Alberta Must Never Surrender Low Tax Fight

[Anonymous]

Manitobans and Ontarians have thrown in the towel to profligate spending, tax gouging, debt increasing NDP and Liberal governments who have made their people poorer, but it is our duty as Albertans to be a ray of light in a world of darkness.

If Canada loses Alberta in the anti-tax fight, we might as well start waving the white flag.



Albertans are the last great hope at keeping the truest of small government maxims alive. Repeat after us! Click your heels!



"We don't have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem."



Premier Jim Prentice has certainly failed the test. With oil prices dropping, so is the revenue the government brings in from oil. So Prentice is now mulling tax increases to make up the difference.



"I don't think Albertans generally advocate for a sales tax but I'm prepared to be educated and to hear from people," Prentice said at a Tuesday luncheon.



Let the miseducation of Premier Prentice begin. What a facepalm moment!



Calgary Sun columnist Rick Bell put it best, opening his latest column with: "First you blow a hole through the official opposition. Then you float the sales tax trial balloon."



A strong Wildrose opposition is needed now more than ever. Thanks for nothing Danielle Smith!



Just more than a decade ago, then-premier Ralph Klein, donning signature cowboy hat, held up that "Paid in Full" sign.



The provincial debt was history. How times have changed! In Ontario, fiscally sane onlookers were green with envy, having just elected Dalton McGuinty who then presided over the doubling of the debt.



But don't worry. Current Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne won't be outdone by any Prentice tax grabs.



The Liberals are poised to introduce some form of carbon tax this year. This could drive up the price of gas by seven or eight cents per litre.



And when the cost of gas sails back over a buck and beyond, get ready for more pain.



It's going to be a bellwether year for the Canadian tax debate. Do regular folks honestly believe the bureaucrats have squeezed every penny in efficiencies?



Do we all think it's right to turn the little guy upside down and shake him for pennies? Should hardworking joes have to be fleeced to pay for public servants getting better benefits than them?



Because that's what these measures in Alberta and Ontario are all about.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/01/14/year-of-taxing-dangerously">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/01/14/y ... angerously">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/01/14/year-of-taxing-dangerously

[Anonymous]

A sales tax would only be viable if it were to replace existing taxes including income taxes. However, with the number of snivel serpents earning over 100k/annum more than doubling in the last half decade, it's clear our problem is overspending. We should not be enabling our provincial government by giving them more revenue to continue putting us further in the red.

No, Mr. Premier. No to a provincial sales tax. No, no, no, a thousand times no.



We should all want our political leaders to take their advice from the smartest people around. And many of Premier Jim Prentice's policy advisors are among the smartest people in the province.



They are also advocates of a sales tax because on paper  a sales tax is a superior form of taxation to income tax or a machinery and equipment tax or just about any other kind of tax.



Theoretically with a sales tax, you can control how much tax you pay by choosing to buy things or not.



The premier has surrounded himself with truly solid thinkers and researchers, unlike Alison Redford who surrounded herself with advisers just like her – arrogant windbags who imagined themselves to be the smartest people around (but weren't).



Mike Percy, Prentice's chief of staff is a very smart economist, the former head of the U. of A.'s business school and, for a term, a pragmatic Liberal MLA.



Percy is a backer of a sales tax.



Jack Mintz, perhaps the smartest tax policy expert in the country and the head of the U of Calgary's school of public policy is a bigtime cheerleader for sales taxes (although to Mintz's credit he wants a PST to replace income tax).



Mintz also has Prentice's ear.



Even former provincial Finance Minister Ted Morton, who could never be accused of being a moderate or a lefty, now favours a PST.



And while I have great respect for all three of these public intellectuals, I still think they are wrong about a sales tax, especially now with Alberta's economy on the brink of a serious slowdown.



Economists love consumption taxes (a sales tax is a tax on consumption) because, as I've said, on paper  they are fairer than income taxes and easier to avoid legally.



But at the level of real world families, that is not how sales taxes are viewed. Nor is that how they affect an economy.



Ordinary families don't see the optional part of the consumption tax theory. They don't see that they have a choice of buying what they need or not.



Your car breaks down, you don't see it as a real choice to walk to work rather than paying for repairs just to avoid the PST.



Or your furnace blows in January. Putting off installing a replacement to avoid the tax is hardly a viable option.



