Alberta’s United Conservative Party Government late yesterday reversed course on its decision to terminate its agreement with Legal Aid Alberta, promising in a statement from Justice Minister Mickey Amery to extend the current funding arrangement while negotiations for a new deal continue.
Trial lawyers in Edmonton, Calgary and other centres had warned Tuesday that the government’s action would “trigger a complete breakdown of an already overtaxed and under-resourced system.”
News stories about that potential outcome appear to have resulted in the government’s screeching smuggler’s turn yesterday.
However, Mr. Amery’s statement indicated that he intends to continue with the UCP’s push for what he called “strengthened transparency and accountability measures,” which sounds like veiled words for what critics of the government’s plans assailed as a violation of the principle “that the person prosecuting an individual must be separate and independent from the person conducting their defence.”
So the good news last night was that the government’s reversal means legal aid services in Alberta will not cease next Tuesday.
The bad news is that it sounds very much as if the UCP and Legal Aid Alberta are still at an impasse about the governance of the organization, and if that can’t be resolved the parties could be back at the same point in a few weeks.
The obvious lesson from the events of the past few hours is that it pays to play hardball in negotiations with this government – indeed, that hardball may be the only thing that is likely to work.
Mr. Amery’s statement, the last news release published by the government yesterday, began on a churlish note, complaining that Legal Aid Alberta’s public funding has “almost doubled” over the past nine years, from $66 million in 2015 to about $138 million this year.
Since legal aid services everywhere are chronically underfunded and given inflation over the past decade, this sounds like rather small beer to pay for a fundamental requirement of a society of laws, but Mr. Amery grumped that, “obviously, this funding growth is unsustainable.”
Well, there is that $4.3-billion surplus the UCP keeps bragging about, so one supposes a case could be made about the sustainability of the program. And, as NDP Justice Critic Irfan Sabir pointed out back in 2022, the UCP had failed to honour the 2018 governance agreement with Legal Aid Alberta and the province’s contribution to legal aid was falling far behind that of other provinces.
“Even more puzzling to our government,” Mr. Amery continued his statement, “Legal Aid Alberta is not materially expanding the number of clients it serves, nor is it being forthcoming with a credible explanation or details as to why this is the case. Albertans expect their government to be responsible with their hard-earned tax dollars.”
Given all that complaining, it took the news release writer six paragraphs to get to the lead: “… we have offered to extend the existing funding agreement to ensure the delivery of legal services by Legal Aid Alberta continues unaltered while we continue to work with Legal Aid Alberta on the new funding agreement.”
The statement also included a hint that the UCP is willing to consider allowing Legal Aid Alberta to maintain enough independence to provide independent legal advice to its clients. Of course the proof of that pudding, to borrow a phrase from folk wisdom, will be in the negotiations.
“Alberta’s government remains committed to ensuring Albertans have access to legal aid services,” Mr. Amery’s statement concluded. The statement does not indicate how long the government’s extension of the current agreement will last, however.
In addition to legal assistance for adults and youth charged with criminal offences, Legal Aid Alberta provides assistance with cases involving families and children who do not have the means to hire legal counsel.
So it seems the bull in the china shop has stopped smashing things and the frantic waving has got its attention, for now.
But it seems that it remains in a bad mood and would like to get back to smashing, but perhaps realizes more bad behavior might lead to it going off to the political packing plant.
So we now have this hastily constructed statement. Not sure why they chose 2015, as the UCP was not in power until some time after that so some of the funding increase should be credited to someone else. I suppose on having to point out the obvious here, one can conclude this wasn’t the UCP communications teams best work.
Hopefully things will calm down, a better agreement will be reached and next time the UCP will think twice before giving into their more petty, vindictive and destructive impulses.
Governance by ADHD…it doesn’t get more exciting.
