Bill 36: Stripping Property Rights from Albertans

[TOM4CWB]

Bill 36: Stripping Property Rights from Albertans

Mar 12, 2012 by: Christopher di Armani | no comments.

Filed under : Agenda 21, Charter of Rights and Freedoms Breaches, Land Issues, Property Rights

Alison Redford’s so-called conservative government’s decision to implement Bill C-36, The Land Stewardship Act, which effectively gives control of all land in Alberta to the provincial government, is a death blow to property rights in Alberta. Under this law, government bureaucrats will now dictate to land owners what they can and cannot do on their own land.

If this sounds obscene to you, then you’d best hang on tight, because it gets worse. Much worse. But first, a little background.

Bill 36, The Land Stewardship Act, was initially brought forward by former Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach’s government. It caused a lot of outrage among farmers and oil patch workers, and with good reason. The Bill allowed government bureaucrats the ability to rescind water licenses, feed lot approvals, oil patch licenses, and much more, without the ability for the land owner to challenge the decision in court or be paid compensation for the loss of use of their land.

This is the sort of abuse I would expect to see in Soviet Russia, not in the province that most Canadians view as the lone province that still defends Freedom and Liberty in Canada. Of course that perception is not true and hasn’t been for decades, but it still persists despite all proof to the contrary such as that embodied in Bill 36, The Land Stewardship Act.

When Alison Redford took over as leader of Alberta’s Progressive Conservative Party and with it, the office of Premier of Alberta, the very first thing she did was stop Bill 36 dead in its tracks. That was a good sign that the new but unelected Premier of Alberta was going to respect the rights of Albertans.

That good sign was, however, very short-lived.

While Premier Redford did create a Property Rights Task Force that traveled the province to garner feedback on the proposed bill, she has promptly ignored everything the Task Force told her in the report and will now move Bill 36 forward unchanged.

Redford obviously has a very different definition of “democracy” than I do. Her definition would appear to read as follows:

Democracy according to Alison Redford: the right of the Premier of Alberta to follow the dictates of unelected career bureaucrats and their anti-freedom agenda while utterly ignoring the will of the people and their Rights while trampling their Freedoms and Liberty into dust.

Nice…

The Property Rights Task Force Report made the feelings of Albertans very clear:

The passion with which Albertans spoke and wrote reflects the incredibly important role that property rights play in people’s lives. As one individual put it, “they are the fundamental underpinnings of our democracy and society.” [p. 3]

A government that does not respect the property rights of individuals is an affront to Freedom and Liberty. Alberta’s current government is nothing if not an affront to Freedom and Liberty.


The Property Rights Task Force was created to listen to Albertans voice their concerns and ideas about how they would like their property rights respected. There is a broad understanding that our growing province creates a demand on the land and the need for responsible, common sense approaches to managing this growth. And while there is a desire to ensure Alberta reaches its potential, there is also a feeling that Albertans’ property rights should not be compromised for the purpose of managing growth or development.

Albertans have told us that they must be actively consulted about management approaches and decisions on land use that affect them. They need to be assured that they have access to courts and representation to negotiate – or argue against – actions that could affect their property rights and, where ground must be given, they expect appropriate compensation. [p 4]

Under Bill 36 none of these protections apply.

The government does not have to rationalize their land use decisions, they do not have to pay compensation for the loss of use of property, and there is no ability to challenge the decision in court.

This is unelected Premier Alison Redford’s idea of “consultation” with Albertans? What Alberta needs is a premier that comprehends what Rights and Freedoms truly mean, something Alison Redford clearly is incapable of.


Property rights are at the core of that way of life. They underpin everything that happens with land and resources. Albertans depend on having and being able to exercise these crucial rights. They rightly and understandably wish to see these rights preserved and respected.

The individuals who participated in this process presented a range of views to the Task Force, but an overriding message came through very clearly. Albertans want certainty when it comes to their property rights – certainty about what those rights are; about the rules for how industry and government must respect those rights; and about what must happen, financially and legally, if those rights are infringed or impacted. [p 41]

The official government response to the legitimate concerns of Albertans, who will have the right to use their property taken away from them without any compensation, is atrocious.


