The Alberta New Democratic Party or Alberta NDP is a social-democratic political party in Alberta, Canada, which succeeded the Alberta section of the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation and the even earlier Alberta wing of the Canadian Labour Party and the United Farmers of Alberta. From the mid-1980s to 2004, the party abbreviated its name as the “New Democrats” (ND).
The party achieved Official Opposition status in the Legislative Assembly of Alberta from 1986 to 1993. It was swept out of the legislature in 1993 and spent the next two decades in the political wilderness. While it managed to get back into the legislature in 1997, it never won more than four seats. Its time on the fringe of Alberta politics ended in the 2015 provincial election, when it won 54 of the 87 seats in the legislature to form the government of Alberta for the first time. Until 2015, Alberta had been the only province in western Canada—the party’s birthplace—where the NDP had never governed at the provincial level.

Not a lot there, and little about mission and visions on their website. The election is in 19 months so we may learn more about their plans for the future. The Calgary Herald has a poll that shows that if the election was held today, the United Conservative Party would handily win.

How does a former fringe party which campaigns on the left and centre combat the right wing remnants of the former conservative dynasty? Here’s an idea, unite the left and centre parties.
In British Columbia the NDP and the Greens have a union in government. The Alberta Party and the Alberta Liberal Party are almost a union in almost every way except by formality. Why not merge?

Let us look at the Alberta Party, the Alberta Liberal Party and the Alberta Green Party, their missions and see if there is any common ground. I think there is but it is up to politicians to decide to work together or go their separate ways.

Starting with the Alberta Party;

From Wikipedia:

The Alberta Party, formally the Alberta Party Political Association, is a political party in the province of Alberta, Canada. The party describes itself as a centrist and pragmatic party that is not dogmatically ideological in its approach to politics.
For most of its history the Alberta Party was a right-wing organization, until the rise of the Wildrose Alliance as Alberta’s main conservative alternative to the governing Progressive Conservatives attracted away the Alberta Party’s more conservative members. This left a small rump of more left-wing members in control of the Alberta Party. In 2010 the Alberta Party board voted to merge with Renew Alberta, a progressive group that had been organizing to form a new political party in Alberta. The Alberta Party thus shed its conservative past for a more centrist political outlook. The party has been cited in The Globe and Mail and The Economist as part of the break in one-party politics in Alberta.

From The Alberta Party website;

Vision;
We will form a government committed to diversity, integrity, transparency and collaboration. As leaders of positive change, we value inclusiveness, ideas over ideologies, and champion economic, environmental and social responsibility.

Mission
We will:
Model responsible and ethical government.
Generate and implement practical, constructive solutions through listening, citizen engagement, evidence-based policy and building common ground.
Tackle tough issues facing Albertans by examining root causes and maintaining a long-term view of prosperity and sustainability.
Act as guardians of the public interest.
Conduct ourselves in an open, transparent and accountable manner.
Steadfastly refuse to engage in short-sighted, politically motivated, partisan politics.
Provide economic, environmental and social leadership in order to benefit Alberta, Canada and the world.

The Alberta Party is committed to building a policy framework that is based on the following six key values:

1) Prosperity
We believe that private enterprise and entrepreneurship are the keys to our economic success. The government should foster an environment which facilitates economic investment, reduces red tape and encourages creativity.

2) Fiscal Responsibility
We believe that government must use public dollars as effectively and efficiently as possible. The government should balance the books and set aside money for a rainy day. This is best accomplished through long-term planning, common sense and transparency.

3) Social Responsibility
We believe every Albertan deserves the opportunity to succeed. Our government should aspire to provide excellent and innovative public education, public health care, and infrastructure, as well as a compassionate helping hand in times of need. We believe this can be accomplished through responsible use of public funds.

4) Sustainability
We believe that sustainability must be a core value of government. Rethinking unsustainable practices, making strategic investments in research and technology, and implementing smart policy choices will protect and enhance our environment for future generations.

