A collection of digital wonders and some other stuff
A lot has happened in the last week. A petition to recall Nathan Neudorf has been approved but it was not my petition.
It’s been a busy week and unfortunately I’m not prepared to say much at this time but hopefully I’ll have a substantial update soon.
Yesterday I submitted an application for recall petition from the Government of Alberta and once they receive it a seven day review period will commence. There is also a seven day period for my MLA to respond to the petition.1
I’ve been getting a tremendous response from people that want to help and we are going to need a lot of help but first we must all wait until the application has been approved and then the flood gates will open. Then the constituents of Lethbridge-East will have a chance to profess their righteous indignation at the “Honourable” Nathan Neudorf.
Thank you so much for everyone who has expressed interest in helping.
“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”
–Labor leader Nicholas Klein in 19142
A friend’s wife recently met with the MLA for Lethbridge East, the so-called honourable Nathan Neudorf. Here are the notes she shared on Facebook about the meeting:
Reflections from my recent Meeting with Nathan Neudorf
On November 10, I sat down with MLA Nathan Neudorf to discuss my concerns about Public Education and his vote in favour of legislating teachers back to work using the Notwithstanding Clause.
I’ll be honest—I wasn’t sure how the meeting would go. But I was grateful for the chance to speak directly with him.
During the meeting, I shared many concerns (which I will list below), but the main concern regarded the use of the Notwithstanding Clause.
Nathan’s explanation: He told me he wasn’t personally in favour of the clause, but said that “due to the Democratic Process” he had to vote yes with his party. When I pressed him, he admitted that if he voted against, he would be removed from the UCP.
My response: That’s not the Democratic Process—that’s Party Policy/Solidarity. Democracy means representing the people who not only elected you, but who are in your constituency, not simply following party orders. If Neudorf had stood up for what was right, he could have remained as an independent MLA and kept his integrity intact.
As someone who teaches about democracy and Canada’s government systems, I find it deeply troubling when elected officials confuse party loyalty with democratic responsibility.
A Quick Refresher on Democracy (for anyone who needs it. Maybe some MLA’s out there?):
• Democracy = power of the people (Greek “demos” + “kratia”).
-which Nicolaides should be aware of. Just saying.• In Canada, we use representative democracy: citizens elect MLAs to represent them, not their party bosses.
True democratic participation includes:
- Voting
- Paying taxes & jury duty
- Petitioning & protesting
- Staying informed
The Charter of Rights protects our right to protest, freedom of expression, and peaceful assembly—unless a government invokes the Notwithstanding Clause to override those rights.
Why this matters: Democracy only works if citizens are informed and engaged. Without proper funding for Public Education, we risk raising generations of voters who don’t understand their rights—or how easily those rights can be taken away.
Democracy isn’t perfect, but it gives us the power to demand change. That power is lost when elected officials put party loyalty above the people they represent.
My takeaway: I want MLAs who understand democracy, have the courage to stand up for what’s right, and who put integrity above party politics. Albertans deserve nothing less.
The Gist of My Concerns Raised with MLA Nathan Neudorf
- Government tried to strip away teachers’ pensions.
- Removed ATA’s disciplinary measures that were working.
- Rolled out a flawed curriculum with zero resources—teachers left to buy/create their own.
- Cut PUF funding for children with severe needs in public schools, but kept it for private schools.
- Changed funding models so schools aren’t funded based on actual students in classrooms.
- Forced mandatory assessments (Bill 6)
- For Kindergarten–Grade 5:
- Not designed by experts
- No diagnosis or supports provided
- 30–90 minutes per child, no funding for subs
- Kindergarten assessments required, even though KG isn’t mandatory
- Used the Notwithstanding Clause to legislate teachers back instead of bargaining in good faith.
- Undermining teachers by lowering education requirements, risking quality and salaries.
- Ignored class sizes and complexity until now, after excluding them from negotiations.
- Alberta = highest funding for private schools + lowest funding for public schools in Canada.
Bottom line: Alberta’s government is undermining teachers, underfunding public schools, and misrepresenting democracy. OUR KIDS DESERVE BETTER!
I tried to get a meeting with Nathan Neudorf myself but was told he was too booked up to meet at this time.
The Edmonton Journal has a story by Michele Taylor called, “What you need to know about Alberta’s recall law“.
