United Conservative Party releases CPP survey results 21 months late
It's taken nearly two years for the province to release results from a survey that asked Albertans if they wanted an Alberta Pension Plan (APP).
The survey showed 63 per cent of respondents were opposed to an APP, while only 10 per cent were in support.
More recent polling from Leger in February found 55 per cent of Albertan's opposed an Alberta Pension Plan. A May 2025 poll from Janet Brown found 55 per cent of Albertans were in support of the APP if there were more details.
In May, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith said, 'I am seeing the results you are, I am not seeing that there is an appetite to put it to the people at the moment.'
Duane Bratt, a political science professor at Mount Royal University, says the Janet Brown poll, commissioned by the government of Alberta, has interesting results with the number of people waiting for more information.
Story continues below advertisement
He adds people wanted answers to questions. 'Like, what is the amount that Alberta Pension Plan would start with? What would be the contribution rates? What would be the benefit rates? What would be the mobility between provinces? All of those sorts of questions haven't been answered,' said Bratt.
1:56
Alberta finance minister says he has not 'flip-flopped' on proposed pension change
Bratt says the survey was not fair because it asked questions that assumed the respondent wanted an Alberta Pension Plan. 'The question itself was, would you want to leave the CPP if you had the exact same program. In the absence of any details, how do you know that that's the exact same program,' said Bratt.
Get breaking National news
For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen. Sign up for breaking National newsletter Sign Up
By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy
He adds the survey results are no longer accurate but the delay of the release of the results shows a lack of transparency from the provincial government.
'The bigger story is how and why the government of Alberta refused to hand over public survey data that they encouraged Albertans to fill out. They went to extreme measures to block it, because they realized it was going to embarrass them. They believed that this was a neutral process to just explore the idea of leaving the Canadian pension plan, but it wasn't,' said Bratt.
Story continues below advertisement
The province says they will continue to talk with Albertans on this topic and says nothing will change unless Albertans approve a new pension plan in a referendum.
Bratt says by itself, majority of Albertans are against the province pulling out of CPP and creating the APP. He adds that he expects to see several referendum questions about Alberta's independence. Those might include questions on the APP, an Alberta police force, and Alberta independence.
'I think what the government is hoping for is maybe people might not want to separate, but they still want to send a message to Ottawa,' said Bratt.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CTV News
an hour ago
- CTV News
Majority of Albertans want to stay on Canada Pension Plan: survey
Edmonton Watch A quietly released UCP survey shows 63 per cent of respondents are against an Alberta Pension Plan. CTV News Edmonton's Amanda Anderson reports.
Global News
2 hours ago
- Global News
New Purdue opioid crisis settlement builds ‘momentum' for Canada: B.C. AG
Recent settlements in U.S. government lawsuits against opioid manufacturer Purdue Pharma and the firm that allegedly consulted on boosting its sales have B.C.'s attorney general feeling 'heartened' as she pursues similar lawsuits in Canada. Monday saw 55 U.S. states and territories reach a US$7.5-billion settlement with Purdue, the maker of OxyContin, and members of the Sackler family that sought to hold them accountable for contributing to the opioid overdose crisis. As part of the settlement, the Sacklers will give up their control of the bankrupt company and will be barred from selling prescription opioids in the future. A federal judge said Wednesday that he will rule Friday on a plan for local governments and individual victims, who would also be entitled to compensation, to vote on approving the settlement by September, allowing it to proceed. Story continues below advertisement The announcement of the U.S. settlement came after the B.C. Supreme Court on Friday certified a class-action lawsuit by the province against McKinsey & Company, which is accused of advising Purdue and other drugmakers on how to market their opioid products in Canada. McKinsey has already had to pay over US$1 billion in penalties to settle similar lawsuits in the U.S., which also led to jail time for a McKinsey executive. 'I'm really pleased with the momentum,' B.C. Attorney General Niki Sharma told Global News in an interview. 'My job as attorney general is to make sure we pursue it very aggressively and as quickly as we can, so I am heartened by the success in the States and will keep on leading the charge here in Canada.' The B.C. lawsuit against McKinsey is separate from a larger class action against dozens of opioid manufacturers and distributors on allegations they downplayed the risk their products posed in order to rake in profits. That lawsuit was allowed to go ahead last fall and was certified in January. 