Is Danielle Smith A Game Changer in Alberta Politics?

As I said in an earlier post the political attention in Alberta will shift from the WAP Leadership of Danielle Smith to the PC AGM confidence vote on the Stelmach leadership.

I see the WAP overplaying their hand already claiming to being "ready to govern" in the next election, likely less than 3 years away. They have one MLA through winning a protest vote by election in Calgary. They have the underwhelming support of less than 8500 Albertans who could be bothering to even mail in a ballot. That hardly makes the WAP a "party of winners" as they are now claiming.

The grumpy old Reformer type social conservatives had to be embarrassed by the poor showing of their SoCon candidate in the WAP leadership results. One even more extreme WAP leadership candidate withdrew from the contest without explanation.  His anti-homosexual and closet Alberta separatist leanings didn't help promote what the new gentler big-tent party the new leader is calling for the WAP to become.

Smith, once selected to lead the WAP, was recently quoted as saying:

“Wildrose Alliance was seen even a few months ago as another marginal protest party. Now we’re the government in waiting”

“We’ve been doing a lot of cringing and ducking to avoid being labeled extremist. We should now stop. It’s undignified.”

But it's true the newly merged Wildrose and Alliance parties are full of extremists. Nice to see the new leader admitting that they have been "cringing and ducking to avoid" the label. It is not a label. It is the truth. The WAP can expect Albertans to cringe as this traditionalist political party tries to duck and hide from its yester-year discriminatory social policies.

I see the old-boys club of certain disgruntled Calgarians elites, who used to get direct and personal political access to Premier Klein back in the day, are now taking their shots at Premier Stelmach...including the former Premier himself. Shabby! I take my shots on the government too but I try to keep my criticism on policy and politics - not personality.

I was recalling the Klein-Betkowski PC leadership contest back in 1992. There were some elements in the Klein support base who said about Betkowski that "They were not going to be lead by that uppity educated city woman." Some of those same elements are now supporting Smith. I figure there must be some progress being made.

The biggest mistake we made in the Betkowski leadership campaign was to beat Ralph by 1 vote on the first ballot. The Klein forces came out of their self-satisfied shell and kicked our butts on the second ballot, even after every other candidate came to the Betkowski side.

We will have to wait and see if the Stelmach forces respond to the WAP in the same way by energizing and engaging. The reality still is the PC Party and the Stelmach government can choose to lose and even by the time the next election rolls around. If that happens then they will have both collaborated to engineer their mutual demise. November 7 at the PC AGM should give us some early warning signs as to what will emerge.

Danielle Smith's leadership victory and the recent WAP election result will be merely a catalyst for creating or the consciousness for change. She and the WAP are not necessarily going to set the direction or the destination from such change. There are other political forces afoot that may come into play. There may be a push for rebooting Alberta and designing a political agenda and alternative towards a more progressive direction and destination.

As Ralph used to say, "Stay tuned."

IS KLEIN STILL BITTER-OR JUST STATING FACTS?

Former Premier Klein is on record with a Canadian Press story today saying if Premier Stelmach gets less than 70% support at the November 7 Progressive Conservative Party Leadership confidence review he should resign as Party Leader and therefor Premier.

If Premier Stelmach lacks the confidence of the PC Party delegates, Alberta could be into another leadership race early in the new year. I have commented on this in other posts that you can read here and here.

Mr. Klein was summarily dismissed by the PC Party in April 2006 when he lingered too long and the party faithful decided for him it was time for a change. That was after he he served leader of the party and the Province for 13 years. Klein may still be bitter but that is beside the point.

There are no laws or rules that dictate this situation but there are past experiences that set conventions. The conventional wisdom was set by Prime Minister Joe Clark in 1980. He was Prime Minister of Canada, leading a minority government that lost the confidence of the House on a Budget vote.

Clark put his party leadership on the line at a convention and got just under 70% support. He said that was not good enough and he resigned a party leader triggering a leadership review - which he lost to Brian Mulroney. Mulroney had been meeting secretly with supporters for months planning a coupe and a run at the party leadership just in such an event.

Conventional wisdom says anything under 70% support from party delegates and Premier Stelmach will need to resign and test his leadership with the entire PC Party and the people of Alberta with the one person - one vote leadership system the PC Party uses. Between 70 and 80% he will be seen as the walking wounded and can survive but with difficulty. Over 80% and he is safe.

The anxiety level is high going into the November 7th AGM confidence vote that some supporting MLAs to Premier Stelmach even suggested a show of hands confidence vote and not a secret ballot. Not a smart thing to do and it was quickly kiboshed.

The PC AGM vote is only one event creating growing uncertainty in the politics of the province. The first was the recent and devastating results of the Calgary Glenmore by-election. the next significant event will be the October 17th results of the Wildrose Alliance leadership. It will be important for three reasons, who wins, by what margin and what is the total voter turnout.

Then we have the PC AGM Leadership confidence vote on November 7th. The next serious leadership issue facing Premier Stelmach will be the Alberta consequences to the Copenhagen meetings on the world's reaction to climate change stating December 7th. The Alberta oilsands will be in the cross hairs of those global discussions and the consequences to Alberta will be a significant test of Premier Stelmach's leadership.

I have no prediction or insight as to what will happen in any of these pending events but Albertans better be aware of them because there is an incredible uncertainty about being Albertan these days.

It's Not About Boutilier - It's About Politics and Leadership

Political leadership, particularly when in government, has three key elements. There is the party leadership, caucus leadership and the government leadership. They are all different but they are significantly overlapping elements that together determine the effectiveness of modern political leadership.

Premier Stelmach's government leadership is legally and technically secure for at least three years until the next election. Given that timing and his impressive majority government in the last election plus the enormous political powers of the Premier's office as head of state, Stelmach is pretty secure, at least technically and conventionally.


Stelmach has just confirmed and consolidated his caucus leadership with his unilateral, fast and furious firing of the backbencher Guy Boutilier. Boutilier built his political bed and the caucus knows it. They concur with the Premier's conclusions and support his actions. Boutilier, while appearing to merely represent his constituency, which is his right and his duty, his timing and technique was off as a government MLA and member of Treasury Board. He left Stelmach no choice but to expel him from the PC caucus. I expect a strong caucus backing for the Premier's decision. It will not be out of fear for future reprisals but rather for better teamwork and better policy execution in what will be difficult times ahead.


On the other hand, Stelmach's governing leadership is being actively questioned on the streets all over Alberta. It is mostly happening in Calgary and led by energy sector executives but there are others who are also grumbling and rumbling about him too. The Calgary based energy sector seems to have made it their mission to undermine the Premier, allegedly over royalties, but their angst goes deeper. It goes all the way back to Stelmach's "surprise" winning of the PC Party leadership over Jim Dinning. Dinning was the Calgary choice for heir apparent to the Premiership. That never happened and some of the Calgary elite have never gotten over it.


Now we come to party leadership. Here is where members of the PC Party of Alberta get to rate Stelmach and relay a message to their party leader. It could be good, bad and even ugly. We have no idea today what the outcome will be. This party leadership evaluation will not be done without serious consideration of all the duties and responsibilities Stelmach has as Premier. So frustrations will be tempered by reality when the vote happens.