From the article:
Under the law, any eligible voter who has lived in a constituency for at least three months can apply to start a recall petition. The applicant must pay a $500 fee, show identification, and submit a statement of no more than 100 words explaining why the MLA should be recalled. The chief electoral officer, who oversees Elections Alberta, has seven days to approve or reject the application.
If approved, organizers have 90 days to gather signatures from registered voters in that constituency. Only registered local canvassers can collect signatures, and each must swear an affidavit confirming that they personally witnessed every signature. To succeed, the petition must collect valid signatures from at least 60 per cent of the voters who cast ballots in the most recent provincial election, which was changed from 40 per cent of total registered voters.
If that enormous threshold is met, Elections Alberta verifies the petition and publishes the results. The Lieutenant Governor in Council — effectively, the provincial cabinet — must then declare a recall vote within four months. If a simple majority of voters say “yes” to removing the MLA, the seat is declared vacant, and a byelection follows.
I’ve been talking with other concerned residents of Lethbridge East and learning how to enact a recall for our representative that voted to strip teachers’ charter rights away with Bill 2 when there were many other options to get teachers back in the classroom. Stay tuned.
In the 2023 provincial election, the Lethbridge East Riding had a very close result with Nathan Neudorf ultimately remaining MLA. 1
With what happened in the Legislature the other day, the passing of Bill 2 without debate… Neudorf needs to be held accountable. He voted for this attack on our freedoms. He needs to be recalled.
Update: It appears I’m not the only one that feels this way: https://operationtotalrecall.ca
Update 2: Instead of just complaining, I’m going to do something about it.
I watched the livestream yesterday as the UCP ruling party voted to take away our constitutionally protected right to collective bargaining and the freedom to gather and strike. I’m livid.
The Alberta Teachers’ Association president, Jason Schilling, shared his thoughts in a news scrum yesterday:
https://youtu.be/Hy1YKLrbGuQ?si=iEeVKSbVv5uwgnKQ
Now that they’ve taken this unprecedented step, what rights will they take away next?
It looks like the Alberta Federation of Labour is preparing a response. If the teachers can’t strike then the unions that are still allowed to strike will take up that mantle. This fight is not over and it looks like it’s going to be ugly.
How it started:
How it’s going:
The loss of >27% lead and failing to win re-election in his own riding has to be a major blow to Pierre Poilievre but in his concession speech last night he declared he’s determined to continue on in his role as leader of the opposition. He even bragged that he prevented the Liberals from achieving a majority government.
Jagmeet Singh, on the other hand, resigned last night after his party’s support imploded in the face of fear over Trump’s sovereignty and tariff threats and the loss of his own seat in parliament. In time Singh will be remembered more for his great contribution to improving Canadian public health care with the NDP’s dental plan than leading his party into non-party status. It should be noted that without Singh’s coalition government support, the Liberals otherwise would have been wiped out in a snap election a long time ago and Poilievre would have been the one negotiating with the US when Trump breached our trade deal.
Which leads me to wonder, if we don’t renegotiate NAFTA1, does that mean we can get rid of the GST?
Back in the 1980’s the Liberal government was pushing for a new trade agreement with the United States. Brian Mulroney opposed it before he was elected:
“Don’t talk to me about free trade…. Free trade is a danger to Canadian sovereignty. You’ll hear no more of it from me…. This country could not survive with a policy of unfettered free trade…. This is a separate country, we’d be swamped. It’s bad enough as it is.”
But after he was elected he turned face and negotiated The Canada–United States Free Trade Agreement (CUSFTA) and with it came the GST.
“Canada’s Goods and Services Tax (GST) came into effect on January 1, 1991. (Mulroney had to stock the Senate with extra Tory appointees to get the tax passed by the Liberal-dominated Upper House.) Set at 7 percent, the GST replaced a federal manufacturer’s tax of 13.5 percent, and in doing so, shifted the burden from private companies to individual consumers. The GST, in turn, was brought in to compensate for import duties and excise taxes that were now being lost under — you guessed it — free trade. Keep that in mind the next time you cough up your share of the national sales tax: Free trade isn’t free.”2
My friend Chelsea Matisz was on the panel for the latest episode of West of Centre: The new normal is not normal, but are Albertans ready to separate?
