What it means to be Wild in Alberta - Macleans.ca

What it means to be Wild in Alberta

As MLAs prepare to sit this week, Wildrose leader Danielle Smith girds for inspection


The Alberta legislature resumes in Edmonton this week, and with that return comes a new dynamic. The Wildrose Alliance, its poll numbers swelling, arrives with two new representatives, floor-crossers from the Conservative side, tripling the party’s presence under the dome. And so, a question: Who are these people and what do they want? For good or for bad, it’s a query with definite answers. In a nutshell, the Calgary Herald’s Jason Fekete writes, “the Wildrose Alliance champions a slew of policies that differentiate it from the Tories and other political parties on a gamut of issues: considering a provincial police force; questioning the science of climate change; banning teachers’ strikes; protecting the ‘conscience rights’ of health professionals; allowing citizens to recall elected officials; and withdrawing from the Canada Pension Plan in favour of a provincial option.” According to one pundit quoted here, the Wildrose may well have made a misstep in so pointedly questioning the validity of climate change science. “It’s very easy to just look like you’ve come out of 1972 or something, and that would be dangerous,” says the University of Calgary’s David Taras. Some might welcome a ride in that time machine; Albertans first elected the Tories back in 1971.

Calgary Herald

Filed under:

What it means to be Wild in Alberta

  1. Good news for Stelmach! They sounded to good to be true…so long Wildrose…

  2. The original article refers to the Wild Rose Alliance as extreme right wing. In spite of the authors editorial comment I would not classify the Wild Rose Alliance as extreme right wing but rather center right. They are a nice contrast to the left wing liberals, conservatives and NDP. Political scientists like David Taras have lived their whole lives in the university culture making a good living off the taxpayer so really can't be expected to support anything other than bigger governments with higher taxes. The naysayers will likely be surprized next election. Hopefully we will get a federal party with similar views, if not it may be time for Alberta to exit the socialist utopia that races full speed toward bankruptcy.

  3. Unsure of why you are saying so long. Too early to support, but also too early to say so long. Why?

  4. Any party that once had Craig Chandler standing within BO sniffing distance is extreme right wing, case closed.

    Me? I'm digging a system of anti-aircraft trenches to get ready for their election victory.

  5. I'm all for another conservative party in Alberta that can keep the Tories accountable and bring down the deficit, but some of the ideas in this platform suggest that Wildrose is less interested in smaller government than it claims. A provincial pension plan will require hiring more civil servants to work in Edmonton, while the creation of a police force would be a redundant waste of money since there's already pan-Canadian force that can track individuals between provinces.

    Smaller government is one thing, but trying to reconcile it with bigger government for the sake of provincial autonomy is just silly. There are more important things this party should be discussing. Tax reform, democratic reform, health care, advanced education, the Heritage Trust Fund, and the list goes on….

  6. just keep on rockin danielle, rock, rock, rock that boat! keep that status quo in check! whatever it takes…wildrose country is watching…. dinosaurs…fossils…stelmachs stoolies…long over drawn has been pro con party poopers!

  7. Can we have the Wildrose party set up an affiliate in BC please?

  8. Incidentally, is it just me, or is "girds for inspection" a really strange choice of words?