Like politicians, political party influentials also want to retain political power. Winning elections for rabid political partisans is not everything, it is the only thing. Indications are that the party faithful were pleased with the Premier's performance at the recent Policy Conference. A good sign. However a recent poll however has shown no growth in the Premier's support since the last election and some surprising softness in rural Alberta. If winning is the only thing how will that desire drive the decision about Stelmach's party leadership performance in the climate of an AGM, not a policy conference?


Policy conferences attract a different kind of partisan political animal than show up at AGMs. Policy wonks are interested in talking and exploring ideas, political processes and governance issues - forever! They are often more interested in getting the governing right and forget the need to get the right to govern thing done first. AGMs, on the other hand, attracts a more red meat kind of partisan player. These are folks who are more interested in the power of politics and being ready for the next big political fight. They want to do what it takes to win elections. Leadership is job #1 for achieving that goal for any political party.

The PC Party Constitution requires that its leader be subjected to what is essentially a confidence vote at the next AGM after each election - win or lose. That vote will happen at the November AGM in Red Deer. I think there is good reason to be concerned about the final outcome. Who will show and how will they vote? What issues or concerns will be on their minds as they "evaluate" the Premier as the leader of their party? Will we have pooled political ignorance or collective reflective wisdom in determining the outcome? What pressures will be brought to bear on party members leading up to the process? There is a lot at stake this November no matter how you look at it.


Ralph Klein, much to his surprise, was turfed as leader of the PC Party at one of these AGM evaluation votes. If Ed Stelmach suffers the same fate will we be back into a PC leadership race for the Premiership of the province as soon as spring of 2010? Will we be in a federal election at that time too? What will an early leadership campaign do to the PC political brand and the confidence Albertans? Will Albertans be happy with another chance to select a Premier - or not? What will be the impact on the economy? Will a lack of strong support for the Premier cause investment uncertainty and will it prolong the recession? Or will the party decide that another change is necessary and will they cause it to happen, sooner than later? Damn the consequences!

So I think Premier Stelmach's caucus leadership is well in hand. Government leadership is always a work in progress and the record so far is mixed. But the party leadership is also in play. It may have a serious negative impact on the other two political leadership realms, especially if the party evaluation of the Premier goes badly. Even a tepid support for the Premier's party leadership in November will damage the Premier, the party and the province. I expect a full court press from the PC caucus to encourage PC party members to show up and indicate their strong support Stelmach's party leadership in November and that will start in earnest by mid September.


There a hundreds of critical questions facing the future of Alberta. But make no mistake about the importance of the PC Party leadership results. That may determine much of the future for the province. This November in Red Deer is when a small group of Albertans, who just happen to be members of the PC Party, will show up at their Annual General Meeting. They will take a vote and they will make a very important decision. They will have the power to impact the entire future of the province.

It all depends on how they express their confidence in Premier Stelmach in a secret ballot vote. That all depends on how they feel about Premier Stelmach's overall leadership performance at the time. That enormous power is in the hands of a small group of citizens who belong to what is essentially private club, namely the Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta.

November is a long way off and lots can happen. The 100 days between now and November is an eternity in politics. Let's hope for the best but lets not presume anything between now and then. There is much at stake for all Albertans, not just the political partisans. The outcome of the PC Party AGM vote on the party leadership this November will dramatically impact the entire province - regardless of the final results. Scary eh?

BOOTilier's Been a Problem for a Long Time

Here is another reason why the Premier is right to Boot Boutilier. Three years ago today I posted a piece about Boutilier as then Minister of Environment insisting that he be allowed to testify at an EUB hearing on an oil sands project...on two days notice.

He became famous for his testimony consistently saying he was there as the Wood Buffalo MLA and not the Minister of Environment. He assured the hearing that "he could turn off that part of his brain that was the Minister's role and just be the MLA." He became famous for that advanced neurological capacity.

I called him reckless then and he was. He could have forced that hearing to be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court with his ill advised ege driven "intervention." I believed then and I still believe today that he was more concerned that the Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo's legitimate intervention and that would somehow upstage him as the local MLA. This hubris was too much. But to take such a position and for the Klein government to allow that to happen meant Boutilier actually jeopardized the executive branch discretion of the Klein government in the oil sands project approval process.

Klein knew what Boutilier was up to but was either ignorant of the consequences or oblivious to the problem. Soon afterwards Ron Stevens, the Deputy Premier and Minister of Justice suddenly became the Chair of the all powerful special multi-departmental Cabinet committee that was dealing with the oil sands policy and strategy. I think the Minister of Justice took over that committee just in case the province got sued because of the rashness of the then Minister of the Environment.

The problem that is Boutiler goes back a long way and has persisted for many years. Stelmach has not over reacted to this. There is always a last straw.

Stelmach Boots Boutilier Out of Caucus

So Boutilier was bounced out of caucus by the Premier. Quel surprise! What are we as citizens to read into all of this? What is the real motivation behind this move by the Premier?

Is it an internal party and caucus matter only? Is it a bigger issue about representative democracy versus leadership dominated politics? Is it about being a unified team (aka message mouthing sheep) as a governing party apparatus? Is it personal to Boutilier, since he has a very checkered political record and has not a very effective Cabinet level politician anyway. Could it be the last straw about Boutilier that goes all the way back to his questionable intervention while serving as Minister of the Environment and his ill-advised direct testimony "as an MLA" in a regulatory hearing on a Suncor oilsand project? Could it be because he supported Oberg in the leadership? Could it be all those thing...and more?

I'm betting all of that and more is behind Premier Stelmach last straw decision with the political future of Guy Boutilier as a Progressive Conservative. I expect Boutilier will be courted by the Wildrose Alliance and his Independent status will not last too long as he seek revenge by sitting as a WRAP MLA. Boutilier was one of the few caucus members to support "Ralph can't fire me because I know where the skeletons are buried" Lyle Oberg in his leadership bid for the Progressive Conservative Party.

Oberg you will remember besmirched the entire PC caucus with those comments. In a stroke of political theatrical brilliance Klein had the PC caucus expel Oberg from their ranks. Klein stayed "above the fray" and rightly so because Oberg's skeleton remarks insulted every other PC MLA in the caucus. Boutilier has only targeted the Minister of Health and since Stelmach made that appointment, the Boutilier challenge is directly at the Premier too. Stelmach picked up Guy's gauntlet and was a one-man bomb disposal crew as he personally dumped Guy from the PC caucus.

As for Guy, he got was was coming to him. It was incumbent on the Premier to fire him under the circumstances. I am all for more open debate and public discussion by governing MLAs on public policy but Boutilier was over the line and was asking for the obvious political consequences. It is entirely appropriate for an MLA to push politically for your constituency needs but it is about time, place and technique.

The timing tone and content of Boutilier's criticism of the Minister of Health and the personalization of his media comments, like accusing the Minister of "gibberish", went over the line. Stelmach has no choice but to boot him. Boutilier wants to talk to caucus who he implies are his "accusers." That was a request appropriately denied by Stelmach. The Premier is Boutilier's accuser and Stelmach is rightly in his rights as Boutiler's political nemesis. Stelmach has spoken on the issue of Boutilier's future with the PC caucus with great clarity. There is none! Move on!

Boutilier is no hero, nor is he an innocent victim, nor is he a martyr in this medieval morality play of partisan politics. He is merely a guy who doesn't get it and is quite frankly very late into the game of constituency representative democracy. For years he fiddled and frittered while his constituency, Wood Buffalo and particularly Fort McMurray, burned with growth pressures, infrastructure shortfalls and enormous safety and social crisis.