5) Democracy
We believe that public business should be conducted in public. Government should ensure that the legislative process is open, fair, transparent and inclusive of the people it governs. Our government should foster debate, actively engage citizens, and make itself accountable to the people it serves.

6) Quality of life
We believe that a great quality of life requires strong communities. Through support of recreation, sports, arts and culture, government can help to build strong and vibrant communities.

Let us look at the Alberta Liberal Party;

From Wikipedia;
The Alberta Liberal Party is a provincial political party in Alberta, Canada. Founded in 1905, it was the dominant political party until the 1921 election, with the first three provincial Premiers being Liberals. Since 1921, it has formed the official opposition in the Legislative Assembly of Alberta several times, most recently from 1993 until 2012.

From the Alberta Liberal Party website;

The Alberta Liberal Party has been working for Albertans since 1905 and we believe that we must champion our strong values in government. We are fiscally-prudent, a party that proudly supports socially progressive change, and that cares deeply about our stewardship of the environment. We believe that it is our duty to run effective and efficient governments, that respects the autonomy of the individual, and that safeguards the environment. This way we build both a strong society and a vibrant economy.

1) Equal Opportunity
Liberals oppose both privilege and prejudice. Everyone should have as equal as possible an opportunity to participate in society, enjoying equal rights and freedoms, and sharing responsibilities.

2) Free Enterprise
Alberta Liberals have faith in the free enterprise system. Through it, the widest number of opportunities are provided, the greatest number of needs are satisfied, and initiative is most rewarded. Nevertheless, the market system is not perfect. The government has a role to play in preventing exploitation, protecting consumers and preserving the environment. Government also has a role to play in facilitating economic development and competition, and serving public needs which the private sector cannot or will not meet.

3) Fiscal Responsibility
Alberta Liberals believe that government has an obligation to manage the affairs of the province in a prudent and responsible manner. Wasteful spending threatens essential government programs such as health care and education for today’s constituents, and fairness dictates that future generations not be burdened with our debts.

4) Environmental Responsibility
Alberta Liberals believe that the protection of the environment is essential to the longterm health of our planet and ourselves, and to our quality of life. Environmental policy must look beyond a traditional view of economics to reflect the cultural and spiritual importance of the environment in our lives. Responsible policy-makers must consider the environment a sacred trust.

5) Change
Liberals have always been reformers. We seek to improve the system as we search for ways of improving the human condition. We are not afraid to initiate change. Without compromising our principles, our search for solutions is driven not by rigid ideology but by the question, “What is best?”

Thirdly let us look at the Green Party of Canada;

From Wikipedia;
The Green Party of Alberta is a registered political party in Alberta, Canada, that is allied with the Green Party of Canada, and the other provincial Green parties. The party was registered by Elections Alberta on December 22, 2011, to replace the deregistered Alberta Greens, and ran its first candidates for office in the 2012 provincial election under the name Evergreen Party of Alberta. The party changed its name to “Green Party of Alberta” on November 1, 2012.

From Green Party of Alberta website;

Mission
To participate in Alberta electoral politics with the aim of having such a provincial government come to power;
To educate Albertans as to the need for a government committed to Green principles
The Green Party of Alberta is committed to the 6 principles of the world-wide Green Party movement:

1) Ecological wisdom
Human beings are part of the natural world and we respect the specific value of all forms of life.

2)Non-violence
We are committed to non-violence and cooperation between states, inside societies and between individuals

3) Participatory democracy
In a healthy democracy all citizens have the right to express their views and are able to directly participate in the environmental, economic, social and political decisions which affect their lives

4) Respect for diversity
We honour all forms of diversity – for example, racial, linguistic, ethnic, sexual, religious and spiritual – within the context of individual responsibility toward all beings.

5) Social justice
We honour all forms of diversity – for example, racial, linguistic, ethnic, sexual, religious and spiritual – within the context of individual responsibility toward all beings.

