It is time to get serious about the implications of the Dion/May so-called Red/Green show. I have been waiting for this liaison to consummate for some time now. I am delighted as a Canadian to see a new politics start to crystallize with this collaboration. Who would not trade Lizzie for Belinda if you were serous about the future and good governance of the country?
I have scanned a smattering of blogs on this issue and listened to the local Liberal Party president Allan Armsworthy interview on the House this morning. He is a most reasonable and enlightened man in my opinion. It is worth a listen.
As for disenfranchising Liberal voters in Central Nova constituency well yes that may be true for a few folks but we are dealing with the Law of Small Numbers here. Everyone who voted Liberal, or for any other party for that matter, is not one of “them” and they did not decide to "join the party" as a result of their vote. They are just ordinary citizens who voted in a certain way and who made their decision based on any number of individual motivating drivers. Old thinking MSM seems to believe everyone who voted Liberal is a Liberal and they will be upset and disenfranchised. "Out of touch" is the kindest thing one can say about such superficial observations.
The real world sees about 3% of Canadians actually belonging to political parties...that is all of them combined. So those gladiator Liberal members in Central Nova, if you are ticked…go ahead and cry a river of angst and anguish but you know you will get over it. Besides May could well be the best Liberal you can muster as a preferred candidate anyway.
Political parties have too much power and influence given the sparse and clubby nature of the usually exclusive activist membership. That is true of all political parties these days. This focus on local party membership reaction over this collaboration is not the main issue at play here.
What is truly wonderful about this unconventional collaboration of Dion and May is just that. It is collaboration not a confrontation and it is based on an expression of personal convictions and values. This “unusual” move by Dion and May is not about power politics, the cult of personality or adversarial partisanship. It is not a back room deal and Layton has to desperately characterize it. It is about two pragmatic people with leadership ability, a depth of character and with genuine convictions who want to make a difference acting strategically. I applaud the move.
Lets face it we have a plethora of McKay types in the House of Commons and a dearth of May types. This is a designed effort towards creating a potential for a greater diversity of voices that the first past the post approach will not deliver. This is in and of itself enough to make this collaboration worthy of praise.
We live in a relational world not a hierarchical one any more. That maybe news to Harper but I doubt it. My guess is Harper just does not want to network with his own Caucus. He wants to command and control them. Given the value set and loose cannon proclivities of many of them, one can hardly blame Harper.
Dion and May on the other hand are post-conventional politicians and the first wave of a new kind of politics. Their collaboration is the first tangible sign of a new political order emerging. Heaven knows we need one.
ongratulations to both of them for this courage and wisdom. I expect we will see Canada better served because of this initiative. If not this coming election, then the next one for sure.
Recommend this Post at Progressive Blogger
Saturday, April 14, 2007
Alberta Declares a State of Emergency Due to Mountain Pine Beetle
My posting on adapting to the Mountain Pine Beetle has been getting a lot of hits and attention. With this level of interest I thought readers may want to have more background. The report we did for the Grande Alberta Economic Region in January dealt with the economic, social and environmental costs of the Beetle to this region based on the devastating experience form British Columbia mostly.
I see Premier Stelmach and Minister Morton have declared a state of emergency because of the Mountain Pine Beetle. It is a good thing. Even the southerners are getting concerned and they are not as dependent on the Boreal Forest as norther Albertans are. The beetle is now in Banff and Jasper National Parks in significant numbers now too. that adds a whole new dimension to the problems. This is going to be a national emergency soon too I expect.
We have a video interview coming on Policy Channel shortly with Glenn Taylor, Mayor of Hinton and the Chair of the Grande Alberta Economic Region. If you are concerned about the biota at all you will want to see that interview.
Recommend the Post to Progressive Bloggers
I see Premier Stelmach and Minister Morton have declared a state of emergency because of the Mountain Pine Beetle. It is a good thing. Even the southerners are getting concerned and they are not as dependent on the Boreal Forest as norther Albertans are. The beetle is now in Banff and Jasper National Parks in significant numbers now too. that adds a whole new dimension to the problems. This is going to be a national emergency soon too I expect.
We have a video interview coming on Policy Channel shortly with Glenn Taylor, Mayor of Hinton and the Chair of the Grande Alberta Economic Region. If you are concerned about the biota at all you will want to see that interview.
