Alberta can set up its own pension plan, that is clear. But the likelihood of Alberta doing so under the terms laid out in the report is zero:
The report asserts Alberta is entitled to $334 billion, or 53 per cent, of the CPP’s total base assets of $575 billion. One wonders if perhaps Canada is meant to view this as a bargain, given that the report notes $334 billion is Alberta’s minimum entitlement; it could be $637 billion, eclipsing the entire fund!
Alberta can set up its own pension plan, that is clear. But the likelihood of Alberta doing so under the terms laid out in the report is zero. Accountants and economists are no doubt already crunching the numbers, but University of Calgary economist Trevor Tombe estimates Alberta’s entitlement is probably closer to 20-25 per cent, not 53 per cent, so maybe $129 billion. This falls well short of the money the UCP needs in order to sell Albertans on the benefits of pursuing its quasi-separatist urges.
The idea of “sticking it” to Canada sells well with many UCP supporters, even if they would be the ones feeling the pointy end of that stick. Thus, we can expect over the next while wall-to-wall government ads and Premier Smith, on her weekly radio show, extolling the benefits of going it alone. The government has promised a referendum on the issue. My guess — my hope — is that Albertans will see this proposal for the political hucksterism it is and vote it down. But stranger things have happened before: think Brexit.
No matter the referendum’s result, the plan faces huge obstacles. There is the certain opposition of the premiers of other provinces, several of whom are conservatives. While many support Smith’s efforts to gain more provincial power, breaking up the CPP is a bridge too far, especially when the claim is well over half the plan’s assets.
Technically, of course, the other premiers have no say in the matter. But technicalities be damned, they will be heard — and loudly, because the extortionate “entitlements” demanded by Alberta are not only absurd on their face but would cause enormous harm to current CPP recipients living outside Alberta, as well as the other provinces’ economies.
Technically, also, the federal parties have no say in the matter. The fund is administered independent of the government. But the UCP’s plan creates a dilemma for Pierre Poilievre, in particular. He currently sports a huge lead in the polls and is positively giddy at the thought of becoming prime minister. As always, the party counts on support in Alberta, a province that federal conservatives, under a myriad of names, have owned since the late 1950s.
Being prime minister means being PM for everyone, not just Albertans. The national economy relies on an integrated network of policies and programs, among them the CPP which allows workers to move seamlessly from region to region to take up jobs, and for retired workers to live comfortable lives in their later years. How will Poilievre respond to a provincial government whose course of action aims at bankrupting a key part of that economy?
He may wish to place the entire blame on Justin Trudeau. But the UCP’s actions are aimed at the Canadian state and its people. The federal Conservatives cannot duck and hide from the issue. Danielle Smith’s hand grenade, aimed at Canada, is just as likely to find its victim Poilievre’s Conservative party.
edmontonjournal.com
The report asserts Alberta is entitled to $334 billion, or 53 per cent, of the CPP’s total base assets of $575 billion. One wonders if perhaps Canada is meant to view this as a bargain, given that the report notes $334 billion is Alberta’s minimum entitlement; it could be $637 billion, eclipsing the entire fund!
Alberta can set up its own pension plan, that is clear. But the likelihood of Alberta doing so under the terms laid out in the report is zero. Accountants and economists are no doubt already crunching the numbers, but University of Calgary economist Trevor Tombe estimates Alberta’s entitlement is probably closer to 20-25 per cent, not 53 per cent, so maybe $129 billion. This falls well short of the money the UCP needs in order to sell Albertans on the benefits of pursuing its quasi-separatist urges.
The idea of “sticking it” to Canada sells well with many UCP supporters, even if they would be the ones feeling the pointy end of that stick. Thus, we can expect over the next while wall-to-wall government ads and Premier Smith, on her weekly radio show, extolling the benefits of going it alone. The government has promised a referendum on the issue. My guess — my hope — is that Albertans will see this proposal for the political hucksterism it is and vote it down. But stranger things have happened before: think Brexit.
No matter the referendum’s result, the plan faces huge obstacles. There is the certain opposition of the premiers of other provinces, several of whom are conservatives. While many support Smith’s efforts to gain more provincial power, breaking up the CPP is a bridge too far, especially when the claim is well over half the plan’s assets.
Technically, of course, the other premiers have no say in the matter. But technicalities be damned, they will be heard — and loudly, because the extortionate “entitlements” demanded by Alberta are not only absurd on their face but would cause enormous harm to current CPP recipients living outside Alberta, as well as the other provinces’ economies.
Technically, also, the federal parties have no say in the matter. The fund is administered independent of the government. But the UCP’s plan creates a dilemma for Pierre Poilievre, in particular. He currently sports a huge lead in the polls and is positively giddy at the thought of becoming prime minister. As always, the party counts on support in Alberta, a province that federal conservatives, under a myriad of names, have owned since the late 1950s.
Being prime minister means being PM for everyone, not just Albertans. The national economy relies on an integrated network of policies and programs, among them the CPP which allows workers to move seamlessly from region to region to take up jobs, and for retired workers to live comfortable lives in their later years. How will Poilievre respond to a provincial government whose course of action aims at bankrupting a key part of that economy?
He may wish to place the entire blame on Justin Trudeau. But the UCP’s actions are aimed at the Canadian state and its people. The federal Conservatives cannot duck and hide from the issue. Danielle Smith’s hand grenade, aimed at Canada, is just as likely to find its victim Poilievre’s Conservative party.
Opinion: Alberta leaving CPP could backfire on Poilievre
Alberta can set up its own pension plan, that is clear. But the likelihood of Alberta doing so under the terms laid out in the report is zero.
edmontonjournal.com