It's theoretically possible to avoid groceries, toiletries, meals out, vacations, clothes and other purchases to control the amount of tax one pays, but in the real world, almost no one looks at it that way. For ordinary Albertans, a provincial sales tax would be just another government levy that they would have to put up with.



The real harm would be on big-ticket items – cars, trucks, houses, appliances. There consumers might well choose not to buy, so they can avoid the tax. But the harm that would do to the economy would more than offset the increased revenues a PST might bring into provincial coffers.



The Alberta government doesn't have mostly a revenue problem. Mostly it has a spending problem, such as nearly 10,000 health- care workers making more than $100,000 a year, plus pensions and benefits.



Bringing in a new tax, especially one that would be wildly unpopular with a lot of Albertans, at the very time they are in danger of losing their jobs or small businesses because of the decline of world oil prices would be economically foolish. And it would be politically foolish while the government is still wildly overspending.



Don't do it, Mr. Premier.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/01/14/gunter-no-no-no-to-sales-tax">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/01/14/g ... -sales-tax">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/01/14/gunter-no-no-no-to-sales-tax

[Anonymous]

Ralph Klein must be turning in his grave. He slashed the deficit when oil was trading at less than $9/bbl. Raising taxes/lowering Albertans standard of living because the government doesn't have the balls to stand up to greedy public unions?? Not on King Ralph's watch. I was a kid in the 90's, but I am nostalgic for it. ac_gumpop

In Alberta they used to say the only way taxes are going is down.



Now the only way taxes are going is up.



Which taxes and how much is the only thing that's still up for grabs.



The premier is asked point blank Wednesday about the likelihood Albertans are going to face some kind of increased taxation.



Get your Connect the Dots dictionary out and follow along.



"Clearly we're going to have to increase government revenues. There are no other alternatives," says Premier Prentice.



"We can run, to some degree, a deficit. Beyond that we have to cut expenses and increase revenues. There are no other alternatives and we need to do it in a balanced way.



"You cannot sustain the highest quality and most expensive public services in the country without a revenue base. It's not possible."



With less cash coming in from the oilpatch golden goose the finger points at us for the "revenue."



Earlier, in the to-and-fro with newshounds, Prentice says not only does Alberta have the highest cost public services in the country and the highest wages in the public sector but the province has the lowest corporate income tax, the lowest personal income tax, the lowest gas tax and no provincial sales tax.



Prentice says that arrangement worked out because of the oodles of oilpatch royalties coming into the government kitty but now that coin has, in the premier's words, "essentially evaporated."



"We have lived in a world where we've had high-quality, expensive public services and low taxes and the two can't be reconciled when the government oil revenues it's been based upon have collapsed," says Prentice.



"And I do mean collapsed."



Prentice says the past year's budget scored $9-billion-plus from oil's black gold but now "all but a small part of that has essentially evaporated."



He again says the government has three ways out and he want to use all three.



The first is to cut spending. The second is to "increase revenues through taxes." The third is to run deficits.



So we could get a provincial sales tax, yes, an Alberta PST, a Prentice Sales Tax.



Or Prentice could say no to the PST and we could all be in for an income tax hike. Or we could see higher income earners taxed at a higher rate. Or both.



It could be more tax at the pump. Or health care premiums hitting those whose companies won't pay that bill and hitting hardest those of modest income.



It could be more than one whack to the wallet. There is a big hole to fill. The Prentice Progressive Conservatives need to find dough.



No decisions have been made but one way or another we will pay for the folly of past Progressive Conservative mismanagement, the squandering of cash, the lack of planning, the buying of votes in the one-party state.



These are all sins where the PCs will almost certainly never pay a political price.



That's why the sins were committed so easily. Enough Albertans marked the X next to the PC candidate.



As for those people speaking out, Prentice does remind us he's didn't say he supports a sales tax. He doesn't feel Albertans want a sales tax.



He's heard such sentiment over the last day.



He just wants to hear more opinions about a sales tax.



Actually this writer believed there would be more pushback against a sales tax.



You know, the vocal and vehement stuff, the in-your-face agitation, the heat sending those pickpocketing politicians scurrying back to the drawing board.



In the past, even in the very recent past, the reaction to a sales tax often started with an F and ended with a You.



Then again, those rallying the troops in the past have switched sides and don't wag their tongues anymore.



That's why the deal to get Wildrose MLA to defect was so important, before the budget and before this spring's likely election.



For the tax medicine to go down a little easier, Prentice does say the government will talk with public sector workers on how "to deal with the fiscal constraints we are now seeing."



