Well that inspires confidence.
When LifeWorks respectfully submitted its report to the Smith government outlining how Alberta could move from CPP to an Alberta Pension Plan, the executive summary was signed by someone who preferred to remain anonymous, hence their signature was “Redacted to protect privacy.”
Perhaps Anonymous was worried about having to justify the preposterous assumption that Alberta, which made 16% of the contributions to CPP, was entitled to 53% ($334 billion) of the fund when it waltzes out the door.
This is extremely problematic because everything in the LifeWorks report—the assertion that APP will result in higher pension benefits and lower contribution rates while saving Albertans $5 billion/year—hinges on the $334B assumption being reasonable.
It’s not.
The CPP Investment Board stated that Alberta which contributed 16% can’t “legally, realistically or morally be allowed to claim more than half the assets.”
The economist, Trevor Tombe, says claiming 53% of the fund is “transparently unreasonable” noting that if BC and Ontario adopted Alberta’s math, the three provinces would withdraw 128% of the fund.
Instead Tombe suggests Alberta’s share of CPP would range from 16% ($100B) at low end to 25% ($150B) at the very high end. His preferred estimate is 20% of CPP’s assets.
Given this gap between reasonable and out to lunch, the question of how much Alberta will take out of the CPP fund will be determined by the Supreme Court of Canada. And that will take years.
Would Albertans be better of with an APP?
Tombe says an APP offers scope for a “modestly lower contribution rate” by employers and workers, but that’s offset by much higher demographic and economic risk. For example, if Alberta experiences balanced migration in and out of the province, two-thirds of that “modest” benefit will evaporate.
The LifeWorks report outlines a number of medium to high risks of failure relating to the transition from CPP to APP. This risk is lowest if Alberta sticks with the existing CPP resources and systems to manage APP; the risk (and cost) is much higher if Alberta uses Alberta public service providers or the private sector to invest and administer our pension funds.
Smith says she wants an APP because then her government could control the fund, however the CPP Investment Board is an independent body, it’s unclear it would agree to administer APP if Smith insists on controlling APP’s investment strategy.
Even if CPP agreed to administer APP on these terms, the UCP government’s track record when it comes to investment strategy is pitiful–$1.3B lost on Keystone XL, $3B lost by AIMCo, God knows how much money down the drain with the privatization and de-privatization of DynaLife, the list goes on.
Finally, the fact that Smith will likely invest our pension funds in the fossil fuel energy sector should scare the bejesus out of us.
Pension experts like Keith Ambachsheer say if your economy is dependent on the health of a particular industry, and you also put your retirement savings into that industry, you’re putting yourself in double jeopardy. Instead, you should adopt a diversified investment strategy, one that won’t tank if/when that sector goes into decline.
Why are they doing it?
When Smith was running in the last election, she assured Albertans that “no one is touching anybody’s pension.”
She’s reneged on that promise and is pushing Alberta into an APP which in Tombe’s analysis could be “modestly” better than CPP but puts our pensions at greater risk.
So why is she doing it?
Is she trying to get back at the federal government? If so, she’s managed to alienate her conservative buddies, Pierre Poilievre, Doug Ford and Scott Moe with her claim on 53% of the CPP fund.
Is she trying to keep the fossil fuel energy sector happy? Isn’t her government’s munificence in the form of tax breaks and subsidies enough? (Incidentally the executives running these companies don’t care what happens to CPP, it’s pocket change in their multi-million dollar investment portfolios).
Is it a way to keep the Free Alberta/TBA folks happy? Good luck with that.
Is it a smoke screen to divert attention away from her government’s failure to fix healthcare and education?
Whatever the reason, the minute Smith tabled the anonymous, unrealistic LifeWorks report, she demonstrated she cannot be trusted with our pensions.
A referendum on this issue is coming. Vote wisely.
Susan on the Soapbox 
Great to be home after a trip afar. I had almost forgotten how bad the UCP can be. I think the anonymous signature to the executive summary of the Lifeworks report really says it all. A group that declines or fears to be identified for their work is somewhat suspicious. How long can they pull the wool over too many people’s eyes ? Avalon Roberts
Welcome home Avalon! What the anonymous LifeWorks person failed to consider was that when this goes to court (and it will) someone from LifeWorks will have to take the stand to explain under oath how they came up with the $334 billion number. That means taking the court through all the assumptions, justifying them, and explaining why LifeWorks decided $334 billion was a reasonable and credible number. Frankly, there will be nothing left of this witness or LifeWork’s credibility after opposing counsel for CPP, the other provinces and the federal government get through with him or her.
There’s no good reason why Smith is reneging on her promise not to touch pensions….she’s likely doing it because its been one of her brainwaves for some time already……….and having finally reached a position of power, she’s going to make the most of it.
