There are anonymous calls on this Blog for an apology by “Allie” in comments she made in the previous posting. I have read the comments and am at a loss to find where Allie “smears” Mr. Stokes, the economist who did the Oberg platform review.
No one is questioning the reviewer’s qualifications, credibility or integrity that I can see. Mr. Stokes qualifications are not in doubt. I think he is eminently qualified to do the work he did for the Oberg campaign. He also clearly knows he is offering an opinion as a professional economist in the context of a political campaign.
Surely then an ordinary citizen can state a personal reservation about the political context of a candidate who seeks a professional opinion that costs out their political campaign promises without it being characterized as a smear on the profesional who undertook the work. Over the years I have written legal opinions that others have disagreed with but that can hardly be construed as a smear on me as a lawyer. It is merely another opinion.
What Allie said was: “I am personally not too impressed with the costing of Oberg's promises (nor would I be with anyone else's for that matter). While I find it an interesting tactic - and aimed at the general Albertan who never really cares to understand politics too deeply - I also do not necessarily have any reason to trust a report that a candidate has paid people to produce that is so favourable of his own campaign structure.”
Further to this... what are the real chances that even if the costings in the report are close to being accurate that those will be the way the costs unfold in an Oberg Government? Who is to say that Dr Oberg will even make those same choices he has outlined once he is presented with other priorities?”
Let’s look for a minute at the factual content of Mr. Stokes’ a one page evaluation letter which is posted on Dr. Oberg’s website. He outlines two scenarios in evaluating the Oberg platform and he says he is measuring the Oberg platform for “sustainability” over a 5 year time frame only.
One scenario is characterized as a low energy prices and low economic growth and the other scenario is a high energy price and high economic growth. The assumptions he uses are interesting. In the Low Energy Scenario we have oil prices assumed at $42/bbl, gas at $6.25/gigajoule and economic growth in Alberta at only 2%. In the High energy Scenario we have oil prices assumed at $65/bbl, gas at $7.10/gigajoule and economic growth in Alberta at only 3%.
When was the last time Alberta’s economic growth was only 2 or 3 percent and is it reasonable to presume that rate of economic growth for the next five years given $42 or $65 oil and about $100Billion of oil sands project investment alone in process? Also what are the assumptions that were used for our population growth and the calculations for the impact of the Oberg tax cuts on the government’s revenues for the next five years? No doubt these were considered in evaluating the Oberg platform sustainability. Have I missed them?
I know when the oil sands industry is doing a project feasibility analysis for investment purposes they use $25 and sometime $30 oil prices. Mr. Stokes’ letter emphasizes the point that energy prices are volatile. In fact oil prices have dropped about 23% since July 2006. Mr. Stokes is obviously free to use what ever assumptions he wishes but I wonder on what basis $42 or $65 per barrel was used for the Oberg platform validation. I also wonder what the sustainability of the Oberg platform would look like if the more prudent industry standard oil price assumption of $25 to $30 oil price was used.
I wonder further if Dr. Oberg is inclined to revisit his costing calculations and give us a bit more disclosure and detail as to the assumptions and the workings of the economic model that was used. It could go a long way to rehabilitating the public’s confidence in his candidacy.
Saturday, October 28, 2006
Friday, October 27, 2006
Dr. Oberg Says The Campaign Must Get Back to Being "Open, Honest and Accurate."
Today a reader sent me a copy of an "Open Letter to Albertans" from Dr. Oberg. In it he tries to move the focus of his fiasco away from himself. He also expresses his desire to "...get back to an open, honest and accurate discussion of campaign of ideas."
SPARE ME!
ALL the other candidates never left that kind of open, honest and accurate campaign discussion. Only Dr. Oberg decided to wallow in innuendo and unfounded accusations while he consciously calculated to recklessly savage the reputations of ALL the other candidates.
Only Dr. Oberg needs to get back to being open, honest in his discussions. But frankly Doctor, it is an offer that is too little and too late in my books. This "Open Letter" is a fatuous missive that is nothing more that damage control and pure spin. It is him just continuing to be misleading and misrepresentative about the facts and enormity of his own misconduct.
He again creates "facts" like the "offense" was done by government employees on taxpayers time. But he offers no proof. You are entitled to your own opinions Dr. Oberg but not your own facts.
Consider the silliness of the fact that he received the fax containing the "offensive" materials, from the Legislature. Was it sent - pray tell - during office hours? If so, ought that government employee, who he is so nobly protecting, be seen as guilty of doing political work on taxpayer time? When you are in a hole the best thing thing to do is quit digging Dr. Oberg.