Everything we know about “the West” seems to be shifting this week. On a global scale, the U.S. has upended the post-war international order by slapping tariffs on dozens of countries, effectively shredding free trade. Closer to home, former Reform Party leader Preston Manning warns of a potential “West wants out” scenario if the Liberals form government again. How real are these threats? West of Centre host Kathleen Petty talks with three everyday Albertans about navigating this highly unusual election. Journalists Rob Breakenridge and Lisa Johnson then weigh in on whether these pressures could redefine the upcoming election — and Canada’s political landscape at large.
I just wanted to add that I haven’t heard anyone talking about Alberta separation. In a grade 11 social studies class that I was guest teaching the other day, the students hadn’t even heard the term “Wexit”1. While there are some anti-Canadian idiots making waves on American News, I would say they are only few and far between.
Vox is reporting that Canada is so furious at the US right now:
I wanted a firsthand account of how all this is affecting normal Canadians and Canadian politics. So I dialed up Vox’s Zack Beauchamp, who lives in Canada, to get the scoop.
Zack told me that “Canadians are angry — just out-of-this-world angry about what the United States is doing to them.”
The only thing I would add is that for many Canadians, while it’s true we are mad, we are anxious to go back to not being mad and that’s going to take some serious relationship work — more than just getting a new leadership in four years. For starters he needs to knock off the 51st state jokes1.
(via Kottke)
Tim Cook’s personal donation of $1,000,000 to Trump’s bribe fund inauguration fund has left a bad taste in the mouth of Apple fans across the net.
First, the situation from Mike Allen via Axios:
Apple CEO Tim Cook will personally donate $1 million to President-elect Trump’s inaugural committee, sources with knowledge of the donation tell Axios.
Why it matters: The donation reflects a long, collaborative relationship between Trump and Cook that included many meetings during Trump’s first term, and dinner at Mar-a-Lago last month.
Other CEOs and companies have made seven-figure inauguration contributions in their efforts to build bridges to the incoming administration.
John Gruber via Daring Fireball:
It seems pretty obvious that it was Apple/Cook that leaked this to Axios, not Trump’s side, given the eye-roll-inducing “proud American tradition” spin, but more especially the nugget that only Cook personally, not Apple as a company, is contributing. That’s Cook asking for any and all ire to be directed at him, personally, not Apple. Good luck with that.
Marco Arment via Mastodon:
Is it that hard to believe?
Why do we think Tim Cook couldn’t possibly support Trump, while all of these other billionaires support him for their own billionaire self-interests?
Why do we keep making excuses for him?
Why do we keep making excuses for Apple?
Nick Heer via Pixel Envy:
Call this what you want: bipartisanship, diplomacy, pragmatic, outright support, or “the spirit of unity”. But one thing you cannot call it is principled. We have become accustomed to business leaders sacrificing some of their personal principles to support their company in some way — for some reason, it is just business is a universal excuse for terrible behaviour — but all of these figures have already seen what the incoming administration does with power and they want to support it. For anyone who claims to support laws or customs, this is not principled behaviour.
Daniel Jalkut via Daniel Punkass :
On the occasion of Apple’s slithering CEO Tim Cook donating $1M to a neo-fascist insurrectionist, it’s FINALLY time to deploy the often overused expression “this never would have happened if Steve Jobs were still in charge.”
Monton Reece via Manton.org:
Tim Cook has led Apple to incredible success, but his words are hollow. Even the principles he seems to care most passionately about, like user privacy, are in doubt. I’m increasingly thinking it’s an act.
I’ve been an Apple developer since the 1990s when the company was doomed. Fans propped up the company because we believed they were different. They focused on design and creativity. They were the rebels and troublemakers, trying to push the human race forward through technology.
Most of the employees at Apple still care about these things. Tim Cook cares about appeasing a would-be autocrat and taxing developers in an app distribution monopoly. It’s time for new leadership.
Cabel Sasser via Mastodon:
I wonder how Tim would answer the question: “why are you donating to this one, but didn’t donate to the last one?”. That’d be fascinating to see.
It’s a sad day for Tim Cook, Apple, and the of course the USA. How can they expect the world to choke down their claim of American exceptionalism when its leaders both in and out of government are so transparently corrupt?