Readers of this Blog know I will sometimes rant about the misleading framing of issues intended to activate values and lead to unsupported conclusions. Sometimes this is done intentionally, naively or inadvertently but it happens and citizens have to be aware of it.
We need to know the values and principles we apply individually and as a society to political and public policy issues. These are very important but get short shrift in the marketing model of modern political campaigns.
Props to Les Brost who gave me the heads up to a fascinating (and even funny if it were not so serious) example of just how this can work. Enjoy at first, because it is clever. I am still thinking about the implications of how this can happen and what it means.
Here is the link:
I am interested in pragmatic pluralist politics, citizen participation, protecting democracy and exploring a full range of public policy issues from an Albertan perspective.
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Dion Gets Some Benefit of the Doubt
The Ipsos-Reid post convention poll shows Dion has some traction in Ontario and Quebec. Just as one swallow does not make a summer, one poll does not make a trend.
Dion is getting some benefit of the doubt in BC and Alberta with a 41/35 and 39/33 favourable over unfavourable rating respectively. The sleeper statistic is the “Don’t know enough about the person” shows 24% in BC and Ontario and 27% in Alberta. He obviously needs to spend some “quality” time in the west between now and the next election.
The Liberals are not out of the penalty box yet either, nor should they be. When asked if the Liberals “deserve to be elected and govern under the leadership of Stephane Dion nationally 44% agreed and 50% disagreed. In BC 56% disagreed and 66% said no in Alberta. Ontario and Quebec were ambivalent at about 50/50 but the Maritimes liked him with 54% agreeing the Liberals with Dion deserved to govern and only 37% disagreeing.
The next federal election will be a contest between two leaders who have two different visions, two different ideologies and different perspectives on the role of government. It will be less about “charisma and style” more about policy and ideas. Wahtever ballot box issue emerges it will be influenced by Canadian's perceptions about the characters and trustworthiness of the two major party leaders.
The sub-plot to the personality/character drama will be the environment. That will be the platform where the battle is staged and fought the hardest. It will vary in content and context in different regions across the country but it will be pervasive.
The environment as a major decision driving political issue will give the Greens a credibility boost and may actually generate some seats this time. They will get a chance to set the agenda and the tone of the debate. They will have to be able to embrace the integration of a growing economy and enhanced environmental outcomes to be successful. Picking one over the other will set them back, and maybe way back.
This next federal campaign may relegate the NDP to the sidelines. They have to find a resonating issue that claims and frames their place in the race. It they fail, this election will be the begininng of the Greens as the new Third Party. The NDP risk in this election is that they devolve into a rump and becoming a relic as a federal political force.
The unofficial campaign has started and the race for the hearts and minds of Canadians is definitely on. Everything out of Ottawa will be done and designed through an election lens by all the political players all the time. In the short term expect more heat then light.
Harper picked his spot for the last election. He does not have that luxury this time. He may still try to engineer his defeat with timing and an issue that will be more propitious and firm up his base. He can do this by having the Bloc “force” him into an earlier election over our role in Afghanistan.
Alberta politicos’ fresh off the PC leadership contest can catch their breath over Christmas but we better be ready to roll early in the New Year.
Dion is getting some benefit of the doubt in BC and Alberta with a 41/35 and 39/33 favourable over unfavourable rating respectively. The sleeper statistic is the “Don’t know enough about the person” shows 24% in BC and Ontario and 27% in Alberta. He obviously needs to spend some “quality” time in the west between now and the next election.
The Liberals are not out of the penalty box yet either, nor should they be. When asked if the Liberals “deserve to be elected and govern under the leadership of Stephane Dion nationally 44% agreed and 50% disagreed. In BC 56% disagreed and 66% said no in Alberta. Ontario and Quebec were ambivalent at about 50/50 but the Maritimes liked him with 54% agreeing the Liberals with Dion deserved to govern and only 37% disagreeing.
The next federal election will be a contest between two leaders who have two different visions, two different ideologies and different perspectives on the role of government. It will be less about “charisma and style” more about policy and ideas. Wahtever ballot box issue emerges it will be influenced by Canadian's perceptions about the characters and trustworthiness of the two major party leaders.