There are no winner is this embarrassment for all ofus who are of a PC persuasion - from the Premier down to mere members like myself. There are lots of loser however. The good folks of the Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo still have serious social, growth, infrastructure, safety and capacity problems. Now they have nobody in the critical government caucus meetings to keep them up keep up to date on what is really happening that impacts them. They are the big losers in all of this. Their continuing efforts to respond to these enormous challenges for their unique and hard pressed community are caught hard in these recessionary times. We now have many more Alberta communities facing challenges just like Fort McMurray. But that does not solve the problem nor fix the consequences of the systemic neglect inherent in the Fort McMurray reality of over two decades of gold rush growth in the oil sands.

Stelmach has done the only thing the partisan political circumstances allow him to do. He had to turf Boutilier, and for so many reasons. In the hothouse of partisan politics it was a decision that is totally justified. This result is more attributed to Boutilier's doing than Stelmach's. It is not a situation that enables a more enlightened discussion about presenting a more open and representative democracy. It is all about asserting leaderhisp in a climate that is all about raw power in politics. Guy played his hand and was trumped by ht ePremier. That trick is over but the game goes on. Guy, however, is no longer at the table and will no longer be dealt any political cards by the Stelmach government.

As for a better governance model, we have nothing to learn or applaud from the travesty of these recent events. It is time for citizens to act like owners of the oil sands, the water, the land, the air and the democracy that makes up Alberta. It is too serious a situation to leave to petty politics and partisan infighting...regardless of your political persuasion. Without a re-engagement in politics by Albertan these events will rule, become the norm and everyone loses. Please tell me citizens of Alberta that your sense of being Albertan and you sense of shared and personal responsibility for this place is greater than indicated by these offensive events.

I hope the lessons for Albertans is such that they will re-engage in the political culture of their province. Politics stinks because you and I have abdicated our shared responsibility and have allowed it to rot.

The Rocky Road to the Repeal of Bill 44 Provisions in The Alberta Human Rights Act.

What is Next for Bill 44 Provision in Alberta Human Rights Act?
The frequency and volume of political commentary about passing The Alberta Human Rights Act (AHRA) that adopted the Bill 44 opting out provisions will diminish over the next few months. It is summer after all. The reality of the consequences of this ill-advised and ill-conceived law will come once the Act is proclaimed and becomes the actual law of the land.


There are some unrest and rumblings within the Progressive Conservative Party rank and file against Bill 44 provisions in the AHRA. I also hear some in the PC Party are trying to stifle and suppress any continuing talk about Bill 44, presuming it will be forgotten over time. I don't think that will be the case given the anger I have seen expressed over this bad politics and poor governance decision. That approached worked in a pre-Internet world but it will not work now.


There are a few moves afoot within some PC Party constituencies to submit a resolution for repeal of the opting out provisions for debate the AGM in November 2009. I am all for that and hope it happens but there are many hurdles to jump to make that a reality. Here is a sense of what it would take and what it would mean for the PC Party to debate the repeal of the opting out provisions of the AHRA at the next AGM.


The PC Party is not the PC Government.
First, if must be clearly understood that whatever the PC Party decides is not binding on the Stelmach government. The PC Party is just another political special interest group. It is not the government. I served on the PC Party Policy Committee for years but over a decade ago. I had a constant fight with the Reform/Alliance wing members who did not grasp the difference between the government and the policy proposals of the political party that supported it. Grassroots run deep with old-time Reformers.


Sometimes process is everything so here is how it works, as I understand it. I checked the process and it is essentially the same as in my day in dealing with Party Resolutions at AGMs. Here is a link to the PC Party website for the actual constituency resolution process, if you are interested.

The PC Party debates Resolutions at every AGM from submissions made by individual constituency organizations. Each constituency can submit two resolutions. The first one (the "A" Resolution) will always be debated. While the second one (the "B" Resolution) may not be debated because of time constraints. If there are duplicates of resolutions they are combined and only one is debated. Some resolutions are declined because the don't deal with provincial jurisdiction or they are too vague or too local in nature.


A group of Regional Directors and constituency level VPs of Policy, all as party volunteers, will do the vetting of the resolutions received. The A and B Resolutions are dealt with first come first served and up to 6 minutes of debate is provided for each one. Then any party member in the room can vote on the Resolution on a show of hands. Open transparent and fair to my mind.


Those Resolutions that get support from the membership are submitted to the government as information and advice. The government caucus then considers them and responds to the Party on each one, in writing. The government's responses range from agreement to disagreement and everything in between and often includes a reporting on the status and progress on resolutions and related issues.


Will the PC AGM Debate a Repeal Resolution?
So what will it take to get the AHRA provisions of Bill 44 to be debated as a Resolution at the November PC Party AGM? The first step is for a local party constituency organization to draft an appropriate proposed resolution and then decide as a local Board to submit it to the AGM.


That first step has already been done by the Edmonton Whitemud PC Constituency but there is a wrinkle. My information is the Bill 44 Repeal Resolution from Whitemud was a tie vote for second place - a "B" Resolution. The constituency apparently has decided to submit three resolutions rather than break the tie for the B resolution. It is an interesting development because the Repeal Resolution it will at best be a "B" Resolution and it risks not being debated due to time constraints. That has never happened in my experience in dealing with Party Resolutions, but it is a possibility, and in politics if it is possible anything can happen so nothing should surprise us.


Here are some interesting "What Ifs." What if in the initial Party vetting process they cull one of the two Whitemud B resolutions because only two Resolutions are allowed. Would the Bill 44 resolution be the one culled? The resolution vetting process could more likely send the two B resolutions back to Whitemud and require them to break the tie and will that happen or will they settle on only submitting an "A" Resolution?

If at the party organizational level, they decided to cull the only Repeal Resolution on such a technicality, I expect progressives in the PC Party would either revolt against the Party Executive or just leave the party. My money is on the Party going back to the Whitemud constituency and making them break the tie vote. So much uncertainty still prevails.


This could be avoided if another PC Constituency organization were to submit an "A" Resolution to recommend repeal of the AHRA opting out provisions. To date that has not happened but it might. I think it should happen for the sake of the PC Party itself but there appears to be some of nervous nellies who help run the party. They clearly want this to go away so all this Bill 44 controversy would just disappear somehow.


Some Serious Political Implications Around a Repeal Resolution
Here are some of the political implications for the PC Party, the PC government and progressive Albertans emerging from these various scenarios. If there is a Resolution for the Repeal of the AHRA opting out provisions debated at the AGM, and it passes, the Stelmach government can reconsider its policy and move to repeal the provisions. It can also say no, that is a done deal and they can refuse to reconsider. That is their option as our government but there will be repercussions in the PC Party and the PC government either way.


If such a Resolution is defeated by the PC Party membership then there will be soul searching in the progressive membership ranks of the PC Party considering if this party is still viable as their political "home." Who knows if or when that will happen. The party progressives I have talked to about Bill 44 know there is no other political party for them to go where they feel comfortable and believe they could be effective. The question then is will they join the other 60% of disengaged Albertans or pursue something different to express their political philosophy and aspirations for Alberta? Will the "Alberta Citizen Cynicism" party gets thousands more non-voters?