To respond to the recommendations of the Property Rights Task Force report “Engaging with Albertans,” the government will:

take steps to improve engagement with Albertans; including being more consistent, predictable and timely in consultations;

review requirements for industry to reclaim, remediate land and remove unused infrastructure;

review the Expropriation Act as well as the Surface Rights Act, regulations guidelines or principles related to compensation and property rights; and,

create a Property Rights Advocate to share information and help people determine the appropriate resolution mechanism – including the courts.

Sounds great, doesn’t it? Except what they say they will do is utterly meaningless.

They’ve already “consulted” with Albertans… and then promptly ignored everything they were told during those consultations.

Their pledge to “review” the Expropriation Act and the Surface Rights Act are meaningless. Now, if they were to pledge to “change” these Acts to “better protect Albertans from overzealous bureaucrats and the whims of political expediency”, then I might be willing to believe Ms. Redford’s government.

Lastly, the Property Rights Advocate they tout as the “solution” to the problem they are creating with Bill 36, the Land Stewardship Act, has absolutely NO power to do anything other than file an annual report.

That hardly meets the definition of “advocate” in any meaningful way, does it?

As Danielle Smith wrote so clearly in the February 15, 2011 edition of the Hanna Herald under the banner “Government takes sledge hammer to property rights”:


Private property, and the rights that protect it, form the bedrock of any free and democratic society. Government authority ends where private property – and the rights of those who own it begins.

Good governments respect property rights and the role they play in limiting the power of the state. Bad governments trample on them to expand that power. This is what we’ve seen in Alberta.


While I don’t live in Alberta, if I did I know exactly who I would be voting for in the upcoming provincial election.

Read for yourself:

Alberta Property Rights Task Force Report

Alberta Government Response to the report

Another excellent resource is Keith Wilson’s February 14, 2011 response to Professor Nigel Bankes regarding The Alberta Land Stewardship Act and its ability to extinguish land titles by Cabinet decree: http://www.landownersagainstbills.com/Wilson%20Response%20to%20Professor%20Bankes%20re%2 0ALSA%20and%20Land%20Titles.pdf

Lastly, here are a few videos that give an excellent overview of the effect of Bill 36, as well as Premier Redford’s failure to protect the Rights and Freedoms of Albertans by moving forward with Bill 36 unchanged.

http://christopherdiarmani.com/5056/property-rights/bill-36-stripping-property-rights-from-albertans/

[TOM4CWB]

Has anyone heard of 'Agenda 21'?

Being that Alison worked for the UN... it should be NO surprise;

PLEASE Read this one...:

Sack the Menacing Marxist Agenda 21 and Subsidiary Programs

Feb 23, 2012 by: Jane Gaffin | one comment.

Filed under : Political Corruption, Property Rights, United Nations

When politicians were in full cry about the benefits of linking the state of Alaska with Canada’s province of British Columbia via rail back in 2004, the only thing I could visualize the trains hauling was human cargo.

One reason I envisioned something akin to the Jews and Gypsies herded onto cattle cars for their trip from Eastern Europe to the Nazi concentration camps is due to a United Nations brainchild called Smart Growth.

Smart Growth is just one of a multitude of methods for carrying out Agenda 21 that has been moving at a slow-motion, under-the-radar pace since the plan was hatched during the United Nations’ Earth Summit, a big environmental brainwashing conference staged in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 1992.

Yet the communistic theories have been on the drawing board since the United Nations was formed in 1945.

Over the years, Agenda 21’s insidious, ever-expanding tentacles have reached out in every direction to surreptitiously encapsulate every facet of people’s lives while they weren’t paying attention.

Agenda 21–which simply means “Agenda for the 21st Century”–is the ultimate plan of action to save the world from human activity. That means dismantling industrial civilization and relieving individuals of their right to own property, specifically real estate.

The Rio Earth Summit also produced the Convention on Biological Diversity; Framework Convention on Climate Change; and Statement of Forest Principles.