This woman is an ideologue….trained by the Frazer Institute and the Manning centre folks……she learned long ago to juggle the figures, spin the stats, and make wild promises, in order to convince the gullible to go her way. This time it may seem like she’s overshot reason by a large margin………
But I suspect we underestimate how ignorant of accounting facts and investment rules and regulations her base is. As advantaged Albertans, why shouldn’t we walk off with the lion’s share of everything, pay less for our premiums and get more per month when we retire????
Sounds good to me. But then, I’ll likely be pushing up daisies before this smartest gal in the room gets her wish. Its the politics of outrageous promises and industrial sized rage farming.
Let’s continue to talk sense to our friends and relatives. An Alberta pension plan is a non starter.
Ingamarie, Your comment about us underestimating how ignorant of accounting facts and investment rules her base is was reinforced today by a letter to the editor in the Globe & Mail, The letter writer suggested an APP administered by Albertans in Alberta “would give the province an almost Norwegian-like wealth economy.” Obviously the writer is unaware that Smith is considering allowing CPP to administer APP (building the APP from scratch here in Alberta would cost $2 billion) and unlike Norway’s sovereign fund which is invested in international investments, not the oil and gas sector, Smith wants to dictate investment strategy into supporting Alberta’s business sector, ie oil and natural gas.
Educating those who blindly support the APP because it’s another chance to goad the feds, is going to be very challenging.
Cui Bono (Who Benefits) is the only question that needs to be asked here and all is revealed – in all its tawdry velliety. An APP would be perfect vehicle for the UCP to lay their mitts on a pool of cash to double down dumb bankroll the O&G actors here in Western Canada.
It ain’t hard to predict the actions of the UCP this term – endless performative frission for the base by tweaking the nose of the Feds while stoking the sore-bigtoe “me-me-me ohhh poor me” Alberta separatist whinge. Floating the APP is a great bean ball to back the Feds from the plate – Double Win!
One does have to hand it to her though – once she gets an idea, she’s like a dim pitbull on a moldy bone – Dave Cournoyer dug out an OpEd piece written by Smith over 20 years ago on this very topic – see https://daveberta.substack.com/p/alberta-pension-plan-games-begin
One does wonder though what will happen to these wingnut UCP ideas if “The-Man-with-the-most-slappable-face-in-Federal-Politics” Pierre Polievre manages a majority Federal Government?
Hell, will she ever survive her first internal party leadership review after she’s been so keen to be playing around with Alberta seniors pensions? One wonders what was her brain-trust thinking here …. (I shudder calling Anderson et al a brain trust…. sticky gumball bowl? Sock half-full of humbugs??)
Lee, great question! What was Smith’s brain-trust thinking? When Smith said Alberta was entitled to withdraw $334B from CPP she immediately put herself at loggerheads with Pierre Poilievre and all of the provinces and territories, including the 5 headed up by conservative governments. All of them will side with the feds in disputing the reasonableness of the $334B number.
The media has to press Poilievre on his views of Smith’s position. I can’t imagine any circumstance under which he’d agree the $334B number is reasonable.
Wouldn’t it be ironic if when this whole thing blows up it takes Smith and Poilievre down. It would be a replay of Smith’s time on the Calgary Board of Education. Things became so toxic during Smith’s time there that the PC government disbanded the CBE until the trustees could be replaced.
OMG I did not know about Daniela on the Calgary Board of Education – what a treat.
Thanks very much for your comment on this most ludicrous of proposals by our Smith led Provincial government. It is such a fantastical amount… to be jeered and ridiculed… or worse still, ignored because it is so delusional. I’ve asked myself the same question… why is she doing this? I think it is to divert attention from the other chicanery that she and her colleagues are up to… we have to keep eye on our health care and education systems… and other subtle ways that the UCP government can undermine the future of our province…. Despite looking like a complete idiot in her presentation of this APP proposal, Smith is no fool and no doubt has other dangerous ideas up her sleeve.. and behind her blandly smiling facade…
Lee you’re welcome! I agree Smith has other dangerous ideas up her sleeve. I think we’ll see them roll out in the Fall sitting and I fear they will be a hodge-podge of policies aimed at exacerbating the culture wars (which sadly appear to be part of modern politics) in the form of attacks on the LBGTQ2S+ community (a surefire winner with her base), Also we’ll see subsidies to the oil and gas sector in the form of *RStar to prop up deadbeat companies that refuse to clean up their mess; coal mining in the Rockies will rear its ugly head (again) and so on.
It’s going to be a long hard fall. But we need to stay on top of the UCP agenda because they’re coming after all of us.
Susan: WordPress is still giving me grief.
Dwayne, I feel your pain. WP wouldn’t let me sign into my own blog today. I don’t know what the bright lights who run the program are thinking but I wish they’d stop tinkering with it.