Recommend the Post to Progressive Bloggers
Friday, April 13, 2007
Alberta Can Be Part of the Global Warming Solution and Not Just Part of the Problem
My business partner Satya Das published an op-ed in the electronic version of the Globe and Mail today making the counter-intuitive argument that Alberta is actually part of the global warming solution and not just part of the problem.
The flat-earthers and CO2 exhaler exalters have been commenting in full denial mode on the Globe piece. They have nothing to say that adds to resolving the concern. Because in fact any prudent precautionary principle demands that we act in appropriate ways to reduce the human influence on increasing GHG emissions. What is appropriate is the question, not if CO2 is a natural ecological element or a pollutant or a GHG - or not. It is all of those in fact. So what!
I am half way through a set of workshops I am presenting on behalf of the Grande Alberta Economic Region. So far everyone gets the reality of global warming and the immediate consequence they face is the reality of the Mountain Pine Beetle. Our aggressive policy of forest fire fighting has had the effect of provide enormous amounts of Beetle food as we have preserved and protected mature stands. Drought, forest fire and management techniques with global warming all encourage the ravages of the Beetle.
I have been impressed in my meetings with people in this economic region and especially with the real live issues they face. These are the first Albertans who will live directly with the devastating consequences of global warming. They will suffer significant economic, environmental and social consequence. The theoretical bleating of arms-length ideologues parsing minor points for the purpose of argument scores or debating points bore me.
If you are interested/concerned about the MPB visit the GAER site or Policy Channel often for updates.
We have to start to make very serious efforts and plan for significant adaptations of how we work in consort with the planet. A good place to start is to quit trying to dominate Mother Nature. She has proven to be fickle at best and inherently indifferent to our concerns and petty purposes.
The planet will do fine. It will continue to exist, even if it is significantly different than we know it today. It will still be "here." There is no need to presume that our species, or any other species for that matter, will realize and enjoy a similar fate the way things are going.
The flat-earthers and CO2 exhaler exalters have been commenting in full denial mode on the Globe piece. They have nothing to say that adds to resolving the concern. Because in fact any prudent precautionary principle demands that we act in appropriate ways to reduce the human influence on increasing GHG emissions. What is appropriate is the question, not if CO2 is a natural ecological element or a pollutant or a GHG - or not. It is all of those in fact. So what!
I am half way through a set of workshops I am presenting on behalf of the Grande Alberta Economic Region. So far everyone gets the reality of global warming and the immediate consequence they face is the reality of the Mountain Pine Beetle. Our aggressive policy of forest fire fighting has had the effect of provide enormous amounts of Beetle food as we have preserved and protected mature stands. Drought, forest fire and management techniques with global warming all encourage the ravages of the Beetle.
I have been impressed in my meetings with people in this economic region and especially with the real live issues they face. These are the first Albertans who will live directly with the devastating consequences of global warming. They will suffer significant economic, environmental and social consequence. The theoretical bleating of arms-length ideologues parsing minor points for the purpose of argument scores or debating points bore me.
If you are interested/concerned about the MPB visit the GAER site or Policy Channel often for updates.
We have to start to make very serious efforts and plan for significant adaptations of how we work in consort with the planet. A good place to start is to quit trying to dominate Mother Nature. She has proven to be fickle at best and inherently indifferent to our concerns and petty purposes.
The planet will do fine. It will continue to exist, even if it is significantly different than we know it today. It will still be "here." There is no need to presume that our species, or any other species for that matter, will realize and enjoy a similar fate the way things are going.
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
Adapting to the Mountain Pine Beetle in Alberta
I met with a group of community leaders in Edson Alberta last night and conducted a workshop on the reality of the Mountain Pine Beetle infestation on Alberta’s forestry based communities. I am on the road this week and next in communities like Hinton, Jasper, Drayton Valley, Whitecourt and Grande Cache getting local input and insight.
I was impressed with the community spirit and realistic attitudes of the participants in Edson. The local Member of Parliament Rob Merrifield came and stayed for the evening. He was very helpful and knowledgeable and gave some of the science and public policy updates coming out of Natural Resources Canada. Nice to see another politician who "gets it" in terms of how quality representational politics should be done. I was impressed and I am no easy "sell" on politicians these days, as regular readers know.
It looks like on the Alberta side of the issue the early indications are an 80% kill rate above the snow level from this winter. The bad news is about a 50-60% survival rate under the snow - and we had lots of snow in the forest this year.
