19 Comments
User's avatar
Donna Stevenson's avatar

How costly are referendum? Are they binding in any way? I like the idea of teaming up when going after signatures; ie: Dr. Wesley's focus group tour (I would donate the proceeds of that to the cause), include ABR Recall petitions and the Thomas Lukaszyk petition (if it gets approved). No sense every group doing a whole lot of work separately. I'd support whichever avenue (maybe the #CorruptCare scandal to get a proper judicial review) gets the UCP out of power the fastest. Can there be a bunch of referendum out at the same time?

Expand full comment
Ken Chapman's avatar

An application for a referendum petition cost $500. The gathering of sufficient signatures in 120 days I estimate to be about $100,000. There would have to be carpet bombing advertising.

Referendems can be binding if on a constitutional issue. They otherwise could be binding if the provincial government declare them to be.

Yes there can be more than one referendum at a time. The taxpayer cost would minimsl if they were conducted at the same time as an Election.

As for recall petitions, I think they are a waste of time. The petition criteria to qualify is prohibitively high. Even if successful they merely trigger a by Election. That can be delayed up to 6 months, enough time to have the enthusiasm evaporate.

Expand full comment
Donna Stevenson's avatar

Thank you.

Expand full comment
Moe's avatar

I totally agree with this… turn the tables if she wants to run our province on referendums well let’s go!!

Expand full comment
Randy Wolstenholm's avatar

Scrapping ALL referendums would be a good place to start. Under informed or disengaged citizens are too easily persuaded to cast a vote for a simple solution to a complex problem.

Expand full comment
Ken Chapman's avatar

I should have added Referendum #12 Should Referendums be abolished?

Expand full comment
C  Derish's avatar

But with Smith at the wheel, we know that isn't going to happen sadly. 😕

Expand full comment
Sheryl Campbell 🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦's avatar

Yes! Yes! Yes! What a smart thinker you are Ken.

Agree with all your points absolutely.

Expand full comment
Wayne Stewart's avatar

We have to do something for Smith now is getting away with bad policy after bad policy. How about joining with Jared Wesley in supporting his series of town halls this summer.

Expand full comment
Steff L's avatar

Definitely! Especially 5 and 8A (there are two 8s)

We need to do something before Smith and her MAGA UCP destroy Alberta

Expand full comment
Ken Chapman's avatar

I fixed the crazy rights flub. Thanks.

Expand full comment
IM Citizen's avatar

Let's go straight to if you use your position as lobby vs governance. Out you go-!

Expand full comment
Ruben Nelson's avatar

I am leery of referenda. In a well-governed self-governing society referenda would not ever be needed.

They sound sound fine as long as you do not have them. Then they can be anything you imagine them to be. In reality they allow folks with enough money to out-organize folks who have too little money and time to get involved. In 2022 and 2024 Californians had to vote on 12 or more initiatives. Do you really have time to keep track of them, much less get involved enough to influence even 4 of them? I expect that in Alberta they will be more curse, than blessing.

Expand full comment
Ken Chapman's avatar

I absolutely agree. We need to become better at being responsible engaged citizens, and not just at election time. We won't get better government until we become better citizens. Referendums are way to susceptible to misinformation, disinformation and manipulation by monied and extremist interests.

Expand full comment
C  Derish's avatar

I would encourage referendums to our advantage. Smith is manipulating and destroying this province in so many ways. We need to act by utilizing this tool.

Expand full comment
Mark Kolke's avatar

Praiseworthy work, so I'll add my applause. Is the 'other side' proposing only 1 question? Are these referenda simultaneous or at different times, on different ballots? One of the problems with referenda and plebiscites (just look at Calgary and multiple times over fluoridation) because the government of the day will interpret the outcome as THEY see fit, or question the specificity of the question. So the more complex the question, the more potential for multiple interpretations. And, on a slightly different tangent, it was interesting this week to see the Premier finally release the results of the opinions of Albertans about opting out of CPP ... it took a long time to swing from saying 'we wanted to opt out - that's they were telling us at first' to now admitting we were 63% opposed. Ms. Smith has a casual relationship with truth-telling. It will be her undoing. [ Trussler didn't go further in her rebuke because she was at the limit of her authority: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-ethics-premier-danielle-smith-breached-conflict-of-interest-act-1.6847662 ]

Expand full comment
Ken Chapman's avatar

I think the first Referendum should be to repeal the Sovereignty Act. It is reputed to be unconstitutional in part. It invites litigation, not negotiation to resolve issues. It sets up and supports the Separatist agenda and, when applied, creates investor uncertainty. It's not symbolic. It's shambolic.

Expand full comment
Janet Pennington's avatar

Excellent, I am happy to help & sign!

Expand full comment
Paula Stein's avatar

Smith is using referenda to manipulate and destroy. I think we could use the referendum tool to fight fire with fire. Keep the question a simple yes or no response.

Expand full comment