Premier Smith says Alberta preparing Sovereignty Act motion over federal emissions plans
Premier Smith says Alberta preparing Sovereignty Act motion over federal emissions plans
Hours after the operators of the province's power grid warned that new federal electricity regulations could lead to blackouts, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith said her government is preparing for the possibility of enacting her signature legislation in an effort to push back against Ottawa's planned emissions reductions.
"We're preparing a Sovereignty Act motion, and I'm hoping we don't have to use it. That's why we're at the table having these negotiations," Smith said, referring to a recently formed Alberta-Ottawa working group focused on emissions reductions.
"But we are going to defend our constitutional jurisdiction to make sure that we develop our oil and gas industry at our own pace, and that we develop our electricity system so that it achieves the goal of reliability and affordability."
When asked at what point she would potentially invoke the act, Smith said she has continually said she would do so if Ottawa "comes through with emissions caps that are unconstitutional."
You're viewing part of a thread.
Good education for most is a fairly modern thing (tons of boomers never finished highschool), Alberta is middle of the pack when it comes to post secondary education %.
You're jumping to a weird conclusion (and I know you don't believe it yourself and that you know I never said that, you're just trying to be a contrarian), that more education = less vote when it's the contrary, although it might happen depending on the options being offered (see Ontario reelecting Ford with an abysmal vote attendance). Today's tendency is more about people that didn't use to vote now going because of polarization and having parties that "speak to them" and it works because...
The most educated also tend to live in urban locations, since they're not spread out over the territory and the FPTP system not being proportional it means that cities lean left but rural/suburban districts (leaning right/more right than cities [see Toronto vs its suburbs]) represent a majority of the seats (see... well there's tons of elections where the party that wins a majority of the seats didn't get a majority of the votes or similar aberrations, like the Alberta conservatives losing 11 seats with 2% less votes but the NDP winning 15 seats with 11% more votes compared to the previous election).
There's also more options left of the conservatives than there are right of the conservatives in Canada, so the vote on the left gets divided more.
https://www.narcity.com/least-educated-provinces-territories-canada
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11162-022-09717-4
Good education for most is a fairly modern thing (tons of boomers never finished highschool)
Are you conflating education with schooling? They are not one and the same.
The most educated also tend to live in urban locations...
I am not sure what you are trying to say here. Each riding has essentially the same number of people. Some poorer ridings have fewer people (giving them greater say), and some wealthier ridings have more people (giving them less say), but on the balance they are of mostly the same size within some margin of error.
That means that the representation, while not totally perfect, is nearly proportional. And what ridings do have more say have a clear tendency to be left leaning. The ridings with the least say have a tendency to be right leaning. So if you want to talk about what minimal proportionality does exist, it favours the left.
well there’s tons of elections where the party that wins a majority of the seats didn’t get a majority of the votes
We do not have a party system. Many wish we did and call for reform to see it become a party system, but as of today we do not. We have, for better or worse, a system of individual representatives. It is quite true that freedom of association allows those representatives to belong to a party, but observing that 𝑥 number of seats are occupied by members who have chosen to belong to a given party is kind of like observing that 𝑦 number of seats are occupied by men. It is merely incidental, not the basis of their election.
To be more exact, it might be the basis of an uneducated vote – just about anything goes with that kind of wildcard. In fact, I'm quite certain some uneducated votes select the man on the ballot just to ensure they don't get a woman. But a good education sees one understand how our democratic system of government actually works and steers one to vote for what actually matters.
Perhaps what you are trying to say is that because those who show up to vote are uneducated, they just might not realize that they are voting for the wrong thing – i.e. for a party instead of a person?
Yeah... it's just not worth it to answer that.
It is no less worth it now than before. Why not be honest? I understand that some people get their feelings hurt when the learn something new, and this no doubt is your attempt to sooth your feelings, but snap out of that. Education should excite you!
It's not worth it because you purposefully pretend to not understand and try to derail the conversation with nonsensical arguments and you know what I do with people who act like that? I send them off to the block list 🙂
Nothing has changed about me. I think you miss the mark when you claim there is purposeful intent (I recognize may come across that way accidentally – communication is hard!), but even if we buy into that line of reasoning, that was always true. Whatever worth you found in replying the first time is still present now. These qualities are the same as before.
I send them off to the block list 🙂
Probably for the best. It is clear you are going to get upset every time I point out your errors. And I will continue to do so, because that's how a good education is established. I would have hoped you would do the same for me when I make errors (of which there are plenty) so that I can improve my education, but I understand that education scares you for some reason, so I respect that you want to remove yourself from that.