Susan: Thanks for sharing another great blog. I’ll try and comment again. It seems like Danielle Smith is intent on pushing her agendas forward, without any understanding of the consequences. She behaves like a petulant teenager, who wants to have her own way, but the parents will not allow it. A provincial pension plan is not a sound idea, given how much money was lost with AIMCo, at different times. On two occasions, under AIMCo, money from the Heritage Savings Trust Fund was lost. Almost $2 billion was gone from it, and at another time additional money was lost. Due to bad investments in the volatile oil and gas markets, under AIMCo, $4 billion worth of pension money had been lost. This is not a gamble we should be taking. It is the retirement of people we are talking about. Danielle Smith is acting like a loudmouth, and is trying to attack the federal government. What is this supposed to accomplish? The Alberta pension plan was not going to be on the agenda for the provincial election in May. Danielle Smith was being cunning and sneaky, and this helped the UCP return to power. Had the Alberta pension plan been part of the provincial election itinerary, the UCP would have been soundly defeated. A referendum on the matter is going to be very expensive. This could also be a detractor from the E-Coli issue, that involved so many children getting sick from it, at the daycares in Alberta. It seems that it’s almost a weekly occurrence where the UCP winds up doing something really stupid. What will it be the next time? It just feels like there never was a provincial election in Alberta, because we are not seeing any positive changes with the UCP in power. The UCP continued where they left off. I’ll share some more fitting music. This is a Pink Floyd song from 1973, called Money. It was written by Roger Waters.
Dwayne: I’m so glad you’re back with your song picks! So this one, Money, absolutely nailed it. “I’m alright, Jack, keep your hands off of my stack” and “Share it fairly, but don’t take a slice of my pie”. Perfect lyrics. I remember talking to someone at an NDP event, a rich person who (surprise) supported the NDP. He made the comment if the rich didn’t do more to rectify income inequity and support social programs, those who were less fortunate would reach a point where they’d refuse to be left in the ditch. It was a pay now, or pay dearly later scenario. I thought that was an intriguing insight coming from someone who had everything that money could buy.
Thank you to Lee Neville, for the link to Dave Cournoyer’s blog and his historical research.
That old op-ed by Smith includes a clue to the whole rationalization (I can’t call it a rationale, there’s nothing rational about it) behind snagging Albertans’ money from the Canada Pension Plan. Smith opined in 2003, “Alberta might not do a better job of managing its own pension fund, but it couldn’t do any worse.”
It should be no surprise that Smith was wrong even then. As Trevor Tombe pointed out in his recent paper, the CPP was extensively modernized to prevent its going broke. That happened in 1997. In 2003, Smith was still peddling the debunked idea the CPP was going under—and soon. (I strongly advise you to read Tombe’s paper; follow Ms. Soapbox’s hyperlink, above.)
I’m not surprised that Smith still clings to this 20-year-old fallacy today. The Free Alberta Fantasists listen to each other way too much. The $334 billion grab is similarly based on the original legislation, which included the opt-out clause at the behest of Ontario premier John Robarts—in 1964. It’s been superseded by updated legislation, and anyway the other governments would have to agree to hand over ANY cash to Smith. I don’t see that happening.
While Tombe’s analysis indicates Alberta COULD go it alone, he also points out many potential risks. There are also important questions still unanswered, and Tombe points out his analysis “is not a substitute for more detailed actuarial assessments, which—to be clear—are not yet possible”; in short, there’s more work to be done. Don’t count on Danielle Smith and the Free Alberta Fantasists to do the work.
So why the fuss, anyway? Quebec envy (“Hey, they got their own pension plan. It ain’t fair!”) won’t benefit Albertans. Pointless arguments with Justin Trudeau (“Don’t tell us what to do!”) won’t solve any problems; quite the opposite. (And BTW, why hasn’t Pierre Poilievre waded into this? Deafening silence….) Maybe, just maybe, it’s merely another attempt to create a “bargaining chip” for future negotiations.
I wish I could draw political cartoons. Picture Miz Smith standing under a classic cartoon 10-ton weight. Dynamite is bundled around the chain, and a wire leads to a big, red button in Smith’s hand. She’s screeching at Justin Trudeau, “I’ll press the button! I will!!!” He’s standing just outside the splash zone….
To complete the cartoon, change the original label on that 10-ton weight from “Sovereignty Act” to “Alberta Pension Plan.” Update as needed….
I think Smith’s immediate motivation for pushing this may have changed. Small cap oil companies support her and they are having trouble attracting investment. If she gets an APP she can control, she can invest it in a bunch of failing oil companies while the oil industry shrinks due to the energy transition she is refusing to admit is happening.
She is entirely focussed on serving the oil and gas industry, not Albertans.
You’re probalby right, Valerie. The short-term goal would be to find a big pot of ready cash for oil & gas bailouts. In this, as so much else, Smith et al will be stymied. The CPP legislation allows a provincial government to opt out–but only AFTER a three-year period to untangle the legal and finacial aspects (as per T. Tombe paper).
Long-term, it’s still part of the Free Alberta Fantasy. I cannot believe they’ll succeed in enraging enough people, either in Oilberduh or the rest of Canada, to succeed.
Valerie: this is an excellent point. As you said the small cap companies, unlike the large caps, are having difficulty attracting investment. What better source of investment dollars than Smith and through Smith all those Canadians (including Albertans) who contributed to CPP.