Prevention is not possible. Mitigation efforts can only buy us time to adapt. Adaptation is the key. The impact is going to be huge on the environment, the economy and the forest related communities. Complex and challenging are key concepts that people are grasping and what to do and how to do it are the big questions around adaptation.
This MPB adaptation planning and execution is going to be one of the largest ecological, economic and social issues facing Alberta in the next few years. It is going to impact and engage all orders of government, all aspects of business and industry, every possible environmental element of air, land, water, biodiversity, habitat, just to name a few. As for community and society, the changes there are going to be dramatic as well.
This challange is complex enough that it is going to demand a true collaboration that is top down and bottom up at the same time. We have time to adapt provided we don't squander it. Bickering over if the science of climate change is real or not is a waste of this precious time.
I will give some links in future postings if readers want to keep on top of the developments in mitigation and adaptation to the new climate change reality of the Mountain Pine Beetle in Alberta.
I was impressed with the community spirit and realistic attitudes of the participants in Edson. The local Member of Parliament Rob Merrifield came and stayed for the evening. He was very helpful and knowledgeable and gave some of the science and public policy updates coming out of Natural Resources Canada. Nice to see another politician who "gets it" in terms of how quality representational politics should be done. I was impressed and I am no easy "sell" on politicians these days, as regular readers know.
It looks like on the Alberta side of the issue the early indications are an 80% kill rate above the snow level from this winter. The bad news is about a 50-60% survival rate under the snow - and we had lots of snow in the forest this year.
Prevention is not possible. Mitigation efforts can only buy us time to adapt. Adaptation is the key. The impact is going to be huge on the environment, the economy and the forest related communities. Complex and challenging are key concepts that people are grasping and what to do and how to do it are the big questions around adaptation.
This MPB adaptation planning and execution is going to be one of the largest ecological, economic and social issues facing Alberta in the next few years. It is going to impact and engage all orders of government, all aspects of business and industry, every possible environmental element of air, land, water, biodiversity, habitat, just to name a few. As for community and society, the changes there are going to be dramatic as well.
This challange is complex enough that it is going to demand a true collaboration that is top down and bottom up at the same time. We have time to adapt provided we don't squander it. Bickering over if the science of climate change is real or not is a waste of this precious time.
I will give some links in future postings if readers want to keep on top of the developments in mitigation and adaptation to the new climate change reality of the Mountain Pine Beetle in Alberta.
Sunday, April 08, 2007
Our April 8th Column in LaPresse
LaPresse 8 avril 2007
Ken Chapman et Satya Das
Les auteurs dirigent Cambridge Strategies Inc, groupe-conseil albertain en politique publique.
The emergence of Mario Dumont and his autonomist agenda profoundly alters the traditional landscape of the Canadian federation.
In the middle of political uncertainty, the only certainty we have left is that we are all living on moving ground.
Yet this shifting terrain can be a place of some promise. Depending on the connotation and the meaning attached, the word autonomist can also be descriptive of Alberta – a desire for jurisdictional autonomy, in the context of a profound attachment to the idea of Canada.
In a sense, it is good that Quebec shifted away from deciding the old federalist versus separatist criteria. That division brought us close to sterility and futility. Any new channel of discourse, so robustly supported by Quebec voters, is preferable to the stalemate.
Even more interesting is the consensus among commentators that the rise of the ADQ reflects the politics of identity. If this is true, it has implications outside Quebec, in other parts of Canada where similar strains on traditional identity are very much a part of the social and cultural landscape.
Dumont’s ADQ tapped into the angst of rural and socially conservative Quebecers over accommodations around immigration, family values, distrust of elites and a fear of an erosion of francophone identity. Apart from francophone identity, these are resonant issues in Alberta as well.
Dumont’s campaign comments have been characterized as “a more prudent kind of nationalism” allowing him to play both sides of the federalist-separatist fence, yet his future depends on how an autonomist approach is elaborated in practice. If this is about demanding Ottawa respect provincial jurisdiction and a belief that strong provinces add to the strength of Canada, we are all for it. If it means isolationism, we are not!
We see Dumont today as a three-legged man. He has one foot with the federalists, one with the separatists and another planted firmly with Quebec’s social conservatives. Can the “real” Dumont sustain this stance for very long? He has to shift his political weight one way or another or he will risk looking indecisive and ill-defined as the inevitable next election looms large.