"The silver-tongued devil has nothing to lose and is just shifting his share of the blame."
Kris Kristofferson
Here, for the record is what I received as the Oberg "Open Letter." Read it and make up your own minds if you think this is indicative of a man who has the quality of judgment and strength of character to be our leader and our Premier.
"Open Letter to Albertans from Lyle Oberg October 27, 2006"
Recently I publicly released part of a document that was prepared by senior staff members of two Alberta government ministers that both support the Jim Dinning campaign. My comments around this were twofold.
First, it was a conflict of interest for these people to undertake this work using taxpayers resources and dollars. Second, the document contained some very insulting references to rural Alberta.
I am sure that you have by now read the offensive lines.
I would like all Albertans to know a few things about why I chose to bring this issue forward, and why it is important to not simply dismiss it as innocent political chatter, as some people in the media have suggested.
In the words of one of the authors, "we are kind of political hacks…this is the kind of stuff we do for kicks." I would like to set the record straight. The people involved are not junior level "political hacks" as they have suggested. They head up the offices of two of the most important Alberta Ministries, Intergovernmental Affairs and Energy, and their salaries are paid for by Alberta taxpayers.
Some of the media in major cities have dismissed these comments, as Mr. Dinning’s advisers have suggested, saying ‘don’t worry’, and that this is nothing unusual. That is exactly the type of attitude that worried me about this evidence in the first place. In an Oberg government that type of misconduct will never be business as usual.
Perhaps some see nothing wrong in what was done, but I do not agree. Moreover, I suspect nobody endorses the disrespect evident in these pages. I ask you to support my campaign to bring this type of unacceptable behavior to an end.
"Let’s get back to an open, honest and accurate discussion of campaign of ideas."
Warmest regards,
Lyle Oberg
PC Leadership Candidate
SPARE ME!
ALL the other candidates never left that kind of open, honest and accurate campaign discussion. Only Dr. Oberg decided to wallow in innuendo and unfounded accusations while he consciously calculated to recklessly savage the reputations of ALL the other candidates.
Only Dr. Oberg needs to get back to being open, honest in his discussions. But frankly Doctor, it is an offer that is too little and too late in my books. This "Open Letter" is a fatuous missive that is nothing more that damage control and pure spin. It is him just continuing to be misleading and misrepresentative about the facts and enormity of his own misconduct.
He again creates "facts" like the "offense" was done by government employees on taxpayers time. But he offers no proof. You are entitled to your own opinions Dr. Oberg but not your own facts.
Consider the silliness of the fact that he received the fax containing the "offensive" materials, from the Legislature. Was it sent - pray tell - during office hours? If so, ought that government employee, who he is so nobly protecting, be seen as guilty of doing political work on taxpayer time? When you are in a hole the best thing thing to do is quit digging Dr. Oberg.
"The silver-tongued devil has nothing to lose and is just shifting his share of the blame."
Kris Kristofferson
Here, for the record is what I received as the Oberg "Open Letter." Read it and make up your own minds if you think this is indicative of a man who has the quality of judgment and strength of character to be our leader and our Premier.
"Open Letter to Albertans from Lyle Oberg October 27, 2006"
Recently I publicly released part of a document that was prepared by senior staff members of two Alberta government ministers that both support the Jim Dinning campaign. My comments around this were twofold.
First, it was a conflict of interest for these people to undertake this work using taxpayers resources and dollars. Second, the document contained some very insulting references to rural Alberta.
I am sure that you have by now read the offensive lines.
I would like all Albertans to know a few things about why I chose to bring this issue forward, and why it is important to not simply dismiss it as innocent political chatter, as some people in the media have suggested.
In the words of one of the authors, "we are kind of political hacks…this is the kind of stuff we do for kicks." I would like to set the record straight. The people involved are not junior level "political hacks" as they have suggested. They head up the offices of two of the most important Alberta Ministries, Intergovernmental Affairs and Energy, and their salaries are paid for by Alberta taxpayers.
Some of the media in major cities have dismissed these comments, as Mr. Dinning’s advisers have suggested, saying ‘don’t worry’, and that this is nothing unusual. That is exactly the type of attitude that worried me about this evidence in the first place. In an Oberg government that type of misconduct will never be business as usual.
Perhaps some see nothing wrong in what was done, but I do not agree. Moreover, I suspect nobody endorses the disrespect evident in these pages. I ask you to support my campaign to bring this type of unacceptable behavior to an end.