A host of ways and means was set up the same year to advance the ambitious Agenda 21. Working in collaboration with an incredibly large non-government organizational (NGO) structure, the United Nations formed a Commission with the cute-sounding name “Sustainable Development”.

One project among many others under the Sustainable Development umbrella is a Wildlands Project that calls for eliminating human presence. Its purpose is to “re-wild” landscape and return at least 50 percent of Canada as well as America’s 50 states back to a natural condition reminiscent of before the Pilgrims landed on Plymouth Rock in 1620.

Proponents of Smart Growth and the Wildlands Project rank the animal kingdom and bug population above importance to the intelligent human species. Therefore, low-life humans will have to be relocated into “special” habitat areas.

Those “habitats” either will be military-run concentration camps, complete with barbed wire and guard towers, or “sustainable communities” similar to one portrayed in the British-produced TV series “The Prisoner” starring Patrick McGoohan. After catching on to what is going on inside the agency, the secret agent angrily resigns his post only to be abducted and held captive by unknown powers. Under constant surveillance from cameras and spies and unable to escape from the mysterious village, he has lost his identity and is known only as No. 6. Nobody knows who is No. 1.

Remember those dreary Habitat Conferences back in the 1970s? Habitat geniuses were designing ugly, Orwellian apartment complexes to serve Westerners well as revamped concentration camps because at the 1992 Rio conference, UN puppet and chairman Maurice Strong convinced his faithful followers that single-family dwellings were no longer “sustainable”.

Under the mandate of Smart Growth, residents are being forced from beautiful suburbia, rustic country acreages and expansive farm and ranch lands by whatever means possible. Those means may be forfeiture laws, environmental protection provisions, species at risk acts. Whatever it takes, governments are removing the occupants from their properties without legal recourse or financial compensation.

The low-life human habitat will be rounded up and caged like animals into unhealthy ghettos to allow the buffalo to roam and rabbits to romp freely in the reclaimed green spaces and wildlife preserves.

Smart Growth is a politically-correct term to mask a variety of policy initiatives designed to bring about “sustainable development” of “sustainable communities” that will produce “sustainable lifestyles”, as determined by the movers and shakers of Agenda 21.

The main mover was Manitoba-born Maurice Strong, the prophet of doom billionaire and friend of Canada’s Paul Martin One and Two (the second one is a former Canadian prime minister). At the relevant time, the Geneva-based Strong luxuriated in the powerful position as chief advisor to UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan and the World Bank.

Presently, Strong’s hypocritical agenda is to betray the United States, a free society which has afforded him a comfortable capitalistic living, by overthrowing and replacing the world superpower with China as Numero Uno.

Strong, a devout capitalist who passionately promotes world Marxism, owns an expansive land spread at Crestone in southwestern Colorado where he controls the valley’s water rights. Ironically, he has already announced that through his baby, Agenda 21, water will be rationed at 10 gallons a day per person.

Some news people have asserted–maybe sarcastically– that he was hanging out in Beijing to avoid indictment for his role of skimming off billions in the UN Oil for Food scandal.


“If it turns out that prominent politicians and businessmen profiteered while Iraqis were deprived of basic necessities that the Oil for Food program was supposed to pay for (food and medicine), there should be serious consequences, up to and including criminal prosecution,” a non-contestable statement made in the March 21, 2004 Washington Times.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/mar/21/20040321-101405-2593r/?

However, Strong is safe. He is too rich and powerful–as are the others involved–to be concerned about indictment. No police force has the grit to investigate, much less lay charges, and no justice system has the fortitude to prosecute. Besides, a court case would expose all the dirt in the top echelons across a broad-base of countries, especially naming all the rip-off artists sitting in lofty places of the United Nations.

When chairing the 1992 Earth Summit he controlled treaties ranging from climate change to biodiversity that provided “legal” foundation and “enforcement” of international environmental standards.

He’s the guy who called for and worked towards establishing the One-World Military.

Canada jumped in with both feet to adopt hundreds of United Nations creations, most of them coming from Strong and his NGO and environmental E-NGO disciples.