There are Implication for Progressives.
There is another more subtle but even more significant potential implication coming out of how the PC Party handles a Resolution to repeal AHRA opting out provisions. If they never received such a resolution from a constituency then local constituency ennui or angst against "rocking the boat" gets the Party off the hook. But that does not resolve the larger political issue, namely the anger amongst all the progressive Albertans who are still angry over the unnecessary Bill 44 optioning out provisions in the AHRA.

If no PC constituency organization has the courage and conviction to submit a repeal resolution for debate at the AGM I expect most progressive PC members will drift away from the party and be missing in action in the next election. The non-partisan Alberta progressives will decide to actively campaign against the PC Party in preparation for the next election. We are seeing the tip of that iceberg as evidenced in the wave of social media and traditional media commentary on the appropriateness of some recent personal comments made in public by Iris Evans and Doug Elniski. The PC Party and the PC government can expect more of this kind of scrutiny and aggressive response from now on - regardless of any AGM debate or its outcome.


If the Party receives a submission but tries to subvert the AGM debate of a repeal resolution I will expect to see progressive party members getting more vocal and deciding in droves to be no shows at the November AGM meeting. I can't see that subversion happening but it is politics and anything can happen. If it did happen I would be more disappointed than surprised. The likely unintended consequences are that the majority of PC party members who will "show up" at the AGM (and who will likely be encouraged to show up) will be those social conservatives on the far right of the party who tend to support Ted Morton.

There are Potential Implications for the Stelmach Leadership too.
Under those circumstances, a really significant political turn of events from the Bill 44 fiasco, that could happen at this November AGM. That is a potential threat to Premier Stelmach's continuing leadership of the PC Party. The PC Party Constitution requires that the Leader to face a confidence vote at the first AGM following an election - win or lose. That is how the Party sent a message to Ralph Klein that it was time for him to go a few years back. Ralph lingered as Leader, but the Party told him, in a vote of no uncertain terms, that he was past his best before date. He was gone!

PC Party Leader Ed Stelmach has to face a similar leadership confidence vote of party members at the November AGM.


What if the party "faithful" who show up at the AGM are predominantly social conservatives because they are emboldened by Bill 44? What if the the progressives stay home because the are discouraged by Bill 44? Could this be the "perfect storm" for the far right to give Premier Stelmach a low vote of support? What level of low support would seriously undermine his continuing leadership? What if his support is low enough, like Klein's 55% support? Will he have a backbench revolt of social conservatives that demand another leadership race? Will we be into a PC leadership contest for a new Alberta Premier sooner than we thought or even wished for? What will such uncertainty do to the Alberta economy and any recovery from the recession?


This is what can happen when internal partisan political expediency is preferred over good governance - like in the case of the Bill 44 fiasco. Bill 44 issues will be quiet over the summer but they will be front and centre again in the fall. Stay tuned. It promises to be interesting, unnerving, disappointing and even devastating, depending on your perspective.

GOA Goes After Big Tobacco to Recover Health Care Costs.

The Alberta government through the Minister of Health and Wellness just introduced Bill 48 today, Crown’s Right of Recovery Act. It is a great move and aimed at enabling the province to recover health costs incurred in a number of situations. They include car accidents but the law will use a wrongdoer’s insurance to recover health costs. That could get complicated in how to calculate the health costs associated.

The essence of the Bill is in section 2(1) that says in effect if someone receives health services for personal injuries due to wrongful acts or omission of a wrongdoer, the province then has the right to recover the health care costs, both current and future costs, from the wrongdoer. If someone, who is a victim receiving care due and contributory negligent, the wrongdoer is off the hook for that portion of the health care costs the victim is responsible for.

Bill 48 deals with convicted criminals who are hurt in committing a crime. They will be paying their health care costs. And it also goes after the tobacco industry to recover the health costs associated with the damage done by their products. The tobacco sections are very complex and I will need more time to study and digest what they mean and if second hand smoke is involved too. Overall - Wow! As a citizen and taxpayer, on first blush, I'm loving this Bill.

The province makes a direct claim for recovery of health care costs against tobacco companies so the patient is not involved in any messy litigation. The province looks like it is actually pursuing the tobacco companies on an aggregated basis to recover all health costs caused by and associated with tobacco produces. With tobacco, it looks like it is not dealt with on case by case approach but in the aggregate. That is smart.

Lots of detail to consider here but this is a great step in the right direction. It was impossible to get the Klein government to accept a ban on smoking in public and work places. There were numerous tries and all were rebuffed by Ralph Klein. That smoking ban was finally accomplished by Dave Hancock when he was Minister of Health and Wellness in the first Stelmach government.

His good work is being carried on by the current Minister, Ron Liepert. Full disclosure, I worked with a consortium of health professionals and advocacy groups to get the smoking ban in Alberta last year. There are lots on blog post in the archives if you want to know more about that initiative.

Bill 44 sucks but Bill 48 makes great sense.

Why Harper is Afraid of an Election

Harper has not gained any traction or sustained momentum in the polls since he became the pro tem Prime Minister of Canada so many long months ago.

He played with the Quebec sovereigntist’s “nationalists” sentiments a while back and got a dead cat bounce for a bit. He even got cozy with Mario Dumont of the right wing ADQ and intentionally snubbed the Quebec Prime Minister Jean Charest when he was suffering as the leader of a minority government. That has all changed recently. For Harper to realize his dream of a majority right wing government he needs Quebec or Ontario. Looks like Quebec as cooled to the ADQ and Mr. Harper’s friend Mario Dumont.

The blogger Paulitics gives a very comprehensive and interesting account of the shifting sentiments in Quebec. He is worth a read for sure if you are concerned about the future of a unified Canada. The Harper Cons friends, the ADQ, are in free fall. What will that to do Harper's prospects in Quebec in the next election?

The recent Quebec bye-elections are another reason why Harper has to be cooling if not quivering about facing the Canadian electorate any time soon. Quebec has figured him out, Ontario has as well and Atlantic Canada never did like him. The west is now more competitive – except for Alberta of course. But if Harper, the Albertan, keeps taking on personal advisors from the old Ontario Harris government and snubs the Alberta boys who made Ralph Klein and coached Mike Harris, you have to wonder how long they will stay “loyal” to Harper's cause.

"All I am Saying is Give Ed a Chance."

UPDATE March 2/08 - THE STRATEGIC VOTING SECOND GUESSING HAS STARTED IN CALGARY. CHECK OUT LICIA CORBELLA IN THE CALGARY HERALD.

This weekend in Alberta has been eerily quiet and anxiety raising for the hard-core partisan campaigners off all political stripes who have been working hard for local candidates and their leaders in this election. This is because no one really knows what will happen tomorrow at the polling booth.

The opinion polls are all over the map. The undecided is high, there are 300,000 new Albertans since the last election and they are a wild card. The old political "order of things" in the power structure of Alberta is changing too.

Personally I am neither optimistic nor pessimistic…I am fatalistic. Que sera sera is how I see it. The citizens of Alberta who show up and vote will decide our future and I trust their wisdom. Albertans are quitely reflecting this weekend and struggling to make up their minds about how they will vote. They hold the future of the province in their collective hands and they are weighing the alternative choices before them and considering the consequences.

There are many regional differences and issues in play all over the provionce. Indications are that Ed’s rural vote is holding and Edmonton is firming up behind Ed where polls say he can expect more seats. The deep south is in play in some places and there are some other intereting local campaigns to watch too. And then there is the Calgary factor.

