Partial Oil Sands Moratorium Has Industry and ENGO Support!

The proposal for a partial moratorium on further oil sands development to lands can be freed up for conservation as reported in the Globe and Mail today is huge for the future of Alberta.

The conservation initiative sponsored by some members of the Cumulative Environmental Management Association (CEMA) shows enlightened leadership from some key players the energy industry corporate sector, some thought leaders in the environmental movement, aboriginal groups in the Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo.

CEMA has been around for awhile and a bit lethargic on dealing with issues but this initiative is a blockbuster positive move. The industry names are the Who’s Who in the Alberta energy sector and they are calling for a slowdown of new surface and subsurface rights in the Athabasca region of oil sands development. CNRL and EnCana don’t agree with the slowdown idea, no surprise. However strong advocates of corporate social responsibility like Nexen and OPTI Canada are also opposed and that is a surprise. Syncrude abstained and UTS Energy is in favour of the moratorium concept but has concerns of conservation site impacts where they adjoin project sites.

The lack of reclamation in oil sands to date and the harsh challenging realities of tailing ponds and actually achieving the needed reclamation standards expected on open pit mines especially is a real concern. One of the mitigation means is to provide off sets in other areas to compensate for the habitat, forest and biodiversity damage inherent in open pit oil sands development. This CEMA initiative is a profoundly important integrated step in that direction. Having the support of the various diverse interests and sometimes completing philosophical approaches is a major move in the right direction.

Ed Stelmach is a big proponent of the pending Land Use Framework. We at Cambridge Strategies know from our Oil Sands Survey results that land use is an emerging issue. Habitat, GHG, water and reclamation are the urgent and important oil sands issues for Albertans. Conservation areas that serve those ends using a land use framework as the tool to achieve those ends is the best policy approach going forward.

Thank you CEMA and especially corporations and ENGOs like Petro-Canada, Suncor Inc., Shell Canada, Imperial Oil, Devon Canada and ConocoPhillips and the Pembina Institute who are all on side. Congratulations on a great start to a new consciousness about responsible and sustainable oil sands development.

Debate Uncovers Personal Animosities Amongst the Alberta Political Leaders.

The Debate last week had some interesting subplots. Those revolved around the personal skirmishes between the leaders. It gives a sense of the personal positioning, fears and animosity that may exist between the various party leaders in this campaign.

The order of importance and context of these personal trysts, that I perceived, are as follows:

#1 Mason vs. Taft: Mason has to ensure his base does not go strategic on him and vote Liberal to try and defeat Tories…like what happened in Edmonton in 2004. A vote for Mason is not a Tory victory vote in 2008 but Mason is saying the Alberta Liberals are pretty much the same as the PCs…both are in the pocket of big money. Vote NDP to keep them both honest.

#2 Hinman vs. Stelmach: Hinman has to show some of his “true conservative” credentials and take Stelmach on over his “overspending” and “progressive” values. Hinman gets to ignore the needed increased spending is due to lack of meeting the needed infrastructure and maintenance spending of past years under the Klein regime. Hinman has to give the far right a reason to believe in him and that is best done by showing that the PCs have lost their way. He has gone too far claiming the Stelmach PCs are unprincipled people who “tear up contracts” with oil sands companies (not true at all but good spin) and therefore the PCs not worth reconsidering. Reality check…Suncor has already voluntarily renegotiated its royalty deal and Syncrude is on its way to do the same thing. NO contracts are being torn up and Hinman knows it. He is taking a pass on integrity with this misrepresentation crap…and he knows that too.

#3 Taft vs. Stelmach: This is Taft bemoaning the past of PC governance to the point his is actually running against Ralph not Ed. For example he frames 37 years of the same PC government is long enough and that is reason enough to change government. He discounts the fact that voters decide who they wish to govern them. He skates over the fact that elections are a chance to change governments every 4 years or so and that the various PC governments have been responsive and nimble enough to change with the times. Taft has to beat Ed on a personal level if his is to win this election and based on the changes in the last 14 months, Taft can’t count on Ed gaffing his way out of government. Taft is hoping Calgary is in the process redefining its Red Mile to be a profound Liberal Red Mine with lots of seat shifts. Ed is banking on Redmonton returning to the PCs and becoming EDmonton. Cute metaphors but is there any truth in them? We will know in a week.

