I wanted to do a blog post today on the latest retreat from responsible royalty rates by the Stelmach government. My research made me realize that Don Braid of the Calgary Herald more than captures my response.
The short term thinking of generating activity by single minded policy approaches is hindering integrated thoughtful policy approaches. We know from our research and the early findings of The Big Listen by the Alberta Party that Albertans want a public policy approach that has a longer term view. We can't ignore the ecological and social impacts of shallow, simple-minded and myopic approaches to competitiveness that is exemplified by a constant foregoing of rents from non-renewable resources.
These resource royalties rents are one time chances to grasp the intergenerational and birthright benefits of our kids and their kids. We are being told our government can't afford to pay teachers according to the contracts we negotiated with them but we can walk away from another $1.5B of royalties because why? More drilling activity in more marginal areas? How much more have the companies who are doing this more drilling committed to do as a result of the royalty give-away? Are there any guarantees from them in this deal? What about a condition of a rollback that these companies first clean up and reclaim some of the old wellsites, roads and seismic lines they no longer need so wildlife can return to these areas?
We are not well governed and the Wildrose would be worse. They appear to be already owned and controlled by the conventional energy sector. These guys are so cloaked in anonymity that they will not even disclose their contributions to the leader of that party. We need a viable political alternative in Alberta that has Integrity, is Honest with us, truly Accountable, actually Transparent and who sees Stewardship of public assets and resources in the greater public of all Albertans interest as its job.
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Do You Believe Calgary is #1 Eco-City in the WORLD?
Mercer's Quality of Living and Eco-City survey of 221 cities world wide does not likely include Edmonton. Not sure but if it were to find Calgary at the top ranking Eco-city in the world something is fishy about the survey. Calgary has lots of merits but beyond the public transit system it is hardly a top ranked eco-city. It has the largest number of cars per capita in Canada and is urban sprawl writ large...and that is still the norm in Cowtown with 100% of its growth in the suburbs.
Mercer says it used the following criteria for eco-ranking. Water availability, water potability, waste removal, sewage, air pollution and traffic congestion. Water availability is a serious problem for the future of Calgary. In fact there was a restriction put on industrial use of water a few years ago. Calgary suffers from water shortages and with the growth it has endured, that will only become more critical. Only recently has Calgary metered water and that met with serious resistance I understand. Quality of water in Alberta is excellent almost everywhere with notable exceptions. Waste removal and recycling are not big items in the Calgary civic culture - at least not compared to Edmonton. Edmonton has a long standing and extensive blue box recycling system and city owned composting plant and even recycles Christmas trees. As for traffic congestion with the largest per capita car population and the Deerfoot Trail rush hour "parking lot" and narrow downtown street system, traffic congestion is a serious problem for Calgary.
This is not a knock against Calgary. It is very livable city with lots going for it. But to rank it as #1 Eco-City in the WORLD? That stretched credulity. Mercer needs to broaden and deepen its Eco-City criteria and look to other locales for comparisons - especially in Canada.
Mercer says it used the following criteria for eco-ranking. Water availability, water potability, waste removal, sewage, air pollution and traffic congestion. Water availability is a serious problem for the future of Calgary. In fact there was a restriction put on industrial use of water a few years ago. Calgary suffers from water shortages and with the growth it has endured, that will only become more critical. Only recently has Calgary metered water and that met with serious resistance I understand. Quality of water in Alberta is excellent almost everywhere with notable exceptions. Waste removal and recycling are not big items in the Calgary civic culture - at least not compared to Edmonton. Edmonton has a long standing and extensive blue box recycling system and city owned composting plant and even recycles Christmas trees. As for traffic congestion with the largest per capita car population and the Deerfoot Trail rush hour "parking lot" and narrow downtown street system, traffic congestion is a serious problem for Calgary.
This is not a knock against Calgary. It is very livable city with lots going for it. But to rank it as #1 Eco-City in the WORLD? That stretched credulity. Mercer needs to broaden and deepen its Eco-City criteria and look to other locales for comparisons - especially in Canada.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Sir Ken Robinson: Bring on the learning revolution! | Video on TED.com
Sir Ken Robinson: Bring on the learning revolution! Video on TED.com
If you are interested in the future and what we need to change to adapt and enjoy the revolutions that are all around us you will want to watch Ken Robinson at TED this year.
If you enjoy this then you will want to hear the speakers (including Gwynne Dyer) and participate in the public dialogues happening May 31 in Calgary and June 1 in Edmonton on the theme "Learning Our Way to the Next Alberta." You can learn more and buy tickets ($10) online at http://www.learningourway.ca/ Ticket sales end Noon on Friday May 28 so you will want to act now.