In Calgary it is all about choosing between being pissed with Ed Stelmach (because he is not one of them) or being practical and pragmatic about their continuing place in Alberta’s political power structure. This choice is made especially problematic for Calgary’s power brokers if Edmonton goes to Ed this time and he ends up with a comfortable majority. Sending message to Ed by voting RED is one thing but losing influence to Edmonton - that would be too much to bear.

There is an interesting and telling comment in the Edmonton Journal today that quotes a U of C political scientist who said “Calgary’s not used to being ignored.” Calgary has not been ignored by Stelmach since he won the PC leadership, and particularly since he called this election campaign. But Alberta has changed and it is no longer “Ralph’s World.” In Ralph’s World , Klein did not so much "own" Calgary as the Calgary elites "owned" Ralph. They had Klein's ear and he pretty much did what they whispered into it.

But now there is a new man in charge and he comes from northern and rural Alberta. He is definitely not from Calgary...and that is disquieting for the Calgaty old-boys who firmly believed what was good for Calgary was defacto good for the rest of Alberta. Ed is not in the pockets of these energy elites nor is he beholden to them. As a result the old energy sector power players don’t know how to respond to him except to be personally condescendingly at times, brashly aggressive at other time, especially over royalties, and a tad defensively too, from time to time.

The energy elites in Calgary are used to being “The Loop” not merely in the loop. The Calgary energy elite angst is made more complicated as they wonder and weigh what will be their future influence in Alberta politics if they go RED and Ed wins a comfortable majority particularly because of a strong “EDmonton” showing. The Edmonton outcome is still uncertain but that does not make the Calgary power-broker-voter decision any easier as they try and figure out how they can stay “in control and in charge of Alberta.”

In any event, sometime tomorrow night we will know the outcomes of this election. There will be many different outcomes depending on your perspectives and aspirations for the province - and your place in it. By Tuesday, the past will just be the past and Alberta will be moving on in one way or another, in one direction or another and with a new government with a new mandate.

I just hope the election results are clear and conclusive and not vague and variable. If the latter happens we will waste a lot more of our precious time fumbling around trying to get our political act together trying to get our future directions and destinations defined, designed and delivered. We have already lollygagged for 8 years at the end of Ralph’s World.” Alberta can’t afford 2 or 3 more years of wondering, wandering and squandering our future opportunities and potential.

Is Ralph Klein Calling for an Unrestricted North American Continental Energy Strategy - in the Middle of an Election?

The Fraser Institute has just released a report on a North American continental energy strategy, authoured in part by former Premier Ralph Klein.

It calls for a “long-term continental strategic framework which would support further integration of North American energy markets.” Seek a potential for “convergence of energy commodity markets” that would result in lower consumer prices and easier switching between energy commodities. Klein and Co. argue that more convergence of the North American energy market would be a “signal to international investors” that we are already “…a stable policy environment with less risk than competing world regions….” Policy certainty in the energy sector is said to be a key for project investors who have to plan out in terms of decades.

They see the framework for going forward is NAFTA and the report acknowledges this. However every US Presidential candidate still in the race form both parties are pretty protectionist and some are seemingly downright hostile to NAFTA, including Obama. The Fraser Institute paper says it will “…offer policy recommendations that could facilitate change to the Agreement (NAFTA) in a manner that is compatible with the objectives of a continental energy strategy.”

This language makes me nervous as a Canadian and an Albertan - and a free trader. This report at first blush is a manifesto to use the Security and Prosperity Partnership of March 2005 as a vehicle to sell out our raw bitumen to the US markets and not to require the upgrading benefits to come to Albertans.

Here is a paraphrase of a very interesting and somewhat disturbing quote from the report:

"Since the signing of NAFTA in December 1992, the North American energy sector has developed, in general, under the assumption of open and free markets in the three countries, and the energy sector has been shaped by the existing regulatory framework with respect to intra-continental trade, investment, and manufacturing. As the times have changed, the need for new legislation concerning North America's energy framework has increased. NAFTA's open-ended position on the the regulatory frameworks affecting energy, which essentially allows each country to do what it will, leaves much to be desired with respect to increasing the integration of North American energy policy, markets and transportation systems. [emphasis added] For example, North America needs an implementation plan for streamlining regulations pertaining to cross-boarder energy flows. Also, energy policies in Mexico, Canada and the United States must be reviewed in relation to the changes being made in environmental policy and in other related policies, and the three countries need ot strive for cohesive approaches to market, pricing, and environmental issuses."

I have to finish reading this Fraser Institute Report and I hope I have cause for more optimism for Alberta and Canada’s independent energy resource future than what I have digested so far. I can't understand what Canada, and ALberta, should be in a mad dash to an unrestricted integration of North American based energy markets with a limited role of government to protect the interests of Albertans, the owners of the resources.

I think we need to assure the Americans of continental energy supply but on terms and conditions and at a pace of development Alberta can absorb. A secure continental energy supply makes sense but not on an exclusive access basis to the oil sands. We need to attract more foreign investment and markest for synthetic crude outside of North America. And the upgrading has to happen in Alberta.

The value added aspects of oil sands development have to benefit future generations. It is not progress for Alberta and Canada to continue to be drawers of water, hewers of wood and now also add in "merely miners of bitumen." So far this report makes me nervous but I have not read it all yet. I think every Albertan better study and understand what is being proposed here.

Come on CBC - You're Too Good for This Tripe

I am intrigued by the CBC report on “issue framing” around Mr. Ron Wood, the retired and former press secretary of former and retired Preston Manning, former leader of the former and retired federal Reform Party.

I have no problem with "retired" folks, and "former" folks expressing opinions or voting however they wish. But to suggest the Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta under the new leadership of Ed Stelmach is “tired, old and complacent and need some time in exile” is just too rich and wantonly rhetorical. It just does not reflect any reasonable sense of reality!!!

If the Stelmach government is “tired, old and complacent” then how do you account for Stelmach’s considerable political and policy accomplishments of the past year? His new accomplishment and the fixing of the old mess left behind were so numerous and so significant that they outstripped the entire policy program and performance of the last 8 years of the Klein regime - substantially.

To suggest the PC Caucus that is tired, old and complacent, if it holds any truth, which I reject; it is mostly because of those MLAs who have announced their retirement. No doubt many are retiring as a result of the change in leadership and that is a normal renewal process. Not everyone who is retiring fits the description of tired, old and complacent but some do. But that has nothing to do with Stelmach’s capacity for good governing.

I have no problem with Mr. Wood publicly supporting a Liberal candidate. That is his right. I have done it myself, federally, with Anne McLellan. To suggest a federal Reform Party operative who is voting Liberal provincially is not shifting allegiances. For one reason, it is not just different parties but entirely different jurisdictions.

There is no affiliation between the federal Reform Party and the provincial PCs so how is this endorsment a shift of allegiances? Voting PC, or for any other party, is hardly enough to conclude that a citizen has declared an allegiance to a political party. Voting is nothing more than a right of citizenship – it is not a declaration of party allegiance.

There is no indication from the CBC piece that Mr. Wood was ever active in the Alberta Progressive Conservative Party either. To assume his retired and former role in the former Reform Party is equivalent to an allegiance to the Alberta Progressive Conservative Party is misleading. They have nothing to do with each other.

