Here is the thing about all of this: It is really impossible to know how an APP would perform compared to the CPPIB, which is internationally known, revered and has a solid return on its investments that outpace the vast majority of other plans. They have the scale to pay minimal fees and the experience to make deals.
The problem here is right off the hopper the figures the report use are just insane and have no basis in reality. There is no way Alberta is entitled to 53% of the CPP. So, every other figure they use is dubious at best. Will Albertan's see a slight decrease in contributions? It is entirely possible. But probably not the $1500 or so they claim. I mean, as I mentioned previously, the APP would need to hire professionals (or outsource part of it) to manage the plan, they would pay higher fees (as would the CPP without Alberta), and while their population in young right now...it won't be forever. Who is to say that the energy transition happens faster than anyone expects and the oil and gas boom that has fuelled Alberta dries up?
There is a lot of risk involved with this decoupling, but the fact that this report fudges key figures and uses pie-in-the-sky reasoning to advocate for this tells you all you need to know. It is another half-baked idea from Smith and the UCP that doesn't explain ALL the challenges and risks. If I was in Alberta I'd vote against it.
calgaryherald.com