The sub-plot to the personality/character drama will be the environment. That will be the platform where the battle is staged and fought the hardest. It will vary in content and context in different regions across the country but it will be pervasive.
The environment as a major decision driving political issue will give the Greens a credibility boost and may actually generate some seats this time. They will get a chance to set the agenda and the tone of the debate. They will have to be able to embrace the integration of a growing economy and enhanced environmental outcomes to be successful. Picking one over the other will set them back, and maybe way back.
This next federal campaign may relegate the NDP to the sidelines. They have to find a resonating issue that claims and frames their place in the race. It they fail, this election will be the begininng of the Greens as the new Third Party. The NDP risk in this election is that they devolve into a rump and becoming a relic as a federal political force.
The unofficial campaign has started and the race for the hearts and minds of Canadians is definitely on. Everything out of Ottawa will be done and designed through an election lens by all the political players all the time. In the short term expect more heat then light.
Harper picked his spot for the last election. He does not have that luxury this time. He may still try to engineer his defeat with timing and an issue that will be more propitious and firm up his base. He can do this by having the Bloc “force” him into an earlier election over our role in Afghanistan.
Alberta politicos’ fresh off the PC leadership contest can catch their breath over Christmas but we better be ready to roll early in the New Year.
Sunday, December 10, 2006
Alberta's Times Are A Changin'
The Calgary Sun still does not get what happened and the new the way Alberta will be governed as a result of the Stelmach win. They think Oberg was a key to the win, in no small part because he is a southerner and they do not perceive the sense and sensibilities of the rest of Alberta. As the Paul Simon song goes, so goes the Calgary Sun, "...a man still hears what he wants to hear and disgrards the rest."
Oberg had a hand in the Stelmach win for sure but not much real impact on the end result as any objective analyses will show. He delivered his own constituency, which is more than his Wood Buffalo endorsee Boutilier did. Hung Pham, Oberg’s other big vote generating and significant endorsee with his large block of Vietnamese voters, all moved with Pham to Morton and Calgary went total Dinning as a result. So much for an Oberg significant influence impacting the final outcome.
The real difference in the leadership result was the central and northern rural shift and the real voter growth caused by the Stelmach campaign itself. This was aided and abetted by Edmonton showing up and focusing on Stelmach over Dinning based on Hancock delivering Edmonton to Stelmach. Hancock was able at transferring his campaign operations and volunteer team and the rest of his votes throughout Alberta to Stelmach as well.
Hancock was the first to support Stelmach on the first Saturday vote and also promoted #2 votes for Stelmach throughout the campaign. Hancock started the traction and momentum to Stelmach in Edmonton and area.
Oberg was a delayed Stelmach “supporter” but took a few DAYS to actually back him on the second ballot. Norris was even slower to endorse Stelmach and both I expect bled lots of #2 votes to Morton, for different reasons. In the end result would still be the same and the Calgary media are oblivious to this reality.
The last 14 years in Alberta have been Calgary centric with a rural support based on Ralph Klein’s celebrated support in both spheres. It is evidenced by virtually every candidate having an appeasement policy platform for Edmonton as the Capital City. That has all changed now and the Calgary Compact has to understand how they fit into the new Alberta reality. It will not be difficult because Stelmach is an inclusive kind of guy, not like some other potential leadership candidates would have been very ego-centric leaders.
Stelmach is a rural guy and he won the leadership with the rural vote and with the help of Hancock delivering Edmonton. That is a really different reality than the Calgary media allows themselves to accept. As well Stelmach has the ability to explain the complexity of all of modern life in all of rural Alberta to the urban Albertans. This changing rural reality now includes the forestry and oil sands north and farming in cental areas as well as the ranching and dry land farming in the south. It is vital that Alberta's city-folk, including the Calgary Compact, understand and embrace this rural reality, and they can, if they are prepared to listen.
The Alberta agenda under Klein has been so dominated by what has come to be known as the Calgary Compact, throughout the rest of Alberta. The dramatic Dinning loss and the moribund Morton campaign in the second week underscored the growing animus that has developed toward Calgary. The image of a self-centred dominance of governance control and agenda influence in Alberta was in need of change and that came to be reflected in the results.