#4 Mason vs. Taft and Stelmach: As variations on the same theme, distinctions without a difference. He claims both are in the pockets of big business and they don’t have the best interests of his “regular Albertans” in their hearts...as he obviously does. Nick Taylor, a former Alberta Liberal leader and federal Senator once described his successor Liberal leader, Laurence Decore, as “Getty with glasses.” Mason says the difference between Stelmach and Taft is indistinguishable at their core that he would net even made that distinction between how they would govern.…especially their too cozy relationship with big business in Alberta. Not very accurate on the evidence…but good positioning for Mason to speak to his base who need to believe in him to stay with him.

If all politics are local, are all leadership arguments and differences of opinion ultimately personal?

Dave Hancock's Blog Post on the Environment

Why do I support Dave Hancock? Read this blog post from his campaign website for just one of the reasons.

This post shows the difference between a PROGRESSIVE Conservative and the just plain markets will solve everything type Conservatives that Paul Hinman promotes!

The Green's George Read Circumvents the MSM and Gets His Message Across.

Now is the time for all Albertans to prove their contrarian spirit and take a few minutes and give a listen to George Read of the Alberta Greens. Cut out of the debate by the supercilious determination of the Alberta television networks George is the Rodney Dangerfield of Alberta politics. Read is a maverick with a cause whereas Hinman is a rebel without one. Hat tip to Archie McLean of the Edmonton Journal for the link.

Visit his YouTube response to the debate questions. For those in my generation, who don’t know what YouTube is, let me explain. It is the nextGen’s interactive alternative viewing source to replace the MSM's "out-casting" model of network television. If you don’t know what nextGen means Wiki it…if you can’t figure out either of these concepts then rapidly retreat into the stupefying confining boxes of Dave Rutherford or Charles Adler.

Read’s rough cut video shows that he is knowledge, informed, authentic and genuine. No slick Vancouver or Toronto ad agency puffery here…a real deal kinda guy with commentary that is refreshingly progressive.

Alberta Debate Results: #1 Stelmach, #2 Don't Know, #3 Taft

The impact of the Alberta election debate is the subject of a CanWest poll published today. My blog post for the CBC YouCast site said the debate changed nothing for the undecided voter but the leaders all reaffirmed and reassured their bases. The poll results confirm this.

Pundits and MSM see political debates as contests between party leaders so, by definition, there has to be a winner and a loser. When there isn’t a clear result the chattering class suffer from a kind of political cognitive dissonance because can’t resolve the values conflict that demands a winner and a loser. I say let them suffer.

Looking at the poll results, ¾ of viewers did not change their minds and 23% are still undecided with about 10 days to go. The numbers say Stelmach “won” for 30.1% of the respondents and 34.6% say they are voting for him. Taft is perceived to have “won” by 23.3% and 23.1% are voting for him. This is showing the core vote for each party is pleased with their guy’s performance – nothing more can be read into this poll result. The NDP and WAP results are inconsequential but there are some interesting strategic implications around them for the two main parties.

The WAP’s Hinman confirmed his fiscal fundamentalist right-wing agenda. His challenge was to reassure the newly merged WAP members that they are a political force and not be discouraged with the President’s resignation and the poor showing on candidate recruitment. Hinman has to sustain his 70K popular vote from the 2004 election and get re-elect to succeed.

The NDP has to reassure core supporters not to vote Liberal for strategic purposes to defeat the PCs. He has done that by taking on both Stelmach and Taft. He has positioned Taft as pretty much a PCer in a red sweater. His core is reassured that an NDP vote is not a waste and they should return to the role of keeping both the Libs and the PC honest. He has to at least retain seats and sustain popular vote levels to succeed.

Taft has performed well this election campaign but the debate is where he will have peaked and is now plateaued. He will sustain this support level to and through Election Day. That potentially means more seats but not government. With no clear ballot question and a considerable but seemingly disengaged undecided segment, the big momentum change the Libs need to form government is not happening. His attempt to position Stelmach as same old…same old has not gelled because Stelmach has proven to be an agent of significant change in the past 14 months.

As for Stelmach, he has kept his true Progressive Conservative party core. With Hinman’s debate performance, the far right voters that abandoned Klein in 2004, are not coming back. That is a god thing because it clearly puts to bed that Stelmach is just a continuation of the past government. Stelmach has recognized that Albertans what change and elections are always about change and choices. The results coming out of this debate and the campaign so far shows Albertans want change but they are coming to realize Ed Stelmach is the kind a prudent, thoughtful and careful change agent we need in these time of turmoil.

It looks like Albertans are prepared to give him a real shot as a change agent and to give him more time to get the needed changes done right, not just rapidly. This time he will have his own team and his own mandate. He will also face a much higher expectation level for deliver on his promises and to stay true to his stated values than any other Premier of Alberta in history.