Sophistry in the form of interpretive language games and the ‘values’ that are involved and/or embedded in the game playing itself is a favorite activity of the political class. Second rate political platitude, verbal legerdemain, and manipulation are all part of the make believe magic show routine; where for example, “Albertans expect their government to be responsible with their hard-earned tax dollars.”
The ‘expectations’ are as meaningless as is the cheap repetitive talk of ‘responsibility’ and ‘accountability’. If it is the case that there are no obligations if there is no meaningful accountability, then the speculative ‘ought’ as expectation becomes a fiction as well:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-bitumen-sturgeon-refinery-nwrp-1.5718044
Even more puzzling to Edmontonians, Edmonton Police Service is not materially expanding the number of clients it serves, nor is it forthcoming with a credible explanation or details as to why this is the case (massively increased budget). Edmontonians expect their police service to be responsible (and transparaent) with their hard-earned tax dollars. (Hey, TBA government and McFee, see how that works?)
@DJC how many smuggler’s turns is now? My wife and I were trying to count. We are thinking it’s 3, but we can’t remember the details of the other 2.
Found 1 of them – the low income transit pass
Gerald, under Smith and Kenney, in addition to the low-income transit pass, we have the Sovereignty Act changes, the Athabasca University staff move, Lougheed-era coal policies (removed by Kenney, replaced by Kenney, slyly removed again by Smith), ministerial pandemic travel (OK by Kenney, banned by Kenney, OK by Smith, School social distancing. These are the examples that were covered here. There was a lot more technical stuff about rules for staff working in health care facilities that have been changed multiple times, sometimes for sound reasons, sometimes for ideological reasons, throughout the UCP period. Then there was Deena Hinshaw, rewarded by Kenney, fired by Smith, re-hired by AHS, re-fired by Smith, although that’s not so much a reversal by the UCP as just serial incompetence. Then we have, under Kenney and Smith, blockades bad, blockades good, blockades sort of bad, blockades good again, and so on, up to the present, blockades still OK as long as they stay in the ditch. DJC
Also ignore the fact that a ditchbilly blockader caused a large traffic accident the other day but there were no serious injuries, so blockades OK unless the MSM finally makes a fuss about that or until the next accident kills someone the UCP cares about.
It was reported here:
https://www.reddeeradvocate.com/home/vehicles-collide-in-front-of-highway-2-rest-stop-on-canada-day-7422530
The UCP has a habit of backtracking after their very bad policy ideas are implemented. This is never a surprise.
What’s that? It’s the sound of Mickey Amery complaining that poverty has increased, along with the rising population in Alberta. It’s almost an admission that his government’s failures are directly responsible for the increased need for Legal Aid. There are consequences for doing precious little to house the unhoused, failing to enact rent controls, or to catch up and keep up with inflation for those on social assistance and AISH, or closing safe consumption sites or restricting access to social programs and services. Shall I go on?
It was a dumb idea to act first and think later. Did he think no one would notice the termination of funding, so the program could be disappeared entirely? Albertans aren’t that cold-hearted (yet), and many realize that undermining the principle of the right to defence for the poor held the potential to undermine justice for the rest of us, with the exception of the wealthy. Undermine justice for all, take away democracy. Soon we’ll turn into the United States, where people of high privilege and wealth, like past and future presidents, are retroactively, presently and forever exempt from the laws of the land. Happy Independence Day? No thanks. We’re Canadian.
Legal aid in Alberta ? Never heard of it ,but I’ve heard how Legal aid makes it trouble for Albertans ,there is no so much program of “legal aid” ,fairy tales again
I kind of agree with you. I got Legal Aid when my ex beat and left me. It cost 4000.00 and they made me pay every cent back. So it is not a free service for women. Ex brother-in-law used them I think at least 8000.00 did not pay a cent back. So just how did this free system work. I think it is free money for lawyers not to help devastated people.
Screw my life up program should be the title ,not legal aid
Alberta Justice Minister Cops to Keystone of UCP Policy-Making.
