Reboot Alberta

Thursday, February 21, 2008

Is George Read What Albertans Are Looking For in Their Next Leader?

Have the personal qualities and capabilities Albertans want to see in their political leaders changed in 5 years? When political leadership was not an issue in Alberta, way back in May 2003, Cambridge Strategies did a survey of the preference drivers of Albertans on the “next leader.”

We asked Albertans about their preferences in the following areas:

Preparation – what kind of experience should he/she have?
Vision – where did we want them to focus Alberta’s future?
Education – how much education was needed to do the job?
Personal Qualities – which kind of character qualities were preferred?
Communications Skills – What communications skills and approach was preferred?
Change Agent – what approach to change should the next leader undertake?

We found some attributes to be positive as strengths to build on. Others were negatives that candidates should avoid or fix if they fit the personal profile of any Alberta leadership aspirant.

So here is what Albertans said then was the most desirable/optimal kind of leader. They must have life and business experience with a minimum of a university degree. They should be advancing new ideas and be able to bring clarity to complex issues. They had to exhibit integrity and honesty or be experienced and knowledgeable. Their vision for Alberta has to be expansive and focused on Alberta future in a world view, or at the very least, Alberta’s role in Canada.

Albertans were looking for a fresh approach to leadership in those days. Not much has changed I would say. The optimistic Albertan wanted more of Alberta’s potential to be realized. They were keen to have a leader who advanced new ideas and supported them but not one who was seen as content to follow the lead of others.

The pessimistic Albertans want the focus on solving our problems first. They worried about Alberta’s place in Canada, they wanted someone with knowledge and experience and good a listening and understanding issues. But who would also put out new ideas and champion causes.

The least optimal/negative attributes for leadership in Alberta was a leader who focused on Alberta, had only a high school education, is “media savvy” and is assertive and self confident. Looks like Ralph Klein would not win if the voter decisions were based solely on these negative perceptions of leadership. Elections have a life of their own and while PC supporter stayed home and other left for the Alliance, Ralph won again in Novemver 2004, but he dropped quite a few seats that election and the party sent him off to retirement in April of 2006.

A word of caution to today’s Alberta Liberal leader, Dr. Taft, an academic background was a big negative for leadership. It could be worse Kevin; the other preparation negative was a legal background. Good thing you didn’t teach law while at the University.

One overlooked leader who fits this set of leadership attributes bill pretty well today is George Read of the Albert Green Party. For education; he has a PoliSci degree, Preparation; business experience working in the furniture manufacturing business and as a tree planter as a summer job while going to school so he knows something about the forestry industry. As for Alberta role in Canada, well he was the National Campaign Manager for the federal Greens in the 2005-06 federal election. As for championing new ideas, how about his work with the Environmentally Responsible Livestock Operators and the Western Sky Land Trust for innovations.

All in all not a bad fit. Too bad he is not part of the debate tonight so Albertans could look him in the eye and judge for themselves his personal qualities of honesty and integrity. we could see for ourselves just how he exercises his communications skills and works under pressure. But that opportunity will not be available to Albertans in this debate tonight and that is a Pity!


Stelmach Responds to the Misleading Attack Ads...Good For Him!

I applaud the more aggressive TV campaign ads from the Stelmach team. If you don’t define yourself in politics others will do it for you. The union consortium that is sponsoring the attack ads on Stelmach is trying to tie into the Klein admission that he did not have a plan. Nothing could be further from the truth. Stelmach has done more forward thinking planning and policy implementation in a year than was done in the prior 7 years altogether. Ed is not Ralph, and while some may lament that, I don’t. Ralph was great for Alberta in his time but that time has passed.

Getting the math right around debt and deficit was not easy but it was not nearly as difficult as the much larger and more significant governance and policy challenges that Alberta has to grapple with today. We need leadership that is more reflective, thoughtful, compassionate, adaptive and integrated. Toughness, decisiveness and discipline are still important qualities today too but only in the context of a practical long view integrated planning consciousness. These are the realities of the next Premier of the province.

I have worked on various projects where Stelmach was a key Minister. I know him to be careful but also creative, decisive and forward thinking. As Minister of both Infrastructure and Transportation he brought the kind of capacity to the department and that resulted in his recent introduction of the 20 Capital Plan for Alberta. The new royalty structure will provide certainty for the Alberta energy industry for a decade at a time when the issues are more complex and more critical and uncertain than ever before. To get the Edmonton Capital Region Plan moving and to institute an Oil Sands Strategic Planning and Management group in government are more examples of long range, big impact and strategic planning decisions that are hallmarks of Stelmach’s leadership.

The Stelmach settlement of the teachers' unfunded pension liability was an issue that was ignored for years. He dealt with quickly and conclusively. He also let the ATA and the various school boards ultimately decide if they wanted the deal. To me this is showing he is not just a prescriptive top down dictatorial leader. If a better idea came forth from the ATA locals and school boards, I am sure he would have changed things to improve the package.

The Stelmach story about how he cares, how he sees Alberta’s natural, human and public resources being used for the common good needs to be told loudly and clearly. The Stelmach view of the role of responsibility of accountable government needs to be told loudly and clearly too. There have been a few hiccups under Stelmach’s watch but nothing that can’t be fixed effectively and quickly. There is a much broader integrated policy agenda that must be addressed for the next Alberta. That expanded integrated policy agenda must include our environmental responsibilities and social well challenges have to be given at least equal prominence as our economic wellbeing.