It would be equally misleading if the Wood story were framed by the CBC in such a way to claim that he has shifted his allegiance away from Stephen Harper’s federal Conservatives because he is voting Liberal in an Alberta provincial election. That would also be pure balderdash.

Mr. Wood can vote for whomever he likes and for what ever reasons he chooses. But to characterize his vote from Federal Reform to provincial Liberal as a shift of allegiance is a stretch beyond any measure of reasonableness. Mr. Wood's other gratuitous comments accusing Stelmach of leading a "tired, old and complacent" government is equally unreasonable and belied by the facts.

There are serious issues in this election and there are serious candidates from all parties putting forth their ideas on how to address those issues. There are real stories out there people - not this fluff! Can’t we focus our coverage efforts in this campaign on actually trying to identify the impact and import of those issues and ideas? Can’t we put some rigour into our media commentary and talk about the effectiveness of the various ideas and try to bring some clarity to complex issues. Can't we focus on exploring the implications the real issues and stories may hold for the future of Alberta?

Being tedious, trite, misleading and truly irrelevant like the voting choices story of Mr. Wood are a waste of CBC time and talent. CBC may not be the only MSM to “cover” this but I am a big fan of Mother Corp. When I see them decline to this level of political "coverage" I don’t just despair, I get disappointed.

It's Election Time in Alberta and the Future is the Issue.

I always enjoy the Edmonton Journal’s Paula Simons’ perspective on things. We mostly align but not always. Well her column today is almost a total overlap as how I see the transition between Klein and Stelmach. It is worth a read.

Stelmach is too much of a gentleman to run against Klein. I do recall Klein ran against the Getty record rather successfully back in the day. The “messes” of the past are being addressed by Stelmach and he is putting his own stamp on how his government will operate and his more inclusive and integrated policy focus. Stelmach is a change and shift away from the old days. He is thoughtful, reflective, caring and capable - and a refreshing change as we now focus on the planning and positioning of the province for the future.

This blog will focus mostly on the election with posts from an Albertan with a Progressive and Conservative perspective. I intend to explore and engage on a wide range of issues and events through out the campaign. I am hoping to encourage more citizen engagement and some serious commitment of time and energy so folks can see a reason to return to politics as a positive part of their lives.

My focus is to try and get a better government that is progressive and conservative and to help readers/citizens/voters understand how that vital and effective combination of principles can be the best way to go forward as a province. I expect contrarian and complementary comments but I also expect civility as the basis for the conversations too.

I am also working professionally on some issues for clients and will be careful to advise when a comment or a post is about a client’s activities and objectives too.

Elections are about choices and changes. They are about getting on with determining the destination and directions for the new Alberta. Apathy is boring and not an option if you value your democratic freedoms. So this time – in this election - get engaged Alberta – it is our future that is at stake.

Poll Shows Stelmach is Strong but Darkening Clouds Exist

Alberta is all over the front pages and above the fold stories in the Globe and Mail. The Strategic Counsel poll is showing Premier Stelmach is doing much better in the minds of ordinary Albertans than with the energy industry C-suites in downtown Calgary. This is good news going into an election that will be called in about 2 weeks. I will do s specific post on this poll and

The Report on Business story is a bit more unsettling as it looks like the Alberta Minister of Energy is weakening on a strong stance on royalties with the Alberta oil and gas industry. The Stelmach government has to be careful to do any such review with the industry in public and not behind closed doors.

The Klein government had an all too cosy back room relationship with the energy industry and did not do a very good job of protecting the interests of the resource owners…ordinary Albertans.

Stelmach has recently instituted an all party legislative committee process. That is the proper place for the energy industry attend in public to make it case about the “unintended consequences” they are facing as a result of the royalty review decisions. The fundamental question is should the royalty rates which are rents, be used as a means to subsidize uneconomic high cost drilling and why shouldn’t the higher producing wells pay a higher royalty?

There is a difficult political situation around the trust level of Albertans have over how well their government has managed our natural resources and the growth in Alberta during the Klein years. Any hint of returning to the behind closed doors and back room deals between Alberta Energy and the industry on our resource management will come with a significant political cost to the Stelmach government.

Mr. Premier - Just Say No to Mr. Chandler!

The PC Party Executive and its leader, Ed Stelmach, is coming together in Red Deer this Saturday to consider if Mr. Craig Chandler’s nomination in Calgary Egmont is in the best interests of the party. I am unequivocal in saying that it is not.

Mr. Chandler’s record speaks for itself and is being well exploited by Liberal Bloggers and well documented and commented on in the main stream media in Alberta and now nationally in the Globe and Mail editorial pages. These commentaries are focused on Mr. Chandler’s attitudes and beliefs and issues with matters decided by the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

The record of Mr. Chandler speaks for itself and is well documented. I also think this matter has some purely crass political elements that need to be considered as well. The Stelmach government has some serious challenges in retaining and recruiting electoral support in Calgary.

The Calgary response to the Stelmach Cabinet appointments was shock and awe as they felt frozen out of their usual place of power and influence. The loss of former Premier Klein’s seat to the Liberals in the by-election in Calgary Elbow earlier this year was a very clear shot across the Stelmach bow. The recent full court press on the royalty review emanating from the energy towers in downtown Calgary is another unsettling example.

The PC party appears to be at least organizationally inert in Calgary and that ennui allowed the Alliance Party to take over the Egmont PC constituency and to be very effective in nominating Mr. Chandler as their “favourite son.”

To accept Mr. Chandler’s nomination means the citizens as voters in Calgary Egmont will see the Candler candidacy as nothing more than the Alliance party in a Progressive Conservative wrapper. That means the PC Party will effectively forfeit this seat to the Liberals if they accept Mr. Chandler’s nomination. How can forfeiting a seat to another party be in the best interests of the party?

Chandler’s candidacy will be the election story in Calgary and may be seen by Calgarians as yet another slight to that city by the PC party offering a candidate who has a proven record that does not respect the human rights of homosexuals. Calgary is a modern, inclusive and cosmopolitan city. It is hard to see a circumstance where Calgarians will embrace a candidate with these values and attitudes of Mr. Chandler. They are so out of alignment with how that great Canadian city sees itself.

There is not a single compelling reason to accept Mr. Chandler’s nomination on merit, principle or even based on pure politics. I can’t imagine how the Ed Stelmach that I know could see any way that he would welcome Mr. Chandler to his team as a Progressive Conservative candidate in Calgary. But politics is a strange business so we will have to wait and see how this all unfolds (or unravels) on Saturday.

Premier Stelmach Shows What Good Socially Progressive and Fiscally Conservative Government is All About This Week.

This has been a good week for Albertans and yours truly.

Tobacco Reduction Act Passes:
Our government has moved decisively on third reading of Bill 45 to prohibit smoking in public and work places. This will improve the quality of life, save lives and tax money form tobacco related disease over time. I have been working professionally with the coalition organized to get this legislation passed. Congratulations to Dave Hancock, Alberta’s Minister of Health and Wellness for this great political and policy accomplishment.

Public Good Exemption in Lobbyists Act for Voluntary Sector:
Next we see our government has moved to exempt public-good non-profit/voluntary organizations from the requirements of the new Lobbyists Act. That means volunteers and staff people in these various community based and charitable organizations do not have to worry about what they say to whom about what in the government when it comes to their good works.