There is a change in leadership now. That changes how things will get done, decided and delivered. Calgary still figures into this but if this Calgary Sun piece is any indication that paper has some things to figure out too. This is not going to be a punishing shift. Everyone will be included and considered and balanced for the greater good, because that is Stelmach’s style. But the Calgary Compact is no longer the dominant force it once was that could presume to speak for all of Alberta.
Alberta is, all of a sudden, more interesting, complex, diverse and an inclusive society. It will be good for everyone in the end…including Calgary…but this Calgary Sun story shows they have a ways to go yet before they figure out what really happened with this change of political leadership on December 2, 2006.
Saturday, December 09, 2006
Canada's National Newspaper Talks About the Arts and Alberta...YES!
The Globe and Mail is covering Stelmach's Alberta in more than just energy business or environmental terms...they are looking into the Arts in Alberta too...Terrific.
I spent some time on the phone recently with Alexandra Gill who penned the piece for the Globe and Mail. Here is the link in case you missed it.
The artistic soul of Alberta has long been in Edmonton where there is more variety, depth, diversity and tradition...but Calgary is coming on strong. The emergence of other areas like Red Deer, Athabasca, Lethbridge to name a few are adding to the new Alberta too. It is time we got beyond the redneck and roughneck caricature imagery that has become a stifling cliche for what the rest of Canada has come to see as Albertan.
Arts, culture and heritage has been ignored for far too long by the GOA. I expect that will change with a new Premier. The leadership campaign saw a few candidates appreciate the creative spirit that beats in the breast of the new Alberta. I trust this “political will” shall persist then quickly evolve into some serious support.
There is a new sense of what it means to be Albertan in every corner of the province. There is a more vibrant and vital definition about what quality of life really means emerging throughout Alberta today. I did a Policy Channel interview with Simon Brault, the Vice Chair of the Canada Council on the role and importance of the arts to society and the economy. Here is that link as well
The arts, culture and heritage are 21st century public infrastructure in a knowledge based economy and technologically sophisticated society like Alberta, just as roads and rails were in the early industrial economy.
Friday, December 08, 2006
"How Morton Made Stelmach Leader"
Link Byfield has provided his “take” of the PC Party Leadership results from last Saturday’s voting. I can agree with Link that Morton was a “backbencher” but to claim he had no “media or public support” is a stretch. How did he “knock out four Cabinet Ministers,” on the first ballot, divine intervention?
I have said before that the reality of modern politics is the facts, while interesting, are almost totally irrelevant to people. It is how you frame issues and how they activate people’s values and beliefs that make the difference. Link is a master at taking a set of facts, framing them in such a way that he sets them up to generate the reaction he wants and he invites people to share his pre-conceived conclusion. This is “spin” at its most sophisticated level.
Here is what he has done in this “Commentary” piece. His preconceived conclusion is that Ted Morton is the real cause of the Ed Stelmach victory. He says as a fact that, “Then because most of his (Morton’s) supporters chose Stelmach as their second pick, Morton’s camp gave Stelmach his whopping majority over Jim Dinning.”
Link also concludes by saying, “So only one of the three finalists was actually defeated, not two. Say what? Are we to believe from this statement that Professor Morton somehow won this election too? I don’t think so.
For the record, Stelmach moved from #3 to #1 between the first and second ballot. What if Morton was second and Dinning had been third and out of the second count? Would Link be as quick to conclude that the Dinning’s camp gave Stelmach the victory because his voter’s second preferences went to Stelmach. Obviously then too “only one of the three, (Morton in this case) was actually defeated?” I don’t think so!
More that 10,000 Morton supporters did not mark Stelmach for second choice and, can you believe this, over 4000 of Morton supporters picked Dinning as second choice. If Morton was the real “cause” of the Stelmach victory those 14,000 votes would have been there for Ed too, wouldn’t you think?
Next he goes further by wrapping all this in another “issue frame”, the same old lets pick a fight with Ottawa. He obviously expects Ed to pick a specific “Morton identified” fight with Ottawa which is based on the myth that the Feds are taking more money out of Alberta than they are entitled to.