6) Sustainability
We recognize the limited scope for the material expansion of society within the biosphere and the need to maintain biodiversity through the sustainable use of renewable resources.

Each of the party has differences in goals and priorities but they have enough similarities. Is it enough to form a coalition or corroborative government? Can they step away from egos and work together to offer an option to the United Conservative Party? Will we be sliding into another 40 year conservative dynasty? We will find out in May 2019.

Follow Author

Business

Dallas mayor invites NYers to first ‘sanctuary city from socialism’

Published on

From The Center Square

By

After the self-described socialist Zohran Mamdani won the Democratic primary for mayor in New York, Dallas Mayor Eric Johnson invited New Yorkers and others to move to Dallas.

Mamdani has vowed to implement a wide range of tax increases on corporations and property and to “shift the tax burden” to “richer and whiter neighborhoods.”

New York businesses and individuals have already been relocating to states like Texas, which has no corporate or personal income taxes.

Johnson, a Black mayor and former Democrat, switched parties to become a Republican in 2023 after opposing a city council tax hike, The Center Square reported.

“Dear Concerned New York City Resident or Business Owner: Don’t panic,” Johnson said. “Just move to Dallas, where we strongly support our police, value our partners in the business community, embrace free markets, shun excessive regulation, and protect the American Dream!”

Fortune 500 companies and others in recent years continue to relocate their headquarters to Dallas; it’s also home to the new Texas Stock Exchange (TXSE). The TXSE will provide an alternative to the New York Stock Exchange and Nasdaq and there are already more finance professionals in Texas than in New York, TXSE Group Inc. founder and CEO James Lee argues.

From 2020-2023, the Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington MSA reported the greatest percentage of growth in the country of 34%, The Center Square reported.

Johnson on Thursday continued his invitation to New Yorkers and others living in “socialist” sanctuary cities, saying on social media, “If your city is (or is about to be) a sanctuary for criminals, mayhem, job-killing regulations, and failed socialist experiments, I have a modest invitation for you: MOVE TO DALLAS. You can call us the nation’s first official ‘Sanctuary City from Socialism.’”

“We value free enterprise, law and order, and our first responders. Common sense and the American Dream still reside here. We have all your big-city comforts and conveniences without the suffocating vice grip of government bureaucrats.”

As many Democratic-led cities joined a movement to defund their police departments, Johnson prioritized police funding and supporting law and order.

“Back in the 1800s, people moving to Texas for greater opportunities would etch ‘GTT’ for ‘Gone to Texas’ on their doors moving to the Mexican colony of Tejas,” Johnson continued, referring to Americans who moved to the Mexican colony of Tejas to acquire land grants from the Mexican government.

“If you’re a New Yorker heading to Dallas, maybe try ‘GTD’ to let fellow lovers of law and order know where you’ve gone,” Johnson said.

Modern-day GTT movers, including a large number of New Yorkers, cite high personal income taxes, high property taxes, high costs of living, high crime, and other factors as their reasons for leaving their states and moving to Texas, according to multiple reports over the last few years.

In response to Johnson’s invitation, Gov. Greg Abbott said, “Dallas is the first self-declared “Sanctuary City from Socialism. The State of Texas will provide whatever support is needed to fulfill that mission.”

The governor has already been doing this by signing pro-business bills into law and awarding Texas Enterprise Grants to businesses that relocate or expand operations in Texas, many of which are doing so in the Dallas area.

“Texas truly is the Best State for Business and stands as a model for the nation,” Abbott said. “Freedom is a magnet, and Texas offers entrepreneurs and hardworking Texans the freedom to succeed. When choosing where to relocate or expand their businesses, more innovative industry leaders recognize the competitive advantages found only in Texas. The nation’s leading CEOs continually cite our pro-growth economic policies – with no corporate income tax and no personal income tax – along with our young, skilled, diverse, and growing workforce, easy access to global markets, robust infrastructure, and predictable business-friendly regulations.”