Given the UCP’s track record, even if we got the $344B it would be gone before our kids retired.
Thanks Mike J. I loved the cartoon you created in our imaginations. I heard Trevor Tombe on CBC’s The Current. He was crystal clear that Smith’s $334B number was a fantasy and suggested Smith could be using the threat of withdrawing from CPP as another mechanism to bludgeon Trudeau to get what she wants. What, pray tell? Does she think she’ll be able to force the feds to give her a pass on emissions reductions targets? That didn’t work when Kenney threatened a referendum on equalization, so what does she think she’s going to accomplish?
Tombe also said It was a risky political strategy to use the CPP as a political football. I’d go even further than that. Given that Smith’s base is packed with poorly informed people, it is a cynical, divisive and corrosive tactic that drives Albertans farther apart and shames us all in the eyes of the nation.
The richest province in the country has no business being this greedy.
Here’s another fun question for Queen Danielle of Qberduh. Who wrote the LifeWorks report? In fact, what exactly is LifeWorks? A few minutes with Professor Bing produced a long list of references to an employee-wellness program, something about health benefits and even references to “Telus HEALTH (formerly LifeWorks)”—but nothing that looked related to financial consultancy. There was even a Wikipedia entry about “LifeWorks, formerly Morneau Sheppell” being bought by Telus. MS officially closed down on 1 September 2022—so it ain’t them who wrote that so-called report. So who did?
There’s a “Lifeworks Consulting Ltd.” In Dun & Bradstreet for Edmonton (don’t bother, the link timed out), and the Better Business Bureau similarly lists Lifeworks Consulting Ltd. at this link:
https://www.bbb.org/ca/ab/edmonton/profile/first-aid-instruction/lifeworks-consulting-ltd-0117-127102
–but there’s little or no info on what they do.
According to Zoominfo.com, Lifeworks Consulting in Edmonton offers training for various first aid courses:
https://www.zoominfo.com/c/lifeworks-consulting-ltd/541759602
But nothing resembling a business or financial consultant that I can see, much less a specialist in pension-plan administration.
What gives? I cannot believe that even Danielle Smith would be dumb enough to ask a wellness-coaching and (perhaps) health insurance organization to opine on a brand-new pension scam—I mean, “scheme”–for Albertans.
So, I ask again: WHO DID DANIELLE SMITH PAY FOR THIS REPORT?
Mike J: I understand that Telus took over LifeWorks, formerly Morneau Shepell, in Sept 2022 in order to gain access to a new source of revenue–employee wellness. But as you wisely point out this is not the same as consulting in the arcane world of the CPP pension structure, its legal foundation, and valuation.
I would not be surprised if and when this matter gets to court and Smith is required to put the author of the LifeWorks report on the stand we will discover that the report that’s the foundation of her $334B valuation is deeply flawed.
Unfortunately by then we’ll have been dragged through a misleading and divisive pro-APP PR exercise.
It’s a shameful waste of our tax dollars.
Thanks, Susan, for the clarification. If you, I and papajaxn all found the same information, it sure looks like Smith—more likely, a staffer or one of the Free Alberta Fantasists—paid a ringer to produce the “report” they wanted.
I would not be surprised if that speculative staffer/ FAF operative wrote the outline and somehow found someone dumb enough to make it look official. We may never know, unless this shameful deception does end up in court.
A report by the UCP or paid by them can be anything really. What are their standards? Convoy consultants? Conspiracy theories from Tweeter?
Gosh a clown from the last Ralph Klein Circus is back. Is Jim Dinning so devoid of self confidence that decided to work for Danielle Smith? Wow how low can you go Jimmy?
Susan: Here is my next song pick. This is new music from Robin Trower, and the song is called I’ll Be Moving On. It features Sari Schorr on vocals. Robin Trower’s new album, Joyful Sky, will be released next month. This song is off of that album. Robin Trower turned 78, in March. He was in the British rock band Procol Harum, before he went on a long and well received solo career in 1971. He did briefly return to Procol Harum in 1991, and was on their album, The Prodigal Stranger.
Excellent words of comfort.
Dwayne, I’m impressed. Robin Trower is 78 and he turns out songs like this.
I’ve got to say the lyrics are particularly appropriate in this case. My husband and I have said that if Alberta moves to the APP we will be “moving on” because we’re Canadians who live in Alberta, not Albertans who happen to live in Canada. And Smith’s latest attack in the string of attacks on Canada in the name of Alberta are just too much to bear.
Susan: This is Robin Trower’s 12th studio album, since 2000. It would be nice if there was a tribute concert for Gary Brooker, and Keith Reid, who were part of Procol Harum, and Robin Trower could be there. Robin Trower is on the original version of Conquistador, released in 1967, before Procol Harum redid the song live with the Edmonton Symphony Orchestra, in 1971, after Robin Trower left the band that year. Dave Ball replaced him on guitar, and is on that live album. Gary Brooker and Keith Reid passed away in 2022, and in 2023.