My firm, Cambridge Strategies Inc is a sponsor of this event along with the ATA and Literacy Alberta. Hope to meet you in Calgary or Edmonton
If you are interested in the future and what we need to change to adapt and enjoy the revolutions that are all around us you will want to watch Ken Robinson at TED this year.
If you enjoy this then you will want to hear the speakers (including Gwynne Dyer) and participate in the public dialogues happening May 31 in Calgary and June 1 in Edmonton on the theme "Learning Our Way to the Next Alberta." You can learn more and buy tickets ($10) online at http://www.learningourway.ca/ Ticket sales end Noon on Friday May 28 so you will want to act now.
My firm, Cambridge Strategies Inc is a sponsor of this event along with the ATA and Literacy Alberta. Hope to meet you in Calgary or Edmonton
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Alberta Law Society Polls on Legal Services Quality and Value for Money
This is not my usual blog post stuff but as a lawyer I found it interesting! Looks like the days of lawyer jokes are pretty much past when you see recent Law Society of Alberta survey results. This blog post is just a repeat of the summary of findings I received as a member of the Law Society of Alberta. The actual poll results will be out tomorrow and available at http://www.lawsociety.ab.ca/. I hope that brings more clarity to the findings and afford an opportunty for some more indepth conclusions.
It has been an axiom for a long time that people do not like lawyers but they like their lawyer. This survey seems to address the last half of this question but not the first part so much. Here are some findings that Rod Jerke QC, the President of the Law Society says, “…show(s) that the public is generally satisfied with the service and value they receive.”
The Law Society notes the relationship between the delivery of legal services and the regulation and governance of the legal profession. This poll is said to “give valuable insight on the reputation of the legal profession and the high levels of satisfaction experienced by consumers of legal services.” ON the down side the survey showed “consumers” were concerned about availability of legal services to low income Albertans and the “perception of the costs of legal service.”
Next step is to survey lawyers but it is not clear how that will relate to the consumer survey. I have to say I find it strange to be referring to clients as consumers but many legal services have become commodities so I guess it makes sense. I also hope the actual survey breaks down the results in terms of types of legal services and geographically. Are divorce “consumers” at the same satisfaction levels as real estate “consumer?” I am curious to see if there is any difference between rural and urban and/or Edmonton and Calgary perceptions.
So here is a smattering of the poll results. There are 78% very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with the legal service provided. I wonder what values were attributed by the public to their being very or somewhat satisfied. Is somewhat satisfied less than 5 but more than 1 on a 10 point scale?
As for value for money spent on lawyers only 34% who were polled say they received “very good value.” Then some 37% said they received “somewhat good value.” What does somewhat mean and what values were used to determine that answer?
How do you find a lawyer? This area has some more value based substance to it. Referral from another person – which means word of mouth, was the key factor for 41% of poll participants. Reputation was important to 43 % but what values and factors constitute reputation? Glad you asked! Here is where we got some useful information about what guide and drives lawyer selection. Legal training and professional credentials worked for 30%. Standing, whatever that means other than being subject to the Code of Ethics was crucial for 26%. Personal knowledge and relationship with a lawyer drove 25% while cost and proximity/access issues drove hiring decisions for 23%.
I applaud the Law Society for doing research on public perceptions on various aspects of legal services. But opinion polls are not of much value in figuring what really guide and drives the public’s state of mind in reaching such decisions. They are better than focus groups but not much better. The more effective way is to use discrete choice modeling or conjoint techniques to force participants to make trade off and choices between various values that they use to measure what is important to them about legal services.
I need to know more about the actual survey questions and methodology before I can comment further. Opinion polls are becoming notoriously inaccurate and when terms like “somewhat satisfied” is so vague that it is dangerous to attribute too much positive or negative results to those responses.
There is no doubt some useful information here for lawyers but it is far from being conclusive evidence to make sound a judgement and draw a decisive conclusion about what the consuming public thinks about the quality of legal service and the value for money received.
It has been an axiom for a long time that people do not like lawyers but they like their lawyer. This survey seems to address the last half of this question but not the first part so much. Here are some findings that Rod Jerke QC, the President of the Law Society says, “…show(s) that the public is generally satisfied with the service and value they receive.”
The Law Society notes the relationship between the delivery of legal services and the regulation and governance of the legal profession. This poll is said to “give valuable insight on the reputation of the legal profession and the high levels of satisfaction experienced by consumers of legal services.” ON the down side the survey showed “consumers” were concerned about availability of legal services to low income Albertans and the “perception of the costs of legal service.”
