January 24th, 2021

No need for City to pay for a go-between

By Letter to the Editor on February 1, 2020.

Re: “City hires firm to help lobby province.”

We all are fortunate to be living in a country that accepts representative democracy as a norm. Our system of British parliamentary government did not come quickly or easily; its development painfully slow, emerging traditionally out of Magna Carta in 1215. We vote for three levels of government in Canada – dominion (federal), provincial or territorial, and civic (urban or county). Each level deals with different aspects and has a different jurisdiction with a minimum of overlap.

Because these levels represent the needs of their constituents with narrowing specificity, there are times when the levels meet and discuss regional differences and sort out areas of disagreement. Meetings are held between premiers and even finance ministers. Certainly representatives from Alberta’s cities must have ongoing communication with each other and with the province (the cities are, after all, “creatures” of the province).

I recently read that the mayor and city council of Lethbridge have hired a liaison entity to deal with the provincial government. How absurd, I thought. How manipulative and invidious. My knee-jerk reaction was simply “How about we vote them out and the new mayor and council can deal directly with the government” – they all are representatives, after all.

The MLA for Lethbridge-East, Nathan Neudorf, is perfectly capable of taking citizens’ concerns to the government caucus, as he is a totally competent member of that body. There’s no need to spend even more money we don’t have for some other go-between. More efficiently, just deal directly with the province that you are a creature of.

Of course, the reasons are political – our mayor and most of the council disagree with everything the governing UCP stands for. Next civic election, remember who accepted all the NDP bright ideas that are ruining our city. We all have the power to vote directly for a council that will liaise fully with higher government. Please do so.

Robert Budd


Share this story:

Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
John P Nightingale

Not unlike the 30 million the UCP have seen fit to spend on a “War Room” , er sorry the “Canadian Energy Centre”.


Yeah JPN that’s 30 million well spent! Your buddy fanatic enviro groups (along with all your left-wing governing morons) are hell-bent on shutting-down our province! That’s the least we could spend!


“…our mayor and most of the council disagree with everything the governing UCP stands for.”
-Robert Budd

As Mr. Budd neglected to identify what the UCP stands for, in order to critically analyze his assertions, a partial list of what is known and/or has been revealed about what the UCP stands for is in order.

1. A disregard for ethics and the Rule of Law

The premier began campaigning in Alberta while still sitting as an MP and collecting a salary as a sitting MP. As a result of the UCP leadership election shenanigans, the former Election Commissioner levied more than two hundred thousand dollars in fines to individuals for contravening the Elections Act and subsequently turned the investigation over to the RCMP who continue to investigate. In the midst of his investigation, the UCP fired the Election Commissioner.

It has been revealed that the current Minister of Justice Doug Schweitzer was pressured by the individual the Premier appointed as head of anti-Alberta energy inquiry, Steve Allan, who supported Schweitzer in his election campaign only if Schweitzer would publicly support the Springbank Dam Project the way Allan saw fit.

Additionally, Commissioner Allan saw fit to grant a sole-source contract to his son’s law firm in the amount of $905 thousand dollars.

2. No moral compass.

The UCP has demonstrated a concerted lack of regard for the most vulnerable in this province with the changes to programs like AISH and Income Support Benefits. By 2023, the UCP government will have decreased support for AISH by $210 million dollars. Additionally, AISH funding will no longer be indexed. The final blow, to date, is represented by the change to the first of the month for AISH and Income Support recipients beginning March 2020.

A profit before people ideology is demonstrated by the corporate tax reduction and the Premier’s defence of O&G companies who are in arrears for taxes owed to municipalities.

3. Lack of vision for the future in education.

Returning to an outdated education model not suited to prepare students for success in the 21st century. This model is highly suspicious as it appears to be structured around only supporting the resource extraction sector in Alberta as dictated by employers in these industries.

4. Arts support only if it is not contrary to public policy.

Displaying a disregard for the place of the arts in Alberta culture with the closing of Alberta Branded. Also noted is the change from grant funding to a tax credit system. But, not all artistic endeavours will be eligible. For example, film and television artists in Alberta will be ineligible to receive tax credits if the productions are deemed to be “contrary to public policy” as defined by the minister.

5. Centralizing municipal government decisions and restructuring municipal elections.

The Alberta Urban Municipalities Association has expressed concern over the potential for the UCP to introduce changes to municipal politics to make them function on more partisan lines.

The UCP scrapped the City Charters for Edmonton and Calgary and has proposed that ALL municipalities will be required to seek provincial approval before entering into agreements with the federal government.

This list is definitely not exhaustive but it reveals a significant erosion to democratic governance in this province.

Tris Pargeter

IMO, I didn’t know about the arts situation on top of everything else, and there is much more where that came from obviously. These guys are clearly serious, and I know I’m not alone in my growing horror at JUST how serious they are about drastically renovating our modern society via that “hidden agenda” that I keep trying to remind people of. But most yawn at or ignore what they seem to see as personal, and a minor issue, despite religious doctrine being used as the ongoing sanction for taking us all backwards. Bit by bit, you are RIGHT; this truly IS becoming a dictatorship, and by the most deeply deluded among us, who also harbour much resentment at being called out on their magical thinking. No one LIKES being called crazy, but don’t extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence? And they have become ever more sanguine, petulant, and “righteous,” taking full advantage of the tolerance among non-believers. Their bold advance here is making hay while the sun shines, it explains their smug, plodding avidity, knowing that no matter WHAT THEY SAY OR DO, EITHER BEFORE OR AFTER the election, will compromise the vote of many fellow believers. And the oil industry situation filled in the gaps as they used the economy as the trojan horse to start on their project. And the anger at non-believers, despite the huge pass given to their alternate and entirely manufactured reality.
My question is: why do you not find this shocking enough to at least submit this as a letter to the editor? Truly, why do so few people from this forum do that? Is it really as Snoutspot explained when asked why so few use their own names on here—that many are actually afraid of the Christians here, who have been particularly nasty and aggressive when crossed?


Two questions, Tris Pargeter.

1. Are_you_shocked enough to write a letter to the editor?

2. Compared to the Medicine Hat News, why is the Lethbridge Herald silent?



Thank you Robert Budd for your letter, which, by the way, is factual and that I absolutely agree with in its entirety.


Oh yes Robert come next election we will remember!