Good luck with that.



Are we talking wage rollbacks here? These PCs don't have the spine and the unions know it.



We also hear the province is reviewing how fast spending for construction on Calgary's southwest ring road will roll out. More delays.



Yes, another day ends with Prentice once again rousing Albertans to sacrifice in the battle against this blitz of bad news.



"We will weather this," says the premier.



"We've been through low oil prices before. We'll see low prices again. We will get through this."



Alas, last time around the provincial government didn't tax us to victory.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/01/14/tax-hike-talk-no-longer-taboo-in-alberta">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/01/14/t ... in-alberta">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/01/14/tax-hike-talk-no-longer-taboo-in-alberta

[Anonymous]

Another example of why our democratic system of pandering sucks. We have a supposedly "conservative" feds and their Grit Ontario counterparts doling out $$ to buy votes and most likely some very expensive jobs.  

The noisy quarrels in Canadian politics would be aggravating even if they were about something. But usually they're not.



Remember the long ugly juvenile spat between Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne over whether to bicker in person or just keep at it from a distance? Personally I was voting for distance since they were doing a fine job of being uncivil in letters and public statements so why waste time and money travelling to do it face to face?



They did anyway, disagreed, and went away again. And commentators gravely observed that it wasn't surprising given their very different personal styles and ideologies. And indeed their styles differ: Wynne is one of those unsufferably friendly, cheerful people from whom one flees in real life, while Harper is so cold and forbidding that if he smirks at you it's actually a sign he's warming up.



But differing ideologies also supposedly left them with nothing to say to one another that could not, as David Reevely put it, have been said using text messaging (His summary: "Stephen: I want u 2 spend more on infrstrcture" "No. PS I hate ur pension scheme.")



So why do I pick up Tuesday's paper and discover that the federal and Ontario provincial administrations have jointly hurled over $100 million at some auto-parts firm that bestowed upon Canada the sublime favour of locating itself here to produce more fuel-efficient transmissions?



I thought we had this argument about governments picking winners and losers back in the 1970s, and decided they were bad at it and besides it was pointless. After all, if a company (in this case Linamar) makes a better fuel-efficient transmission, auto makers will buy it because their customers want to save money on gas and there will be no need for subsidies. And if it doesn't make a better transmission there will be no justification for subsidies. Markets reward this sort of thing very well so if activist government is needed it's not here. Right? Right. Settled.



In theory. In practice politicians on the left have learned nothing regarding industrial strategy. As Wynne herself put it in 2013, while giving a vast amount (to us, not to government) of our money to Cisco, a $220-million grant to a company that made $7.9 billion in profits the previous year, "My vision for Ontario is that it's a place where government makes smart, forward-looking investments." Like, you know, MaRS. Or Ornge.



OK, lesson not learned on that side of the aisle. So Wynne gave Linamar $50.25 million, a fortune to us regular schleps but just one day's interest on the provincial debt to our betters. But what's Harper doing joining right in?



His minister of transport and free money, Lisa Raitt, threw in a $50.7-million "repayable loan" (apparently in government there are other kinds), babbling "Linamar could have based this project in other countries but it didn't. It chose to take advantage of Canada's manufacturing landscape, our strong supply chain, our low taxes, open markets and of course the talented workforce that we have." Oh, and this great big wad of other people's cash.



To be sure, Wynne gave a government grant and Harper a government loan. But if the firm is commercially sound it can borrow from a bank and if it's not it shouldn't get a loan. So how is it that Harper shares Wynne's vision of governments knowing better than banks, investors or customers where your money should go? Harper. The libertarian slasher. Or was that just talk?



If so, if you all agree that 1970s industrial strategies are good, what was all the partisan shrieking about? Oh, yeah. Who gets the credit, and votes, for being foolishly generous with our money.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/01/14/taking-credit-for-spending-our-money">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/01/14/t ... -our-money">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/01/14/taking-credit-for-spending-our-money

[Lance Leftardashian]

THe world needs much lower taxes and much higher welfare and EI checks

[Anonymous]

I would not object to a tax increase if the government was actually trying to rein in overly generous wages and contracts for our Canada's most expensive civil service. That isn'tthe case though and we should NOT be charged more because the government wants to keep buying labour peace at our expense.

If I were a betting man, I'd say provincial Tory government won't introduce a sales tax.  



But increases to existing taxes and new non-sales taxes? There's a very good chance.