2:00 Supreme Court upholds B.C. opioid lawsuit B.C. is leading both lawsuits on behalf of the other Canadian provinces and territories and the federal government, with the goal of recovering health-care costs that went toward responding to the overdose crisis, Sharma said. Story continues below advertisement 'We think it's unfair that companies that profited so much, knowing that their product was so harmful and that would cause this level of addiction, aren't paying for the costs of health care,' she said. A spokesperson for McKinsey told Global News it intends to defend itself against the lawsuit, which the company says is without merit. 'McKinsey did not undertake any work in Canada to enhance the sale or marketing of opioids,' the spokesperson said in an email. Alleged tactics to 'turbocharge' opioid sales B.C.'s lawsuit against McKinsey alleges the Canadian subsidiaries of Purdue, as well as Johnson & Johnson, Janssen and other drugmakers, employed many of the same tactics used by U.S. parent companies to boost their sales. Get weekly health news Receive the latest medical news and health information delivered to you every Sunday. Sign up for weekly health newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy The B.C. Supreme Court, in certifying the lawsuit, noted in its decision that multinational companies often apply business and marketing strategies 'universally.' Story continues below advertisement Last December, McKinsey agreed to pay U$650 million to resolve a U.S. Justice Department lawsuit that focused on the firm's work with Purdue, including allegations that McKinsey advised on steps to 'turbocharge' sales of OxyContin. Martin Elling, a former McKinsey senior partner who worked on Purdue matters, was sentenced to six months in prison after pleading guilty to obstruction of justice related to that case. 2:42 Conservatives grill Trudeau on former McKinsey head connection ahead of committee appearance The federal settlement was on top of a combined US$641 million McKinsey agreed to pay in 2021 to resolve similar claims brought by U.S. state attorneys general. In total, federal and state lawsuits related to the opioid crisis have resulted in roughly US$50 billion in settlements, according to researchers from Johns Hopkins University who track such claims. Long-term heavy use of prescription painkillers like OxyContin due to dependence contributed to a majority of opioid-related hospitalizations and overdoses in the early 2000s across North America. In recent years, illicit opioids like fentanyl have overtaken prescription opioids as the primary driver of the opioid crisis. Story continues below advertisement Between 2016 and last September, nearly 51,000 Canadians have died of an opioid-related overdose, according to federal data. B.C., which declared a public health emergency in 2016, saw the most fatal overdoses of any other province during that time, with more than 16,000 deaths. 'I think like many provinces across this country, we've really seen the toll of the opioid crisis on people not only with long-lasting addictions and impacts there, but loss of life and a lot of people that are mourning the loss of their loved ones,' Sharma said. A spokesperson for Health Canada said the federal government 'believes companies should be held accountable for their role in the overdose crisis' and will continue to work with provinces and territories on B.C.'s legal actions. 'The overdose crisis continues to be one of Canada's most pressing public health challenges,' the spokesperson said in an email to Global News. Health Canada is reviewing and 'considering' developments from the recent Purdue settlement in the U.S., the statement added. Where should the money go? In 2022, B.C. secured a $150-million settlement on behalf of Canadian governments in a class action against Purdue. The settlement was finalized in early 2023, allowing individuals to submit claims from a $20-million portion set aside for victims and their families, a process that remains ongoing. Story continues below advertisement The pending lawsuit against opioid manufacturers and distributors names Purdue and its various subsidiaries, as well as Johnson & Johnson, Janssen and Canadian companies like Loblaw and its subsidiary Shoppers Drug Mart. It remains in litigation. 