Could not agree more. It is a sick feeling to listen to all her crap but this one about Canada is just total garbage.
Like you, I am a Canadian that lives in Alberta. This to me is terrible not just for us in Alberta but all those Canadians witnessing this display of selfishness, greed always poking that we are being robbed by the rest of Canada.
It is not just being in bed with the Oil companies, it is the fact that the citizen is a problem to them. Every time there is an announcement is always something against us or to contain us or being so controversial that they get mentioned in international media.
Since the UCP took power I see on the faces, not just disbelief but grief. We really have to think seriously about a political system that brings this kind of mediocrity to the top of leadership in Alberta. This is too dangerous for us to ignore.
One of my favorite groups. I had no idea at that time what Edmonton was or where.
Believe it or not it was the first time in my life I had heard about Edmonton because of Procol Harum playing with the philharmonic orchestra.
Nick Taylor, the former Alberta Liberal leader once said that the dream of every small business owner in Alberta was to sell out and retire to BC, and that was the fundamental problem with Alberta politics. Too few regard Alberta as their permanent home. We don’t treat the place like owners, much less our home place.
Caron for the UCP and the Conservatives in general, the feeling of home is not part of the equation. What they look for is money, the economy. Of course with numbers like 184 thousand coming in last year alone and part of the retired generation going away, this province is fertile ground for transient people that could careless about what happens here. A great percentage of people living in Alberta came here for easy money in the oil industry. The results is what you suggest in your message
‘Too few regard Alberta as their permanent home. We don’t treat the place like owners, much less our home place.’
This is a big problem but not for the UCP because they can control labour way easier when they do not feel at home.
I agree with you on this.
Carlos: you comment reminded me of my life as a teenager on Vancourver Island. My dad built houses for a living. The number of houses he built for people moving in from Saskatchewan and Alberta was astounding. It’s funny how Albertans who hated the thought of paying a sales tax and higher income taxes have no problem with either when they move to BC.
When you mention the author not wanting to show their face, perhaps there are some strange background characters that might know more than they let on. LifeWorks, used to belong to Bill Morneau when it was Warren Scheppel which divorced themselves from him by changing to LifeWorks. Then it was suddenly taken over by the “Enwhistle Engine otherwise aka Telus Health” So you have the former Federal Minister of Finance ex-Cabinet Minister known as Bill (prime Minister in waiting) perhaps may know something about this. Now the Telus-owned LifeWorks a division of Telus Health distributes the pension payments and records formerly dispersed by the Royal Bank of Canada in regard to one pension I receive. The difference is that the pensions now are never dispensed on the first day of the month when the first of the month is a SAT, Sun or holiday Monday. The money is disbursed on the first “banking day of the month when the banks are supposedly open.” Why does one company believe they can run everything that has to do with people’s well-being? Why are the statements of earnings for tax purposes under this LifeWorks operation usually the last one received? Will they have anything to do with the new APP?
So, LifeWorks is really part of Telus Health? And they administer (some, a, one single) pension plan?
I asked Professor Bing to help me find info on LifeWorks—and I hope WordPress will eventually post my comment here—and found some links to Telus Health and a Wikipedia entry on Moreau Sheppell. But nothing popped up that even IMPLIED LifeWorks is a consulting firm specializing in, well, anything. Health benefits and corporate wellness programs, as I recall.
Your revelation that LifeWorks delays your pension payment on those days that banks are nominally closed is suggestive, and the suggestion ain’t a good one. Hanging on to other peoples’ money for even a few days a year can rake in big interest payments for the guys who write the cheques. And “[w]ill they have anything to do with the new APP?” I’d bet the fix is already in—LifeWorks will be the administrators of the new and improved Alberta Porkbarrel Plan.
God help us, every one….
Papajaxn: this is excellent background information.
I was struck by the questions at the end of your comment: I think the answer to the first two questions is “They believe they can run everything and they hold statements of earning until the last minute because they’re large corporations and at the end of the day it’s all about the bottom line.” Or more simply put, “If it makes money, let’s do it.”
That brings us to your very last question, which is a very good question indeed. I would guess that if Telus is good to the government and delivers the kinds of reports the government wants to see, it will have a leg up in the competition (assuming there is on) to determine who gets to run the new APP. Funny how that works.
Thank you Susan. Well done.
Why is her approach always so pathetically shallow?
I would like to add more but the thing that won’t leave me for the moment is the picture of someone whispering words into her ear. She digested those words, turns them into her own words, then blats them out.
The truly interesting person here is the word whisperer.
Rob Anderson et al?
This reminds me of the Russian/Putin propaganda strategy. Pick on a major issue, lie about it vociferously and ad nauseam. But every issue is a wedge between Alberta and the rest of Canada. The end game is make belonging to Canada completely unpalatable.
Then the point of all this seems to be simple Western (Alberta) Separatism.
Why does Take Back Alberta push this, what’s point?