While I think Premier Jim Prentice is genuinely struggling with whether a provincial sales tax is a good idea — he is sincerely looking at whether it would be better for the province than repeated cycles of boom and bust resource revenues — it is no coincidence that talk of a PST also makes an excellent smokescreen for other tax hikes.



Here's how the smokescreen would work: Prentice thinks out loud about implementing a sales tax (as he did Tuesday during a lunch in Edmonton). Most Albertans get up in arms. The Tory caucus convinces him a PST is politically dangerou s, so he backs off.



Instead, Prentice and provincial Finance Minister Robin Campbell introduce a surtax on incomes of over, say, $100,000. Or they get rid of Alberta's flat tax on income and instead charge Albertans more tax the higher their incomes — a so-called progressive tax.



Or they reintroduce health care premiums or jack up user fees and sin taxes or place tolls on major highways or reduce oil and gas exploration write-offs. Or all of the above. But they get away with it because Albertans will say, "Whew, at least they didn't bring in a sales tax!"



That's how talk of a PST could be used as a smokescreen. Still, PST or not, there can be no justification for tax hikes or user fees or premiums, at least not until the provincial government has done much, MUCH more to reduce its spending.



To be sure, a $7 billion reduction in resource revenues in a single year is a huge blow to the provincial treasury. It's about a 15% drop.



But it is not the biggest-ever decline. In the late 1980s and early 1990 under Don Getty's government, revenues declined 29%.



Moreover, a $7-billion decline would only take provincial revenues back to the level they were at in 2008. That was a bad year, too, but not historically bad.



The point is, the $7 billion decline expected in the coming fiscal year would not be a problem if the Tories were not spending so damn much money.



For instance, as Wildrose MLA Shayne Saskiw pointed out Tuesday, there are nearly 10,000 — 10,000! — employees at Alberta Health Services making more than $100,000 a year, not including benefits, expenses and rich pensions.



Together, these 10,000 employees are making more than $1 billion a year and likely nearer $1.5 billion. That's nearly 4% of total provincial spending on just 10,000 employees — and that's just one department. According to a University of Calgary study, during the 2000s, 95% of every new dollar the province collected went to higher wages for civil servants, teachers, nurses, health care worke r s and other direct and indirect employees.



While public-sector pay across the country rose just about 65%, in Alberta it rose nearly twice that high — 119%.



Admittedly, during that decade nearly a million new people moved to Alberta. Yet "the province's total wage bill rose to nearly 45% of total expenditure in 2010, from just over a quarter in 2000." Even after adjusting for inflation and population increase, the province's public-sector wage bill grew 20% in real terms.



Most of that is a result of ridiculously rich labour contracts the province signed with its workers to buy labour peace. Now that oil prices are plummeting, those goodtimes contracts are coming home to roost.



But that is not taxpayers' fault. So until the Tories cut expenses bigtime, there should be no tax increases, period.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/01/16/gunter-prentice-sales-tax-talk-just-a-smokescreen-for-other-increases">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/01/16/g ... -increases">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/01/16/gunter-prentice-sales-tax-talk-just-a-smokescreen-for-other-increases

[Anonymous]

Higher taxes on alcohol and cigarettes would be a good idea..



I hope they do not bring back Alberta Health premiums..



Our premiums would be covered by our employers, but for many low income or part time workers in this province, they cannot pay that.

[Anonymous]

To ask for more money from Albertans when the government does not have the guts to reign in greedy unions is unethical. Why should we give you more money to buy labour peace(elections)?

I made a pile of notes at two events this week, the Edmonton Economic Development annual lunch where Premier Jim Prentice talked turkey about the Alberta government's over-reliance on oil/gas royalty revenue, the other a panel discussion at the U of A's Institute for Public Economics, entitled "Does Alberta Need A Sales Tax?"



I should have just sat back and listened.



For it all boils down to one thing: To control government spending, Prentice must confront Alberta's well-paid public sector – i.e. anybody funded from the provincial purse – with the same determination and tenacity as Ralph Klein did in the '90s.



Prentice is asking Albertans to accept new taxation to compensate for the $6 billion to $7 billion shortfall created by the loss of oil/gas royalty revenue due to the oil price crash.



Perhaps ... but only if he lives up to his side of this bargain.



As Klein did, Prentice has to walk the walk and talk the talk when it comes to controlling government expenses.



And I'm not sure he has the kahunas to do so.



