As Elections Alberta approved five more recall petitions yesterday, bringing the number of United Conservative Party MLAs facing at least a theoretical threat of losing their jobs to 14, provincial government cabinet ministers kept repeating their dubious mantra that their party’s Recall Act was never intended to be used this way.
Perhaps we can give them this much: this isn’t the way they expected to see the legislation used – that is to say, against them, instead of against the NDP.
The latest MLAs to be added to the recall list are:
- Glenn Van Dijken, MLA for Athabasca-Barrhead-Westlock, with 12,719 validated signatures required for the petition to succeed
- Jackie Lovely, Camrose, 12,391
- Nathan Neudorf, Lethbridge-East, utilities minister, 13,207
- Jason Stephan, Red Deer-South, 14,508
- Searle Turton, Spruce Grove-Stoney Plain, 15,189
They join Education Minister Demetrios Nicolaides, Calgary-Bow; Deputy Speaker Angela Pitt, Airdrie-East; Nolan Dyck, Grande Prairie; Advanced Education Minister Myles McDougall, Calgary-Fish Creek; Speaker Ric McIver, Calgary-Hays; Immigration and Multiculturalism Minister Muhammad Yaseen, Calgary-North; Indigenous Relations Minister Rajan Sawhney, Calgary-North West; Agriculture Minister RJ Sigurdson, Highwood; and Red Tape Reduction Minister Dale Nally, Morinville-St. Albert on the recall list.
Funny, though, isn’t it, the way the UCP’s supporters had no problem at all when the Recall Act was used to try to unseat former Calgary Mayor Jyoti Gondek last year because they didn’t like her policies?
As petition applicant Landon Johnston explained to CTV Calgary what he was up to in February 2024, he was upset by spending and tax increases at City Hall. In other words, he disagreed with Ms. Gondek’s policies.
Calgary Sun columnist Rick Bell, never shy about backing a conservative cause, cheered him on. “He’s actually feeling pretty good despite having a task worthy of Hercules,” Mr. Bell enthused.
In the event, Mr. Johnston was no Hercules. His petition flopped, and Ms. Gondek remained in office for the time being. But presumably the effort wasn’t a total waste of Mr. Johnston’s time. He managed to get himself elected as a Calgary city councillor in last month’s municipal election while Ms. Gondek lost that vote.
Now that Albertans fed up with Danielle Smith and the UCP – not necessarily New Democrats, by the way – are organizing recall campaigns against government MLAs, it’s an entirely different story and “egregious” has become the word of the month.
“The spirit and the intent behind recall of course was for your local residents and local constituents to be able to hold an MLA accountable if they’ve done something significantly egregious, and that doesn’t seem to be the case with what we’re seeing now,” Education Minister Demetrius Nicolaides grumbled two weeks ago about the recall petition against him, the first one given the nod by Elections Alberta.
Just yesterday, at an unrelated news conference, is was egregious all over again.
“The intent was always to have a way to deal with elected officials that had shown egregious behaviour and it was a way to deal with them outside of the regular election cycles,” said Finance Minister Nate Horner. “You can judge for yourself if you think that’s how it’s being used.”
At the same newser, Social Services Minister Jason Nixon pitched in: “When this legislation was originally made, in the last Legislature under premier Kenney, it was designed to hold individual MLAs that may have done something egregious inside their constituencies.”
Well, to be fair, 2024 was then and this is now. Everything will probably all change again when the UCP’s Take Back Alberta faction starts trying to gin up recall campaigns against the overly passive NDP Opposition, which as far as anyone can tell has had absolutely nothing to do with the grassroots recall campaigns.
Meanwhile, the UCP’s three-day annual general meeting in Edmonton starts Friday, leaving Premier Smith in a bit of a spot on this issue. I’m not suggesting she won’t be greeted by cheers and plaudits – her misuse of the Notwithstanding Clause to squelch the freedoms of others will go over just fine with the party’s “Freedom” crowd.
But, still, she’ll be in hot water with the UCP’s MAGA-adjacent base if she so much as talks about repealing recall legislation and she’ll be in hot water with her caucus if she doesn’t. My guess is that means the topic will barely come up next weekend, but it’ll be being feverishly discussed in the UCP’s back rooms in December.
Is using a privileged voter list to attack a recall organizer egregious?
Speaking of egregious, would Mr. Nally’s use of privileged information from the official Morinville-St. Albert voters list to claim that petition organizer Joshua Eberhart didn’t vote in the last provincial election count as egregious?