Continue Reading

conflict

US airstrike on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Was it obliteration?

Published on

A satellite image of the Isfahan nuclear research center in Iran shows visible damage to structures and nearby tunnel entrances from recent US airstrikes. / Satellite image (c) 2025 Maxar Technologies.

Seymour Hersh Seymour Hersh

The US attack on Iran may not have wiped out its nuclear ambitions but it did set them back years

I started my career in journalism during the early 1960s as a reporter for the City News Bureau of Chicago, a now long-gone local news agency that was set up by the Chicago newspapers in the 1890s to cover the police and fire departments, City Hall, the courts, the morgue, and so on. It was a training ground, and the essential message for its aspiring reporters was: “If your mother says she loves you, check it out.”

It was a message I wish our cable networks would take to heart. CNN and MSNBC, basing their reporting on an alleged Defense Intelligence Agency analysis, have consistently reported that the Air Force raids in Iran on June 22 did not accomplish their primary goal: total destruction of Iran’s nuclear-weapons capacity. US newspapers also joined in, but it was the two nominally liberal cable channels, with their dislike—make that contempt—for President Donald Trump, that drove the early coverage.

There was no DIA analysis per se. All US units that engage in combat must file an “after-action report” to the DIA after a military engagement. In this case, the report would have come from the US Central Command, located at MacDill Air Force base in Tampa, Florida. CENTCOM is responsible for all US military operations in the Middle East, Egypt, Central Asia, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. One US official involved in the process told me that “the first thing out of the box is you have to tell your boss what happened.” It was that initial report of the bombing attack that was forwarded to DIA headquarters along the Potomac River in Washington and copied or summarized by someone not authorized to do so and sent to the various media outlets.

The view of many who were involved in the planning and execution of the mission is that the report was summarized and leaked “for political purposes”—to cast immediate doubt on the success of the mission. The early reports went so far as to suggest that Iran’s nuclear program has survived incapacitation by the attack. Seven US B-2 “Spirit” bombers, each carrying two deep-penetration “bunker-busters” weighing 30,000 pounds, had flown without challenge from their base in Missouri to the primary target: Iran’s Fordo nuclear facility, concealed deep inside a mountain twenty miles north of the city of Qom.

The planning for the attack began with the knowledge that the main target—the working area of the nuclear program—was buried at least 260 feet below the rocky surface at Fordo. The gas centrifuges spinning there were repeatedly enriching uranium, in what is known as a cascade, not to weapons-grade level—uranium-235 isotopes enriched to 90 percent—but to 60 percent. Further processing to create weapons grade uranium, if Iran chose to do so, could be done in a matter of weeks, or less. The Air Force planning group had also been informed before the bombing raid, most likely by the Israelis, who have a vast spy network in Iran, that more than 450 pounds of the enriched gas stored at Fordo had been shipped to safety at another vital Iranian nuclear site at Isfahan, 215 miles south of Tehran. Isfahan was the only known facility in Iran capable of converting the Fordo gas into a highly enriched metal—a critical early stage of building the bomb. Isfahan also was a separate target of the US attack on Fordo, and was pulverized by Tomahawk missiles fired by a U.S. submarine operating in the Gulf of Aden, off Yemen.

As a journalist who for decades has covered the nascent nuclear crisis in the Middle East, it seemed clear to me and to informed friends I have in Washington and Israel that if Fordo somehow survived its bunker-buster attack, as was initially suggested, and continued to enrich more uranium, Isfahan would not. No enrichment, no Iranian bomb.

I’ve been frustrated and angry at cable news coverage for years, and that includes Fox News, too, and decided to try and find the real story. If your mother says she loves you, check it out. And I checked out enough of it to share.

