The Canadian leadership debate last night was terrific. Stephane Dion got it right in the post debate scrum when the media asked him who won. He said Canadians won and I could not agree more.
I have to give great kudos to the Moderator Steve Paikin. He was forthright, masterful and adaptable to take advantage of the human moments and ensure fairness for all the leaders. When things got out of hand with everyone talking at the same time he used humour and firmness to take back control.
The roundtable format was a wonderful improvement over the podium because the leaders got to speak to each other in a move conversational manner. And we got to tune in and watch the human interaction not just the shrink wrapped media trained messaging of podium puppets o f past debates.
This was not a television program masquerading as a debate. This was a human exchange around real issues framed by real citizens. The following open discussion added context and differentiated the candidates and their policy proposals. Last night was a great opportunity for us to see the pith and substance of the people who want our trust and our vote and permission to govern us.
I have a new found respect for every candidate because of how they focused on the issues and challenged each other’s position. Sure there were cheap shots, some deserved, some not, but Canadians can tell the difference.
Harper has not answered media or citizen questions for first 24 days of the campaign. Last night he had to answer and admit to mistakes and be accountable under good political scrutiny. He can’t presume Canadians will sleep walk through the campaign and not show up because if Harper has his way, it would be a Seinfeld Campaign – about nothing.
I see the Harper War Room has been the ones to really panic and they are all of a sudden whipping up campaign platform. Harper’s handlers have all of a sudden announced they will release a Conservative campaign platform - next Tuesday the LAST 7 DAYS OF THE CAMPAIGN. That is an insult to Canadian citizens. It will be too little and way too late to be taken seriously.
Harper’s plan for personal power was to win a majority government based on a “mandate” that he does not have to be accountable for. He presumes he can make up any policy he wants as he sees fit AFTER the election. If there is no campaign platform Harper will presume he has absolute power to do whatever he wants - once elected with a majority government. That is the extent of the serious political risk that Canadians are taking by voting for Harper.
Harper was caught last night for taking the Canadian voters for granted…not just the Alberta voters which has been his habit for years. Harper will not release his platform until after the advance polls. Those voters will have to vote and not know where Harper wants to take their country as Prime Minister.
The rushed and reactive Conservative election platform will only leave one week for citizens, the media and other parties to scrutinize it. No wonder Harper did not want May in the debates. The same public pressure that got May and the Green into the debates was about to bite Harper again as citizens wonder what Harper is proposing for the future of Canada. Harper’s reactive last minute damage control with his panicky change of mind to actually prepare and campaign platform is telling.
Harper is obviously nervous for the first time in the campaign. He is afraid that he will have to go beyond his do nothing economic approach that is now so suspect among voters. Thanks to Elizabeth May, Jack Layton, Gilles Duceppe and Stephane Dion in the debate last night we may actually get a glimpse of what the real Stephen Harper is proposing as a Prime Minister.
Friday, October 03, 2008
Thursday, October 02, 2008
Sustainable Oil Sands Development - An Alberta Challenge
My business partner, Satya Das, has written an op-ed that was published in the Edmonton Journal October 1.
It is on the implications of an economic slowdown on Alberta. Satya says it is importance to use the time for Alberta to catch our collective breath. Then we have to get serious about our stewardship responsibilities around oil sands development.
The responsibility is to the environment as to future generations. Satya says “Unless we urgently and credible address the challenge of making our oil sands sustainable, Alberta may never be allowed to fulfill its economic potential."
Here is the link to the entire piece. http://www.cambridgestrategies.com/Wall%20Street%20meltdown%20gives%20Alberta%20breathing%20room%20for%20the%20oilsands.pdf
It is on the implications of an economic slowdown on Alberta. Satya says it is importance to use the time for Alberta to catch our collective breath. Then we have to get serious about our stewardship responsibilities around oil sands development.
The responsibility is to the environment as to future generations. Satya says “Unless we urgently and credible address the challenge of making our oil sands sustainable, Alberta may never be allowed to fulfill its economic potential."
Here is the link to the entire piece. http://www.cambridgestrategies.com/Wall%20Street%20meltdown%20gives%20Alberta%20breathing%20room%20for%20the%20oilsands.pdf
Business Ethics & Greenwashing
The October issue of Alberta Venture magazine is out. The business ethics column that I help write is called “The Right Call.”
This month it is about Greenwashing.
The perspectives in the column are quite more about the cynicism of this phenomenon. I was interested in Michael Atkin’s statement that hybrid vehicles are a “scam.”
He is an automotive dealer who says “nothing is really being done to really address vehicles and the environment.”
Here is the link: http://www.albertaventure.com/?p=2766&year=2008
This month it is about Greenwashing.