Perhaps at the very least it separates Alberta fossil fuels from environmental responsibility. No energy transition until the final bit of carbon has been given freely to the world as CO2.
This strategy might be to create an independent country with new laws that ignore indigenous rights, deny any obligation for environmental cleanup.
What is the effective royalty rate if environmental cleanup and even perhaps municipal tax liabilities are removed from the ledgers?
The owners of these firms can then retire to someplace that is not a god awful garbage dump.
Mike
>
I’ve always thought Alberta separatists are the stupidest people in Alberta.
Here’s a thread about Smith’s goal
https://nitter.net/JasonOnTheDrums/status/1705266067172622490#m
Rob Anderson is one of the authors of this
https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/albertainstitute/pages/337/attachments/original/1637104983/Free_Alberta_Strategy_-_Web_Version.pdf?1637104983
Valerie: thanks for those links. As I read Jason Scott’s tread I realized that the things listed there, that you and I agree are bloody stupid are the very things her supporters are applauding her for. As such I agree with your conclusion about the intelligence, or lack thereof, of Albertans.
I saw in the news today that Smith says she’s going to invoke the Sovereignty Act to rebuff the feds electricity regulations. In the story she was reported as saying: “Hopefully, no one ever has to see [the motion]. Hopefully … we’re able to come to a peaceful resolution with our federal counterparts.” A peaceful resolution? She makes it sound like she’s going to war. Frankly, I think she’s hoping she won’t have to test her ridiculous statute in a court of law where it will be ripped apart.
What a nit.
Here’s the link: https://calgaryherald.com/news/alberta-electric-operator-warns-clean-electricity-regulations-coming-too-soon/wcm/732d8580-5891-4ac3-8a40-48758a66ce98
I’ve always thought Alberta separatists are the stupidest people in Alberta.
Here’s a thread about Smith’s goal
https://nitter.net/JasonOnTheDrums/status/1705266067172622490#m
Rob Anderson is one of the authors of this
https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/albertainstitute/pages/337/attachments/original/1637104983/Free_Alberta_Strategy_-_Web_Version.pdf?1637104983
Mike G: many interesting points here. I love your characterization of Rob Anderson as the word whisperer. He and Danielle seem to the kind of relationship I’ve seen in my corporate days where the CEO is the strong, likeable leader with a trusty No. 2 who can be counted on to deliver the bad news. It’s a symbiotic relationship that works well for both parties and accomplishes the mission, which as Anderson clearly stated in his Free Alberta strategy document, is to position Alberta for separation.
I suspect Smith and Anderson think they can play David Parker and the TBA, but I have no doubt that they’ll lose control of Parker before too long. Although having said that Smith will need to keep Parker onside if the TBA group captures the remaining UCP board seats. They will have full control of the party if that happens and we can expect Smith’s Legislative agenda to be packed with legislation to protect parents’ rights, etc. bringing us one step closer to the Handmaids Tale world Parker et all are building.
As for those running companies intent on eliminating regulations that keep us and the environment safe, well, it’s going to be a field day.
The flurry of peculiar decisions and policies appears part of the snow job that a majority of Albertans voted for. Sad as the poisoning of what once were generally celebrated health and education pillars of a reasonably robust Alberta society has been, distraction from other, destructive policy decisions has been effective. One seemingly ‘forgotten’ policy is the resurrection of ucp’s and AER endorsement of strip mining the eastern rockies for foreign profit and additional post production remediation, at taxpayers’ expense.
Perhaps I am being overly cynical.
Interesting conspiracy theory perhaps.
>
And to add insult to injury the Alberta pretend government questionnaire re: APP is written as we all want it, but we might tweak the way it works. The rest of Canada is laughing at Alberta and will continue until the Queen Dodo Danielle with her tinfoil crown is gone. Hopefully there will still be a province….
YES Sharon – Hopefully there will still be a province.
The way it is going we could have a provincial name change to CHEVRON.
Sharon: I filled out that ridiculous survey. As you said there’s no where to indicate you don’t want to leave the CPP. So I resorted to answering “don’t know” or something to the effect that I wants a low risk pension plan that did not have any government intervention. I put comments in every comment box. I got tossed out of one box because I had too much “free text”. As you can imagine, my comments were pretty pithy at the end.
I take comfort in the fact that the national press (Globe & Mail) has done a great job of covering this debacle and if for some reason the reference says Alberta should leave CPP the rest of Canada will fight Smith tooth and nail.
Susan, I also did the ridiculous survey this morning. As you said none of the choices included ‘stay in the CPP’ & yes, the survey was crafted in a way that would pretty much allow the government to say folks who responded were on board with the plan to replace CPP with an APP. However, there were a couple of spots that allowed for comments under ‘Other’. Limited word count – 100 in one spot, 200 in another but I made sure that I stated my objection to leaving the CPP wherever the survey would let me. Also mentioned the poor fiscal management of Alberta’s Heritage Fund to boot! However I expect such comments to be ‘smoothed over’ or ‘discounted’ when survey results are compiled. I’d say from the way the questions were structured that the only comments that will be counted will be the ones saying ‘go for it!’ because it is clear that is what the government wants to hear. Pity they will waste $7.5 million (or more) of our tax dollars to put the question to Albertans. They could have just as easily put out a ‘survey’ to ask Albertans to vote Yes or No to pursuing an APP & saved a ton of money & time.