This was the position expressed by the Muttart Foundation and Volunteer Alberta’s brief to the government on the Lobbyists Act. I wrote the Volunteer Alberta brief pointing out the proposed legislation would cause a chill in the volunteer community because it was so harsh and inappropriately drafted. This new Public-Good Exemption amendment to Bill 1, the Lobbyists was also proposed by Dave Hancock and will undoubtedly pass in this session. Congratulations once again.

Teachers Unfunded Pension Liability Issue Finally Resolved:

Now today Premier Stelmach resolves the final debt obligation of the province, the unfunded pension liability for Alberta teachers. This has been a perennial problem that has been bungled by the Klein government and Dr. Lyle Oberg in his former capacity as Minister of Learning. This matter has been one of the most unfair and long time outstanding labour issues that Klein and Oberg used as a punishment for a past teachers strike.

Full disclosure, over the past three years, I have worked from time to time on this matter on behalf of the Alberta Teachers Association. I know Dave Hancock has been working on this issue for years behind the scenes too. But the credit for this progressive step in good government and the saving of some $48B in accrued taxpayer costs over time goes to Premier Stelmach and the leadership of the ATA.

It has been a pretty good week for socially progressive and fiscally conservative government everything considered.

Too Much Heat and Not Enough Light on the Royalty Collection Issues

So now we see the over heated rhetoric and misinformation campaigning move from the energy industry and into the Alberta Legislature. This is a sad “state of affairs.”

The Alberta Liberals are torquing the facts by insinuating criminal intent on the Klein government Ministers of Energy and the current Minister of Energy and is reported to be “suggesting” a criminal investigation may be needed….” Mr. Taft, the Leader of the Alberta Liberals is apparently making these unfounded accusations and he knows better. After all he has a B.A. in political science, a Masters degree in community development and a PhD in business. So this hyping of the facts by such an educated and experienced individual is neither ignorance nor innocence. It is more like the kind of negative, half-truth, Republican-esque partisan politics we have come to expect from Stephen Harper.

The Auditor General Fred Dunn has clearly stated the situation around past royalty collection decisions by the Klein government. This kind of decision is at the discretion of the government and taken by the appropriate Minister, the Energy Minister in this case.

Premier Stelmach also seems to be getting caught up in the torque the facts for effect and rhetoric. He is reported to be tying an “Our Fair Share” recommendation for a proposed Oil Sands Severance Tax as being akin to the NEP and saying such a tax would “cripple the province’s economy.” That is mostly a political judgement. Ironically if Stelmach had kept that severance tax recommendation he would not have to try and renegotiate the Suncor/Syncrude royalty agreements. That tax would have leveled the playing field for the newer projects. That is partly why the Expert Panel recommended the tax.

Political judgment aside, Premier Stelmach goes much further by implying such a "production tax" would drive people out of the province, create a situation where people could not pay their mortgages and many business would go broke…as he suggests happened with the NEP.

The NEP is part of the Alberta mythosphere and we tend to forget that the NEP was negotiated with Alberta. The fact is conveniently forgotten that before the NEP got implemented President Reagan released the US strategic oil supplies. That alone pulled the rug out of the world oil prices and as they plunged they sent the Alberta economy into a tail spin. The NEP would have really hurt Alberta but it didn't, President Reagan got to us first.

The issue of uncollected energy royalties is very clear in the Auditor Generals Report. The administration recommended an increase and that recommendation was rejected by the Minister(s) of the day. That decision was totally within the government discretion so no legal wrong doing is at issue. To project a criminal intent is over the line.

What is at issue here is the quality and consequences of the policy judgment call to not increase royalties and how and why it was made at that time. We elect politicians to make these “hard choices” on our behalf and the issues are never simple and all the facts are never fully known. It is always a judgment call.

So it comes down to a few salient points. Did the Ministers of the day follow a proper review process and analysis of the situation in coming to this discretionary judgment? On what basis did they make the decision and was it a sound judgment and how do they justify the decision as being in the public interest.

The other key question is who did the Klein government listen to in arriving at such decision? Interestingly, Premier Stelmach is quoted now as saying "But at the end of the day, in this government the decisions are made by government, not listening to advice that may come from bureaucracies." "We take advice obviously, from others."

Well I hope the new Lobbyist Act will help us answer the question of just who those "others" are who our elected representatives listen to in the future and why they were so persuasive. We Albertans can then perhaps begin to understand just what part of the public interest those "others" represent. We can also consider if our elected representatives are serving the common good in the exercise of the many discretions they have and the complex decisions they have to make.

Lets remind the politicians of Premier Stelmach's early suggestion to calm down. Lets also get serious about this stuff. There is enough grist for any political mill in these royalty issues that hype and rhetoric are not only unnecessary - it is unhelpful in assisting Albertans in better understanding what is and was going on.

None of this needs to be torqued for effect. The politically motivated manufacturing of misleading media headlines are not helpful. Lets get opportunistic partisan politics out of the royalty deliberations and go right to the debate about how we ensure open, transparent, accountable and good government as the larger goal.

There are signs of hope this could happen. The multi-party support of the NDP motion for an emergency debate on these issues was a step in the right direction…we need more politicians with that greater sense of responsibility and public duty who will stand up like that. Good for those individual MLAs from all parties who voted for the emergency debate. I am looking forward to reading Hansard to see who the real statesmen are on this issue.

Manning Wants a More Comprehensive Policy Approach in Alberta - and He is Right

You have to admire Preston Manning and Peter Lougheed. They both have different takes on the Stelmach’s government responses and the consequences to the “Our Fair Share” Royalty Review Panel recommendations.

Lougheed praised Stelmach and it should be noted Lougheed knows what he is talking about, having raised royalties himself many years ago. The federal Minister for Alberta Jim Prentice also praised the Stelmach response.

Manning, on the other hand, pans Stelmach’s response but not so much on the royalty issues in terms of balance and appropriateness but on the larger issue of the capacity of Stelmach to adequately govern.

Let’s look at what Manning has to say. He accuses Stelmach of tearing up agreements with two major oilsands players (Suncor and Syncrude). That is not the case and Manning knows it. Stelmach has confirmed that those deals run until 2016 and if they are not renegotiated by mutual agreement, they will continue to be honoured.

Manning was on CTV’s Question Period yesterday noting that the Stelmach government may fall into minority territory should another 150,000 Albertans stay home on Election Day. This is in addition to the 210,000 PC supporters who stayed home in the 2004 Klein election. Here is where I agree with Manning, if that happens, Stelmach in minority or even losing territory.

However an election is not here yet and there is lots of time for Stelmach to do the rights thing to restore good government to Alberta…and get the credit for it. That means he needs to be between the far right and the old-style Klein somnambulist approach to governing but also to fix the social and ecological deficits in Alberta to day and going forward. A single minded focus on the economic agenda alone is not good enough.

Now let’s look at the Manning Agenda based on from his reported comments. He notes “…the big picture just hasn’t been spelled out, that’s where I see the problems.” The items in the Manning “big picture” are tying royalty rates to tax policy, continental energy security and environment. And he pointedly asks if Stelmach has the competence to deal with these issues as well. It is a fair and provocative question. It will get distorted and massaged by all kinds of spin-masters but I think Albertans can see through that noise and keep a focus on their core concerns.