The Progressive and Conservative model of governance is the best approach to deal with this broader more integrated long view sustainable policy agenda for the next Alberta. Ed Stelmach’s leadership of the province will change the context of what progressive conservative governance will become. He will be more socially progressive and compassionate about the human capital potential for all Albertans. He will put conservation back on the agenda in terms of Alberta’s natural capital stewardship and development of infrastructure and other physical capital demands. He will ensure that future generations of Albertans interests and needs are considered as he moves to conserve more of our one-time natural resource revenues as well.

The other personal quality I admire in Ed Stelmach is his proven capacity to learn, adapt and to embrace new ideas and approaches to solve problems. The most important challenge facing the next Alberta is going to be our individual and collective ability to learn and adapt quickly, effectively and appropriately. We all have to be able to anticipate and respond to the challenges and changes to the new normal of the next Alberta. It trust Ed Stelmach to show us the way and to be a model of how we undertake the greater opportunities and responsibilities of being Albertan moving forward.

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

Poll Shows Taft's Election in Edmonton Riverview is No Shoe-In

Well we pundits and the mainstream media may think this election campaign is boring but recent poll results in Edmonton Riverview shows that the citizens there don’t think it is boring. A full 93% of the citizens of Edmonton Riverview say they intend to vote in the election. We know fewer will show up but that expression of voter intent is pretty good everything considered.

Here are the startling results of the 1037 people in the Edmonton Riverview constituency who were polled on Feb18-19. This is the home turf of the leader of the Alberta Liberal Party, Dr. Kevin Taft. This random poll sample size has a margin of error +/- 3% 19 times out of 20.

QUESTION:
“If you were to vote today, which of the following parties would you vote for?”

Liberal 35%
Progressive Conservative 28%
NDP 7%
Green 5%
Wildrose Alliance 5%
Undecided 19%

Last election Dr. Taft garnered 65.48% of the vote and the PC candidate took 22.77%.

QUESTION:
“Which of the following issues will be most important in helping you decide your vote?”

Health Care 41%
Environment 26%
Crime and Justice 18%
Affordable Housing 15%

Campaigns matter and I have said all along that this election is too close to call, especially given how volatile the electorate is this time. Looking at these results Dr. Taft may have to spend much more time in his constituency than he originally planned.

The undecided vote is high for half way through a campaign and if they show up anything can happen. The Greens and the WAP are hot on the heels of the NDP too. I wonder if there is a foot race for third place in the province this time too.

If the Alberta voters want change and if Edmonton Riverview is any indication, change may come in many forms. It will be interesting to see the range and variety of changes that may come from this election.

I said weeks ago the only safe seat in Alberta this time is Ed Stelmach’s. Everyone else will have to earn victory the hard way – by working for it on the phone, at the doors and through the internet. This election is far from over – and as Edmonton Riverview is telling us, it is not boring either.

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

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.

Special Interest Groups Are Busy About "Surveying" the Candidates.

The special interest groups surveys are coming in hot and heavy to the candidates in the past few days. These are techniques used to inform candidates of the issues of interest to various special interests and to illicit responses form candidates.

The campaign war rooms in the past have often tightly controlled the messages in such survey responses. The Ed Stelmach war room has not been prescriptive to candidates on what they say and which surveys they may wish to reply to. There are suggestions being made as to responses but PC candidates are free to speak their own minds in survey replies.

The surveys themselves cover a wide range of topics. Some are very good, others are set ups and very biased and others are plain ugly in their attempts to get meaningful candidate responses on issues of “import.” The latter two survey models usually ask leading questions and accept only yes or no answers. If the issues were that simple they would not need leading questions and the answers would be obvious.

Here is a sampling of surveys I have seen and applaud, scratch my head ofver or just plain want to “dis’ them – and for good reason.

The CAANA group is all about commuter air service in Alberta and want to know if candidates support “Open Sky’s Policy” passenger air service in Alberta but the real agenda is passenger air service into the Edmonton Muni Airport. This matter of the Edmonton Muni passenger service is outside the provincial jurisdiction and candidates can try an influence the issue but they can’t decide it. Best to pass on this one…there are more key issues, especially for Edmonton candidates to deal with.

The Citizens Advocating the Use of Sustainable Energy (CAUSE – cute eh?) are a Calgary group who oppose the development of nuclear energy in northern Alberta. Some “context setting” language is in the survey that is prescriptive and the expected response to a complex set of issues is again yes or no. Naïve to say the least but it helps bring the nuclear question to candidate consciousness – if they take the group seriously.

The Gay Calgary and Edmonton Magazine has a survey they have out is unfocused and on everything from privatized healthcare to rent controls and low cost hosing to the Civil Marriage ct and environmental issues. The kicker, they will publish replies in their March edition. The election is March 3, what good will a March publication date do any candidates?

HealthVision 2020 is a group promoting a dedicated funding of a health promotion fund focused on improving the quality of life of Albertans and they provide helpful context behind their questions. The Pembina Institute survey on oil sands development gives rationales for the questions they ask as well. They still all design in yes and no answers but they at least the issues are conceptual and not just totally self-serving for the sponsor's cause.

It will be interesting to see how survey sponsors use the results and if anyone beyond their own circles of friends actually will care about these surveys in the end. Can a special interst group actually create a ballot question for its members using such survey techniques? Or will people just use the survey information as more background in deciding how to vote. That is an interesting research question for some political scientist to study some day. My guess is that such surveys are just white noise in the real world of how voters make choices.