Linda: I did the NDP survey as well. It was very simple: Do you want to stay with CPP Yes/No and why. Do you want to go to an APP Yes/No and why. That’s the level of questions we should be asking right now, not “horse before the cart” questions like what’s your risk tolerance and who do you want to manage the APP fund.
Susan: Here is my final song pick. This is from The Jimi Hendrix Experience, and they are covering a Bob Dylan song, All Along The Watchtower. This was released in 1968.
Dwayne, ah yes…All Along the Watchtower. It’s amazing how prescient these songs were even way back in 1968. Or, maybe we just haven’t learned a damned thing in over 50 years. In any event, thank you!
Pingback: Talk about embarrassing! Jim Dinning lends his faded credibility to Danielle Smith’s pension snake oil scam - Alberta Politics
This is probably the most foolhardy, reckless, dangerous proposal by any government in Canadian history — worse even than Québec separatism.
What a bunch of conspiracy theorists can claim is quite astonishing.
If Danielle Smith is real on this one, she is written off my books for good NOW.
Seriously Danielle? Ask for the whole amount, after all just half is obviously not stupid enough. You need to be more outrageous so we can get rid of you as soon as possible.
Carlos, I smiled when I read your comment suggesting Smith could just ask for the entire $334B. As you point out, the rationale in support asking for the whole enchilada is just as compelling (not) as for asking for just 53% of it.
Quebec at least had a reason – a different culture. Not a good reason for most Canadians but at least there was one.
Danielle Smith’s reason is to get more money for the oil companies and of course some benefits of course.
After all they have been exploited (LOL) by the provincial government with no royalties to speak of and paying 8% taxes. They have it better here than anywhere else in the third world. Only Alberta rednecks would give this bonus to the Oil Companies and for decades. Basically we have kissed good bye the future of the coming generations, if any is going to actually survive.
The only good think is that if this goes to the Supreme Court then she will be manure before it is resolved.
Jerrymacgp: You nailed it. Now if we could just figure out why Albertans are cheering her on…
jerrymacgp: I couldn’t agree with you more!
This is the part I like best
‘The CPP Investment Board stated that Alberta which contributed 16% can’t “legally, realistically or morally be allowed to claim more than half the assets.”
Well first of all the Board is not aware yet that in Alberta we have our own way of doing accounting and how we come to conclusions about CPP or any other programs. So what is the point? Morally? What the heck does that mean?
In Alberta Morally spells like O like in Oscar, I like me me me, L like Lysol.
Putting in 16% of the total and claiming 53% is just how we understand fairness.
I think you have to update your handbook on Alberta
This is typical us – when are we going to grow up?
https://albertapolitics.ca/2023/09/talk-about-embarrassing-jim-dinning-lends-his-faded-credibility-to-danielle-smiths-pension-snake-oil-scam/
I guess Jim Dinning is looking for extra pension money
Sorry they just keep coming – not my fault
https://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2023/09/28/sovereignty-act-may-be-used-to-fight-2035-net-zero-electricity-plan-alberta-premier/
Carlos: this one is going to be fun to watch. Smith is posturing. She doesn’t want to take the feds to court under the Sovereignty Act because the court will chew her up and spit her out, thereby gutting the #1 thing that propelled her into the leadership in the first place. I think she’ll grasp at anything the feds offer her and then crow that the mere threat of invoking the Sovereignty Act was enough to bring the feds into line. Not true of course, but her followers won’t know that.
Susan: Former Prime Minister, Brian Mulroney, who also happens to be a lawyer, has went on record saying that the Sovereignty Act cannot have any success. He would be correct on this.
“Smith says she wants an APP because then her government could control the fund”. Exactly! This APP move is in no way intended to be for ‘the benefit of all Albertans’. It is a power play, pure & simple. I’ve already seen some of the ads extolling the virtues of an APP, promising (because the ones making the promise in no way will ever be held accountable for breaking it) the sun, moon & stars to the credulous UCP base if only they will just vote ‘Yes’ to the snake oil pitch from Danielle & crew. Using the usual cry of how Alberta subsidizes other provinces, namely Quebec. Well, Quebec began the QPP at the same time the CPP came into being. Contributions are deducted from salaries earned while working in that province & like the CPP, pensioners can live anywhere in Canada or abroad in any country with a reciprocal pension agreement (some 60+ countries). Anyone who works in other provinces does not contribute to the QPP so Canadians living in other provinces/territories INCLUDING ALBERTA have in no way ‘subsidized’ Quebec’s pension plan. I’d add that the QPP & CPP pensions are pretty much the same dollar wise; there may be a couple dollars more or less (literally) between the two when it comes to pension payments.