“Warning: This document contains privileged information from Elections Alberta, and permission from Eberhart may be required before publication,” Mr. Nally said in his statement to Chief Electoral Officer Gordon McClure on the recall. “According to Elections Alberta data, Joshua Eberhart does not vote in provincial elections.”
Mr. Eberhart said he did in fact vote. And even if he didn’t, under the Recall Act that would be irrelevant as long as he’s qualified to vote and lives in the riding. But that’s not the point. The point is that Mr. Nally’s action seems to many observers to be reasonable grounds for a recall, that is, egregious.
It is not be egregious, which is a weighty sounding word one expects to be used by academics or someone like William F Buckley, not the anti vax populi UCP gang. However, they now seem to be desperately trying anything to try make their arguments sound more credible and less self serving.
A better word for the situation is serious, as in recall is a serious threat to the UCP and its MLAs. A problem with recall is that it creates a series of local campaigns a provincisl party is ill equipped to deal with. Heck even some who voted UCP and may even still do so could have issues with their local MLAs, some of which don’t seem to have been that present or interested in what their constituents think. So it becomes a series of referendums on various local MLAs, some of whom are very unimpressive or uninterested in local concerns. Given the prevailing negative mood and economic situation, voters may also have another reason to recall them.
So it may be best for Smith to just pull the pin and call a general election instead of risking having her majority go down one by one like dominoes falling, caught by the prevailing mood.
Very good summation and very possible response by Danielle.
“It is not be egregious, which is a weighty sounding word one expects to be used by academics or someone like William F Buckley, not the anti vax populi UCP gang.”
Another word they may need explained is “petard”, but I doubt they will appreciate knowing.
Paul: Knowing some of the brainiacs in the UCP Caucus, if they come across the reference they may just think it’s a simple typo. DJC
It appears that Mr. Nally violated section 163 of the Elections Act by using the voters list for a purpose other than what is specified in the Act. Of course these types of unlawful breaches are just part of standard operating procedures for the UCP and do not result in any meaningful penalties, as long as the clapping seals toe the line and follow Dingy’s lead.
I happen to think using the Notwithstanding Clause outside of its intended purpose is egregious. All these UCP MLAs voted to use it like a hammer on teachers, so they all deserve recall.
I think comparing people to cattle to justify use of the NWC against a small minority of children is egregious. What next? Loading people into cattle cars? I think marching with a group of people who think gay people are “minions of Satan” in a (hate) parade is egregious. I think breaking conflict of interest rules is egregious. I think funnelling millions and billions of dollars of public money into a whole lot of crap contracts that benefit people with government connections is egregious. I could go on and on and on but you get my point. Those who have done nothing wrong have nothing to fear with recall.
This is the winter of our discontent. What do we call the season when the snow melts? Alberta Spring?
“What do we call the season when the snow melts?”
These days? January.
Great comment!
Dale Nally is my MLA although I have never voted him. My daughter went to high school with his son and Mr Nally got him to press their teachers on who they were voting for in the last election. Definitely some egregious and petty behaviour. Two thirds of the riding is rural where he enjoys strong support so I don’t see him geting recalled. Not that Danielle Smith is going to allow anyone to be recalled. The recall legistation is actually one of Jason Kenney’s phony popualist policies which Danielle Smith has continued. At least she isn’t driving around the province in an RV too. I think she has a better read on the UCP base than Kenney ever had. On a side note, I’ve also wondering why Dale Nally looks so confused in every picture. Reducing red tape must be mentally taxing maybe?
UCP General Meeting is in Edmonton, at the Expo Centre this weekend. Living in Red Deer, I often get Alberta’s two largest cities mixed up. I often find myself driving down the Deerfoot when I meant to head to Edmonton’s bright lights.
Thanks, Neil. I knew that, and I’ve stated it in this space before. And, yet, whenever I think about a UCP AGM, my brain assumes it’s gonna be in Calgary … because Calgary. Anyway, no one to blame but myself. It’s been fixed. DJC
My prediction: no change to the recall act. Smith is caught in a left stick of her own devising (with some help from Kenney). She knows exactly what happens to clown party premiers who invoke the wrath of their banjo playing, mouth breathing & ideologically inbred base.
She will tell her mla’s at risk “well look, 60% is a lot of signatures, and it’s just the first step. If four members actually lose a recall vote, then I’ll just call an early election so they can return to the trough.”
An added filip: since the recall act pertains to electoral law, the notwithstanding clause is inapplicable.