Payrolls in Alberta's publicly funded sectors – in the schools, in the civil service, especially in the medical system – have risen well above compensation levels in all other provinces, at a faster rate of increase than any justification can warrant. There's sufficient evidence, mountains of it, that those working within Alberta's public sectors have the best deals in the country.



Everybody knows the nurses have an excellent collective contract (from their point of view) with Alberta Health Services, as have our doctors for their contracted services. The Alberta Teachers Association isn't complaining about salaries. The Alberta Federation of Labour concentrates on better pay in the contracted-out service sectors. Its members in the public sector know they're doing just fine.



The sweet deals were the result of sweet times. Alberta had been rolling in cash and they got their share.



Well that cash has gone. Yet no self-respecting union will give ground without a massive fight. If Prentice stands up to the unions as did Klein, we will see mass protests, rotating strikes, teacher strikes, illegal walkouts, nurse and doctor slow-downs.



But until the Government of Alberta trims back its payroll by some 10%, we'll never be serious about living within our means, sustainable funding, etc. etc.



We've seen Jim Prentice do many good things in the short time he has been premier. He has the potential to be as dynamic and visionary a leader as was Peter Lougheed.



But is he tough enough? Can he go 12 rounds in the ring against the nurses, teachers, doctors and civil service unions?



If Prentice has an Achilles' heel, it's questions about his personal toughness.



He does not like confrontation. His is a "let us reason together" style of leadership.



But if he's to bring government spending back under control, if he's determined to create an Alberta that can ride out the highs and lows of oil and gas prices, he's got to contain public sector labour costs.



And if he's successful, it will be after a long, ugly fight leaving all sides exhausted and embittered. It's the nature of the beast.



I admire Prentice's communication skills, his succinct summary of the current government revenue shortfall. A $6 to $7 billion "revenue hole", he says, is equal to the annual Alberta education budget, to the government's direct payroll.



Alberta has relied on $8 to $10 billion a year in oil revenues to balance its budget, "and that money has simply evaporated," Prentice said. "We have been living beyond our means. We've been living on resource revenue that belongs to our kids and grandchildren. This can't go on. "



Prentice will emerge from his financial deliberations with a mixed bag of tax changes – be it re-introduction of a provincial sales tax (a 2% sales tax in 1936 was rescinded in 1937), re-introduction of medical premiums, re-introduction of progressive income taxes.



He might even do the impossible, coming up with a long-term fiscal plan that actually, down the line, could smooth out the lows and highs of energy royalty revenue streams.



But Albertans won't accept any new taxes unless Prentice is clearly cutting expenditures.



Cutting expenditures means less money for salaries. Which means serious and prolonged confrontation with organized labour and contracted professionals.



Is Prentice tough enough?



FACTOIDS



Who's earning what from the Alberta public purse – excluding benefits, overtime and shift differentials



(Sources: Alberta Health Services, United Nurses of Alberta, Alberta Teachers Association, Province of Alberta job postings.)



Doctors, annual gross average revenues 2012/13 (excluding overhead of $150,000) - $377,368, 28.6% higher than national average.



Registered nurse, starting salary 2006, about $58,000: Starting salary as per collective agreement in 2016 about $76,000.



Teacher with the Edmonton Public School Board, starting salary with four-year degree, $58,000. Salary after 10 years, $92,000.



Government of Alberta Senior Information Management Analyst, Edmonton, 2015, anticipated pay, $70,000 to $90,000 a year.



Government of Alberta Case Worker, Foster Care, Grande Prairie, 2015, anticipated pay, $62,000 to $80,000.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/01/16/hicks-on-biz-does-alberta-premier-prentice-have-what-it-takes-to-stand-up-to-unions">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/01/16/h ... -to-unions">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/01/16/hicks-on-biz-does-alberta-premier-prentice-have-what-it-takes-to-stand-up-to-unions

[Anonymous]

To ask for more money from Albertans when the government does not have the guts to reign in greedy unions is unethical. Why should we give you more money to buy labour peace(elections)?

I made a pile of notes at two events this week, the Edmonton Economic Development annual lunch where Premier Jim Prentice talked turkey about the Alberta government's over-reliance on oil/gas royalty revenue, the other a panel discussion at the U of A's Institute for Public Economics, entitled "Does Alberta Need A Sales Tax?"



I should have just sat back and listened.



