C'est la vie
This week in AB
The unthinkable, unheard of, and expected: Rachel Notley’s leadership and the future of the NDP
Rachel Notley led the NDP to do the unthinkable — form government in Alberta. After losing government in 2019, she did something that was unheard of — remained leader of the party with membership support. Now, in 2024, she did the expected and announced she would pass the torch.
The reactions were a predictable mix; well wishes, some personal affront, and a few variations of “don’t let the door hit you on the way out”.
Whatever the reaction, it’s difficult to objectively disagree with the fact that Rachel Notley built the NDP into a formidable opposition in the province of Alberta, even if it has yet to be fully realized in rural where the party may not be a strong contender, but has consistently earned second place in three general elections.
Though the party’s 2015 electoral success has yet to be reproduced, it would be impossible to claim that their support has not grown. Some will say that is due to a rejection of the UCP, or its leadership, but since 2015, the party’s greatest asset (and liability) has been Rachel Notley herself.
The party will now prepare (publicly) for a leadership race and I’m not personally expecting some sort of cringe worthy tire fire.
As with any leadership race, a membership will be required for the privilege of having a vote. Like all parties, that membership will require about $10 and your address.
And no, you don’t have to worry about what they will do with your personal information because they all do exactly the same thing; ask for your time and money.
However.
Since it wasn’t all that long ago, some of you may recall that I advocated for participation in the UCP leadership race as well. In my mind, if the outcome affects us, we may as well participate (and this time, don’t throw a vote to the worst person just because you think it could help your party’s chances — that person may become Premier).
Take Back Alberta founder David Parker has suggested he will sell more memberships for the party than anyone else so that TBA people can also vote in the leadership. Some people have suggested this is an attempt to “take over” the NDP.
May I suggest y’all calm the hell down?
First, unlike the Progressive Conservatives (remember them?) I have no doubt that the NDP leadership selection committee will thoroughly vet any person who is not well known as a supporter of the party already, removing the possibility that a TBA sympathizer will even be on the ballot.
Second, what do you think TBA’s people will actually do with their memberships? Vote for the person you think is the worst candidate that the NDP greenlights? The NDP holds all the power to ensure they would accept any person they allow to run for leadership — it’s not first come, first serve.
Third, parties have the ability to rescind memberships. Sure, vetting 10,000 new members might not be something anyone wants to do, but with that influx of $100K, they can pay some people to do the work.
Finally, we know exactly how parties get taken over and if the Alberta NDP really want to ensure that won’t happen, they can take appropriate measures to protect themselves.
Remember: David Parker couldn’t sell out Tucker Carlson in Calgary and is now trying to give tickets away for Edmonton. I highly doubt he’s going to manage to convince people to give their money to the NDP when they can only vote for an NDP-approved candidate.
Someone’s going to have a rough year
“If Alberta collects $12 billion in royalties and puts $8 billion of that into general revenue, then Alberta has a structural deficit of $8 billion.”
The above is a paraphrased statement made by Danielle Smith during the 2022 UCP leadership. Things were going well for the UCP at the time — at least in terms of royalties.
Since that day, the UCP under Smith’s leadership has tabled Bill 1, Amending the Taxpayer Protection Act to protect residents and businesses from any future tax increase without a referendum, suggested the province would create a Crown Corporation to build more natural gas electricity generation facilities, and is potentially heading into a new year that will see West Texas Intermediate hover around industry’s break-even mark of $70, with estimates ranging from $70 to $80 — seven per cent less than 2023 prices, and 29 per cent less than 2022.
I read an opinion column about how Trudeau’s plans for net zero will force Alberta to “freeze in the dark”. The phrase “let those Eastern bastards freeze in the dark” was originally snarked by Alberta Premier Ralph Klein but this is the first time I’ve seen it clap back at the person who would become Prime Minister more than thirty years later.
Stating what I thought was obvious, I released said Prime Minister from responsibility for the province’s decision to “buy local”, as it were. Alberta is the only province still reliant on fossil fuels for around 80 per cent of its electricity generation.
But what if that was not just about “buying local”?
In a tax averse province, it would be a pretty impressive move; the government collects royalties on natural gas, so why not engineer some of that income with captive consumers? The province picks up additional revenue without the fiscal hawks screaming that the government is using Albertans as a “cash cow”.
On that note, natural gas rates are also forecast to remain “soft” in 2024; good for consumers, not good for royalty revenue, aka the treasury, and that is going to make things difficult for the faces of fiscal conservatism — you can only cut so much before you start hacking off your own support.
However, since the UCP already tied their own hands on revenue, the only thing they can do is bring in more cuts to accommodate the shortfall — and push harder to get their hands on our CPP.
Can we grab a drink later?
Once upon a time, our elected officials could be found having a meal or drink together after duking it out in the Legislature. I can’t say for sure if that extended to their supporters, even though I know a few people who went out of their way to take the discussion off social media and talk in person.
One thing I’ve learned since attending conferences and events of multiple parties is that even though disagreements appear to be inescapable on the surface, the underlying reasons each support a seemingly opposing policy tend to be much more aligned than not.
Unless “truth” is a factor. It’s hard to come to an agreement on foreign policy if one person believes we should just sit on our hands because aliens will surely invade before some asshat decides to nuke the place.
And that is likely the thing that causes the greatest division — we no longer agree on what’s true. Even if I don’t think it’s likely aliens will invade, I’m only relying on 95 per cent certainty; there’s no possibility of coming to an agreement with someone who claims to have 100 per cent certainty that they will.
So, if the only way to avoid being nuked is by not electing the people who are banking on the aliens, then we have to do everything we can to stop them from becoming the people we rely on to make the decisions.
That’s just the way it goes.
Final thoughts
Women of ABpoli is a reader-powered publication. Thank you for reading, sharing, subscribing, and supporting us with a paid subscription — you keep us going!