An outside possibility: while Lt. Gov. Bowen did not refuse assent to Bible Bill’s repeal of his recall act, I am not near so sanguine about Lt. Gov. Lakhani doing the same, especially if there are multiple active petitions or even more so, scheduled recall votes.
I wonder who will install the hot water tanks while Lando is occupied with doing his level best to make sure he pays $30 less per month on his property taxes. Gondek’s replacement failed in his attempt to declare the prevention of the raising of the Palestinian flag at City Hall as an emergency priority. Calgary winning!
The last link is quite an interesting one, as it has a copy of the UCP election flier of 2021 which they campaigned on “Alberta’s United Conservative Party will give voters the power to FIRE their MLAs if they break promises.” Looks to me like they broke many promises and should be fired. It also has a comment about the current session being extended by two weeks so the UCP can change the rules in mid stream to protect their own asses. Somehow it doesn’t get any greasier than this. Dictator Dingy Smith is at it again.
Smith’s petition renovation.
The gift that keeps on giving.
Whenever I hear the saying that you can never overestimate the stupidity of the crowd, I think of Smith and the UCP and their supporters.
Some Albertans might find it egregious that legislation is being tabled to shield AIMCo from lawsuits filed by pension agencies, but lawsuits filed by mining interests are paid out and/or allowed to proceed.
Others might find it egregious that items that were not part of the UCP’s election platform are inching ever closer to becoming law (APP, provincial Police force, separation threats, two tier health care).
Personally, I find it egregious that any disagreement with the provincial governing party makes one a Radical Leftist (is that the new default position, plain ol’ leftists no longer exist?).
So many potential recall initiatives, so little funding to action them…………
“provincial government cabinet ministers kept repeating their dubious mantra that their party’s Recall Act was never intended to be used this way.”
Do they mean like the notwithstanding clause?
With luck, AIMCo, will be the final nail in the UPC coffin.
OOMG Did the UPC really accidentally slip into a more pure democracy “OF the people, BY the people, FoR the people?”
The thought that the populace can call an instant election to subvert derailed policy is old school
” Power to the People”
Hi Dave, long time no see… keep on rockin’
Recently some have thought Mr Kenney looked good compared to Ms Smith.
The Recall Act is his.
Let’s be careful when we reappraise failed politicians. Past electoral losses by the odious, does not sweeten their crap in the present.
The new legislation and the revisions to existing legislation in the latest Legislature session have been stunningly egregious. Add to these, past egregious actions in prior sessions under Smth. If the UCP MLA’s voted for any one of these, their actions count as egregious. So in this, as on so many other occasions, these MLAs and the UCP do not have a leg to stand on.
As I understand it, the way the recall process has been set up, if a petition is successful it will then trigger a vote on whether the MLA targeted in the petition should be recalled. My thinking is that if Danielle Smith is going to repeal the recall act, she will wait until the petitioning is finished, then repeal the legislation. That way she does not lose face repealing the legislation unless it is absolutely necessary. If say, only two petitions collect enough signatures, she could let the process proceed as planned. That might cause her to lose a couple of MLAs, but she will not lose face with her base, or her majority.
On the other hand, if enough petitions are successful, Ms. Smith can repeal the legislation before it gets to the recall vote stage.
Any parliamentary form of government that messes with recall usually comes to grief. Premier Ditzy is fooling herself, if she thinks she can avoid the traps and pitfalls. I love Alberta pols, they are so blinding stupid, especially the right wing ones oftentimes.
Smith and company are doing a fine job and eating their young. If Smith wasn’t pushing such stupid legislation perhaps voters wouldn’t be so keen to recall them. Smith is using the Not Withstanding Clause to avoid the Constitution, That is never a good thing. She is so dumb. If the party is to survive they might consider dumping Smith and some of the others. Of course it would be so much better is the NDP takes office. Haven’t heard much from the NDP or their leader. Guess they don’t have to do much. The UPC just keeps shooting themselves in the foot.
e.a.f.: I see that too.
Some gut feeling tells me that the UCP are finished. Good riddance to bad rubbish!
I have long felt, and argued, that recall, especially in the context of parliamentary democracy, was a bad idea. It is inimical to good governance, which can on occasion require that an MP or MLA vote in the broader interests of the country or province, rather than the narrow parochial interests of their constituents.
But in this case, if the UCP had wanted its application to be as narrowly construed as they are now arguing, I’m sure they could have gotten the legislative drafters deep in the bowels of the Ministry of Justice to write it like that — especially since they’ve had two kicks at that can, once under Kenney and once under Smith. But they didn’t. So, now those chickens are coming home to roost.
Karma, eh?