Danielle Smith says Alberta will withhold funding for judges without more input on selection

Premier Smith’s claims that Alberta has no say in the selection of judges is false. She’s basically got a hatchet, and she’s pummelling the Justice System with it.

https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/ccs-ajc/05.html

https://albertacourts.ca/cj/about-the-court/judicial-information/judicial-appointments

Premier Smith has a background in legacy media, and may be trying to steer the news cycle away from recent reports suggesting that her decisions are killing Albertans in hospitals due to her policy choices, and that she’s been attacking the healthcare system at the expense of society. Without going into the CorruptCare contracts that involve Sam Mraiche, the Premier’s life is messy, and complicated.

https://canadahealthwatch.ca/2026/02/01/deaths-in-er-waiting-rooms-are-a-policy-choice

https://thetyee.ca/News/2026/02/03/Danielle-Smith-AHS-Firing-Spree/

Smith’s Been Attacking the Justice System For A While Now

1

Smith’s been consolidating power into the UCP and herself, and her attacks on the justice system are not limited to judges. The UCP’s interfered with courts to cover up for AIMCo.

https://kopitalk.net/c/alberta/p/93282/alberta-tries-to-legislate-ban-on-lawsuits-about-aimco-losses

2

She’s run legislation to get ahead of court decisions on Alberta’s Citizen Initiative Act

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/alberta-judge-proposed-referendum-unconstitutional-9.7004982

3

Danielle’s UCP consolidated power into how Justice System adjacent support services are run and funded by sacking the Alberta Law Foundation Board members. However one characterizes the way in which the board members left, the ultimate result is still a ransacking.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/law-foundation-staff-resignations-9.7049236

4

The UCP may appear too involved (despite statements to the contrary) with the terminations of two career Crown prosecutors, attacking the appearance of an independent prosecution service.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/alberta-crown-attorneys-association-edmonton-chief-crown-employment-9.6986908

5

The UCP have invoked the Notwithstanding Clause repeatedly to avoid legitimate Charter challenges.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/edmonton/article/alberta-legislature-passes-bill-invoking-charter-override-for-fourth-time/

6

Smith directly voiced support for EPS Chief Warren Driechel when the Chief penned a letter to news media to interfere with the Crown Prosecution’s file. At that moment, the EPS interfered with the Judicial Independence of the court, and the independence of the Crown who has complete decision-making authority over their file.

You see, police serve an important role to enforce the laws. They wear different hats at different times, and as far as courts are concerned they can be public office holders when they decide when and whom to target for investigation and arrest (which makes the news some times for bad reasons), and they’re agents of the state under different roles. Police also enjoy their own independence, subject to their own boards which tie them back to the community (ideally).

When Kaycee Madu controversially reached out to former EPS Chief McFee, Madu obviously crossed red lines for police independence.

When Smith voiced support for the EPS letter, she interfered with the independence of all three justice system participants. But, bizarrely, since she has a history of being a mercenary and a media personality, Smith wasn’t subjected to review (yet) or any discipline. EPS Chief Driechel though, should be subject to review and potential discipline because he should know better. Similarly, EPS lawyer Megan Hankewich, also in a position to know better, and should be subjected to a review.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/edmonton-plea-deal-police-1.7634783

Alberta tries to legislate ban on lawsuits about AIMCo losses

If hardworking Canadians wanted to gamble their earnings at the casino, I think they’d prefer to do that on their own terms. They certainly don’t need their savings taken by an AIMCo to do that for them.

Also, if the UCP don’t want Alberta to cover the losses and restore the retirement monies of Canadians, then what’s the point of AIMCo? I thought the whole idea of managed retirement funds was to INVEST money set aside for Canadian workers so they had some money to live on when they are old and retired. If the UCP feel that Alberta did nothing wrong to owe this lost retirement money that was gambled away, then lay criminal charges and lay claims against AIMCo’s Officers and Managers.

With my thoughts upfront, I want to make sure I understand this situation correctly, AIMCo got to play/manage with money earned by hardworking Canadians. They were able to take an investment strategy that bet on market stability - called VOLTS - which clearly did not manage risk appropriately for a fund handling retirement savings. When AIMCo finally finished gambling the money away, the house takes maybe $1.3 Bln, and AIMCo asks the Canadians saving for their retirement to HOLD THE BAG.

When Canadians say they want their money back, the UCP propose new legislation “to prevent public sector pensions from suing the Alberta Investment Management Corp., or AIMCo, for decisions made before November 2024.” So what is this exactly? The UCP want to shield Albertans? If we were to be protected, if our retirement monies were INVESTED, these gambling debts wouldn’t have been incurred at all. You’re protecting us after the fact from what exactly? Ourselves?

Maybe AIMCo? From “The blowback of AIMCo’s gamble with market volatility”, by Andrew Willis, other experts and observers of AIMCo believe that the fund persistently underperforms. Worse, at least in the view of one University of Alberta Economist’s review, the senior managers and CEOs of AIMCo have given themselves great pay bumps since 2008.

Performance is a continuing problem for AIMCo. The fund’s biggest customer is the $50-billion Local Authorities Pension Plan (LAPP), which covers health-care workers. LAPP recently said AIMCo failed to meet its performance benchmark for 46 consecutive quarters, or 11 years and six months. In 2016, the University of Alberta reviewed the decision to build one provincial fund manager. “The major beneficiaries of the transformation appear to be the senior managers and particularly the senior executives of AIMCo, whose pay has increased significantly [since 2008],” said study author Robert Ascah, an economics professor.

EDIT: Link

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/commentary/article-the-blowback-of-aimcos-gamble-with-market-volatility/

The UCP are covering up for an underperforming AIMCo, and there’s no reason for Canadians to settle for this level of underperformance. Worse, now that AIMCo was clearly seen as failing to manage risk (diplomacy speak for gambling), what’s the point of their existence?

Maybe my gambling reference is debatable. How about this? How many Canadians have to choose between medical bills, food, or housing in the future thanks to the chronic underperformance of AIMCo? If you’re going to prevent Canadians from laying claim against Alberta and AIMCo, then allow them the option of taking their money elsewhere at no loss or penalties

Global News: Stephen Harper appointed to oversee Alberta’s AIMCo fund

#Journalist: Lisa Johnson

#Harper is back.

Not as large as the Premier's interpretation of funds CPP should give to #Alberta for the APP, the #AIMCo's $160 Bn CAD is now managed by new Chairman Stephen Harper. Three of the fired board members have been reappointed, and will be helping Harper, who is reportedly foregoing any wages.

https://globalnews.ca/news/10879509/stephen-harper-aimco-appointment-alberta/

#ABLeg #ABPoli #news