Danielle Smith was out of line to meet with Trump in U.S.
By Lethbridge Herald on February 1, 2025.
Editor,
Once again, David Carpenter has provided the residents of Alberta with a thoughtful, factual response to a very important issue: Premier Smith’s trip to Florida to lobby Mr. Trump for Alberta’s fossil fuel industry. A premier trying to directly negotiate with a U.S. president is a flagrant disregard of federal/provincial jurisdiction.
Ms. Smith is the premier of the province of Alberta, not the Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs. In choosing to meet with the now-president, she stepped way outside of her purview.
When Ms. Smith perceives the federal government stepping, even slightly, into provincial jurisdiction, she has an immediate and inflammatory response. Yet, she seems to think that she can step into federal jurisdiction whenever she wants to.
She failed to attend the meeting which every other Canadian premier attended to discuss and agree to a strong strategy for dealing with the new US administration. In doing so, Ms. Smith has betrayed Canada, the other premiers, all Canadians, and weakened Canada’s ability to negotiate for all Canadians with the new US regime.
We would like to see Ms. Smith’s actions fully investigated by the appropriate authorities, including her own party. Given her inappropriate actions by putting her own interests and that of the UCP ahead of the interest of Canada and all Canadians, she needs to resign.
Nikki and George Crisfield
Lethbridge
9-8
She is part of the Flanagan,Harper plan to make Alberta a petro-country.
Treason.
Apparently you haven’t noticed that oil and gas is far and away the largest export to the US and is the largest contributor to the Canadian economy. We are already a petro state. Anyone and everyone should be in the US protecting that industry.
So can you explain why we are getting literally nothing for our oil and nothing for our gas in royalties while Alaskans and Norwegians continue to enjoy what their oil wealth is providing them? Yet we produce twice as much oil as them combined ?
Perhaps first you can explain what you mean by “literally nothing “, becuase it’s an uninformed, dim witted perspective.
Sure Google this I was involved with the oil industry for years and it was a well known fact of how Ralph Klein and Ed Stelmach screwed Albertans out of hundreds of Billions of Dollars. Can you prove he didn’t?
“Royalties Down 32% Billions Lost in Federal Revenue”
Make certain you read what Lougheed said in it. He was furious with what they did to the people.
Because the welfare province of Quebec, that we have to prop up financially, and the tree-hugging liberals won’t let us build better pipeline systems to increase our ability to ship oil elsewhere. Someone who acts as smart as you should know that. We have to sell our oil at a discount in order to sell it at all due to limited demand. Ever heard of supply and demand? The two other entities you mention are both surrounded by an ocean, in case you did not know that. They can control their shipping and can sell all over the world and we can’t.
Not to mention their production profile and royalty regimes are completely different the Alberta’s. There is lots on the web that explains why Alberta cannot collect revenue in the way Norway does.
It’s a well known fact that Alberta doesn’t pay a penny to Quebec, so why is that so hard for you Reformers to understand and why can’t you understand that Reformer Stephen Harper, with the help of Jason Kenney and Pierre Poilievre changed the formula for the Equalization Payments to Quebec to buy votes?
Maybe you need to get educated by googling these articles.
“Debunked: Alberta Does Not Send The Most Money To Ottawa”
“ Harper Increases Equalization Payments for Quebec “.
With you being such a genius can explain why the Conservative MLAs were so disgusted with Klein and Stelmach for doing this:
“ Royalties Down 32% Billions Lost in Federal Revenues” Lougheed collected proper royalties and corporate taxes so why would you ignore what these Reformers have done to us.
Have you noticed it hasn’t happened in Alaska and Norway?
The Northgate Enbridge Pipeline to Kitamate project was scrapped because it was too risky for spills crossing streams and rivers 1,000 times. Every oilman I know said so, and so did the people with their petitions they signed.
Shelock are those other countries you mentioned land-locked in the same geographical way as Alberta?
That’s got nothing to do with it. When you have Reformers cutting Lougheed’s oil royalties and corporate taxes down to the lowest in the world, as the former Conservative MLAs point out , that’s the problem. So maybe you had better get yourself educated and do some research on the internet, but I doubt you will, you can’t handle the truth, can you?
Might as well call her mantra “Make Alberta Great Again”. As with the other MAGA proclaimer, she is surrounded by adoring genuflecting acolytes whose only interest is themselves and the province of Alberta – the rest of the country be damned. It really is too bad, because politics aside, she is quite articulate and decisive on the public stage. Alberta for decades, has been conservative, but her far right political agenda has swung the pendulum into dangerous uncharted waters.
This entire government is out of line! The rule of law is being attacked. Human rights in this province are being attacked. Power is being consolidated in the office of the premier and her caucus. In response to push back, this government responds with gaslighting, patronizing and outright lies. This government has lost the confidence of the people of Alberta. It is now time for the electorate in Alberta to urge the Lieutenant Governor to dissolve the Legislature and call an election.