The fact is Albertans’ pay federal income and corporate taxes, just as do all Canadians from every province. Albertans make more money and therefore pay more taxes. Duh! This is the essence of progressive income tax models we use in Canada. So much for the facts!
Now Professor Morton believes “…that Albertans must learn to stand on their own feet and reduce the massive outflow of Alberta money to the federal treasury.” Firstly I don’t think Albertans feel very incapable of standing up for themselves, contrary to Professor Morton’s belief.
Secondly, this is not “Alberta money.” That characterization misleads one to think it is resource revenues from the Alberta provincial treasury that are somehow being drained in a “massive outflow…to the federal treasury.”
This money is just the personal and corporate income tax payments of Canadian citizens who live in Alberta. As I said, Albertans make more money than other Canadians so we pay more taxes. Nothing more to it than that! But based on this “blaming” framing of the issue, according to Professor Morton, Premier Stelmach is now supposed to take on Ottawa? And the fight is supposed to be over the personal and corporate taxes we pay just as every other Canadian citizen does?
There are many significant and serious issue facing the Canadian federation and Alberta’s role in it. This Reform/Alliance party manufactured issue artificially framed as a “massive outflow…into the federal treasury” is not one of them.
I have said before that the reality of modern politics is the facts, while interesting, are almost totally irrelevant to people. It is how you frame issues and how they activate people’s values and beliefs that make the difference. Link is a master at taking a set of facts, framing them in such a way that he sets them up to generate the reaction he wants and he invites people to share his pre-conceived conclusion. This is “spin” at its most sophisticated level.
Here is what he has done in this “Commentary” piece. His preconceived conclusion is that Ted Morton is the real cause of the Ed Stelmach victory. He says as a fact that, “Then because most of his (Morton’s) supporters chose Stelmach as their second pick, Morton’s camp gave Stelmach his whopping majority over Jim Dinning.”
Link also concludes by saying, “So only one of the three finalists was actually defeated, not two. Say what? Are we to believe from this statement that Professor Morton somehow won this election too? I don’t think so.
For the record, Stelmach moved from #3 to #1 between the first and second ballot. What if Morton was second and Dinning had been third and out of the second count? Would Link be as quick to conclude that the Dinning’s camp gave Stelmach the victory because his voter’s second preferences went to Stelmach. Obviously then too “only one of the three, (Morton in this case) was actually defeated?” I don’t think so!
More that 10,000 Morton supporters did not mark Stelmach for second choice and, can you believe this, over 4000 of Morton supporters picked Dinning as second choice. If Morton was the real “cause” of the Stelmach victory those 14,000 votes would have been there for Ed too, wouldn’t you think?
Next he goes further by wrapping all this in another “issue frame”, the same old lets pick a fight with Ottawa. He obviously expects Ed to pick a specific “Morton identified” fight with Ottawa which is based on the myth that the Feds are taking more money out of Alberta than they are entitled to.
The fact is Albertans’ pay federal income and corporate taxes, just as do all Canadians from every province. Albertans make more money and therefore pay more taxes. Duh! This is the essence of progressive income tax models we use in Canada. So much for the facts!
Now Professor Morton believes “…that Albertans must learn to stand on their own feet and reduce the massive outflow of Alberta money to the federal treasury.” Firstly I don’t think Albertans feel very incapable of standing up for themselves, contrary to Professor Morton’s belief.
Secondly, this is not “Alberta money.” That characterization misleads one to think it is resource revenues from the Alberta provincial treasury that are somehow being drained in a “massive outflow…to the federal treasury.”
This money is just the personal and corporate income tax payments of Canadian citizens who live in Alberta. As I said, Albertans make more money than other Canadians so we pay more taxes. Nothing more to it than that! But based on this “blaming” framing of the issue, according to Professor Morton, Premier Stelmach is now supposed to take on Ottawa? And the fight is supposed to be over the personal and corporate taxes we pay just as every other Canadian citizen does?
There are many significant and serious issue facing the Canadian federation and Alberta’s role in it. This Reform/Alliance party manufactured issue artificially framed as a “massive outflow…into the federal treasury” is not one of them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)