For it all boils down to one thing: To control government spending, Prentice must confront Alberta's well-paid public sector – i.e. anybody funded from the provincial purse – with the same determination and tenacity as Ralph Klein did in the '90s.



Prentice is asking Albertans to accept new taxation to compensate for the $6 billion to $7 billion shortfall created by the loss of oil/gas royalty revenue due to the oil price crash.



Perhaps ... but only if he lives up to his side of this bargain.



As Klein did, Prentice has to walk the walk and talk the talk when it comes to controlling government expenses.



And I'm not sure he has the kahunas to do so.



Payrolls in Alberta's publicly funded sectors – in the schools, in the civil service, especially in the medical system – have risen well above compensation levels in all other provinces, at a faster rate of increase than any justification can warrant. There's sufficient evidence, mountains of it, that those working within Alberta's public sectors have the best deals in the country.



Everybody knows the nurses have an excellent collective contract (from their point of view) with Alberta Health Services, as have our doctors for their contracted services. The Alberta Teachers Association isn't complaining about salaries. The Alberta Federation of Labour concentrates on better pay in the contracted-out service sectors. Its members in the public sector know they're doing just fine.



The sweet deals were the result of sweet times. Alberta had been rolling in cash and they got their share.



Well that cash has gone. Yet no self-respecting union will give ground without a massive fight. If Prentice stands up to the unions as did Klein, we will see mass protests, rotating strikes, teacher strikes, illegal walkouts, nurse and doctor slow-downs.



But until the Government of Alberta trims back its payroll by some 10%, we'll never be serious about living within our means, sustainable funding, etc. etc.



We've seen Jim Prentice do many good things in the short time he has been premier. He has the potential to be as dynamic and visionary a leader as was Peter Lougheed.



But is he tough enough? Can he go 12 rounds in the ring against the nurses, teachers, doctors and civil service unions?



If Prentice has an Achilles' heel, it's questions about his personal toughness.



He does not like confrontation. His is a "let us reason together" style of leadership.



But if he's to bring government spending back under control, if he's determined to create an Alberta that can ride out the highs and lows of oil and gas prices, he's got to contain public sector labour costs.



And if he's successful, it will be after a long, ugly fight leaving all sides exhausted and embittered. It's the nature of the beast.



I admire Prentice's communication skills, his succinct summary of the current government revenue shortfall. A $6 to $7 billion "revenue hole", he says, is equal to the annual Alberta education budget, to the government's direct payroll.



Alberta has relied on $8 to $10 billion a year in oil revenues to balance its budget, "and that money has simply evaporated," Prentice said. "We have been living beyond our means. We've been living on resource revenue that belongs to our kids and grandchildren. This can't go on. "



Prentice will emerge from his financial deliberations with a mixed bag of tax changes – be it re-introduction of a provincial sales tax (a 2% sales tax in 1936 was rescinded in 1937), re-introduction of medical premiums, re-introduction of progressive income taxes.



He might even do the impossible, coming up with a long-term fiscal plan that actually, down the line, could smooth out the lows and highs of energy royalty revenue streams.



But Albertans won't accept any new taxes unless Prentice is clearly cutting expenditures.



Cutting expenditures means less money for salaries. Which means serious and prolonged confrontation with organized labour and contracted professionals.



Is Prentice tough enough?



FACTOIDS



Who's earning what from the Alberta public purse – excluding benefits, overtime and shift differentials



(Sources: Alberta Health Services, United Nurses of Alberta, Alberta Teachers Association, Province of Alberta job postings.)



Doctors, annual gross average revenues 2012/13 (excluding overhead of $150,000) - $377,368, 28.6% higher than national average.



Registered nurse, starting salary 2006, about $58,000: Starting salary as per collective agreement in 2016 about $76,000.



Teacher with the Edmonton Public School Board, starting salary with four-year degree, $58,000. Salary after 10 years, $92,000.



Government of Alberta Senior Information Management Analyst, Edmonton, 2015, anticipated pay, $70,000 to $90,000 a year.



Government of Alberta Case Worker, Foster Care, Grande Prairie, 2015, anticipated pay, $62,000 to $80,000.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/01/16/hicks-on-biz-does-alberta-premier-prentice-have-what-it-takes-to-stand-up-to-unions">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/01/16/h ... -to-unions">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/01/16/hicks-on-biz-does-alberta-premier-prentice-have-what-it-takes-to-stand-up-to-unions

Wages may be higher for some Alberta public employees, but I don't think most of us are earning significantly more than the national average.