"Let’s get back to an open, honest and accurate discussion of campaign of ideas."
Warmest regards,
Lyle Oberg
PC Leadership Candidate
Thursday, October 26, 2006
A Wanton and Wanting Dr. Oberg.
Dr. Lyle Oberg has traded in his manufactured positioning of maverick candidate into a new more fitting role, that of a reckless and feckless plain old political hack.
There are lots of blogger and traditional media “show reviews” of his political theatre of the absurd. Oberg promotes a news conference with advanced billing to the media about “juicy stuff” “bloodletting” advising reporters to “bring a smock.” The orchestrated actual “event” turns out to be Oberg self-immolating in a gaudy display of crassness and character flaw.
He promises proof of misconduct in another candidate’s campaign using “sensitive information” from “anonymous sources.” Sadly as it turns out, his sources are not actually anonymous but people he knows, who work in the Legislature and are reported to be related to individuals in his campaign. In one day he transforms himself from a serious possibility for Premier of Alberta into a weapon of muted self destruction.
It seems he was not yet finished as he goes over-the-top with an Orwellian characterization of his actions saying “I chose principle, I chose protection of the individual…” One presumes he is referring to his so-called ‘anonymous sources’ as he states his personal concerned “for their jobs, their future and families.” This is the principled rationale of a man who would be Premier of us all? This is the justification he uses to wantonly cast irresponsible, unsubstantiated – and as it turns out, unfounded personal character aspersions toward every other candidate? Shame on you Dr. Oberg!
We are told there is a long shadow of suspicion and concern by colleagues about Dr. Oberg’s past portfolio performance and his “skeletons” comments merely brought things to a head. The first unsubstantiated “skeletons in closets” accusations towards his Caucus colleagues finally got him kicked out of Caucus. A Caucus to whom he now eagerly offers his "skills and talents" to be their leader. One hardly knows whether to laugh or cry!
Based on the Oberg hapless histrionics of yesterday we are at least assured the Oberg personal “skeleton” has a “bonehead.” We have seen first hand that he can be pithy without being substantial. Based on his “performance” one can’t tell if the good Doctor’s irreconcilable behaviour is preposterously post-modern or just plain bipolar! But now we know one thing for sure. He has shown that he lacks the mental and moral “stuff” to be leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta. That means he also lacks character and judgement to ever become Premier of Alberta.
Albertans must consider carefully our individual and collective futures. We must be especially particular of who we select to be PC Leader and, as a result, our provincial Premier. With potentials like Dr. Oberg "in play" participation in this leadership selection process is not an option. Be careful who you elect...every time!
There are lots of blogger and traditional media “show reviews” of his political theatre of the absurd. Oberg promotes a news conference with advanced billing to the media about “juicy stuff” “bloodletting” advising reporters to “bring a smock.” The orchestrated actual “event” turns out to be Oberg self-immolating in a gaudy display of crassness and character flaw.
He promises proof of misconduct in another candidate’s campaign using “sensitive information” from “anonymous sources.” Sadly as it turns out, his sources are not actually anonymous but people he knows, who work in the Legislature and are reported to be related to individuals in his campaign. In one day he transforms himself from a serious possibility for Premier of Alberta into a weapon of muted self destruction.
It seems he was not yet finished as he goes over-the-top with an Orwellian characterization of his actions saying “I chose principle, I chose protection of the individual…” One presumes he is referring to his so-called ‘anonymous sources’ as he states his personal concerned “for their jobs, their future and families.” This is the principled rationale of a man who would be Premier of us all? This is the justification he uses to wantonly cast irresponsible, unsubstantiated – and as it turns out, unfounded personal character aspersions toward every other candidate? Shame on you Dr. Oberg!
We are told there is a long shadow of suspicion and concern by colleagues about Dr. Oberg’s past portfolio performance and his “skeletons” comments merely brought things to a head. The first unsubstantiated “skeletons in closets” accusations towards his Caucus colleagues finally got him kicked out of Caucus. A Caucus to whom he now eagerly offers his "skills and talents" to be their leader. One hardly knows whether to laugh or cry!
Based on the Oberg hapless histrionics of yesterday we are at least assured the Oberg personal “skeleton” has a “bonehead.” We have seen first hand that he can be pithy without being substantial. Based on his “performance” one can’t tell if the good Doctor’s irreconcilable behaviour is preposterously post-modern or just plain bipolar! But now we know one thing for sure. He has shown that he lacks the mental and moral “stuff” to be leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta. That means he also lacks character and judgement to ever become Premier of Alberta.