Section 38.1 of the Election Act outlines when provincial general elections are held.
General election dates
38.1(1) Nothing in this section affects the powers of the Lieutenant Governor, including the power to dissolve the Legislature, in His Majesty’s name, when the Lieutenant Governor sees fit.
10% tariff on energy 25% on everything else eating crow all you naysaying smith haters. Enjoy it
So, you think Smith’s pathetic and duplicitous grovelling helped?
More likely is that the angry pumpkin got a call from the American oil cartel who’s refineries are tuned to bitumen. But believe what you want.
indeed, buck is the off the mark entirely. trump knows that the usa needs alberta oil, and 25% would create a gasoline and heating issue that likely would be too hot to handle. 10% will hurt many americans, but a good bit less than 25%.
given that our oil sells to the usa at a 15% reduction to market price, with the 10% tariff it kind of comes in at a 25% penalty nonetheless ( i know, not exactly, but close).
of course, our premier that loves to kneel before the orange clown would never think to at least sell our oil at market price, let alone mark it up to offset the tariff.
name calller bucklewheat
The best, most cogent and elegantly simple explanation into the inexplicably destructive negotiating processes of the president, by Prof. David Honig of Indiana University.
“I’m going to get a little wonky and write about Donald Trump and negotiations. For those who don’t know, I’m an adjunct professor at Indiana University – Robert H. McKinney School of Law and I teach negotiations. Okay, here goes.
Trump, as most of us know, is the credited author of “The Art of the Deal,” a book that was actually ghost written by a man named Tony Schwartz, who was given access to Trump and wrote based upon his observations. If you’ve read The Art of the Deal, or if you’ve followed Trump lately, you’ll know, even if you didn’t know the label, that he sees all dealmaking as what we call “distributive bargaining.”
Distributive bargaining always has a winner and a loser. It happens when there is a fixed quantity of something and two sides are fighting over how it gets distributed. Think of it as a pie and you’re fighting over who gets how many pieces. In Trump’s world, the bargaining was for a building, or for construction work, or subcontractors. He perceives a successful bargain as one in which there is a winner and a loser, so if he pays less than the seller wants, he wins. The more he saves the more he wins.
The other type of bargaining is called integrative bargaining. In integrative bargaining the two sides don’t have a complete conflict of interest, and it is possible to reach mutually beneficial agreements. Think of it, not a single pie to be divided by two hungry people, but as a baker and a caterer negotiating over how many pies will be baked at what prices, and the nature of their ongoing relationship after this one gig is over.
The problem with Trump is that he sees only distributive bargaining in an international world that requires integrative bargaining. He can raise tariffs, but so can other countries. He can’t demand they not respond. There is no defined end to the negotiation and there is no simple winner and loser. There are always more pies to be baked. Further, negotiations aren’t binary. China’s choices aren’t (a) buy soybeans from US farmers, or (b) don’t buy soybeans. They can also (c) buy soybeans from Russia, or Argentina, or Brazil, or Canada, etc. That completely strips the distributive bargainer of his power to win or lose, to control the negotiation.
One of the risks of distributive bargaining is bad will. In a one-time distributive bargain, e.g. negotiating with the cabinet maker in your casino about whether you’re going to pay his whole bill or demand a discount, you don’t have to worry about your ongoing credibility or the next deal. If you do that to the cabinet maker, you can bet he won’t agree to do the cabinets in your next casino, and you’re going to have to find another cabinet maker.
There isn’t another Canada.
So when you approach international negotiation, in a world as complex as ours, with integrated economies and multiple buyers and sellers, you simply must approach them through integrative bargaining. If you attempt distributive bargaining, success is impossible. And we see that already.
Trump has raised tariffs on China. China responded, in addition to raising tariffs on US goods, by dropping all its soybean orders from the US and buying them from Russia. The effect is not only to cause tremendous harm to US farmers, but also to increase Russian revenue, making Russia less susceptible to sanctions and boycotts, increasing its economic and political power in the world, and reducing ours. Trump saw steel and aluminum and thought it would be an easy win, BECAUSE HE SAW ONLY STEEL AND ALUMINUM – HE SEES EVERY NEGOTIATION AS DISTRIBUTIVE. China saw it as integrative, and integrated Russia and its soybean purchase orders into a far more complex negotiation ecosystem.
Trump has the same weakness politically. For every winner there must be a loser. And that’s just not how politics works, not over the long run.
For people who study negotiations, this is incredibly basic stuff, negotiations 101, definitions you learn before you even start talking about styles and tactics. And here’s another huge problem for us.
