adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Politics

Alberta treaty chiefs unite against United Conservatives’ proposed sovereignty act

Published

 on

EDMONTON — In what may have been an unprecedented show of unanimity, all of Alberta’s treaty chiefs have spoken out strongly against the provincial government’s proposed sovereignty act.

“It is nothing but a dangerous and damaging plan to undermine democracy and abandon the rule of law,” said Chief Darcy Dixon of the Bearspaw Nation, one of dozens of chiefs from Treaties 6, 7 and 8 who appeared Friday at a news conference to protest the proposed legislation.

The act is the United Conservative Party government’s signature bills for the upcoming legislative session.

“This is a far cry from sovereignty,” Dixon said.

Premier Danielle Smith told the Calgary Chamber of Commerce on Friday that it would be called the Alberta Sovereignty Within a United Canada Act. She has said it would be intended to give the province the power to opt out of federal legislation it deems harmful to its interests.

Although the proposal has been widely derided by constitutional scholars, Smith has said the bill won’t break any of its rules.

Yes it will, said the chiefs, who represent 61 First Nations and all of the province’s treaty groups.

“We take offence to Danielle Smith’s forthcoming sovereignty act and outright reject it,” said Arthur Noskey, Grand Chief of Treaty 8.

The chiefs argue that the treaties are with the Crown, not the provinces. It’s not up to Alberta to recast the terms of the deal.

“We entered into treaty with the Imperial Crown,” said Regena Crowchild, an elder and treaty adviser from Treaty 7. “We certainly did not enter into treaty with (Premier Smith).”

Chief Tony Alexis of the Alexis First Nation said the bill is ultimately aimed at easing resource extraction in the province.

“This bill sets up the province to allow extraction at any rate, completely unprotected.”

Others pointed out that although the bill has been discussed and debated publicly for months, nobody from Smith’s office or cabinet contacted First Nations about it.

“There has been zero consultation,” Alexis said.

“If (Smith) is going to do anything for the people, it can’t be done without the people and that’s what’s happening right now.”

In an emailed response, Smith’s spokeswoman Rebecca Polak said consultations are coming. She said Smith and Indigenous Relations Minister Rick Wilson are to set up meetings with the chiefs.

“The Government of Alberta acknowledges the concerns of the chiefs from Treaty 6, 7 and 8 regarding the proposed Alberta sovereignty act,” Polak wrote. “We are committed to ensuring the legislation specifically states nothing within the act is to be construed as abrogating or derogating from any existing Aboriginal and treaty rights.”

Richard Feehan, the Opposition NDP’s Indigenous relations critic, said his party has already been talking with the chiefs.

“(We) have been hearing their very serious concerns about Danielle Smith’s Sovereignty Act,” he said in a release.

“From the very moment Danielle Smith promised this would be her first piece of legislation, Albertans have been very vocal in their opposition to this damaging bill.”

The proposed legislation has been highly controversial since it became the centrepiece of Smith’s campaign for the leadership of her party last spring.

While its proponents call it a warning to Ottawa against interference in Alberta’s resource industry, others have said it would not withstand a constitutional challenge and that it would drive away investment in the province by creating uncertainty.

Alberta chiefs aren’t the first to oppose what they call provincial encroachment on the Crown-Indigenous relationship.

When the Saskatchewan Party of Premier Scott Moe introduced its own similar legislation, the Saskatchewan First Act, the Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations said it ignored treaty rights.

“The blatant disrespect that this province continues to display is unbelievable,” wrote Chief Bobby Cameron, who represents 74 First Nations in Saskatchewan.

The next session of the Alberta Legislature is to begin Nov. 29.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 18, 2022.

 

Bob Weber, The Canadian Press

News

Technology upgrades mean speedier results expected for B.C. provincial election

Published

 on

 

British Columbians could find out who wins the provincial election on Oct. 19 in about the same time it took to start counting ballots in previous votes.

Andrew Watson, a spokesman for Elections BC, says new electronic vote tabulators mean officials hope to have half of the preliminary results for election night reported within about 30 minutes, and to be substantially complete within an hour of polls closing.

Watson says in previous general elections — where votes have been counted manually — they didn’t start the tallies until about 45 minutes after polls closed.

This will B.C.’s first general election using electronic tabulators after the system was tested in byelections in 2022 and 2023, and Watson says the changes will make the process both faster and more accessible.

Voters still mark their candidate on a paper ballot that will then be fed into the electronic counter, while networked laptops will be used to look up peoples’ names and cross them off the voters list.

One voting location in each riding will also offer various accessible voting methods for the first time, where residents will be able to listen to an audio recording of the candidates and make their selection using either large paddles or by blowing into or sucking on a straw.

The province’s three main party leaders are campaigning across B.C. today with NDP Leader David Eby in Chilliwack promising to double apprenticeships for skilled trades, Conservative Leader John Rustad in Prince George talking power generation, and Greens Leader Sonia Furstenau holding an announcement Thursday about mental health.