Here I think Manning’s focus on what he calls “the big picture” is right on. But I think the focus is not on Stelmach’s competence to govern alone is too narrow. Do any of the political party leaders in Alberta have the trust of Albertans to competently deal with these issues? Our oil sand survey preliminary results show that none of them have generated sufficient trust to deal with growth issues in the province. Stelmach is by far the most trusted political leader in Alberta according to our results but at only 32% support that is not enough to presume electoral success.

There is a need for the political agenda to deal beyond the dollars and get into the environment and social issues and angst that this economic growth has caused. Albertans know that and have moved ahead of the political pundits and politicians to embrace a more comprehensive and integrated approach to public policy and governance. So media sound bites and political personalities aside in the complex real world I think Lougheed, Prentice and Manning are all correct in their comments and observations on the Stelmach royalty response and the potential political and policy consequences to governing.

Albertans will decide all of this in the next election. Staying home and not participating is not a viable option to sustain a robust democracy. My bet is if people are not happy the far right will go to the Alliance or the new Wildrose party if it gets enough signatures to forma party before the election. The left will go Green and the disenchanted middle will also park with the Greens as a way to send a message.

I will shortly post what I think that could mean for all the current political party leaders in the aftermath of the next election.

Lougheed Endorses Stelmach's Royalty Review Response.

The personal endorsement by Peter Lougheed of the Stelmach Royalty Review Response is a big step forward for our new Premier. Lougheed stepping up in support of the recent royalty announcement is significant. Lougheed is an influential voice all over the province and he comes from the small group of Alberta political leaders who have made such difficult decisions in the past. He knows how tough it is and his approval of Stelmach’s decision speaks volumes.

Lougheed has been openly advocating for a slow down of energy project approvals because of the damage they are inflicting due to the overheated pace of growth in Alberta. His big concerns have been damage socially and environmentally but also on fiscal pressures on the province and municipalities to meet the public infrastructure demands in this current pace of growth.

Lougheed’s advice and response is in sharp contrast to the warnings of former Premier Klein last month. Klein was commenting that the energy sector was not happy and therefore royalties were best left well enough alone. Stelmach wisely left that bit of advice alone.

So Lougheed has clarified one thing. Stelmach’s government is definitely not an extension of the Klein regime. There are some who think Stelmach's kindness, politeness and graciousness are shortcomings for the bloodsport of political leadership. They see him as still having the potential to be a Harry Strom, especially if he were to trip up in the pending election.

So what does this tell us about the governing philosophy of a Stelmach governed Alberta? To me it is more evidence of a Stelmach government embracing a progressive social political philosophy. He is about to engage in a more conservationist approach too as we shall see the roll out of some new environmental initiatives and the start up of an integrated land use management strategy.

The fact that a commitment to deal with homelessness as the follow up policy initiative right after the royalty decision is further proof of this shift away from the former neo-con fiscal and social policy agenda. Today in Alberta we have a spending problem due to a premium cost for public infrastructure in this over heated economy. We also now have a revenue problem too – as pointed out by the Auditor General.

Alberta's Auditor General Fred Dunn said some past Ministers of Energy were not collecting all of the energy royalties that were due - even in the old model. In fact those same Ministers of Energy seemed to be even uninterested in doing their duty of ensuring the appropriate royalty revenues due to Albertans were actually being realized.

I think that is about to change - big time - and we will see Premier Ed Stelmach as his own man and with his own style of leadership. Yes, he is not be the slick and polished veneer pre-packaged politician. He is not the product of the professional media trainers the mainstream media is so used to. Yes - he is no orator either...and while he can't "lift the words off the page," he has shown that he can bring clarity to complex issues like royalty regimes.

But no one can doubt Ed Stelmach’s capacity for caring, nor his compassion nor his sincere commitment to Alberta and her people. He is also different because his focus is not just the Alberta of today…or basking in the glory of an Alberta of yesterday. He has a much broader and longer vision of the province and how it should be governed.

Now the lingering question is – is Stelmach capable of doing the job of Premier to the satisfaction of Albertans? He has been on the job for 11 months already and that question is still being asked. Well my guess is we are about 100 days or so away from an election. Those 100 days is more than enough time for Albertans to come to know Ed Stelmach for who he is – as his own man and with his own style of leadership.

Once the election is called it will be up to Albertans to decide if Ed Stelmach can do the job of Premier – and if they want him to do that job. Remember campaigns matter and it is not how they start, but how they finish that really counts.

Besides, Peter Lougheed obviously likes him and that goes a long way in my books.

Some Thoughts From a Lougheed Cabinet Minister on Royalties

Yesterday I received an email from a friend and a former Lougheed Cabinet Minister. His observations on the royalty issues of 2007 compared to the same stuff in 1972, when Lougheed raised them are interesting. The observations and comparison are as follows:

“I submit four comments re: royalties -- First, the extent of change
recommended is barely half of what was done under Lougheed in the '70s -- so it should have been an easy and immediate decision for the Stelmach gov't. I think the recommendations are timid, so no deviation no doubt which way…is acceptable to me.

Second, if the Premier felt time was needed why the hell not have a "Committee of the Whole" public hearing in the Legislature -- exactly what was done in December 1972 (I was there). Then Big Oil could have its say, but to the public at the same time as the gov't, not behind closed doors; others had their say too, and many did.

Three, I don't think the energy industry problems are so much additional cost (which no one would like) but the uncertainty (which anyone making an investment hates).

Finally, Ed's big problem is that he failed to call a general election instead of those bye elections last summer. The Premier's moral authority is hobbled by still being the Klein gov't, though with someone else warming the chair.”

My friend sure has added more grist for the new and positive political mill that Alberta is quickly turning into. I like the idea of a “Committee of the Whole” but it is too late now...but who knows , we are going into a legislative session in early November, it could still happen!

If the “Our Fair Share” recommendations are “barely half of what Lougheed did, then it is arguable the “compromise” is already in the Royalty Review Report…that is my belief. I think Stelmach will enhance the Royalty Review recommendations to provide some ecological incentives as outline in the "Our Fair Share" in the "Afterward" comments.

I think Stelmach will redefine are reframe "the balance" beyond the industry seeking status quo and the Royalty Review recommendations to include social, environmental as well as economic concerns and a balance between short and long term approaches.

Certainty is certainly more critical than additional costs given that Alberta is still going to be in the most competitive half when it comes to royalty costs internationally. The fast we provide a long term stable governance structure that is not available in many other oil producing places and you don’t need a private army to protect you assets or you people seems to be lost in the cost comparisons.

As for the election call, I disagree. Ed doesn’t need and election now and he did not need to call one instead of the by-elections either.

One thing for sure is the response to the Royalty Review will be definitive for Premier Stelmach. The Stelmach government response is going to determine, in the public mind, if he is merely “warming the chair” for the continuation of the Ralph Klein government or is he his own man. My money is on the latter.

When It Comes to Alberta's Energy Resources, Whose "Golden Goose" Is it Anyway?

The old Klein government ruled by Steve West values was so suspicious of academics and expert advice one could almost say they were anti-intellectual.

Times have changed and this insightful editorial piece in the Edmonton Journal and the Calgary Herald by from U of C economics professors is living proof that times are a changin'.

Lets hope the Stelmach version of progressive and conservative policy and politics has a more informed and enlightened approach.