I was told that “the first question for the American planners was how big was the actual workspace at Fordo? Was it a structure? We had to find that out before we got rid of it.” Some of the planners estimated that the working space “was the size of two hockey rinks: 200 feet long and 85 feet wide.” It came to 34,000 square feet. The height of the underground working space was assumed to be ten-and-a-half feet—I was not told the genesis of that assumption—and the size of the target was determined to be 357,000 cubic feet.

The next step was to measure the power of the dozen or more bunker-busters that were planned to be “carefully spaced and dropped” by the US B-2 bombers, using the most advanced guidance systems. (During one high-level session in Washington, one of the Air Force planners was asked what would happen if the B-2’s guidance systems were corrupted by an outside signal. “We’d miss the target” was the answer.)

I was assured that even if the rough estimate of the working space at Fordo was far off, the bombers targeting Fordo each carried a 30,000-pound bomb with an explosive payload of as much as five thousand pounds, which was more than enough to pulverize the mythical hockey rinks, or even a much larger working space.

Some of the bombs were also outfitted with what is known as a hard target void sensing fuze, which enabled the bombs to penetrate multiple layers of a site like Fordo before detonating. This would maximize the destructive effect. Each bomb, dropped in sequence, would create a force of rubble that would cause increasing havoc in the working areas deep inside the mountain.

“The bombs made their own hole. We built a 30,000-pound steel bullet,” the official told me, referring with pride to the bunker-busters.

Most important, he said, was that there were no post-strike hints detected of radioactivity—more evidence that the 450 pounds of enriched uranium had been moved from Fordo to the reprocessing site at Isfahan prior to the US attack there, which was code-named “Midnight Hammer.” That operation included a third US strike at yet another nuclear facility at Natanz.

“The Air Force got everything on the hit list,” the official told me. “Even if Iran rebuilds some centrifuges, it will still need Isfahan. There is no conversion capability without it.”

Why not, I asked, tell the public about the success of the raid and the fact that Iran no longer has a potential nuclear weapon?

The answer: “There will be a top-secret report about all of this, but we don’t tell people how hard we work. We tell the public what we think it wants to hear.”

The US official, asked about the future of the Iranian nuclear program, quickly acknowledged that “there is a communication problem” when it comes to the fate of the program.

The intent of the strike planners, he said, “was to prevent the Iranians from building a nuclear weapon in the near term—a year or so—with the hope they would not try again. The clear understanding was that there was no expectation to ‘obliterate’ every aspect of their nuclear program. We don’t even know what that is.

“Obliteration means the glass—[eliminating] Iran’s nuclear program—is full. The planning and the results are the glass is half-full. For Trump critics, the results are the glass is half-empty—the centrifuges may have survived and four hundred pounds of 60 percent enriched uranium are missing. The bombs could not be assured to penetrate the centrifuge chamber . . . too deep, but they could cover them up [with rocks and other bomb debris] and in the process cause unknown damage to them.

“Whether the 60 percent [enriched uranium] was there or not is irrelevant because without centrifuges they cannot refine it to weapons grade. Add to this the research and refinement and conversion from gas to metal—required for a bomb—at Isfahan are also gone.

“Results? Glass is half-full . . . a couple of years of respite and uncertain future. So now Trump’s defense is Full Glass. Critics? Half-empty. Reality? Half-full. There you are.”

The immediate beneficiary of the use of US force in Iran will not be a more placid Middle East, but Israel, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The Israeli Air Force and army are still killing massive numbers of Palestinians in Gaza.

There remains no evidence that Iran was on the cusp of becoming a nuclear power. But as the world has known for decades, Israel maintains a significant nuclear arsenal that it officially claims does not exist.

This is a story not about the bigger picture, which is muddled, but about a successful US mission that was the subject of a lot of sloppy reporting because of a reviled president. It would have been a breakthrough had anyone in the mainstream press spoken or written about the double standard that benefits Israel and its nuclear umbrella, but in America that remains a taboo.

Subscribe to Seymour Hersh.

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Continue Reading

Trending

X