As for the promise that Albertans will make lower contributions while collecting greater pensions (which hinges on the premise the rest of Canada will consent to Alberta snatching half the current CPP balance to ‘start’ the APP with) I thought I’d put some perspective based in reality. Alberta’s Heritage Savings Trust Fund was founded in May 1976. With the exception of a 4 year NDP government said fund has always been under the control of a Conservative or UCP government since it was created. No, the current Fund balance is not the ‘fault’ of the NDP. In 2023 the current estimated value of that fund is $21.6 billion. Alberta’s estimated population is 4.371 million people. These figures all pulled from the Internet. Meanwhile, let’s look at Norway, a country comprising of 5.408 million people as of 2021 according to Google. Its Heritage Fund was established in 1990 – a full 14 (fourteen!) years AFTER Alberta began its Fund. The estimated value of Norway’s fund today is $1 TRILLION dollars. So let’s see – a 14 year head start, plenty of time for growth & prosperity because you know your Conservative or UCP government is all about what is ‘best for all Albertans’ yet somehow Norway has surpassed Alberta by a 5 to 1 ratio when it comes to their Heritage fund. So ask yourself when thinking about handing over your CPP dollars to Danielle & crew – do you feel lucky? Because you are going to need one whopping amount of luck to survive on what you might get from an APP when you retire based on the fiscal track record.
Linda,
I really wish the Albertan who send a letter to the editor of the Globe and Mail reads this note. He’s under the impression that Smith is doing a fantastic job and when she gets her hands on 53% of CPP Alberta will have a Norway-style fund. It seems these people will believe anything.
Well if by some unbelievable set of circumstances the Feds did actually hand over half the value of the CPP to start the APP with Alberta would be roughly 33% of the way to Norway’s trillion dollars. However I’ve little doubt that first, no way will half of the CPP booty be handed over & second, I very much doubt the Alberta government would be able to resist using that money as a means to ‘invest’ in O&G or whatever goodie their grasping little paws might see fit to acquire. As for the gentleman who believes everyone can get a pony for free, as per the famous saying ‘there’s a sucker born every minute’. Too bad so many of them voted UCP.
Oops, brain fart here. In point of fact, the Norway Fund actually surpassed Alberta’s Heritage Fund by a 50 (fifty) to 1 (one) ratio, as one trillion dollars is a thousand billion, not a hundred billion. Which underscores the pitiful fiscal results from our so called prudent fiscal Conservative governments. The Fraser Institute did a paper on the mismanagement of the Heritage Fund, noting that despite decades of stellar O&G revenues the government only set aside approximately 5.4 (five point four, not fifty four) percent of those revenues in the Fund, which they then raided whenever the budget fell short. Which was often. Which is yet another reason to say ‘No’ or rather ‘NO!’ to the APP proposal. As other commenters have pointed out, the UCP would very likely continue to ‘support’ O&G by ‘investing’ your pension money in those firms, to the detriment of the pension fund recipients. For an actual fact they have done just that with public pension funds such as LAPP, directing AimCo to ‘invest’ the money into LNG facilities & such like ventures. So much for AimCo being independent & arms length. Of course, when AimCo lost $2 billion of Heritage Fund money in an ill conceived market bet (aka gamble) the government didn’t censure them, nor did heads roll. Instead, the Conservatives passed legislation that required public pension funds retain AimCo as their fund manager, regardless of how poorly they performed!
Linda, thanks for the clarification! This weekend the Globe & Mail ran a story on Evan Siddall, AIMCo’s CEO.. Siddall was appointed in 2021 to clean up the mess made by his predecessors. Apparently he’s tranforming the fund by changing out senior leadership, fixing systems that allowed the $2.1B loss to happen, expanding internationally and working with AIMCo clients to restore trust. This is an organization in flux. The last thing it needs is to be handed $334 billion and told to invest it on behalf of Albertans.
Hi Susan, good article. However, there is still a bigger elephant in the room. That is a province,municipality and regular households can go bankrupt. However, a federal government can never go broke as it is the currency issuer, and actually any of Canada’s federal social programs do not even need to based on a PAYGO basis, In other words payroll source deductions are not required for the Feds to make good on the pension and other social programs. Hence, why would someone want a provincial program that could conceivably be considered a potentially ‘unfunded liability. I’ve included a link to that great ‘socialist’ former U.S. Fed chairman, Alan Greenspan. It boggles my mind that most of our economists never bring up this argument relative to any Fed vs Prov plans or programs. They still believe in the PAYGO scheme for Federal programs.
Denislapierre: Good point on PAYGO. I didn’t see the link come through. Any chance you could try to send it again.
Thanks!
Oh this is getting interesting and the fall is starting for both of them – I am sure Parker can get a job with the Harper Foundation or move to Hungary and be Viktor Orban servant.
https://albertapolitics.ca/2023/10/canadian-ditchley-foundation-tells-tbas-david-parker-hes-out-as-a-director-premier-smith-does-damage-control/