Albertans must consider carefully our individual and collective futures. We must be especially particular of who we select to be PC Leader and, as a result, our provincial Premier. With potentials like Dr. Oberg "in play" participation in this leadership selection process is not an option. Be careful who you elect...every time!
Monday, October 23, 2006
What are the Most Important Policy Issues Facing the New PC Leader as Premier?
Policy Channel has decided to gather some data on what are the priority issues and directions Albertans want to see their next government take. We have designed a survey that will ask you to decide the most and least important issue from a varied set of social, economic and environmental issues facing Alberta today.
This will give the next leader/Premier (whomever that may be) some insight into what Albertans see as the most and least important issues and priorities to be tackled in the next short time before a general election is called.
This is not an opinion poll. It forces you to make hard choices, most of which you will not like, because most every issue is important. The issues is how important. You will have to make tradeoffs and determine what issues really drive your policy preferences and priorities. The point of the survey is that the new Progressive Conservative leader is also going to be Premier. He will need to get the Alberta ship of state off the sand bar it as been stuck on for the past few years and get on with governing. Easy to say but not easy to do if you do not have an inkling of what it is Albertans want done by their new Premier as top priorities.
The PC leadership is not an election so it is difficult to say the leadership results are a political mandate and a policy agenda. This survey will help identify and may even influence that policy agenda based on what Albertans say in the results.
This is web based so it is not scientific mostly because it lacks the built in randomness of polling models. However it has some validity because those who show up and take the time to do it are the kind of citizens who are likely to be opinion leaders, engaged and active in civic affairs with some well thought out opinions on issues. If that is you – please take a few moments and do the survey. You may be helping to set the political agenda for the next while at least.
Policy Channel will publish the survey results very week during the campaign and will show the trends and changes in opinions of those people who showed up. If some group wants to “invade” the site and try to skew the survey, the rest of us will get a sense of that and can respond. We can ignore the skewed results and risk that they may be given credibility by the next leader. Or we can “unskew” the results by encouraging others in our spheres of influence to get there opinions and choices reflected by taking the survey.
We also ask you to consider how likely it is or isn’t for you to recommend the candidates to someone. This is not asking how you would vote but to what degree you would recommend a candidate to someone else. Should be interesting how that unfolds as well.
Go to Policy Channel and find the survey in the top left corner of the home page.
This will give the next leader/Premier (whomever that may be) some insight into what Albertans see as the most and least important issues and priorities to be tackled in the next short time before a general election is called.
This is not an opinion poll. It forces you to make hard choices, most of which you will not like, because most every issue is important. The issues is how important. You will have to make tradeoffs and determine what issues really drive your policy preferences and priorities. The point of the survey is that the new Progressive Conservative leader is also going to be Premier. He will need to get the Alberta ship of state off the sand bar it as been stuck on for the past few years and get on with governing. Easy to say but not easy to do if you do not have an inkling of what it is Albertans want done by their new Premier as top priorities.
The PC leadership is not an election so it is difficult to say the leadership results are a political mandate and a policy agenda. This survey will help identify and may even influence that policy agenda based on what Albertans say in the results.
This is web based so it is not scientific mostly because it lacks the built in randomness of polling models. However it has some validity because those who show up and take the time to do it are the kind of citizens who are likely to be opinion leaders, engaged and active in civic affairs with some well thought out opinions on issues. If that is you – please take a few moments and do the survey. You may be helping to set the political agenda for the next while at least.
Policy Channel will publish the survey results very week during the campaign and will show the trends and changes in opinions of those people who showed up. If some group wants to “invade” the site and try to skew the survey, the rest of us will get a sense of that and can respond. We can ignore the skewed results and risk that they may be given credibility by the next leader. Or we can “unskew” the results by encouraging others in our spheres of influence to get there opinions and choices reflected by taking the survey.
We also ask you to consider how likely it is or isn’t for you to recommend the candidates to someone. This is not asking how you would vote but to what degree you would recommend a candidate to someone else. Should be interesting how that unfolds as well.
Go to Policy Channel and find the survey in the top left corner of the home page.
Saturday, October 21, 2006
Link to Garth Turner M.P.
I have added a link to the website of Garth Turner Independent M.P.
I think he is worth following given what is going on in power politics on both sides fo the border these days.
I think he is worth following given what is going on in power politics on both sides fo the border these days.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)