Trump is utterly convinced that his experience in a closely held real estate company has prepared him to run a nation, and therefore he rejects the advice of people who spent entire careers studying the nuances of international negotiations and diplomacy. But the leaders on the other side of the table have not eschewed expertise, they have embraced it. And that means they look at Trump and, given his very limited tool chest and his blindly distributive understanding of negotiation, they know exactly what he is going to do and exactly how to respond to it.
From a professional negotiation point of view, Trump isn’t even bringing checkers to a chess match. He’s bringing a quarter that he insists of flipping for heads or tails, while everybody else is studying the chess board to decide whether its better to open with Najdorf or Grünfeld.”
— David Honig
This is interesting, IMO. Thank you. It seems that creating chaos, creating pain for many, opens up opportunities to control more and profit more. Like a lion starting a stampede to find the weak wildebeest. There is no governance intended.
This is why Smith ingratiating herself at the expense of united resolve is futile – there is no plan, no thought to the tariffs, just chaos-creation. Smith has just shown herself to be a lame wildebeest (to our discredit within Canada).
Unfortunately, there is a plan. 47’s goal is to annex Canada by economic force. Smith is the malleable wedge to Canadian unity. Two objectives in play. 47’s desire to annex Canada to join up with Alaska. Smith’s strategy to create a sovereign Republic of Western Canada, with the ideology of Project 2025 as written up in the Free Alberta Strategy. These are not the days of normal.
given the general level of reactive, redneck, simplicity attached to too much of the alberta ethos and electorate – much like the separatist of quebec, except those seps do not see being american as option – the idea of alberta as the 51st state is very much in play. is there enough of the same narrow, simpleton intolerance in play in bc as well so as to create a geographical unification with alaska?
great find, imo – thank you!
Trump is in violation of the OAS (Organization of American States) Charter:
Article 20 the Charter of the Organization of American States (OAS) declares that “No State may use or encourage the use of coercive measures of an economic or political character in order to force the sovereign will of another State and obtain from it advantages of any kind.”
Wake up . The reduced rate for oil was because he needs our oil and had nothing , nothing whatsoever with Smith’s trip. Similarly, this entire tariff is nothing to do with border security but is a useful way of introducing an emergency response avoiding the restrictions of NAFTA.
Great comments. She also tried to out smart Trudeau and wasted $75 million of taxpayers money by buying children’s cold medicine from Turkey that was proven to be worthless. Add that to the $2.2 million she wasted on Preston Manning and his lies about COVID and how much has she wasted on Jim Dinning for trying to steal our Canada Pension Plan. Then there is the fact that they have now cancelled the hospital to be built in south Edmonton that the NDP approved after wasting $69 million on that and the $7 millions she is wasting on trying to help her pal Pierre Poilievre get elected so he will help her do whatever she wants to Albertans. We should all demand that she retire and face a massive lawsuit to recover what she’s wasted should we? We have all been treated like morons long enough, haven’t we?
Smith was right to go . Canada is a confederation . Alberta is in the confederation as an individual province, Federal leaders have maligned and ignored the fact . Abused some provinces for the benefit of others . Smith is watching out for alberta. Lame duck (ex)prime minister, now acting smart and wanting to stand up for Canadas citizens. Never before, though. Comrade Zzylinski, WEF, WHO, and other entities got his attention and our tax dollars for the last 10 years. Suddenly he cares about us? I’m not fooled by him.
A short civics lesson here, old school. Your notion that “Alberta is in the confederation as an individual province” suggests you think that this relationship resembles a Republic. If this is so, it is a misinformed and misguided notion regarding Canada. It does, however, closely resemble Rob Anderson et al and Danielle Smith’s desire to make Alberta a sovereign state known as the Republic of Western Canada. Does this not represent dangerous separatist ideology? Canada is a sovereign parliamentary democracy and a constitutional monarchy in the Westminster tradition.
https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/just/05.html
The president of the U.S.A has openly declared war on Canada through economic means. In view of this, it may be advisable to consider the following:
In Canada, sedition is the use of speech or words to incite others to rebel against the government or governing authority. According to Section 59 of the Criminal Code, it is a crime to speak seditious words, publish a seditious libel, or be part of a seditious conspiracy. The Supreme Court of Canada has defined sedition as any practice that is calculated to disturb the tranquillity of the state and lead ignorant persons to subvert the government and the laws of the empire. Seditious words, libel, and conspiracy are punishable by a maximum of 14 years in prison.
In keeping with your assertion that you’ve not been fooled, it seriously begs the question who really has been duped?
Try looking in a mirror and see what a “fool” looks like in person.
Sure she was. It gave her a great opportunity to waste another $250,000. American Money of taxpayers money on a two week holiday to Florida, didn’t it? I have never heard of anyone being able to reason with a Dictator, have you? It’s why they’re reign usually ends in bloodshed, like Trump’s almost did, didn’t it? .