It comes as a health-care advocacy group wants to know where British Columbia politicians stand on six key issues ahead of an election it says will decide the future of public health in the province.

The BC Health Coalition wants improved care for seniors, universal access to essential medicine, better access to primary care, reduced surgery wait times, and sustainable working conditions for health-care workers.

It also wants pledges to protect funding for public health care, asking candidates to phase out contracts to profit-driven corporate providers that it says are draining funds from public services.

Ayendri Riddell, the coalition’s director of policy and campaigns, said in a statement that British Columbians need to know if parties will commit to solutions “beyond the political slogans” in campaigning for the Oct. 19 election.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 26, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

How Many Votes Are Needed for a Vote of No Confidence in Canada?

Published

 on

In Canadian parliamentary democracy, a vote of no confidence (also known as a confidence motion) is a crucial mechanism that can force a sitting government to resign or call an election. It is typically initiated when the opposition, or even members of the ruling party, believe that the government has lost the support of the majority in the House of Commons.

What Is a Vote of No Confidence?

A vote of no confidence is essentially a test of whether the government, led by the prime minister, still commands the support of the majority of Members of Parliament (MPs) in the House of Commons. If the government loses such a vote, it is either required to resign or request the dissolution of Parliament, leading to a general election.

This process upholds one of the fundamental principles of Canadian democracy: the government must maintain the confidence of the elected House of Commons to govern. This rule ensures accountability and provides a check on the government’s power.

How Many Votes Are Needed for a No Confidence Motion?

In the Canadian House of Commons, there are 338 seats. To pass a vote of no confidence, a simple majority of MPs must vote in favor of the motion. This means that at least 170 MPs must vote in support of the motion to cause the government to lose confidence.

If the government holds a minority of seats, it is more vulnerable to such a vote. In this case, the opposition parties could band together to reach the 170 votes required for the no-confidence motion to succeed. In a majority government, the ruling party has more than half the seats, making it more difficult for a vote of no confidence to pass, unless there is significant dissent within the ruling party itself.

Types of Confidence Votes

  1. Explicit Confidence Motions: These are motions specifically introduced to test whether the government still holds the confidence of the House. For example, the opposition might move a motion stating, “That this House has no confidence in the government.”
  2. Implicit Confidence Motions: Some votes are automatically considered confidence motions, even if they are not explicitly labeled as such. The most common example is the approval of the federal budget. If a government loses a vote on its budget, it is seen as losing the confidence of the House.
  3. Key Legislation: Occasionally, the government may declare certain pieces of legislation as confidence matters. This could be done to ensure the support of the ruling party and its allies, as a loss on such a bill would mean the collapse of the government.

What Happens If the Government Loses a Confidence Vote?

If a government loses a confidence vote in the House of Commons, two outcomes are possible:

  1. Resignation and New Government Formation: The prime minister may resign, and the governor general can invite another leader, typically the leader of the opposition, to try to form a new government that can command the confidence of the House.
  2. Dissolution of Parliament and General Election: The prime minister can request that the governor general dissolve Parliament, triggering a general election. This gives voters the opportunity to elect a new Parliament and government.

Historical Context of Confidence Votes in Canada

Canada has seen several instances of votes of no confidence, particularly during minority government situations. For example, in 2011, the government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper lost a vote of confidence over contempt of Parliament, which led to the dissolution of Parliament and the federal election.

Historically, most no-confidence votes are associated with budgetary issues or key pieces of legislation. They can be rare, especially in majority governments, as the ruling party usually has enough support to avoid defeat in the House of Commons.

To pass a vote of no confidence in Canada, at least 170 MPs out of 338 must vote in favor of the motion. This vote can lead to the government’s resignation or a general election, making it a powerful tool in ensuring that the government remains accountable to the elected representatives of the people. In the context of Canadian democracy, the vote of no confidence is a key safeguard of parliamentary oversight and political responsibility.

Continue Reading

Politics

Feds eyeing new ways to publicly flag possible foreign interference during elections

Published

 on

 

OTTAWA – A senior federal official says the government is mulling new ways to inform the public about possible foreign interference developments during an election campaign.

Under the current system, a panel of five top bureaucrats would issue a public warning if they believed an incident — or an accumulation of incidents — threatened Canada’s ability to have a free and fair election.

There was no such announcement concerning the 2019 or 2021 general elections.

Allen Sutherland, an assistant secretary to the federal cabinet, told a commission of inquiry today that officials are looking at how citizens might be told about developments that don’t quite reach the current threshold.

He said that would help inform people of things they ought to know more about, even if the incidents don’t rise to the level of threatening the overall integrity of an election.

Allegations of foreign interference in the last two general elections prompted calls for the public inquiry that is now underway.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 26, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending