The policy development effort of Dave Hancock, Alberta's Minister of Health and Wellness to restrict tobacco in Alberta is entering its final stages.
It has passed the Stelmach government’s Agenda and Priorities Committee and was accepted by the Cabinet Policy Committee. Now it is ready for the full Cabinet and the Caucus consideration and indications are that is happening very soon, as early as next week.
I have followed with interest the Alberta evolution of this initiative for new tobacco control legislation both personally and professionally. It has taken the political process a number of years and a number of tries to get enough politicians to see tobacco control as a health, wellness and a cost saving issue and not only as a personal freedom or choice matter.
The debate around this still persists with some people but there is more mythology than fact. The media likes to play up the personal freedom issue but there are fewer and fewer people who are there to articulate it these days. They are people who are usually characterized as rural and unsophisticated and the interviews are done in bars and pool halls or coffees shops or restaurants.
This framing perpetuates the myth of a rural – urban split in Alberta. It sets up rural people as opposed to tobacco control and city people in support. There is an effort to use the issues as a way to define a different value set as between rural and urban Albertans too. This is totally untrue based on numerous polling results the latest being from Ipsos Reid that showed no significant difference between Albertans in Edmonton and Calgary and the rest of the province.
According to that poll a full 80% of Albertans understand the issues and support a province wide smoking ban. The majority of Alberta politicians know that and also understand Alberta has been lagging behind other provinces on this issue for far too long.
There are 18 Alberta municipalities who have already passed smoking bans. To underscore the myth of a rural-urban split on this, the towns of Stettler, Cardston and Whitecourt adopted bans before the City of Calgary did…and Calgary has the highest education levels of any city in the country. Go figure.
Health is not a rural or an urban issue. Nor is workplace safety in terms of second hand smoke. The diminishing numbers of provincial MLAs who oppose the smoking ban are rural but they are not aligned with the core beliefs and values of the main stream of Albertans – especially on this issue. The majority of Alberta's politicians know this is an idea whose time has come.
Klein as Premier would never let this idea of a province wide smoking ban see the light of day. Stelmach’s new government should ensure this new tobacco control initiative becomes law. It is the right thing to do but it gives him another opportunity as well. This new legislation adds a new health care focus on wellness but it also busts two persistent myths. Firstly, that there is a myth about a rural – urban split in the province on fundamental values. There is not. Secondly, that the Stelmach government is just the same and an extension of the Klein regime. It is not. Tobacco control legislation will go along way to proving both myths to be untrue.
Seriously, you think that Stelmach is a completely new leader because he grabs the low-hanging fruit of anti-smoking legisaltion. That is hardy a distinguishing feature on re;latively low importance and priority legislation.
ReplyDeleteWhen Stelmach actually cuts taxes, gets fair royalties on resources and keeps the bitumen in Alberta then I'll believe he is a fresh start from his dismal predecessor.
Anon @ 1:47 - you make some good ponts. Stelmach will not be "a completely new leader" by passing tobacco controls and a smoking ban in public and workplaces.
ReplyDeleteBut that is hardly "low hanging fruit" when you consider it has failed to get sufficient political will behind it 4 times before.
Your measures of the new man is all economic and mostly energy releated. I have given you an example that is socially related AND economic if it reduces the amount and intensity of use of our health care system reducing costs or freeing up money for other concerns AND environment - clean air in living spaces - an oft ignored but vital issue in terms of clean air.
What social and ecological policy change tests would you apply to be convinced Stelmach is different from "his dismal predecessor?"
I success in politics was only economic you would not likely be calling Ralph a "dismal predecessor."
I just hope the legislation allows smoking on patios like they do in California, and that Edmonton scraps its laws because outside of every bar there, the ground is littered with butts. It looks disgusting.
ReplyDeleteKen, I agree with you that attempts at smoking legislation were repeatedly torpedoed by the Klein cabinet (which, of course, included Stelmach). But the public has wanted this for a long time and other jurisdictions have done this years ago.
ReplyDeleteI would not measure success because the Conservatives killed this legislation 4 times and allow it on the 5th attempt.
I am also surprised that you think royalties, tax cuts and keeping the bitumen provide only economic benefits.
Let's face it, Klein seriously damaged the province. Introducing serious gambling in this province was not a step forward socially. The health cuts without a plan and ignoring the infrastructure have damaged the province in every way.
If Stelmach wants to make an impact he needs to develop a vision. A real vision. Not bromides and platitudes and this being the best province blah blah blah.
When Stelmach does something about the housing/rent crunch, reduces gambling and protects the environment that will be a start. But so far he is still governing like he was in the Klein cabinet.
When Stelmach properly funds universities and colleges then we'll see progress. When he funds cities wfairly and without strings then we'll see progress.
The Conservative government intervenes in the free market to help big business like the auto insurers but refuses to intervene in the marketplace to help renters. When Stelmach reverses the disasterous auto insurance then I will believe he is new.
So far, he's still the same do nothing Ed that he was in the Klein cabinet.
Unlike one of your anonymous commenters who cannot be bothered to get or use a Blogger account, I agree with Ken (but perhaps not for the reason he would want).
ReplyDeleteThis move by the Stelmach government to restrict smoking is significant.
First, it is an endorsement of the public health approach to smoking that most, if not all, provinces have already endorsed. Alberta is catching up to the pack.
Second, it is a clear repudiation of Ralph Klein. The fact that a rural-based government is moving forward with this approach illustrates:
a) Smoking in not an urban/rural issue, as Ken notes.
b) If it's not an urban/rural issue, it was a Ralph Klein obsession that blocked meaningful progress on Public Health in Alberta. And sadly, the PC Party from cabinet on down remained silent.
And no one will apologize for not proceeding sooner.
That said, it's nice to see them do the right thing, even if it demonstrates the sort of long term, one party state hypocrisy that Albertans no longer notice in their government.
CfSR - I agree totally with your comment. One thing people forget or gloss over about Parliamentary democracy is the place of Cabinet solidarity.
ReplyDeleteIf, as a Cabinet Minister, you disagree with a Cabinet decision you have two choices...suck it up or resign Cabinet. The former is the norm because you get to "fight another day" but the latter happens. Michael Chong's recent resignation from Harper's Cabinet is the more recent example.
So to say Stelmach was part of Klein's Cabinet and that is somehow is some form of character related hypocrisy is trite analysis at best. This and other issues are now open again for reconsideration and new ideas can come forth…even with the some of the same people at the Cabinet table.
The open question on the tobacco control and province wide smoking ban policy initiative is where do the new kids on the Cabinet block stand? Many are rural representatives but one would hope they act in a representative way and reflect the 80% of rural Albertans who support these changes Dave Hancock is proposing.
Stelmach has not taken the political lead on the smoking ban initiative but he did mandate Dave Hancock as his new Health and Wellness Minister "to promote wellness and disease prevention." Tobacco control and a smoking ban is such an obvious way to reflect this cultural shift that includes wellness and prevention as an equal part of our health care system focus and efforts.
True enough that tobacco control and a province wide smoking ban is low hanging fruit in achieving this goal and it has been for quite some time. Why has it taken so long for the Alberta government "to catch up" is a legitimate question.
We have a chance next week to get this past Cabinet and Caucus and then into law – even potentially in this session - if the political will is there. That is unlikely to happen given the time left in this session and the heavy legislative agenda. But it could happen if the legislative focus and political push was put forth to make this happen.
First Stelmach’s Cabinet and Caucus have to be on side next week or else all is for naught!
Anon@1:57 - Your points are well made and I mostly accept them - especially the point on tobacco control that screwing up 4 times and getting it right on the 5th try is not an mark of competence. BUT it is a sign of change.
ReplyDeleteThat all presumes the tobacco control and smoking ban legislation actually happens - we will know by the end of the coming week.
Your other challenges to the Stelmach government are also key issues that will show a real change in governance and in the direction and the attitude of the PC government.
I see that all happening based on the new attitude and the demonstratable impatience of the PC Party membership at the recent AGM.
I only suggest it is too early to tell if Ed is a rerun of Ralph - my money says he is not. Real change of serious significance is happening and while not all of it is admittedly as well executed as it needs to be - it is real change.
Ed will get better at the execution side (he will have to) but the new model of governance is well on its way.
I understand Cabinet solidarity as a concept but often think it is a weak excuse for ministers to not take stands, inside or outside of the Cabinet room, that would be seen to be challenging the existing orthodoxy.
ReplyDeleteWhile the discussions in the Cabinet room are confidential, ministers who too often break with the deemed consensus in the room are not seen as team players - and that perception is quick to ooze out into the Leg and senior levels of the public service. And nobody really wants to have a maverick minister.
I think this smoking ban is a wonderful initiative. It is one I would support fully, if I were in either the cabinet or the caucus room (or I suppose both).
I hope Hancock can get it through Cabinet and caucus. And I hope he quits if he can't. That would be principled. Has an Alberta PC Minister ever resigned out of principle?
Hiwever, I don't think we can avoid acknowledging that it was a PC government, composed of many of the same ministers and MLAs, that was the only roadblock to proceeding sooner.
It may be that Premier Stelmach wants to be the new broom sweeping clean, but he and his caucus was part of the processes leading to decisions that he now needs to clean up.
While the executive is new, neither the party nor the caucus is new. And the MLAs and party should, in a democracy, be held accountable for the actions of both the Klein era and the new enlightenment.
CfSR - I think Cabinet has to be 'solid' coming out after dealing and deciding an issue.
ReplyDeleteBut its members and those members of Caucus too, should be loud, noisy and diverse and yes even a bit divisive - as the case may be -going into Cabinet discussions.
We have a current example of the latter approach in the Hancock handling of this tobacco control policy process situation. Snelgrove and Lund criticized and challenged Hancock early on for talking about the policy before it was dealt with in Cabinet.
Hancock was unrepentant and unrelenting in saying it was his job as Alberta's Minister of Health and Wellness to promote wellness and disease prevention - on principle and as part of his assigned mandate from the Premier. And yes he would discuss other serious policy issues within his portfolio in public in advance of Cabinet deliberations too!
Hancock has appropriately not commented on the Campaign for a Smoke free Alberta lobby efforts supporting this initiative - of which I am a part of and on a professional basis too BTW. MLAs can and will decided for themselves about how they will respond to such efforts without comment from the Minister.
As for Maverick Ministers, they have very short shelf lives. Garth Turner and Dr. Lyle Oberg are two dramatic cases in point. It is usually the Caucus who does them in but the leader often has some fingerprints on the knife that cuts them loose.
If Hancock does not get this smoking ban policy accepted he ought not to resign. But he should be a conscientious, continuing and consistent and even an amplified voice for serious policy options and change in advance of Cabinet consideration.
Such pre-decision debates have to be seen as part of openness, transparency and accountability of a good government and not as a dissention in the ranks, or a leadership crisis, as the traditional media will undoubtedly characterize any such inner-party dialogue and discourse.
Citizens are a savvy and insightful lot. They will want to see the "rough cut" of the policy idea and watch how it develops.
They will follow the difference between what goes into the process and what comes out in the end and are entitled to an explanation for any changes that resulted from the process.
If the PC government under new leadership is not a force for change the voters will decided about the kind changes they want in the next election anyway.
May as well be ahead of the curve...or at least be able to catch up to the citizen’s concerns and deliver on them if we PCs wish to continue to be worthy of governing.
A smoking ban as a sign of an emerging leader? You know better Ken. People who want to smoke will always find ways to smoke. The smoking ban means he can read polls. If the new Tory leader is serious about helping people, he might deal with more pressing issues such as our kids and laws guaranteeing that no classroom have more than 20 kids, teachers paid properly to educate the kids that parents can't handle, better school buildings, proper pay and tougher regulations for day care workers, cleaner air, cleaner water, better highways so people aren't killed, and other forms of moving people - i.e high speed rail - to lessen the load on the highways. When he makes progress, I have another list.
ReplyDeleteYes Rich - YES a smoking ban in Alberta is the sign of an emerging leader - particularly in the current Alberta context.
ReplyDeleteIt is a new focus on the social side of the policy agenda. No doubt that it is as much about symbolism as it is about good public policy.
The social values aspect of governance has been ignored or under valued in Alberta policy priorities in recent years. Stelmach heralds a change in that attitude with this kind policy change...IF IT PASSES! And that is not a sure bet yet!
You are right - there are many other pressing issues that also need concurrent attention. You list some, and addmitedly, not all of them. I look forward eagerly to your next list.
You imply tobacco control is lower priority than education and day care for our kids or the environment. Consider the fact that 8000 underage teenagers will start smoking this year. We don't enforce our current tobacco restriction and laws. We put cigarettes right behind the candy bars and gum in convenience stores. Little wonder that most smokers started their addiction habit as teengers who are not supposed to be able to acquire tobacco legally.
As for the environment, what about concern for the inside air we breath too? Second hand smoke in workplaces and other public situations actually kills people. Tobacco control has an important environmental aspect as well.
Of course smokers "will always find a way to smoke." It is an addiction after all. Smokers need a nicotine fix and will do whatever it takes to get it...just like any other addict.
Tobacco use needs to be reconsidered and seen as a health and addiction problem. It need to be treated just like any other drug addiction.
We have to find ways to help those who want to quit. Such assistance has to be part of this tobacco control legislation effort too.
I won't agrue that there are lots of prioirty issues in Alberta today. Too often we have seen policy makers fudging the list of priorities. We catch them saying they can't do the right thing now on an issue because it will create expectations in other areas that we will be forced to deal with too.
That "hedging" on doing the right thing in one instance because you might have to do the right thing on other issues is pure political inertia or just plain policy maker timidity.
That is an attidute we can no longer afford especially when it comes to health and wellness concerns.
As for High Speed Rail, I am working on it. I will soon be posting on the rationale for HSR versus adding 2 more highway lanes to the Edmonton-Calgary corridor.
Thanks for bringing it up. Like tobacco control - it is also an Alberta idea whose time has come.
Ken
ReplyDeleteYour counter argument is not convincing. Tobacco is not the prime source of society's ills, nor is government regulation the answer. Build the roads and the schools dammit and allow people to be responsible for themselves.
You are right Rich - "tobacco is NOT the prime source of society's ills." Denial is!
ReplyDeleteA letter to the Editor in the Edmonton Journal today from Bob Walsh, the Ex Dir of the Canadian Council for Tobacco Control closes with this quote:
" After all tobacco costs Canada $17 billion annually"...(that would build a lot of schools and roads) "and a staggering 80 percent of all addiciotn related deaths are due to tabocco."
That is human grief, tragedy and suffering we can reduce with some serious commitment to common sense.