Sounds like a Mack Sennet two-reeler
It’s pretty hard to see this as a win. The basic belligerence of the Smith government is well established at this point, and I pretty much expect to see fights over all sorts of routine business from here on. However shameful it looks from here, the UCP clearly aren’t feeling any of it! So we just have three and a half more years of the cons chipping away at everything the government does.
The Minister’s comments about the increased cost of Legal Aid Alberta were quite misleading. The legal aid tariff (rate paid to private lawyers) was increased by 25% in 2022 (after years at the same level).
Also, the scope of LAA’s criminal work beyond private certificates has grown:
– Legal Aid Alberta hired staff duty counsel for all first-appearance bail hearings around 2018 or so (multiple lawyers working on two 8 hour shifts a day, 7 days a week).
– The number of certificates for counsel to cross-examine complainants when self-represented people are facing charges of domestic violence or sexual violence has risen sharply. So have the certificates to represent complainants of sexual violence in applications by defence counsel to access private records of the complainants (diaries, counselling records, etc.).
– The number of courtrooms with duty counsel has increased. Specialized courts like drug treatment courts, Indigenous courts and the mental health court in Edmonton all are staffed with duty counsel.
I’m only familiar with changes in the criminal law side of LAA’s work. I expect other explanations might be given for cost increases in their work on family law and child welfare matters.
D. Joseph: Thanks for this. Relevant and very helpful. DJC
This is all the fault of the Federal Government, Trudeau in particular.
No…it is the fault of the municipalities…especially Calgary and Edmonton. Scoundrels all of them
Oh no….this is the fault Naheed Nenshi and the NDP
Anyone….but not the person in the mirror. Not ever! Certainly not that politically inastute Mickey Amery or his boss Danielle Smith.
On the plus side….perhaps it will overshadow the serious oncologist shortage in Alberta and the Provinces seeming inability to attract specialists to Alberta for a few weeks.
It’s summer time, time for flip-flops by the UCP, or does it really need to be summer? It is the typical tactic of come up with something outrageous, if there is too much opposition then revert back to square one, or announce it before a weekend with the hope that by Monday everyone will have forgotten about it.
If the UCP is really 14 pts ahead of the NDP this province is in bigger trouble than I thought.
The level of autocracy would put a smile on dictators world wide.
Love and compassion. Who preached that? https://apnews.com/article/vatican-vigano-schism-excommunicate-170df099cd1fe2cf556485c8a3acd072 Does this give them pause to reflect? https://apnews.com/article/vatican-vigano-schism-excommunicate-170df099cd1fe2cf556485c8a3acd072
yes, that was interesting, one day its going to be gone, the next day its coming back. Perhaps some one had a chat with an A.G. or something like that. No legal aid? So when some one is brought into court and they have no lawyer because there is no legal aid, a judge may be unhappy. Legal Aid has been around so long I can’t remember any one not having a lawyer.
It would not look good anywhere if judges started putting people in jail because they had no way to defend themselves. Wouldn’t look good either if judges sent criminals on their happy way if they didn’t have legal representation. Could there be court challenges if anything like that started to happen. Some of those UPC people don’t seem all that bright.
e.a.f.: I feel the UCP got their fingers slapped on this one. Their plan clearly was to be able to have some control of the process of choosing who gets legal aid and who doesn’t. The could have been called out till we were all blue in the face and media would have paid no attention. But the prospect of a complete cessation of the service in a week caught everyone’s attention. Now, you are absolutely right that the courts will not tolerate large numbers of accused persons being unrepresented. But it less clear what they would do about people wishing to challenge government policies (children in care and adolescents recently in care, for example) or in danger because of the government’s ideological beliefs (trans-gender children or women trying to escape social conservative family structures) since denying them legal aid would not muck up the judges’ courtrooms. This may in fact be the real target of the UCP effort to execrt tighter control over what is in reality a very low-cost program. DJC