Next step is to survey lawyers but it is not clear how that will relate to the consumer survey. I have to say I find it strange to be referring to clients as consumers but many legal services have become commodities so I guess it makes sense. I also hope the actual survey breaks down the results in terms of types of legal services and geographically. Are divorce “consumers” at the same satisfaction levels as real estate “consumer?” I am curious to see if there is any difference between rural and urban and/or Edmonton and Calgary perceptions.
So here is a smattering of the poll results. There are 78% very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with the legal service provided. I wonder what values were attributed by the public to their being very or somewhat satisfied. Is somewhat satisfied less than 5 but more than 1 on a 10 point scale?
As for value for money spent on lawyers only 34% who were polled say they received “very good value.” Then some 37% said they received “somewhat good value.” What does somewhat mean and what values were used to determine that answer?
How do you find a lawyer? This area has some more value based substance to it. Referral from another person – which means word of mouth, was the key factor for 41% of poll participants. Reputation was important to 43 % but what values and factors constitute reputation? Glad you asked! Here is where we got some useful information about what guide and drives lawyer selection. Legal training and professional credentials worked for 30%. Standing, whatever that means other than being subject to the Code of Ethics was crucial for 26%. Personal knowledge and relationship with a lawyer drove 25% while cost and proximity/access issues drove hiring decisions for 23%.
I applaud the Law Society for doing research on public perceptions on various aspects of legal services. But opinion polls are not of much value in figuring what really guide and drives the public’s state of mind in reaching such decisions. They are better than focus groups but not much better. The more effective way is to use discrete choice modeling or conjoint techniques to force participants to make trade off and choices between various values that they use to measure what is important to them about legal services.
I need to know more about the actual survey questions and methodology before I can comment further. Opinion polls are becoming notoriously inaccurate and when terms like “somewhat satisfied” is so vague that it is dangerous to attribute too much positive or negative results to those responses.
There is no doubt some useful information here for lawyers but it is far from being conclusive evidence to make sound a judgement and draw a decisive conclusion about what the consuming public thinks about the quality of legal service and the value for money received.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Some Facets of My Focus These Days
Lots happening in my cyberworld.http://ken-chapman.blogspot.com/2010/05/alberta-needs-viable-political.html
As the publisher of Satya Das' "Green Oil" I was delighted to see Stephen Murgatroyd write a blog post on the subject "Making Green Oil Happen."
Marshall Boyd did a blog post following up on my post on the Democratic Renewal Project suggesting limiting choice for voters may split votes but limited voices and points of view at elections is no way to bolster participation in democracy.
Just got off the phone with David Peat the Quantum Physicist who was a contemporary of David Bohm working on reconciling quantum theory with relativity. He now runs the Pari Centre for New Learning in Tuscany Italy and spends his thoughtspace on things from Carl Jung to Synchronicity to Art and Artist and his encounters with Blackfoot culture in Alberta. He is speaking at public dialogues in Edmonton and Calgary and symposium I am working on at the end of the month on the theme "Learning Our Way to the Next Alberta" I expect he will expand on the themes in his book on "Gentle Action: Bringing Creative Change to a Turbulent World."
Then I have been in fascinating Reboot Alberta based conversations with Dr. Haley Simons on the possibilities of a Creative Alberta and the 2010 World Creativity Forum in Oklahoman City this fall and the thought of making Alberta the next and 13th "District of Creativity."
I have a rich and full life and now I have to get back to work.
As the publisher of Satya Das' "Green Oil" I was delighted to see Stephen Murgatroyd write a blog post on the subject "Making Green Oil Happen."
Marshall Boyd did a blog post following up on my post on the Democratic Renewal Project suggesting limiting choice for voters may split votes but limited voices and points of view at elections is no way to bolster participation in democracy.
Just got off the phone with David Peat the Quantum Physicist who was a contemporary of David Bohm working on reconciling quantum theory with relativity. He now runs the Pari Centre for New Learning in Tuscany Italy and spends his thoughtspace on things from Carl Jung to Synchronicity to Art and Artist and his encounters with Blackfoot culture in Alberta. He is speaking at public dialogues in Edmonton and Calgary and symposium I am working on at the end of the month on the theme "Learning Our Way to the Next Alberta" I expect he will expand on the themes in his book on "Gentle Action: Bringing Creative Change to a Turbulent World."
Then I have been in fascinating Reboot Alberta based conversations with Dr. Haley Simons on the possibilities of a Creative Alberta and the 2010 World Creativity Forum in Oklahoman City this fall and the thought of making Alberta the next and 13th "District of Creativity."
I have a rich and full life and now I have to get back to work.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)