The perspectives in the column are quite more about the cynicism of this phenomenon. I was interested in Michael Atkin’s statement that hybrid vehicles are a “scam.”
He is an automotive dealer who says “nothing is really being done to really address vehicles and the environment.”
Here is the link: http://www.albertaventure.com/?p=2766&year=2008
Wednesday, October 01, 2008
Rick Mercer Report Election Kids
Mercer is back - and none to soon. This election needs his "frame of mind" for our national insanity.
Love this video's closer - "Politics is not place for adults."
Is There More to the Conservative's Speech Plagaierism Than Meets the Eye?
I have been thinking about the plagairism mea culpa of Mr. Lippert’s resignation from the Harper Campaign War Room over the cribbing of the John Howard speech. That speech was Harper parroting Howard’s promoting support for George Bush’s blundering into war with Iraq.
Some simple research and my lawyer’s mind tell me some things don’t seem to add up around this event. Owen Lippert was Harper's speech writer. He is not unsophisticated about issues and consequences of plagairism.
He claims it was all him and Harper and the senior advisers, who vet this stuff, did not know anything about his lifts from the Howard speech.
I think it is entirely possible that Mr. Lippert is taking a bullet for Mr. Harper's election campaign. There may be more to the story. Look at Lippert's background:
Former Fraser Institute Director who has published articles on intellectual property rights. In 1999, he wrote a book called, Competitive Strategies for the Protection of Intellectual Property. In 2000, he edited and contributed to another book called, Competitive Strategies for Intellectual Property Protection.
He has written articles that have appeared in the Wall Street Journal, National Post, Globe and Mail.
He was a former member of the Globe and Mail’s editorial board.
He also holds a PhD in European History from the University of Notre Dame, Indiana and a B.A. from Carleton College, Minnesota.
He is currently employed as Senior Policy Advisor at the Canadian International Development Agency.
Does this sound like the kind of guy who would knowingly mislead and steal someone else’s creative work and intellectual property as a matter of convenience? Does this level of experience and background sound like a guy who would be so naïve as to think a cribbed speech delivered in the House of Commons by a Leader of the Opposition that is being video taped and will appear in Hansard would not get noticed?
The official word from the Harper War Room now is they neither confirm nor deny the plagairism. The quote of the official position is “…the employee has released a statement. I think the statement stand for itself.” That is legalese for “no comment” and the hope is the story will go away.
This is a character issue that goes beyond Mr. Lippert. In fact Mr. Lippert’s only character question here may be his decision to take a political bullet to protect others and not his plagairism. If that is the case. Will we ever know? Perhaps! Strange things happen in politics and the truth is usually exposed.
It also took the Harper War Room seven ling hours to come up with a response to the plagairism allegations. Does this all add up for you? Sure doesn’t for me. Still feel OK about trusting Harper and the Conservatives to be your government?
Some simple research and my lawyer’s mind tell me some things don’t seem to add up around this event. Owen Lippert was Harper's speech writer. He is not unsophisticated about issues and consequences of plagairism.
He claims it was all him and Harper and the senior advisers, who vet this stuff, did not know anything about his lifts from the Howard speech.
I think it is entirely possible that Mr. Lippert is taking a bullet for Mr. Harper's election campaign. There may be more to the story. Look at Lippert's background:
Former Fraser Institute Director who has published articles on intellectual property rights. In 1999, he wrote a book called, Competitive Strategies for the Protection of Intellectual Property. In 2000, he edited and contributed to another book called, Competitive Strategies for Intellectual Property Protection.
He has written articles that have appeared in the Wall Street Journal, National Post, Globe and Mail.
He was a former member of the Globe and Mail’s editorial board.
He also holds a PhD in European History from the University of Notre Dame, Indiana and a B.A. from Carleton College, Minnesota.
He is currently employed as Senior Policy Advisor at the Canadian International Development Agency.
Does this sound like the kind of guy who would knowingly mislead and steal someone else’s creative work and intellectual property as a matter of convenience? Does this level of experience and background sound like a guy who would be so naïve as to think a cribbed speech delivered in the House of Commons by a Leader of the Opposition that is being video taped and will appear in Hansard would not get noticed?
The official word from the Harper War Room now is they neither confirm nor deny the plagairism. The quote of the official position is “…the employee has released a statement. I think the statement stand for itself.” That is legalese for “no comment” and the hope is the story will go away.
This is a character issue that goes beyond Mr. Lippert. In fact Mr. Lippert’s only character question here may be his decision to take a political bullet to protect others and not his plagairism. If that is the case. Will we ever know? Perhaps! Strange things happen in politics and the truth is usually exposed.
It also took the Harper War Room seven ling hours to come up with a response to the plagairism allegations. Does this all add up for you? Sure doesn’t for me. Still feel OK about trusting Harper and the Conservatives to be your government?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)