It is a misnomer that NGOs are purported to be “non-government agencies”. They are only an arm’s length in distance from the government whose decision-making is controlled by NGOs. Their lavish funding comes from one government agency or another.

A couple of people can join forces, receive funding and call themselves an NGO. Even various-sized private businesses have become NGO designates.

Since 2004, 20,000 NGOs have doubled to 40,000 to carry the Marxist message around the world.

How on earth can every single North American community possibly come to identical conclusions about what is best for populations diverse in cultures and living in various climes and unique geographical settings?

How did Whitehorse, the sub-Arctic capital of the Yukon Territory located in northwestern Canada, end up eradicating its distinctive and historical personality and taking on boring features of Anywhere Canada?

It’s called “social engineering”. And it was definitely done incrementally without people’s knowledge or approval because they didn’t hear dumb politicians talking about it, thus the press wasn’t covering the issues. Therefore, residents were totally unaware of the implications of “sustainability” that was happening right before their eyes.

Groups of cleverly-trained people skillfully manipulated a process called “collaborative consensus building”. The outcome was predetermined while leading the brainwashed participants into believing that the decision was actually their own.



See: Sustainability and a Free Society are Not Compatible
http://christopherdiarmani.com/index.php?s=sustainability and a free society

That is the way so-called “consensus” was determined under the Yukon Protected Areas Strategy which proposed to tie up all land in the Yukon but eventually died under the Yukon Party’s Fentie government watch. But, as predicted, the environmental initiative resurfaced under other titles that called for the protection of huge tracts of wilderness that has been in the bureaucratic works for the last 40 years, long before “environmentalist” was a household word.

Only countries governed by hardcore socialists dictate where and how people live, work and think and what they eat, wear and read.

Constitutions governing so-called democratic countries do not give governments such high-handed authority as has been prescribed and hijacked through Agenda 21.

Smart Growth, à la Sustainable Communities, is basically accomplished through millions of taxpayers’ dollars transferred in the form of “grants” (bribes) to woo cities and towns to accept and enforce Smart Growth guidelines that are incorporated into legislation and regulations.

Boundaries established to designate city limits or borders between territories, provinces and states–even between countries–will, in the loving terms of Agenda 21’s Smart Growth, “reach out to join hands with the adjacent jurisdiction” in an open-space concept.

This scheme removes the powers and accountability of elected representatives, thus transferring the ultimate decision-making to non-elected boards, NGOs, commissions and councils–none of which are accountable to voters.

Yet voters continue going to the polls believing they can effect change by throwing out the last batch of ineffectual politicians and swearing in a new bunch. It usually gets worse because the new ones are “green”, as in inexperienced, as well as have been brainwashed into acceptance of the environmentalist agenda.

Nothing is going to change until politicians reclaim their roles as representatives of their constituents. As of now, politicians won’t and can’t sway local policies away from the dangerous implications of a Marxist government because they don’t have the background information, understanding, nor the fortitude to endorse change. They also are busy collecting their bribes. Elections merely shift the cushy pork-barreling to another political group and its cronies for a specified term of tenure.

Politically-correct politics has squeezed voting out as a form of a democratic exercise. (Those without a definite understanding of political science, history, subjects and the candidates should stay away from the polls, anyway.) All knowledgeable voters have to show for their votes is a socialist country ripe to join the ranks of a tyrannical One-World Order.

Smart Growth, along with other UN plans, calls for the permanent preservation of all watersheds, rivers, lakes, streams, forest, farmlands, and Crown land.

Huge buffer zones and wide swaths cut for animal corridors designate special-management areas and resources off limits to human activities.

In the Yukon, land-use development decisions were transferred to six boards to be established under a piece of environmental legislation known as the Yukon Econo-Socio Assessment Act (YESAA, pronounced “Yes, suh”.)

Psychologically–but not legally–it took precedence over other binding parliamentary statutes dealing with land and its uses.

As environmental groups dismantle industry, communities decay into ghost towns, as planned. Those residents will be relegated into regulated residential areas, mainly Whitehorse, then relocated again when the masters decide when the trains will run.