We expect the dynamics, timing, issues and even the outcome of the next federal election will have a lot to do with Quebec’s concerns as well. Harper clearly now needs a new “best friend” in Quebec. Jean Charest is not “the man” any more. Andre Boisclair is done, and never was in the running as Harper’s new best friend. Enter Dumont as the great Harper hope for a majority federal government—thanks to Quebec.
Dumont's support for Harper will come at a price in both dollar distributions and the devolution of powers to the province. He will force Harper to look fiscally like a profligate federal Liberal. Our guess is Harper will be bound and determined to buy Quebec’s “loyalty” no matter what it takes. Harper needs to “embrace” Quebec in order to win a majority government. The rest of Canada will not be amused and tensions will rise. Not an easy game for Harper to play but the recent federal Budget shows that every political soul has its price.
We live in uncertain times with minority governments in Canada and Quebec and with Ontario facing an election this fall. Alberta is at best a year away from an election and who knows what these elections will decide or how they will change the country.
Citizens all over Canada are expressing dissatisfaction about how they are being governed. Quebec is just the most recent and the most dramatic expression of this discontent. If this keeps up, we may have to declare that old fashioned command-and-control politicians a nationally endangered species.
Whether Dumont is the first of a new breed, or a repackaged version of an old-school politician, remains to be seen.
Ken Chapman et Satya Das
Les auteurs dirigent Cambridge Strategies Inc, groupe-conseil albertain en politique publique.
The emergence of Mario Dumont and his autonomist agenda profoundly alters the traditional landscape of the Canadian federation.
In the middle of political uncertainty, the only certainty we have left is that we are all living on moving ground.
Yet this shifting terrain can be a place of some promise. Depending on the connotation and the meaning attached, the word autonomist can also be descriptive of Alberta – a desire for jurisdictional autonomy, in the context of a profound attachment to the idea of Canada.
In a sense, it is good that Quebec shifted away from deciding the old federalist versus separatist criteria. That division brought us close to sterility and futility. Any new channel of discourse, so robustly supported by Quebec voters, is preferable to the stalemate.
Even more interesting is the consensus among commentators that the rise of the ADQ reflects the politics of identity. If this is true, it has implications outside Quebec, in other parts of Canada where similar strains on traditional identity are very much a part of the social and cultural landscape.
Dumont’s ADQ tapped into the angst of rural and socially conservative Quebecers over accommodations around immigration, family values, distrust of elites and a fear of an erosion of francophone identity. Apart from francophone identity, these are resonant issues in Alberta as well.
Dumont’s campaign comments have been characterized as “a more prudent kind of nationalism” allowing him to play both sides of the federalist-separatist fence, yet his future depends on how an autonomist approach is elaborated in practice. If this is about demanding Ottawa respect provincial jurisdiction and a belief that strong provinces add to the strength of Canada, we are all for it. If it means isolationism, we are not!
We see Dumont today as a three-legged man. He has one foot with the federalists, one with the separatists and another planted firmly with Quebec’s social conservatives. Can the “real” Dumont sustain this stance for very long? He has to shift his political weight one way or another or he will risk looking indecisive and ill-defined as the inevitable next election looms large.
We expect the dynamics, timing, issues and even the outcome of the next federal election will have a lot to do with Quebec’s concerns as well. Harper clearly now needs a new “best friend” in Quebec. Jean Charest is not “the man” any more. Andre Boisclair is done, and never was in the running as Harper’s new best friend. Enter Dumont as the great Harper hope for a majority federal government—thanks to Quebec.
Dumont's support for Harper will come at a price in both dollar distributions and the devolution of powers to the province. He will force Harper to look fiscally like a profligate federal Liberal. Our guess is Harper will be bound and determined to buy Quebec’s “loyalty” no matter what it takes. Harper needs to “embrace” Quebec in order to win a majority government. The rest of Canada will not be amused and tensions will rise. Not an easy game for Harper to play but the recent federal Budget shows that every political soul has its price.
We live in uncertain times with minority governments in Canada and Quebec and with Ontario facing an election this fall. Alberta is at best a year away from an election and who knows what these elections will decide or how they will change the country.
Citizens all over Canada are expressing dissatisfaction about how they are being governed. Quebec is just the most recent and the most dramatic expression of this discontent. If this keeps up, we may have to declare that old fashioned command-and-control politicians a nationally endangered species.
Whether Dumont is the first of a new breed, or a repackaged version of an old-school politician, remains to be seen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)