Bill 20 calls into question the motivation of the government
By Lethbridge Herald on May 17, 2024.
Editor:
Re: Alberta Municipalities says it still hasn’t been given chance to consult on changes to bill (May 7, 2024).
The UCP certainly appears hesitant to consult – with anyone – regarding Bill 20. Call me ill-informed, but I honestly don’t understand the need for this bill in the first place, and the UCP hasn’t, in my opinion, done much to inform the public about its relevance or necessity.
It makes a person question the government’s motives. In healthy democracies, the separation of church and state has always been considered foundational. I’d argue that the separation of provincial and municipal governmental powers is another such foundation.
Voters elect local councillors and mayors, and voters – not provincial cabinets -should be the ones to evaluate their performance and proceed accordingly. This is why we have elections in the first place, isn’t it? Simply put, how do you trust a government in such a hurry to pass this bill that it refuses to consult, fudges on discussing amendments, and ensures us that its more controversial provisions will only be used as a last resort?
Who gets to decide what constitutes a last resort? It sure sounds like there’s more going on here than meets the eye at first glance.
Ron Fazio
Lethbridge
9-8
The motivation. IMO it is simply to limit candidate pumping through back door fund raising and union support. In other words we can find out who we are voting for BEORE and election and not after.
Bill 20 does exactly the opposite of what you’re saying. It allows unions and corporations to make contributions to local candidates, something currently not allowed. Candidates still don’t have to disclose who donated to them until after the election (another gift from the UCP – that was allowed by Bill 29 under Jason Kenney back in 2020).
It also lets the provincial government veto bylaws and remove councilors, forces municipalities to count votes manually rather than using cheaper and more accurate electronic tabulators, and introduces municipal political parties (something that the majority of Albertans do not want).
You don’t get to just pretend a bill says what you want it to. I think we would both love a bill that limits back door funding and prevents donations from unions and corporations. The UCP doesn’t want that, and this bill doesn’t provide it.
It doesn’t matter how many times you are proven a fool you just keep on proving it. Thanks for helping me prove my point about fools like you ignoring the facts and blindly supporting the word Conservative and ignoring what they have done to us. It certainly proves what a fool you are, doesn’t it?
Because Bill 20 smacks of UCP/TBA totalitarianism and toxic authoritarian control, and if it goes through, and because it is so unpopular even with the rural municipalities, it remains that if UCP/TBA candidates run for office, whether they would be supported. For myself, I would not vote for a UCP/TBA county councillor in my rural municipality. Already, I did not support the TBA-backed UCP MLA in my rural riding. There could come a day, that this UCP/TBA overreach could backfire, hopefully.
It’s getting to the point now, with the controversy over Bill 20, that it might be unwise to admit that one is a UCP/TBA candidate. And, if a candidate would run as an ‘independent,’ it would be prudent to research their history.
This stuff just cannot be made up.