A great cancer has enveloped people in the name of a One-World Order, an agenda sprung into motion with United Nations’ treaties and instruments that aren’t law, of which Canada endorsed an unknown large number that was definitely well over 200.

These cancerous policies have spread throughout the bodies of every federal, state, provincial, territorial government and into the tiniest organs of city and first nation councils.

Regardless of a community’s size, there are freelance bureaucrats running residents’ affairs under the guise of UN-sanctioned non-government organizations, of which there are roughly 40,000 operating worldwide today.

Most people/voters never give a moment’s thought to the UN or an NGO.

Those freelancers are “policy entrepreneurs” who work directly against the grain of society’s contributors. They directly influence the salaried bureaucrats and city managers, who, in turn, pull the strings of the elected ministers and councilors which sometimes is met with the inconvenience of a mad-mob backlash that can at least stop or reverse political decisions in the short term.

NGOs dictate fascist-style rules about how property will be used and determine through a conduit of government bodies how businesses will operate–or not be allowed to operate–in individual communities.

Residents and elected politicians have no say in this “social engineering” matter, or, more to the point, they don’t bother to speak up.

Yet has anybody ever heard of a vote called in any parliamentary session, legislative assembly or city council to uphold any of the United Nations’ rubbish that is succeeding in re-structuring wealthy, industrialized countries and communities into third-world regimes?

“It’s all under the radar,” advised Tom DeWeese, president of the American Policy Center. “It’s all done through cleverly arranged wording of existing programs and budgets, using UN treaties as guidelines.”

In my own not-so-humble opinion, this huge bureaucracy has for too long held governments hostage to its radical agendas. The only way to stop the creeping insanity is for industrialized countries to opt out of the mafiosi institution instead of joining up.

DeWeese said he tells every one he meets, every day of his life: “Get the United States out of the United Nations.”

To take his message one step further, Canada, too, should withdraw from the UN and boot all the arses of those tin-pot dictators and their entourages back to their homelands since they like Marxism so much.

See: The United Nations Needs Dismantling
http://christopherdiarmani.com/index.php?s=the united nations needs dismantling

They don’t want to go home, though; they never had it so good working inside a 37-floor Manhattan ivory tower (the 38th floor is reserved for His Highness’ offices) and feathering their nests lavishly on the back of capitalism they are so eager to destroy.

Individuals in every jurisdiction have to start thinking in terms of what is best for the local citizenry, businesses, commerce, industry and their futures for a particular locale.

Otherwise, the freelance bureaucrats will be rounding up the masses for a train ride into the Dark Ages where the human species will be forced to reverse roles with the lower animal order because as the Marxists like to say “the animals were here first”.

February 22, 2012

http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/2cmLT0/christopherdiarmani.com/4934/property-rights/sack-menacing-marxist-agenda-21-subsidiary-programs/

[Burbert]

Sniveling and whinning is a constant in
the framing community, ifn it's to sunny
wes needs rain, to rainy we needs sunshin.
Gobermont involvement bad, freedom good.
The snivelin never quits. By the way,
where do we vote for the PC next time?

[ASRG]

The land assault bills (19, 24, 36, 50) get stronger and stronger as they go along! Bill 24 actually did take real property, with zero compensation, and a denial to access to the courts.

All these land theft bills are an experiment in Agenda 21 policy? Next up is confiscation of freehold mineral rights, followed by a water market....you will be paying for every drop you take out of your water well or your livestock drinks!

One of the core values of Agenda 21 is the elimination of private property and this was to be achieved over a 50 year period. This isn't some kind of secret.....you can easily access Agenda 21 and read it for yourself?

Alberta seems to be the testing ground...but rest assured if you live in Sask, Manitoba or Ontario.....your turn is coming soon!

I about a month Albertans will get a chance to bring this garbage to a screaming halt? I hope Burbert isn't sarcastically right? I hope people aren't so bloody stupid to vote these PC dogs in again?

All these land bills violate the principle of the "rule of law"? Without the "rule of law", democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on whats for lunch!