5:09 B.C. government steps up legal action against opioid drug makers Researchers writing in the International Journal of Drug Policy earlier this year urged Canadian governments to ensure funds recovered from opioid lawsuit settlements go directly toward combating the drug crisis, rather than unrelated government expenses. Those measures should include funding harm reduction services like overdose prevention centres and safe drug supplies, as well as community organizations that work directly with people suffering from addiction, the paper says. Efforts to track how U.S. state and local governments are spending their opioid settlement money have uncovered several examples of funds not being used to directly respond to the opioid crisis. Story continues below advertisement Canada is being urged to avoid similar 'pitfalls' by mandating that at least 85 per cent of recovered funds be allocated to 'opioid remediation efforts,' and working directly with community organizations and members affected by addiction. Proposed guidelines by researchers at Johns Hopkins University for how U.S. opioid settlement funds should be spent have been adopted in over 25 states, according to the university. Sharma said B.C.'s lawsuits are structured so that any funds recovered by the province will be mandated to go to the health-care system, but that could evolve depending on how settlements are structured. 'It may be that as this develops, and the opioid cases develop, it will be tied to organizations that do addictions treatment, or there could be a whole range of things that go directly towards this crisis,' she said. She pointed to the record $32.5-billion settlement B.C. won in March on behalf of Canadian governments in its lawsuit against the tobacco industry as a model both of the province's health-related legal advocacy and the results it can achieve. 'We are really focused on eliminating the bad actors,' she said. 'It's really important to make sure that we set a line in the sand about what's right and what isn't right with the conduct of all companies out there.'
CBC
3 hours ago
- CBC
How could Canada's pension fund invest more at home? Finance committee chair wants to know
Social Sharing Canada Pension Plan managers face the prospect of hearings by the House of Commons finance committee after MPs learned that only a small fraction of the public pension plan's billions of dollars of assets are invested in Canada. Liberal MP Karina Gould, the newly elected chair of the committee, said it is important for the CPP to be managed effectively but she would like to know why the fund that provides retirement benefits for most Canadians isn't investing more in the domestic economy. "It is concerning," Gould said Thursday. She said she wants to understand why so little is invested in Canada and how the public pension fund could not only "bolster the Canadian economy, but also support Canadians and their pensions." Gould said the committee will be busy holding pre-budget consultations and examining Bill C-4, which includes a tax cut for Canadians. However, if committee members agree, she said hearings into the Canada Pension Plan could take place in the fall. "In this economic moment that we're in, it's really important that we have an understanding of, you know, where our pension funds are investing," Gould said in an interview. "It's definitely something that could be of interest to the committee." Gould said committee hearings could also look at the CPP's mandate and whether it should more closely resemble the double mission of the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec — the province's public pension manager that is charged with both making money and investing in Quebec's economic development. "It's an interesting question to explore," she said. Gould's comments come after the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board (CPPIB), also known as CPP Investments, revealed that just 12 per cent of the CPP's assets are invested in Canada — its lowest level ever. The largest chunk of its $714-billion fund, 47 per cent, is currently invested in the United States — its highest level ever. The revelation has raised questions about whether the CPPIB should be investing more in Canada while the country is in the midst of a trade war with the U.S. Those who support the high level of investment in the United States by the CPP, including the CPPIB itself, argue the plan's mandate is to make money. They argue U.S. investments offer more diversity and higher returns — which help ensure the plan will be able to pay out benefits for years to come. Others, however, question why the plan isn't doing more to invest in Canada to create Canadian jobs and infrastructure projects. They are also concerned about the plan's exposure to the U.S. at a time when President Donald Trump's administration has made the country a riskier place to invest. Like Gould, the NDP's interim leader leader and finance critic Don Davies was surprised to learn that the CPP's investment in Canada had dropped to 12 per cent. "I think it's alarming. I mean I think it's only 12 per cent of, you know, such an incredibly large fund of monies that are paid by Canadian employees and Canadian employers," he said. While Davies says the fund is well managed, he wants the government to review the CPPIB's mandate. "I personally think [the mandate] should be expanded to also include development of the Canadian economy," he said. "There's no shortage of projects that will strengthen our economy and also give good returns to workers and employers," Davies said. "I think Canadians would be surprised to learn that their own pension monies are being used to invest in other countries in such a vastly disproportionate way than in their own country." Davies said he would welcome hearings on the issue by the finance committee, of which he is not a member.
